DRC-2002-001128 - 0901a06880adec6f

Sierra Club Glen Canyon Group
P.O.Box622
Moab UT 84532
March 14,2002
Dennis Downs, Director
Division of Solid andHazardous Waste
Utah Department of Environmental Quality
P.O. Box 144880
Salt Lake City, Utah 84lli +
Subject: Request RCRA Analysis of Molycorp Materials Gorng to White Mesa Mill
Dear Mr. Downs:
The Sierra Club is writing to formally request that the State of Utah perform a RCRA
analysis ofthe lead sulfide sludge from Molycorp's bastinasite mine at Mountain Pass,
California, before this waste is shipped to International Uranium Corporation's (IUC's) uranium
mill at Blanding. An independent consultant, Ms. Jo Ann Tischler, performed an undated
assessment ofthe potential presence of RCRA listed hazardous waste in the lead sulfide sludge
(enclosed). As far as we can determine, the State of Utah has never evaluated, much less
concurred with her assessment.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has given IUC a license amendment to
transport and process the Molycorp waste despite the fact that the State of Utah has not done a
RCRA analysis ofthe waste. The Sierra Club is contesting the legality ofthat decision in a
hearing before the NRC (Docket No. 40-8681-MLA-I l).
RCRA authority was given to the State of Utah to protect its citizens from hazardous
wastes. We request that DEQ perform a RCRA analysis on both the liquid and solid phases of
the Molycorp material to determine ifthey contain a RCRA solid or mixed waste. We frrther
request that such analysis be performed before April 1, uN we wish to include your RCRA
analysis in our presentation to the NRC. Our presentation is due on April 1. We request a letter
from DEQ before April I that provides the status of Utah's RCRA analysis ofthe solid and
liquid components ofthe Molycorp waste, as well as a summary ofthe information used to make
the analysis.
It should not be unduly difficult to perform this analysis. Since IUC has already imported
drummed material from Molycorp, samples can easily be taken Also, the EPA has taken at least
four site surveys ofthe material, and their data are available. We understand that your
department may still have unused prepaid fees to the State Health Laboratories that could be
used for the analysis ofthe waste.
IUC has not yet started transporting un-drummed waste from Molycorp's mine. It is our
sincere hope that DEQ will perform the RCRA analysis expeditiously so that the NRC judge can
review it when deciding whether to allow IUC to proceed with transporting un-drummed waste
from Molycorp's tailings ponds.
We are concerned that the drum and pond wastes at Molycorp have been mixed with
unknown hardeners and other chemicals and that the waste no longer qualifies as a mining waste.
We request that DEQ review the mixing of other chemicals into the Molycorp nwteial,
inctuding laboratory waste, maintenance waste, oil, solvent residues and waste from the
manufactwing process, and that DEQ review the requirements in RCRA for classifying the
Molycorp material as a mixed hazardous waste.
We also ask that the Bevill Amendment be used to classify the waste. Motycorp
petitioned the EPA to classify their after-processing waste as a "beneficiation" material and not a
'lrocessing waste". The EPA dismissed the case without hearing and ruled that the Molycorp
mine produced a processed waste that cannot be classified as an "earthy" ore or "beneficiation"
ore.
Molycorp added lead to the ore to act as aleaclate. The majorrty ofthe lead was mixed
with ttrc processed material and never removed. We believe this mixture should now be
classified as a mixed hazardous waste under RCRA.
Thank you for your prompt affention to this matter. If you have questions, please do not
hesitate to call me at 435/826-4778.
Sincerely,
14,ou,-*,-- 7"D-A a^ A--
Victoria Woodard
Nuclear Waste Chair
Sierra Club Glen Canyon Group
/Cc: vWi[iam Sinclair, State ofUtah Radiation Control Board
John Walker, State ofNevada Environmental Services
Irene Navis, Clark County Nuclear Waste Division
Judy Treichel, Nevada Nuclear Waste Task Force
Jane Feldman, Sierra Club SouthernNevada Group
REVIEW OF MOLYCORP INFORMATION|
TO ASSESS THE POTENTIAL PRESENCE OT
RCRA LISTED HAZARDOUS WASTE
I have perforrncd an independent cvaluation of thc information available to datc on
Uranium Matcrial from rhe Molycorp scttling ponds to assess whether any RCRA Listed
Hazardous Waste is present.
IUSA has dcvelopcd a *Protosol for Dctermining Whcther Altemate Fccd Materials are
Listed Hazardous Wasles" (the "Protocol") (November 22, 1999)" This Protocol has
been developed in conjunction with, and acccpted by, the Statc of Utah Depanmenr of
Environmental Quality ("UDEQ) (Lcncr of December 7, 1999). Thc cvaluation and
recommendations in this Atlachmcnt were dcvelopcd in accordance with this Protocol.
1.0 Source lnvestigeiion/Brgir of This Evrluetion
Suflicient sitc history and background information was available to perform the Source
lnvestigation required in Step I of the Prolocol Decision Logic Diagram ("the Protocol
Diagram"), To pcrform my indcpendent evaluation, I have reviewed thc fiollowing
documents:
l. IUSA/IJDEQ Prorocol for DerermipinF whcthqr Alreratte Fcads -,fue Lisred
Hazardous Wa$tes (IUSA, November, 1999).
2. Process history and pond information from the Molycorp I-peS! SulSde Ponds_:glosure
Plen (February, 1997)
3. Molycorp lener of Novembcr l, 1999 in response to IUSA request for edditional
process information.
4. Molycorp package of site and opcrationarl history information (April 14, 2000)
5. Affidavit Regarding No RCRA Listcd Har+rdous Waste, Providcd by Molycorp to
IUSA
6. Radioactivc Material Profilc Record ("RMPR") prepared by Molycorp for IUSA
The inforrnation is suflicient to concludc th* thc Uranium Material was gcneratcd from a
known process under the control ofthc gcnerator.
2.0 Determination Thet Mrtcrid is Known Not to Contein RCRA Listed
. Hrzerdous Wrute
fhe Protocol Diagram states in Decision Diamond 2. that if a material "is known not ro
he or contain any listed hazardous wlute", then IUSA and UDEQ will consider thc
material not to be listcd hazardous wsste. Item 2 of the Protocol texl states that to make
the determination in Decision Diamond 2,IUSA may,
"Delermine whcthcr specilic information from the Source lnvestigation
exists about the generation and managerncnt of the material to support a
conclusion that thc Material is not (and does not contain) any listed
hazardous waste, For exarnple, if specific information exists that the
Material was nol generated by e lisred source and that the Material has not
been mixed with any listed wastes, lhe Material would not bc a listed
hazardous waste."
Sufficient information does exist to support such a conclusion. Molycorp, based on site
histo:"y, analytical data, and generator's knowlcdgc of their process, has indicatcd that thc
Llranium Material contains no RCRA tisted hazardous wastes. I have reviewed a copy of
The description of the ponds and thc Process Diagram depicting how the pond contents
luere generated, which state that the ponds contain thickened sludge from the clarifier
thickener step in the preparation of leach liquor from bastnasite orcs for S)Vion
exchange.
I have also reviewed a copy of the Molycolp tener of November l, 1999, which sutes
thal:
"None of thc malerials placed in the lead sulfide ponds arc a listed
hazardous waste, . . The marcrials shipped ro the White Mcsa Mill, IUC,
irom the lead ponds *'ill not contain any compound, either inorganic or
crganic, whose origin is a RCRA-listed process."
This information meets thc requirement for spccific Sourcc Investigation information in
the Protocol Decision Diamond 2 and Step 2, and demonstrates that the Material ncither
was generated by a listed wasle source nor ha$ been mixed with a listcd wastc
lv{olycorp's statement is supported by the analytical data, which indicate that the
combination and levels of inorganic components arc consistcnt with uilings from metal
€xfactirrn processing. That is, all thc inorganics appear to comc from extraction of rare
earth elements from natural ores.
Docum€nlstion to Supporl Detcrminetion of No RCRA Listcd Hezerdous
Warte
IUSA has obtained the following documentailion to supporr lhe determination in Box 2
that the material is "known not to contain any listed hazardous waste".
3.0
An affidavit from Molycorp confinning that the pond malerial is not and does nor
contain RCRA listed hazardous wastc associated with any of the four lists: F, P,
U,'oi K.
r f, copy of the IUSA RMPR which contains a declaration that the pond material is
not and contains no RCRA listed hazardous waste.
I have reviewcd both of thesc documcnts. These documents are consislcnt with the
document requirements in Protocol Diagrann Box 3, for a determination based on site
history.
4.0 Concluslon! , '
It is my professional judgement that:
l. The Molycorp Uranium material was gcnirated by a known process undcr the oonrol
of the generalor.
2. The Motycorp Uranium matcrial is not and does not contain RCRA lisred hazardous
waste.
3. The information made available to mc is consistent with the information requircments
set forth in the Protocol.
4. This determination of no RCRA listed hazardous wasrc is consistent with thc dccision
logic of the Protocol.
Oh_ilJ*L(ro o*Tischtcr
Chemical Engineer'
March 5,2OO1
Dennis Downs, Director
Division of Solid and Hazardous Waste
Utah Department of Environmental Quality
168 North 1950 West
Salt Lake City, Utah 84110
Subject: Molycorp Research and Demonstration Permit and RCRA Analysis
Dear Sir:
I have a hearing with the NRC regarding the shipment and processing of
Molycorp, California, waste to the lnternational Uranium (USA) Corporation
(IUSA) facility south of Blanding, Utah. This hearing will review the concerns of
the Stale of Ufah in respect to water pollution, RCRA classification of the waste
and concern that the concentration of recovery products in Molycorp material is
not high enough for IUSA to remove any sellable products.
IUC has repeatedly stated that they need at least 0.15 percent by weight of
recoverable uranium to process material. IUSA has already received drummed
uranium material up to 16 tons from the Molycorp site in California. I have areas
of concern that Utah needs to review.
1. The concentration of recoverable uranium products in the drummed
containers from Molycorp is too low in uranium materialfor IUC to process.
ln their letter of October 17,2OO1, to Mr Melvyn Leach of the NRC
(Attachment A), IUC claimed on page 3 that the drummed uranium material
Tangets from 0.1O% to 0.1 4o/o by weight of uranium and is similar to the lead
sludge pond material they want to receive.
lfeel that the State of Utah needs to require that IUC submit a "Research
and Demonstration Permit" proving that both the pond and drummed Molycorp
material have sufficient uranium content for processing and that they can
process the malerial. A sample of 5000 tons of the drummed rnaterial should be
processed at the mill prior to IUC receiving any additional material. All drums
are lab,eled asto cone,errtration, and an average ccrrcentraticn of 0.15 percent
needs to be used in the test.
2. My second concern is that the State of Utah has not done a RCRA
analysis of the Molycorp material prior to shipment into Utah. I submit that the
only RCRA analyses that can be used in my NRC hearing are from California,
Nevada or Utah. All other RCRA analyses done by the EPA, Molycorp or IUC
are outside their realms of authority and are immaterial and irrelevant. RCRA
authority was given to the State of Utah to protect its citizens from hazardous
wastes. I request that the State of Utah perform a RCRA analysis on both the
liquid and solid phases of the material to determine if they contain a RCRA solid
or mixed waste.
The City of Moab and Grand County are in the formative stages of
preparing an emergency action plan necessary for the protection of local citizens
in case of a truck spill. They will need the State's RCRA analysis for their action
plans. For my hearing with the NRC, I need a letter from Utah that summarizes
the status of Utah RCRA analysis of the solid and liquid components of the
Molycorp waste and a summary of the information used to make the analysis.
Sinee. there is Molycorp drummed materiatat the mil[ site, samples can
easily be taken. Also, the EPA has taken at least four site surveys of the
material, and their data are available. lt's my understanding that your
department may still have unused prepaid fees to the State Health Laboratories
that could be used for the analysis of the waste.
3. My third concern is that the drum and pond wastes at Molycorp have
been mixed with unknown hardeners and other chemicals and that the waste no
longer qualifies as a mining waste. I would ask that Utah review the mixing of
other chemicals into the Molycorp material, including laboratory waste,
maintenance waste, oil, solvent residues and waste from the manufacturing
process, and tltat Utah review the requirements in RCRA for ctassifying the
Molycorp material as a mixed hazardous waste. I would also ask that the Bevill
Ameno?ment be used to classify the waste as discussed below.
Molycorp petitioned the EPA to classify their after-processing waste as a
"beneficiation" material and not a "processing waste" (Attachment B). The EPA
dismissed the case without hearing and stated that "the beneficiation/processing
line occurs between ore preparation and acid digestion when the ore is
vigorously attacked with concentrated acids, resulting in the physical destruction
of the ore strucf ure" and that "all solid wastes arising from (any) operation(s)
after the initial mineral processing operation are considered mineral processing
wastes, rather than beneficiation wastes" (Page 5 of Attachment B). The final
EPA ruling, published in 1989, was that Molycorp produces a processed waste
that cannot be classified as an "earthy" ore or "beneflciation" ore.
Attachment 1 within Attachment A shows the processing flow charts from
Molycorp. The addition of concentrated HCI is one of the initial steps of the
operation. The flow chart indicates that adding lead to the ore is a "leaching
process." This so-called "leaching process" does not meet any requirement for a
standard leaching procedure. In a leaching process, the leachate (lead) and
the resulting product should both be recovered from the ore. ln the case of
Molycorp's processing, the majority of the lead is mixed with the processed
material and never removed. This mixture should now be a mixed hazardous
waste under RCRA. A RCRA analysis by the State of Utah is necessary for the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission to determine that the Molycorp waste is or is
not an 11e(2) byproduct material, and whether the material is or is not an "ore."
4. A fourth concern is that Southeastern Utah needs easier access to
Department of Environmental Quality hazardous waste specialists. The State
should open a satellite ofiice in Moab for controlling the movement and
processing of hazardous waste in Southeastern area. lf IUC receives all the
material from California and New Jersey that they have applied for, then
Southeastern Utah could be one of the largest waste disposal sites in the State.
Thank you for your interest.
Sincerely,-hr%.tZ*
William E. Love
2871 E. Bench Road
Moab, Utah 84532
cc: Grand County, Utah
Moab City, Utah
Wittrarn Sinclair, Director
Division of Radiation Control
168 North 1950 West
P.O. Box 144850
Salt Lake City, UT 841144850
-2rffi-^-<'/-n'd A
lndependen ee plaza,suite gEO . I0s0 Seventeenth street . Denver, Co 8o2li5 ' 3o3 628 7798 (main) o 303 389 4125 (far)
October l7,2ffil
olNrrnNeuoNAL
UneNturu (use)
ConponartoN
VIA E)(PRESS COURIER
Mr. Melvyn Leach, Director
Fuel Cycle Licensing Branch
Mail Stop T-8A33
Office ofNuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
2 White Flint Nor0t
I1545 Rockville Pike
Rockville, MD 20852-2738
Re: Inforrration on Dnrmnred Uranium Material
Amendment Requestto Process an Alternate Feed Material from Molycorp at
White MesaUranium Mill
Source Material License No. SUA-1358
Dear Mr. Leach:
Intemational Uranigm (USA) Corporation (*IUSA') submitted on December 13, 2000 a request
to amend So.rce uateria Li""rrs" No. SUA-1358 to authorize receipt and processing of-a
,ranirrm-bearing material from the Molycorp, Inc. (Molycorpl facililr l-ocaed in Mountain
il; cAifo*i" (the *Mountain Pass Facility). This material resulted from the mineral
*.oir"rv of natural ore for the production of lanthanides. rusA also submitted supplemental
iJor-rtion to NRC on Jantrar5r 2, 2OOl relating to this amendment request The material
uaar"rr"a in IUSA's amendment request and supplemental information letter will be rernoved by
M;t;;'s Lanthanide Division from tbree former impoundments at their mine and mill sirc at
ttre ivtouirta6 pass facility. The amendment request and January 2,2a01 letter refeired to the
material to be removed iom the thre Molycorp impormdments as the "Uranium Materid."
ruut U*rium Material is referred to herein as the '?ond Uranium Material." This letter
,aiioo, a small quantity of additional material from the Mountain Pass facility, currelrtly
;;,"6 in approximately jo ar.r-t at that facility, wtrich ruSA requests be included in the
foregoiag rrquested license amendme,nCI This additional material is referred to herein as the
"Drummed Uranium Matcrial."
The Drurnmed Uranium Material is similar to the Pond Uranium Material in source, cheqrical
"o*positioru radiological composition" and physical properties, and- is expected to be
irAii"g*ri"6e from the Pord Uranitrm Material during and afterprccessing atthe White Mesa
UififtUi..Mill'), and in its impacrs on MiIl tailings. This letter provides a d€tailed comparison
;f th.; pond Urmium Material with the Drummed Uranium Material, and demonstates that the
. \r\A$:,\Qow'
/o-cLs I
-3-
)
I
,uu F
'Mr. Melvyn t each October 17,2001
decommissioaing work plans. According to Molycorp personnel, based on those
commgnications, the Drummed Uranium Material will be classified as uranium and thorium
source material.
The Decenrber 13, 2000 amendment request sought authorization to process approximately
Z1,3OO tons (16,400 CY) of Pond Uranium Material at the Mill as an alternate fbed/ore. This
letter requests that up to approximately 50 additional dnrns (approximately 16 tons) of
Drummed Uranium Material be included in the same license amendme,nt as the Pond Uranium
Material for processing as an altemate feed/ore at the Mill, to enstue ttut all of the Drummed
Uranium Material is also included in the reqgested amendsrent.
Rediochemicel Date
Molycorp estimates that the Drummed Uranium Material has an approximatc uraniun content
ranging hom 0.10 percent to approximarcly 0.14 weight percent (0.12 to 0.18 percent U3Os), or
gr*t"i,with an estimated overall average gnde of 0.12 percent uranium (0.14 peryent UeOa) for
the entire volume of Drummed Uranium Material. This aver4ge uranium content is very similar
to the Pond Uranium Material, which was estimated to have a uranium content ranging from
0.002 to 0.49 weight percent (0.0024 to 0.59 percent UlOe) and an approximarc average of 0.15
weight p€rcent uranirrm (0.18 percent UtOs). Dara provided by Molycorp on the radiochemical
content of the Uranium Material is included in Attachment 3.
According to data provided by Molycorp, the Drummed Uranium Material may have an
approximate total thorium content rangrng from 1l to 288 mg/kg (ppm). According to data
proviaeA by Molycorp, the Pond Uranium Material may have an approximate total thoritun
content ranging from 62 to 5954 mglkg@pm).
Consequently, as de,monstrated by the Molycorp datal the Dnrmmed Uranium lvlaterial is
"*p*t"a to-bc compmable in uranium content, but may be significantly lower in thorim
contcnf than the Pond Urmium ilfiaterial.
Ilazerdour Conrtituent Ilata
The December 13, 2000 amendment request demonstrated that the Pond Uranium Material was
not and did not contain RCRA tisted hazardous waste as desrled iD40 CFR261 eC seq", ,As will
be describod gnder the Chemical Composition and H bus Waste Protocol Sections, below,
the Dnrmmed Uranirrm Mderiat also is noq and does not contain, RCRA tisted hazardous waSe.
t//1
,d'(
/,,//
. Ul}F o
' 'IvIr. Melvlm L€ach -5-October l7,200l
occurring cations such as calcium, iron, and silicon. These naturally-occurring materials are also
found in natural ores processed at the Mill and in the contents of the tailings impourdments at
the Mill. Their presence is not expected to pose any additional worker safety, environmental, or
processing issues at the Mill.
The stabilized drum contents were later mixed with mineral acids, such as hydrochloric acid, and
were reintroduced to the bastnasite circuit. The acidified material, a portion of which constitutes
the Drummed Uranium Material, would be expected to have higher levels of chloride or other
acid anions than the Pond Uranium Material. The Mill plans to introduce the Drummed Uranium
Material to the Mill circuit at the stage before the acid leach circuit, where it will be leached with
acid for recovery of contained uraniuur values. The mineral acid anions are not expected to pose
any additional worker safety, environmental, or processing issues at the Mill.
IUSA/I)DEQ Hazardous Waste Protocol
The December 13, 2000 amendment request described in detail the IUSA/l.Itatt Deparhnent of
Environmenal Quality C.UDEQ) Protocol for Determining Whetlrer Alternate Feed Materials
are Listed Hazardous Waste (the'?rotocol').
In conformance with the requirements of the Protocol, ruSA has p€rforrred a source
investigation to collect information regarding the composition and history of the Drummed
Uranium Material and any existing generator or agency determinations regarding its regulatory
status. Based on this souroe investigation,IUSA has determined that:
1. The Drummed Uranium Material was generated from a known process under the control
ofthe generator.
2. Specific information exists abotrt the generation and management of the Drummed
Uranium Material to support a conclusion ttrat the Dnunmed Uranium Material is not and
does not contain any listed hazardous waste.
3. The generator and the State of California consider the Dnrmmed Uranium Material to be
Uranium and Thorium Source N{aterial.
In the Affidavit included as Attachment 4, Molycorp confirms that the Uranium Material was
generated from a known procexl under the control of the generator.
Based on the frndings above, both Molycorp and ruSA have concluded that the Drummed
Uranium lvlarerial is not a RCRA listcd hazardous ${aste. ruSA has also engaged an irrdependent
consultant, e:rperiencod in RCRA matters and chemical processing, u&o has reviewed the site
history, Dnmmed Uranium Material processing hittoty, analytical data, correspondence,
ruSAAJDEQ Protocol, and license termination planning documents available frrom Molycorp to
datc. The consultant has confirmed trat the Dnrmmed Uranium Material is not and does not
contain RCRA listed hazardous waste. A copy of the consultant's review is provided in
Attachmcot 5.
Mr. Melvyn Leach October 17,2001
the Drummed Uraniunr Material by truck from the Mormtain Pass facility to the MiU wifl be
significant:
o The Drunmed Uranig6 Material wilt be shipped as an "environmentally hazardous
substance" in one or two dedicated, exclusive-use trucKs) (i.e., no other material will be
transported on the trucKs) with the Drummed Uranium Material). The drums will be
uppropri.t"ly labeled, placarded, and manifested, and the shipment will be tracked by the
siipping company from the Mountain Pass site until itreaches the Mill.
o On average during 1998, 459 tnrcks per day traveled the stretch of Sate Road 191 between
Monticcllo, UT and Blanding, UT @ecember 12, 2000 transmittal from State of Utah
Deparhent of Transportation ('UDOT) to ruSA). The Dnxnmed Uranirmr Material will
Ue strippeA in one or two tnrckloads. The increased tnrck faffic load from one or two tnrcks
\ililIbe negligible.
o The truckG) involved in tansporting the Dnlnmed Uraniunr Material to the Mill sitc will be
surveyed *d a""onturninated, as necessary, prior to leaving the Mountain Pass site for the
Mitl and again pnor to leaving the Mill site-
o The Drummed Uranipm Material will be transportcd in drums with sectned lids, which will
eliminate any risk of airborne dusts. Although the Drummed Uranium Material is known to
contain lead, there witl b€ no lead related hazard associated wittr tansport, because there will
be no exposure pathway for ingestion or inhalation of the covered dnln contenB during
transport.
Process
The Drgrnmed Urarrium Material will be temporarily stored in drums on the existing ore storage
pad until a sufficient quantity of material is available to begin processing activities. The
iLr.-"a Uranium Material will be introduced into the Mill via the existing remotc drum
handling station, which was previously installod to handle drtrms of other altemate H materials
(i.e., KOH and Cotter Concentrate). This drum emptying system was designed to eliminate or
reduce employee e)rposurt to or contact with the material by use of remote operated mechanioal
equipnoent and use of water sprays as appropriate to suppress dust. The dnrm haodliry system
empties dnrms into a mixing tank ahead of the leach circuit. Once the solution is transferred
from the mixing tank to the acid leach tank, processing will be identical to that described in the
amendrnent rcquest for the Pond Uranium ldaterial.
Safety Meesures
The Drumrned Uranium Material will be delivered to ttre MiU in closed dnms. The Dnummed
Uranium Maierial will b€ introduoed thlough the exising dnrm handlisg and will
proceed through the leach circuit, CCD circuit, and solvent extraction or ion exchange circuit in
normal process fashion. As described in the amendment request, because thcre are no major
changes-to the Mill circuit" and since the proce,s seqnence will be similar to conventional
granigm solutions, it is anticipated that no extraordinary safety hazards will be encount€red.
-7-
" 'Att6l ''
Attachment I
Molycorp Operational Hi*ory and Flowshect
for Dnrmmod Uranium Mat€rial
--:' -' ffiAt rradRei*oom"n'1- Simplified OporarionsFlow gitST'strowing howttre'Lead Reintroduction
comes fro"' tiit-s"me do""" as the Ponded LeadlUrsniurn
NaOH or NH3
Note: During thc Grus,tring anct lepulPirE process whictrusJ* pH lead/ liqr'or' thc Lcad
beconres unstabilized in ft equipt"*,t *i Ooo not paslr the RCRA no*hazardous tesl
Thus thc lead an<l urahtum is tlre same "".rt"" "t the porded lead rnatcflal as seen in tlm
opaations Oraring-
Stabilized Lead is Crushed,
RepulPed and introduced into
Leach OPeration with Roasted
Bastnasite
1995
Stabilized
Baneled Material
Cernent and Sodium Silicate
199$1998
DeveloPed Lor Uranium
Lead Waste OPeratbn
Sent to Lead RecYcler or
to Certified Land DisPosal
and RePtlP
Clean out Material
that contains unstabilized
Lead and Uranium
ProPosed to IUC
RDll, Ssd2001
JFE Oct2001
Thicken
Lead
Dournstream
Lanthankle
Sepanations
Operation
Lead and Uranium
Proposed to
ruc
sErtr-ot tor38 Fru:
- *rrrt d €$hrfi{tcdtft.ttd llffin
T-080 P.02/07 Job"017
D+rrglrmcil l5ilf 3rvb
Fagc 1 of --*_ paga
BADIOAC{N'E U'TTEilAt TTCEiI gE
plrlrtrr w rrra A$badr W d @a*l*r-. E*dt. lfr lrr Orrrn, S S.fdryD 4 Orr & tffin at lI*rrrlyo$e*f rr lrrt*6E/, .r, ',tuutt,,,t,, N tgt'fl,,3irfr , 'ar/frrc ,n* Ol lrL rDiar.t, I lFE as rtaruDl W @ D. &rr- rc rglult trtl|,
,|'g[G{p.. ,,Urrrlr. fr Wc r, oJbra&g /'/,,r.{*l hN atr,. -r, o G *d, r*.rliil ,rrd frr tfG F.r!pa[t, fr, .r C ,rEC8Eo}lig[dr'&*,tr- feil&amf e#GrDJtpftta*{*r,,,ff!ffi, diltlficll|,D'&f,,tattttg,r*filn*r ae.,t,gt,5,lrh Grfcfil stt tc ,t y sffint q grclk azdlSa $offi e e fuul
t
Atfiul?
,- rh',''
?N*
Al&rfaat
ll$Eo*b
t*nclds hri Plil
P.O. EB ltlMdh,CA gffi
GrtrcrE$autlrargrdhanilfi4!
i ribrh
1ftp36
a,r
erllrfirlrlifr lO
5, tH B)
E l*dnwy nrdblqic IIaIL ErrilLL6
lJslr tWr *Dfi L LEdry ua&n er tilon*l
6-lrffi 7. tua t. PolsrrltaLffi
A. CEiE t37
\
A. S;lbd EurtB@s
ihdcat rilqdEl Sre
57r,,C)
iL OcrarccGEGreccd
Un miIisri.3.
B- Ccsim 137 B. SG.hd t6uol (Ohrnrt
Cnp. Mod.t A-zrq B. Orc cffiEG noG !o crsccd
I30 mlllkrrhr.
C. Cedun t37 C. ScatGd sounng (tcxs
Nud..rllodd 69680{)
c. Thria solrccs Dt ro cxcccd
f00 mfiiorria-
D. Urryln m, ffirlr
ddlatd
D, So[tamr D. Nd0oE ifiro
Dotlud. dIJnab (mqnllr8|4.
f- Ibtb,ff E Sd ntrfinlr E Nc tomi rryolltrb (1OO aGt),
9- fUhcrlea rtr
A- To bc -rd h r Tcsr Nrlilr roficG hoEcr rilodel srgo fr( $or$3 obr.
B. To bc urod u r coDontil, d rn Otnnn Cry mlcr tdd.s l,Iodcl S-A fu ti Ercr$ulmil ddap.
C. TobcrrydlnellE aNucerr$uGth"td"rffiodal5iillt rcmpffihryrrme futlqFrrqtnrc'prddmiry.
D. & t!. to b u ril hddfrd h ffilq *r+r mA perfrg otE n mr ffi.
SEP-I4'lll l0:38 Frs:
3r.E ot c*lrrdr.r|5r;3h ildufilhrc l|aLl
XL
BAOIOASTII'E TATEBIAL TISIII8E
*pdrtrntrrY Eha:*
I-080 P.01/07 Job-01?
Egusr*dflrrltlfrlle
PegB 3 of --4-- ptgec
Lrmlcltmhc -%E5
*ncrrrlrnmfts*rr J0
14,
15.
l?.
1t.
(r) m. n dhsco Sgtu, gmor h Oie Pra8tm .L.n ba hcklo[Ev'
o) IDe Almr.! Brdilo trrty ofilerinrtrlr Frogrmil Dc Wm J. A&sr
SaLd $rusr rlorcribcrl b Srbb r\ B, .d C of tir frtocG sln[ bc tE!E{ Er lcilr!3 rodlor
cournbdoa s imnb mt D rcccd tbe yare-
Thr tollonliqg ldrddndr ril sfroil&.d to colhl {,iF_rt ! ranpr S-={? fryrl emX rmdtr ftb
liernsa ueing-tce3 Gr lftr rcoquhle to rhc Celihtr& Dcprnncrt of llqth Sctlts:
(r) fr; f,drdo $frtY Officlr
G) SDIifud indinialrrb tutgphd in wdtilg by sbg Brtrr$n S.nry Ofut
auan6trt *p 1gdt dflt 1rB; &r &c pqlcr of lqrs fu hakage ud/s courrnlnrdm of rohd satca rfrall
f,3 p.rtb"rrcd qiy Uy
-pcrs6 rpccificab ru6g3lcd n prfrm &rr rmdca.
Reoo66j of ler*!E$&.ulrstbllb!Hr iormirc ofnirrouios andsriataiDBdhrirltpictioo.- _BDcords rnry
DG dlryo!.d d buolreg DBdEd i"qr"don- Ary lE k ut rytlttdg m percnac otrO.m5 olcrocrrrts
or nole of rcaovrbla rrdloririvc nrariet ihall bE reportod o dra Hnram of Hcrlth SGwIEE, Radiologic
IIc.tA Bfia5. 60l N. ?th SGd P.O- Be, *2?gr Srannror, CA 94C34-73X1, uiilrb tYa thlE dt3
r!rt. Ttra r?.rt rhdl iuc,Hc a dcsnipdon of lho do&edw tsrrcB or dcrricc, &c rcq$lr of tb t!$, rnd tlc
corrGcrivc gila rH.
IuaIbJ-n, rElocdolL rd htht ndirdo nrrcy sf daiccs oornfuhg nitiooftts Enfibl dmr&cd'itt
bir li@ rnay bc F harn d by tla frOowig indivifurbt
(d dJolEf
fhc tio:urcc, sbrll cffi e p5dor! tmrcmry arEtry rir rno& F aaoqnt fu rlt tG.hl ro$raqt rr{rtr
dcviccr rpceirrcd ua pocscsrd rrndr dtc licerue, Becsdr of lb imtcamrlo 3b[ bc mrhninod for
irupccdm' ad nqyDc drymd of folto?hE oryruc UOtoUou
f,giloedrc rnrtrrrhh fitt ba urnd by oqwmmO wutkr h rr.t I uffi ttrl t dm trffi
rytdnail b re f0, Codr d faalrrd R.t{hrfiEr }|rt 20, Stlnt C Gtccfru 2Llrm CroqL
?0,JA0fr, auad *cadrA
Thr lhor:c ffi mdc .EllDdnel €rDarEC b n@im ilf td B0I|r u4 qtc Or ui *
td[rttlnN @ itrins tr pltcmBd u reqrdrd Df I}h f0, Co0E d Imrd qtdilfis. Et20,lhdilnlGl$h).
r9.
l0:31 Frm:I T-880 P.06/07 Jol"0{7
Dil#trd$tnafl!t-h:AG*rlEf
AD8r.IItrrIIO{ B(B TAUOACSVB UTTMTL LICS{E
tmEtsg L E!,'r E &rb tu ttf$m, 5bI[ lS z6L 2. lftlE b w pd.t[ o 19 !q irf,d$u, mt t|M
$31| ;lE,rq; i: fc *Ur .{aed, !. !&rtil rffi 3SE,I ra frru1D H bd r ta iiIH a$l 5il'
+ r,.d&A irElrc aWrtr*&bri*|rttbiliaE
t. a Np:dfEllic"r
Ir ltrnlhle&rs
llotnoom- hn- te tlnrcrl Ganruwl
g
L1
b,
Nrdrr rl
CIrBlsre lror[tteh Fp+* Cl,- , .,. ,. ,,, Ag-EAE-
rt*efugcm]bc aErOQ-.E19-@EEio tffi
tlrpotffi EtCrtm trlesu$rerlodrh Bco:rmm
I&r rII.rlhlrrcr n rlUdDrraffiir! uffif uO leH rAEe
Sc*Affi %/60 Brfs, FoEdlP.q tsil fel chy Uonfieh Pgns. GA 4p-$tr-
SErAllhr
SlccD rtiltr*
ctfir
ct
Wil raalorc$c umertrtl t Ds sEEFryJs tffi fJYs Ex"
Ddriruq;ilclIaG,
El +ru rrfiodrr* nffi0Er*
EI ncvn of urhc& hr;tt tE ttr
E enadocc u dmtn uit bHr rh. --@Eg
h n+mrcd dhfrdcrlfu
ln e rsl Urpu mabrhtMrrrbrqhrhr lo.rffi,
Stomd h gE gd trrna
Th sourc naEfit u lr as a grffic ed rn ar at offi.Afrtr aabilee0on mrmht d be h ered( Gncreul mat6c h lhcC ttrD hrg0.
+ Dllofia ft pogo0rd um d&pffirclvr mr&L
Acc Archd
w
tsp
t * Iih&
U oure maErtil
hHutFtr
40,(Ilo ho
rmh
[mor:D
Attachmqt 3
Uraniurn Content Estimates and Analytical Data
for Dnsnmed Uranirrn Material
I
{
E
Eo
!
,t!
t!
T
E
frt
E
E
tt
T
g
5
E
E
T
f,
=
tr
I
Attachment 4
Molycorp Affidavit
ConfirmingNo RCRA Listd Hazadous \tlaste
in Dnrrrmed Uranium lvfuerial
0CT-16-01 00:8? Frn:T-008 P.08/01 Job-39?
poD& trh to lvIffS 19t5. fron 1986 to 1995, a portion offtc ihd8p oomahfug hrr
tluu 0.05 pcroeut urtenn d thoriru wag ihippod ofisits ei&Et br ruowy of had or
frr dlspo:al. Brou 1995 o f9$' e *abitaerl han furce wer rldi&d d
reimrroducpdto 6p ffiScog minrat ctuttit fir frfilrtccoglr oFhmbmidoa Tbis
reimegbn sa s at.onmiqdoqnd rfur tvhmb 1908. Ite drm.rd had slgffid.
ilrdfr rcsiduc oousirts ofmancirl ruorrcd fimth cfucNlit durtry tb drcodrcirmiue
ofildr arsr AII coosthlem of&E dru.'trd hnd suE b *d8e rcrth!. m tron tbr
rare aanh€ccrlacriufooess. No rm*e ftom Ur oilk sourrcE hr boooc rrill br iddcd
lotc&@cdhadsE&$d1n
d BasEd m the erocerrUg .irDc gr,Erbrpd fo tbe rtocrnry of,rrr rmh
dams, &eptposnaldc&d matedelsdo Dt comrbuyofeohdl warttrr
esrmrrspdb U.S. Cod. ofDodcrrl*ogrrldiun, TtI.40, P.rt26L S{aur Du
meodrdt,,tbU.8, Fcd;6rl Bqiaaeryu* 5, f99t"
5. BrEcd ourytmrile{Bc of,urce -.fr"rnFrt ar *c Frci&5r, thcFopo*d
alsm ftcd ptcrieh hrre lot bGrB dpal uilh ursili lrom uy orter nuteq Sit
rrybry: bccm dEfDGd s mvtichmy brc oorttrpd hod wsitcs cglrEiloal IDU.S.
CodG ofedr*al B+uhfu+ Ith 4o, EEt 261, SUIDE3 D rg mdci hff U.S.
Fedcill nc$*r augur q f9*.
6 SpecmcaBr, tbanropooedahrme &erl aociah do Et omirhradour
nla tGt fim aoa4ccifc lotlucs (U.S, RCRA f t5rpc wartos) besar: (e) Irfio[porp do6l
m, qpqatc ryW It $G faffyv,tic[ poCooo tho tf'ps of wrgg M b
ScdmzflJl otrTilh rt{l oftb US. Codc ofFcdcratReuhiu, d o) lfo$rcorp Xec
aerrcr rcclecd d &rFdhy, mbilreftc foposod dtGmrE fiGd err!fth errrbcer
cornbfocd wiit, rrtrstrs &ora ry dhr sourna u&fu,h ouab u.s" RCRA F typo wrs4s rl
d6cdecin.
7- $ccrcr$r'thc ptuposcd rltF ite &od uaarah do d ooffi buriqrs
wa&r fioulr*couc rnu'Eer (u.$ RcRAKtlpeun*rc) bom."ctlbtprp docr n
processes. These include tabulation of all potential listings associated with each known
ttemicat contaminant in ilre material, and the review of chemical prccesl and
material/waste handling history at the site to assess whether the known chemical
contaminants in the material resulted from listed or non-listed sources. This evaluation is
described in Box I and Decision Diamonds 9 through l1 in the Protocol Diugrarn.
Although the rcquireme,lrts of Box 8 and Decision Diamonds 9 through 11 are not
applicable to the Dnunmed Uranium Material (becatrse the Dnrmmed Uranium Material
was producd by a known process under the control of the generator), I have nonetheless
utilized this approach to perform a rigorous and complete evaluation.
4,0 Chemical Contaminants in Molycorp Dnrmmed Uranium Metcrial
The chemical characterization data used in this evaluation is discussed below.
Chcmistry of Bactnesite Ores
Bastnasite ones contain uraniunU thorium, and a wide range of secondary metals, in
addition to lanthanide series elements and other rare earth elements. The concentrations
of secondary metals vary depending on the source and grade of the ore body. According
to Molycorp personnel, the Mountain Pass facility mines and recovers minerals from an
ore body that contains barium, copper, lead, zinc and a numberof other metals.
In the Molycorp mineral recovery circuit, leach liquor solution containing the desired rare
earths is separated into a solid cerium portion ad a liquid heavier lmftanide portion
The cerium portion is either packaged or firrtlrer purified. Lead and iron are rernoved
from the liquid portioq which is then sent to firther product refining and production
steps. Otlrer metals, such as copper and zinc, are co-precipitated with &e lead to varying
degrees. The quality of Molycorp's lanthanide and rare earth products depends to a large
degrec on thc efficie,lrcy at wtrich lead and thcse other metals are removed in the
precipitation/clarification st€p6. The pruer the ra€ eardr products ane (ower
concelrtrations of these metals), the greater the concentrations of these metals will be in
the lead sulfide sludges and lead sulfide filter cake. As operations at Mormtain Pass have
been improved over the yeanr, mgre copper and zinc have been precipitated with the lead.
Molycorp began the reintnoduction of stabilized lead sulfide sludges for firther recovery
of lantahanide values in 1985. As a rezult of this reintroduction, higber lwels of some
metals such as copper and zinc were preipitated with the lead sulfide sludge. As a
result, the lead sulfide sludges that were drummed after 1985 for offsite recovery, on-site
stabilization, and later on-site neoovery, contained higher levels of copper and zinc than
the sludges tansferred to the ponds before 1985.
Hence, it should be expected that analytical data provided by Molycorp for the Drummed
Uranium Material, u,hich was produced after 1985, should show higher conceirtrations of
thcse metals than the anatytical data from the Pond Uranium Mderial, which was
produced earlier.
secondary metals, such as baritnn and lea{ in the ores managed in those diftelent
decades would vary appreciably, either up or down.
As described at ttre beginning of this section, Molycorp made operational changes after
1985 that would be expected to increase the levels of copper and zirc in lead sludges
collecrcd after 1985. The higher levels of copper and zinc in the Drummed Urauium
Material relative to the Pond Uranium Material are consistent with this process
information.
Based on all of the above information, it canbe concluded that:
1. The metals content of Molycorp Pond Uranium Material and Drummed Uranium
Material are reasonably similar.
2. Natrnal variation in thc quallty of ores contributed to differences between
concentrations of some metals in Pond Uranium Materials and Drummed
Uranium Material.
3. Opcrational modifioations after 1985 appear to have increased copper md zinc
levels in Dnrmmed Uranium }vlaterial produced after 1985, compared to Pond
Uranium Materid, uftich was produced prior to 1985.
4.1 Organic Contaminents et Molycorp
According to the Molycorp flowsheet and operational descriptiorq the Drummed
Uraniunr tvtarcrial like the Pond Uranium Material, would not b expected to contain any
organic contamination. This is consistent with site ope,rating history as describd by
telephone conversations with Molycorp personnol, and in the Lead Sulfide Ponds Closure
Pla& indicating that no organic compounds were produced at the frcihty and no organic
chnricals were introduced into the mineral recovery operation.
42 RCRA Statur of Metak rt Molycorp
I.e.d
The major inorganic contamimnts in the Molycorp sludges, both in the ponds and drums,
are inorganic compounds of lead. The analytical data provided by Molycorp indicarc that
six of the dnrms were tested for total lead aod one was tested for TCLP lead.
The test results for all six drums of the drums test€d indicated elevmed lerrels of totat
lead" The teachate test results for the one dnrm sample tested for TCLP ontained a lead
level in excess of the RCRA TCLP threshold value of 5 mg/L in ,00 CFR 261 Table l,
'Manimum Coucentration of Contaminants for the Toxicity Characteristic." Tlrat is, the
material in only one dnrm is known to contain the toxicity characteristic CTC) for lead.
However, Molycorp has assumeq basd on generator knowledge and flrc total lead data
thd all six drums contain lead in concentations above the RCRA TCLP ttueshold.
6
used solely as a rode.nticide. Molycolp did not synthesize ot ule this compound. P121
applies speeifically to disposal of the commercial chemical zinc cyanide, wtrich is used as
either an insecticide or in plating solutions. Molycorp did not synthesize or use this
compound. P205 applies specifically to the disposal of the commercial chemical zinc bis
(dimethylcarbamodithioato S-S'), which is usd as an accelerator in synthesis of vinyllic
polymers via "zipper" polymerization reactions. Molycorp did not synthesize or use this
compound. None of the p listings is applicable to ttre Drummed Uranium Material.
Based on all of the above inforrnation, the presence of zinc in the Drummed Uranium
Material is not indicative of RCRA listed trzardous waste.
Copper
No RCRA TCLP threshold has been established for copper. However, based on the total
metals analysis, half of the drums analyzd had elevated lwels of copper. According to
Molycorp personnel, tbe presence of copper is tpical in bastnasirc ores. As described in
Sestion 4.O abovg the elevated levels of copper in the Drunmed Uranium Material can
be athibuted to process ctranges designed to increase copper removal from the rare earth
products. However, for thoroughness of this evaluation, all potentiat RCRA listed wasrte
sources associated with copper have been reviewed.
One *P" listing, PU)g, is associated with copper. It applies specifically to disposal of the
commercial chemical cq)rous cyanide, which is used in copper electroplating solutions,
as an antifoulant in commercial paint fonnulatiorU as an insecticide and as a reaction
catalyst in organic synthesis plants. No electroplating, commercial paint forrrulation, or
organic synthesis occured on the Molycorp site. Molycorp did not synthesize or use this
compoud. The U listing is not applicable to Dnrnmed Uraninm Material.
There ane no 'V,- "F," or "K" listings associated with copper.
Basd on all of the above informatioq the presence of copper in the Drummed Uranium
Material is not indicative of RCRA listed hazadous wastc.
OtherMetals
The TTLC data from the six drums indicated that the Drummed Uranium Material
contained trace or low levels of antimony, arsenic, barium, beryllium" cadmium,
chromiurr, cobalL mercury, molybdenurn, nickel, selcnium, silvet, tballium aod
vanadium. The Dnrmmed Uranium Material did not exceed the RCRA TCLP threshold
values for any of these metals.
As described abovg according to Molycorp personnel, the presence of all of these metals
is tpical of bastnasite ores. Howevetr, for thoroughness of this waluation, an additional
potential, but unlikely, sounce for these metals was considered-
4.
5.
6.
The Drummed Uranium Material is not and does not contain RCRA listed hazardous
waste.
The inforrration made available to me is consistent with the information requirements
set forth in the Prrotocol.
This detennination of no RCRA listed hazardous waste is consistent with the decision
logic of &e Protocol.
The determination via the Protocol Decision Diamond 2that the Dnmmed Uranirln
Material is not and does not contain RCRA listed hazardous waste is supported and
conlirmed by the rigorous erraltration of every potential RCRA Usting descriH in
this report.
7.
Jo Annfischler
Consulting Chemical Engineer
to/t "t/o
Octob€r ll,zffil
1n
TABLE 1
a
(Rev.0):
a
RCRA LISTINGSSUMMARY OF POTENTIAL
ASSOCIATTI} WITH I,EAI)
IN 40 CFR 261 APPEI{DD( VII
Applicable to
Molycorp Lead
Sulfide Sludge?
sludge is not from
this industry.
sludge is not from
this industry.
sludge is not from
this industy.
sludge is not from
this industry.
shdge is not from
this industry.
sludge is not from
this irdus'try.
sludge is not from
this industry.
sludge is not from
this industry.
shdge is not from
this industry.
Chemicals
Acutely
Hazardous
P List
Non-Specific
Sources
tr'List
Chcmicals
Acutely
Toxic
U List
Wastewater treatnent sludge
from production of lead based
explosive initiators
Petroleum refining dissolved
air flotation C'DAF ) solids
Petroleum refining slop oil
emulsion solids
Petoleum refining API
s€parator solids
leadod tanlc bouoms
Steel electric furnace emission
control dusUsludge
Iron and steel manufacturing
pickle liquor
Acid plant blowdoum
thickencr slurry/sludge from
primary copper production
blowdown
Emission confiol dusUsludge
from secondary lead smelting
aoTABLE 2 (Rev. 0): SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL RCRA LISTINGS
ASSOCIATED WITH ZINC
IN 'tl) CIR 261
Commercial Chemicals
Acutely Toxic
U List
Commercial Cheniceh
Acutely Ilazardous
P List
Non-Specitrc
Sources
F Lict
Specitrc
Sourccs
K List
It This Listing
Applicable to
Molycorp Lead Sulfide
Sludgo?
u249
Zinc phosphide
<lWo solution
No. liole use is as a
rodenticide. Molycorp
did not synthesire or use
this product
YZIJS
Zinc bis (dimethylcarbamo
dithioato S-S')
No. Usod as pol)4mer
accelerator. Molycorp
did not q'nthesire orgse
this product.
Pl21
Zinc cyanide
No. Used as an
insecticide or as plating
solution. Molycorp did
not synthesize or use
this product.
Pt72
Zinc phosphide
>|ff/o sohrtion
No. Sole use is as a
rodenticide. Molycorp
did not slmthesize or usc
this producf
NONE No F Listirgs
NOI{E No K Listings
Molycorp,Inc. v. EPA
United States Court
rOR THE DISTRTCT OF
Argued November 29,
No. 98-1400
Mo1ycorp, Inc.,
Petitionel
v.
of Appeala
COLU}4BIA CIRCUIT
1999 Decided Decernbex 77, 1999
U.S. Envilorunental Protection Agency,
Respondent
Iuead Industfj.es A.ssociation, Inc., et aI-,
Intervenors
Orr Petition for Review of an Order of the
U.S. Envirorrmental Protection Agency
James L. Megder argued the cause for petitj-oner- I9ith him
on the briefs was Robert D. tlyatt.
Daniel- R. Dertke, Attorney, U.S. Department of alustiqe,
argued the cause for respondent. Yith him on the brief was
Lois ;I. Schiffer, Leaistant Attornoy General. steven Silver-
man, Attorncy, U.s. Environmental Protection Agency, en-
tered Ern aPpearance.
Before: Silberrnanr Rogels and Garland, Clrcuit iludgee-
opinion for the Court filed by Circuit .fudge Silberroan.
Silberrnan, circuit iludge: Molycorp, Inc., petitiens for
review of a Technical Background Docurnent issued by the
Environrnental Protection Agency under the Resource con-
servation and RecoveEy ect. Because the docuoent j-s not a
regulation that rre may revier, we dismiss the petition for
htp ://www. ll. georgetown. edulFed-CUCircuiUdc/opinions/98- 1 400a.html 3l5l2w2
Mo.lycorp,Inc. v. EPA
lack of, jurisdiction.
I.
Molycorp, Inc., operates a mine in Mountaj.n Pass, Califor-
nia, about 50 uriles southlvest of Las Vegas in the high desert
of eastern San Bernardino County. The rcine is the only
major domestic source of rare earth metals: scandirm, yttri-
um, and the lanthanides (el€ments !ilith atonic numbers 57
through 71, runni-ng from lanthanum to lutetiuu. on tlre
periodic table). These eleeentc are used as catalysts and
also have applications in such fields as lighting, metallurgyr
ceramics, magmets, and electtonics. The nining process in-
volves excavatlon ftom an open pit, folloned by crushing,
grlnding, and flotation to concentrate bastnasite, a fluorocar-
bonate ore of rare earth metals. the concentrated ore is
roasted and then leached with hydrochloric acid, producing
cerj,urn solids (which can be sold after thickening, filtering,
and drying) and lanthanide chlorides (wttich are subjected to
sqlvent extraction to separate lndividuaL lantlranide eleuents) r
as reLl as varioug r,taste products.
This case concerns the application of the Resource Conser-
vation and RecovetyAct (RCRA), 42 V.s.C. s 590L et seq., to
Molycorp's operations. RCRjL establishes a couPrehensive
scheme for the regulatioa of the handting and disposal of, golid
wastes; under Subtltle c, it irqloses especially stringent
restrictions on hazardous wastea. But subtitle c does not
apply to all hazardous wastes. In 1980, congiress adoPted the
Bevilf Amenduent, which prohibited the EPA from regrulat-
Page 2 of 10
htp ://www.ll.georgetown. edulFed-CyCirctrit/dclopiniond9S- 1 400a.htnl 31512002
Molycorp,Inc. v. EPA
ing "solid waste from the extraction, benef,iciation, and pro-
cessing of ores and mineralsr'unti1 it coryleted a study of
the health and environmental effects of those rrastes. 42
U.S.c. s 692t (b) (3) (A) (ii). After much delay--and some liti-
gationT see genelally Solite CorP. v. EPA, 952 g.zd 4'13 (D.C.
Cir. 1,991)--the EPA issued a regulato-ry deteruination con-
cluding that rrastes uni-guely associated with minetal. extrac-
tion and beneficiation (but not processlng) were produced in
Iarge volunes and tended to present a lotrcr risk of human
exposure than industrial ll{aste, so they wouLd not be subject
to Subtitle c regrulation. 51 Fed. Reg. 24,496 (1986). The
determinatlon did not identlfy specific traste streams that
lrere exeupt, no.tr did it discuss the difference between benefi-
ciation and processing. In 1989, the EPA addressed the
Bevill- status of processing wastes and deterrnined by rule
that a spccific m.ineral processing waste would bc exenpt only
if it ret ihigh volurci and 'lorr hazard' criteria. 54 Fed.
Rcg. 36,592 (1989). Ilte rule also defined "benef,iciation' in
terms of a list of activiticc includinE 'crushing, grinding,
washing, dissolution, crystallization, filtration, sortln.g, sizLngl
drying ... and heapr dr,rmtrr, vat-, tank and in situ leaching."
40 c.r.R. s 26L.4(b) (?) (i) .
Thig dlstinction between beneficiation and processing is
slgmificant, because all beneficiation wastes are excluded frgm
Subtitle C regulation, while processing rastet are excLuded
only if they meet thc high volune and lorr hazard criteria-
to explain the definition, the EPA noted that bcneficiation
tends to produce "high volume solid waste stre,ms that are
htp ://www.ll.georgetoum. eduffed-CUCircuit/dc/opinions/98- 1 400a.htnl
Page 3 of l0
3BDA02
Molycorp,Inc. v. EPA
essentially earthen in character. Despite the fact that valu-
able constituents have been removed, the remaining materlal
is often physically and chemically siruilar to the material (ore
or mineral) that entered the operation.' 54 Fed. Reg. 35,619
(1989). Processing, on the other hand, generates 'waste
streams tha! generally bear little or no resemblance to the
materials that entered the operation.... These operations
rrost often destroy the physical stlucture of the rnaterial,
producing waste streas.s that are not earthen in character.'
Id. under the EPAIs definition, beneficiation is completed at
a specific point in tiroe; after that, aII acti"vlties are Process-
ing. This rneanlr that a step that would otherwise be consid-
ered benefisiation rri1l be considered processing if it is per-
formcd on material that has already undergone processing.
In 1998, the EPA issued a Technical Background Docu-
mcnt, Identifj-cation and Description of ldineral' Processingt
sectors arld /n'aste Streans. Tbe 1038-page docuuent ad-
dresses 49 different ruineral conunodities. It discusses each
conunodity, explains the steps used in its production, and
degcribec the wastes generated by its extraqtion, beneficia-
tion, and processlng.
At issue j.s the section of the Technical Background Docu-
ment discussing the rare earth industry. The draft version
had described Molycorp's operations as producing sooe
waste streags fron beneficiation and others from process-
ing. Molycorp subnitted qoments on the draft, objecting
that the EPArs characterization of goqre of its operations as
http://www.ll.georgetov,m.edulFed-Ct/CiroriUdc/opinions/98-1400a.htnl
Page 4 of l0
31512A02
Molycorp,Inc. v. EPA
processing was inconsistent wlth the beneficiation/proeesaing
distinction set out ih the 1989 rule. Accordiag to llolycorp,
all of the operatlons at Mountain Pass are extraction or be-
neficiation, not processing. But the final document repeated
the Agency't conclusion that for rare earths, 'the beneficia-
tlon/processing line occurs between ore preparation and acid
digestion rrhen the ore is vigorously attacked rrith concen-
trated acids, resulting in the physieal destruction of the ore
structurert and that "a1l solid rastcs arisi.ng from [auy] oper-
ation(s) after the initial 'nineral- processlng operation are
considered mineral processing ttastes, rather than beneficia-
tion rastes.r It }rent on to identify specific $aste rtreams
resulti-ng from rare earth ptocessing operations. Molycorp
petitioned for review, arguing that the docr.rment had been
improperly igsued without notice and corsrent, that its con-
clusions were inconsistent rith the Bevill Amendment, and
that the 1989 rulc wac unlat fully vague ingofar as it defined
beneficiation.
II.
We begin (and end) by considering wtrether lre have juris-
diction to ontertain Uolycorprs chalJ-enge, and we conclude
that we do not for three related but conceptually distinct
rea3ons.
The judlcial review provj.sion of RCR,A rtates that "a
Betition fof rcview of action of the Aduj"nistrator in prorurl-
gating any regulation, or requircment under this chapter o!
denying any petition for the Prou.rlgation, anendnent or
htp://www.ll.georgetown.edulFed-Ct/CirctriUdc/opinions/98-l400q.html
Page 5 of l0
31s12002
Molycorp,Inc. v. EPA
repeal. of any regulation under this chapter rney be filed only
j.n the United States Court of Appeals for the District of
Colurnbia.n 42 V.S.C. s 69?6(a) (1). As Uolycorp recognizes,
this statute is not merely a venue provision, reguirilg that
challenges to finaL regulations be brought before ue rather
than in another court. It is also a lini-tation on our jurisdic-
tion: we may review only fi-na} regrrlations, reguirements, and
denials of petitions to prouulgate. amend or repeal a regnrla-
tion. See Imericatr Portland Cement Alliance v. EPA, 101
E.3d 712, 775 (D.C. cir. 1996)Peti.tioner claims that the
document is a rcgulation. To deterur-ine whether a legu).ato-
ry action constitutes promulgation of a regrulation, lile look to
three factors: (1) the Agency's own characterization of, the
actioni (2) wtrethe! the action was published j.n the E'ederal
Register or the Code of Federal Regulations; and (3) wheth-
er the action has binding effects on prj.vate parties or on the
agency. See Florida Porer e Light Co. v. EPA, 145 F.3d
741.4, 7418 (D.C. Cir. 1998). The first trro critcria serve to
illuruinate the third, for the ultinrate f,oeus of, the inquiry is
r,rtrether the agency action partakes of the fundamental char-
acteristic of a regulation, i.e., that it hag uhe force of law.
The docunent (wtrich was not published in the Federal
Register) states that it "is intended solely to provide inf,orma-
tion to the public and the regulated comru.rnity regarding the
rrastes that are potcntially subject to the requirements of this
title." This disclaimer, which appearB twice in the text,
continues:
Wtrile the guidance contained in this docr,ment may
http ://www. ll. georgetovrn. edulFed-CUCircuiUdc/opinionVgS- I 400a.hml 31s12002
Molycorp,Inc. v. EPA
assist the j-ndustry, public and federal and state regu-
lators in appJ,ying statutory and regulatory requirements
of RCRA, the guidance is not a substitute for those legal
requirements; nor ig it a regulation itself. Thus, it does
not inpose legally-binding reguirements on any partyl
including EPA, States or the regulated com.rnity.
The EPA has slightly obscured the non-binding nature of the
dgcument by statingr at the time the draft docurnent was
introduce{ and again before us, that it would have an "adviso-
ry' role ln enforcement proceedings. See 51 Fed. Reg. 2,338,
21354 (1996). Se take this to mean only, as counsel assured
us at oral argunrent, that the agency is advising the public as
to its present enforcemcnt inclinations--not that the docu-
ment itself rrould be given any weight at all in enforcement
proceedings.
Drawing on our cases construing the exceptions to the
APA's noticc and comcnt reguirement, Molycorp contends
that the Technical Background Docuuent nevertheleas must
be deeucd a tegrulation becausc it has effected a change in
EPA policy. Assuning allfuendo there was such a change,
this arguncnt is baced on a nicunderctandinE of our cases.
XIe havc said that an lnterpretative rule construing a legisla-
tive rule cannot be uodified lrithout the notice and coment
procedure that would be required to change the underlying
rcaul-ation--otherrise, an aEetrcy could easily cvade ngtlce
and coment requiremcnts by anending a rule under the
gfuise of reinterpreting it. See Paralyzed Veterans of Aln. v.
D.C. Arena L.P., tl7 E.3d'579, 586 (D.C. ci.E. 199?). But the
htp //www.ll. georgetovm. dulF€d-CUcirctrit/dc/opinions/98- I 400a-html
Page 7 of l0
31s12002
Molyoorp,Inc. v. EPA
document is not an interpretative rule. As we explained in
Slmcor Inttl corP. v- Shalala,
[I]nterpretative rules and policy statements are quite
different agency instruments. An agency policy state-
t[ent does not seek to impose or elaborata or interpret a
legal nor&. It Derely represents an al;ency positj.on
with respect to hsn it t ill treat--typically enforce--the
governing legat norm. By issuing a policy statement, an
agency ei"ryIy lets the public knorr itg current enforce-
mcnt or adJudicatory aPpEoach.... The prinary dis-
tinction between a substantive rule--reaLJ.y any rule--
and a general ttatement of policy, then, turns on whether
an agency intends to bind j-tself to a particular legal
position.
727 E.3d 90, 94 (D.C. cir. L997',. The document does not set
out an interpretation of RCRA or of the EPA's regulations, it
does not iryoac obligationt on regulated intercsts or on the
EPA. It is as the governucnt insigts uerely a non-binding
statescnt of thc EPA's vicw of how it plans to regard
particular activLties rcLating to the production of mineral
cormroditics. Thereforc it is irrelevant whether the EPA has
taken thc saue position ln the past.l
A careful exasination of petitionet's argument and the
recold, moxeove!, reveals anothet jurisdicti-onal barricr. If
Holycorp rrere correct in contending that EPA unlawfully
changed its 1989 regulation, it first did so back in L991. The
Agency at that timc wrote a letter to thc CaJ.ifornia DePart-
ment of Health Services saying that 'the second 'leachingr
htp ://www. ll.georgetovrn. edulFed-CyCircuiUdc/opinions/98- 1 400a.html
Page 8 of l0
3lsl2w2
Molycorp,Inc. v. EPA
step in [Molycorp's] operation appears to more c:Lotc1.y,rtescm-
ble acid digestion (a mineral processing operati.on) than it
does a conventional Leaching (beneficiation) processr' and
identifying "lead f,ilter caker' 'iron filter caker' and rwaste
zinc contauinated with mercuryr as mineral processing
rf,astes generated at Mountajr Pass. Then in 1992 the EPA
expressed substantially slnilar views directly to Molycorprs
parent cgmpany. Under Molycorprs theory, thoge letters
would have been "reguJ.ations' subject to judiclal revicw. Yet
ttre statute requires that revier be sought within ninety days
of the prormrlgation of the regulation. See 42 U.S.c.
s 5976(a). Molycorprs petition would therefore be uitimely.
If thece problems were not enough, Molycorp's petition
suffers from a third jurisdictional shortcoming: the issue j-t
preeents is not ripe. The record is less than pellucid in
identifying the speci-fic waste streams actually produced at,
Mountain Pasg, and oral argrrxnent rcvealed thrt ttre parties
disagree about what wastes are produced there. That uncer-
tainty leaves opcn thc potsibility that there ultinately witl be
Page 9 of l0
L To be sq!e, aB we noted in Slmcor, see
agency took a position in an eaforceuant
court that was clearJ.y inconsistent with
statement we would not be surprised if a
was trnfavorable.
127 g.3d at 96, if an
proceeding In district
a prior enf,orcement poJ,icy
district courtte reaction
no disagreement over the proper teg'ulatoty classificatlon of
Molycorpts rastet. Thus, there does not currently cxist a
concrete controversy that is ripe for Judicial review. See
http ://www.ll. georgetown. edulFed-Ct/CircuiUdc/opiniondgS- I 400a.html 315l2W2
Molyoorp,Inc. v. EPA
ohio Fotestty A.ss'nr Inc. v. Sierra club, 523 lJ.S. 725' 136
(1998). Nor can it be suggested that denyinE tevlew now
causGs hardship to Molycorp, cf. Abbott Labs. v. Gardner, 387
U.s. 135, 152-53 (1957), because any enforceuent proceeding
against it would be based not on the document (which has no
J-egal effect) but on the underlying 1989 regrulation. Molycotp
is no worse off than it would be had the docurnent not been
issued at all.
't***
Page l0 of l0
It is difficult fo! uB to
brought before u! at this
dlsmi ssed.
So ordered.
understand l,'hy thig case was
time. The petition for review is
htp://www.ll.georgetoum.edu/Fed-CUcirctrit/dclopinions/98-1400a.html 3lsl2w2
O shundahai Networt O
PO Box lllr, Salt lake City, Utah E4110
E0t-r'g.26L4
shund ahai@shund ahai.or$
www.shundahai.org
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Washington, DC 20555-0001 .' ' .,, ' "
Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff
RE: Environmental Assessment for International Uranium Corporation's Uranium Mill Site, White Mesa, San Juan
County, Utah, in Consideration of an Amendment to Source Material License SUA-I358 for the Receipt and
Processing of the Molycorp Altemate Feed
To Whom It May Concem:
Shundahai Network has strived for the past seven years to address environmental justice issues as well as
encourage public participation in creating and implanarting nuclear policies. We have staffand volunteers working
in both Nevada and Utah. With this letter, the Shundahai Network requests that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(NRC) withdraw its finding of no significant impact (FONSD regarding the subject Environmental Assessment @A)
and prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to address the following concems. We also request that
public hearings are held in Las Vegas, Nevada, and Moab, Utah, to allow the public who are affected by this
proposal to give comments to the NRC.
The EA does not provide sufficient data and analysis to support a FONSL The EA falls short in all six of
the general areas that the National Environmental Policy Act requires federal agencies to analyze: (l) the
environmental impact of the action, (2) possible adverse environmental effects, (3) possible altematives, (a) the
relationship between short and long term effects, (5) any irreversible commitment of resources, and (6) coordination
with any public laws of the United States, polices and regulations (42 U.S.C.A. section 4332). This letter shall
explain the inadequacies of the EA in each of these six areas.
(l) The environmental impact of the action--
It is arbitrary and capricious for the NRC to assume that the May 1979 Final Envirurmental Statement (FES)
adequately analyzes the possible environmental effects ofthe proposed action. The International Uranium
Corporation (IUC) is proposing to ransport, r@eive, possess, process, and dispose of dif[erent materials than those
that were assessed n 1979 (lead sulfide sludge and thorium), and new environmental standards have come into
effect since the FES was prepared.
The May 1979 FES, the September 1985 EA, the February 1997 EA, and the February 2000 EA did not analyze the
transportation, receipt, possession, processing, milling or disposal of lead sulfide sludge at the White Mesa mill.
Therefore, it is inappropriate to rely on these documents in the December 2001 EA.
The May 1979 FES did not address accidents related to the transputation of rnanium or thorium byproduct
materials, processing wastes, mining wastes, or other non-ore materials to the White Mesa mill. The FES merely
analyzed "Transportation of materials to and from the mill [which] can be broken down into three categories: (l)
shipments of ore from the mine to the mill, (2) shipments of refined yellow cake from the mill to the uranium
hexafluoride conversion facility, and (3) shipments of process chemicals from suppliers to the mill" [FES, Docket
No. 40-8681, NUREG-0556 (May 1979)1.
The NRC's September 1980 Final Generic Envirormental Impact Staternent BIS] of Uranium Milling did not
analyze accidents related to the transportation of uranium or thorium byproduct materials, processing wastes, mining
wastes, or other non-ore materials to a licensed uranium mill. The 1980 EIS only addressed transportation accidents
related to (l) shipments of refined yellowcake fiom the mill to the uranium hexafluoride conversion facility, (2)
shipments of ore from the mine pit to the mill, and (3) shipments of process chemicals from suppliers to the mill.
[Sec Section 7.1.5, Volume l, Final Generic EIS on Uranium Milling UREG-07-6 (September 1980).]
-shundahai" is a fl*te (Wqten Shohsone) vord meaning "Peace and llatmorrylrith All Cteation"
- -. '/;'Z
- "fa- -. ' ..
%"fti:4,,. J,,, ',{/l
Nor has the NRC developed u firn.nuric Environmental Impact Statement fo.lr"w regulatory program, i.e.,
the processing of uranium feed material other than natural ores and the disposal of non-l le.(?) byproduct material at
licensed ,.anir- mills, as is required by the National Environmental Policy Act. These activities now constitute the
primary, ifnot the sole, activity at currently operating conventional uranium mills. (See Final "Revised Guidance on
Disposal of Non-Atomic Energy Act of 1954 l1e.(2) Byproduct Material.")
At this time, there is no data available regarding the radiological or non-radiological risk of harm to public health
and safety or the environment from the fiansportation, receipt, possession, processing, or disposal of all or any
incremental portior of nor-ore materials at the White Mesa mill. There is no ganeric or sitespecific EIS that has
considered (ionceptualized, postulated, or analyzed) the risk ofharm to public health, safety or the environment of
the tansportation, receipt, possession, processing or disposal of non-l le.(2) byproduct material, "altemate feed
materiaU' or thoriurn byproduct material (11e.(2) andnon 1le.(2)) at the White Mesa uranium mill.
Without an EIS and a Programmatic EIS regarding the tansportation, receipt, possession, processing and disposal of
feed material other than natural ores and the disposal of non I le.(2) byproduct material at licensed uranium mills,
Shrmdahai Network members cannot be assured that these activities will not cause significant incremental
radiological or non-radiological risk of harm to public health, safety or the environment.
The EIS needs to provide the following data, either in the text or as attachments, and a detailed analysis of the data:
Section I
-A detailed description of the bermed concrete pad where the lead sulfide sludge will be temporarily managed,
including the method of construction, where the pad will be located, how high the berm will be, and how any liquid
run-offfrom the pad will be sequestered from the environment
-An engineer's drawing of the bermed concrete pad
-A map ofthe white Mesa facility showing the location of the bermed concrete pad
-A detailed analysis of the archaeological impacts of constructing the bermed concrete pad, with specific references
to the 7-volume archaeological study that was completed before the White Mesa mill was constructed in 1979
-A detailed description of how anyNative American cultral sites and resources in the vicinity of the bermed
concrete pad will be protected
-A detailed description of the milling of lead sulfide sludge
-Chwactenzation of the contents of the 36 drums of radioactive material
-Documentation showing that the State of California considers both the lead sulfide sludge in Molycorp's ponds and
the material in the 36 drums to be source material
-Molycorp's California Radioactive Material License 3229-36
-Molycorp's 1997 Closure Plan
Section 2
-A map of the White Mesa site and surotmding area within a five-mile radius, showing groundwater flow direction,
prevailing wind, isolated residences, Blanding, the White Mesa Reservation, all springs, and all wells (both
monitoring wells and drinking water wells)
-Detailed information about the groundwater beneath the site (depth of the geologic strata, depth of the aquifers,
number of aquifers, rate of artesian flow, rate of groundwater movement to the south and southwest, quality of water
in each aquifer, and a description ofeach location where the groundwater surfaces in springs)
-Detailed information about all wells within a five-mile radius, including whictr wells are completed in the Burro
Canyon Formation vs. the Navajo Sandstone, how many wells are down-gradient, where the down-gradient wells
are located, and how many people rely on the down-gradient wells for domestic water supply, irrigation, or stock
watering
-Detailed information about all springs within a five-mile radius of the White Mesa mill, including flow rate, which
aquifer surfaces at each spring, use ofeach spring by humans and animals, and vegetation present at each spring
-Water quality monitoring data fiom the well that IUC uses for showering and mill operations
-Water quallty monitoring data fiom the two domestic water supply wells on the White Mesa Reservation
-Data that provide the basis for the staternent that the likelihood of bald eaglq peregrine falcon and willow
flycatcher trtilizing the site is exEemely low
-Data that provide the basis for the statement that the Mexican Spotted Owl is not expected to be on the Mesa
-Data that provide the basis for the assumption that no California Condor would use the area near the White Mesa
mill urhen Califomia Condus have been spotted 70 miles to the north and 50 miles to the south
-Data indicating whetho the Navajo Sedge grows around the several springs that occur within a five-mile radius of
the White Mesa mill
-A letter evidencing that the NRC consulted with the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service to obtain a biological opinion
regarding all of the threatened and endangered species that may be present in the vicinity of the White Mesa mill.
,}
Section 3
-Evidence that "the facility is currently in operation." As far as the Shundahai Network can determine, the facility
has processednothing since 1999.
-A table of monitoring data obtained over the last ten years from the tailings cells leak detection system and the six
monitoring wells
-The basis for the statement that "currently there is no indication of groundwater impact from the tailing cells based
on the groundwater sampling." Since there was no standard for uraniurn in groundwatsr until Decernber 6,2000,
what does this statement mean?
-An analysis of whether any contaminants have been detected by ary groundwater sampling at the White Mesa mill
over the past ten years, whether any such detected contaminants are above the limit for that contaminant, and which
limit has been exceeded
-An analysis of wtrether the December 6,2000 standard for uranium in groundwater (30 micrograms per liter) has
been exceeded in the water tested by the leak detection systern and the six monitoring wells over the past tan years
-Analysis of the capacity of the four lined cells and evidence that there is enough room in the existing cells for the
lead sulfide sludge from Molycorp's Mountain Pass mine
-A description ofhow IUC contains/will contain contaminated processing water and water used for dust
suppression.
Section 4
-The basis for the statement that'tnaterial from Molycorp does not contain any additional chemicals that would pose
an increase in threat to the groundwater resources above conventional ore"
-The basis for the conclusion that'ho surface water is expected to be impacted due to the very long travel times of
groundwater to surface water in the area"
-The date when the grormdwater detection monitoring progftIm was implemented
-A description of how the lead sulfide sludge will be loaded onto trucks at the Molycorp ponds, including what
measures will be taken to ensure that no sludge is on the exterior of any truck that pulls onto lnterstate 15
-A description of how the sludge will be offloaded at the White Mesa Mill, including measures that will be taken to
ensure that no sludge is on the exterior of any truck that leaves White Mesa mill
-A description of how the 36 drums will b€ transported and stored at White Mesa mill
-Analysis of regulations pertaining to the storage of such drummed material
-A description of how IUC will contain the water runofffrom its dust suppression program
-A description of how IUC will protect the lead sulfide sludge that is temporarily staged on a concrete pad from
inundation by monsoon rains, and what precautions IUC will take to collect and contain storm runoff from the
bermed concrete pad
-The biological opinion from the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service that confirms that exposure to lead sulfide sludge will
present'ho additional risk to endangered spe{ies"
-The basis for the statement that'ho surface water is expected to be impacted due to the very long tavel times of
groundwater to surface water in the area." The Shundahai Network turderstands that groundwater surfaces in
springs within only 2 miles.
- A description of the precise method of construction of the concrete pad near the trommell screen, how any liquid
run-offfrom the pad will be sequestered from the environment an engineer's drawing of the pad, a map showing
where the pad will be located, a detailed analysis of the archaeological impacts of constructing the pad (with specific
references to the 7-volume archaeological study that was completed before the White Mesa mill was constructed in
1979), and a detailed description of how any Native American graves in the vicinity of the pad will be protected.
Section 6
-A description ofthe existing environmental monitoring program
-A history of all wells in the are4 including data from the monitoring wells
-The basis for the statement that "an acceptable environmental and effluent monitoring program is in place to
monitor effluent releases and to detect whether applicable regulatory limits are exceeded", given that IUC does not
monitor for lead in groundwater or soil.
-The basis for the statement, "Radiological effluents from site operations have been and are expected to continue to
remain below the regulatory limits." Define the regulatory limits and provide the data from IUC's monitoring from
1979 to the present to support this statement.
-The basis for the statement, "A groundwater monitoring program is in place to detect potential seepage of
contaminants from the tailings cells", given that IUC monitors the groundwater only for chloride, potassium, nickel
and uranium, not for lead.
-The State of Utah's monitoring data that show chloroform contamination of the grotrndwater, and analyze whether
this contamination indicates that the milling operation does indeed negatively impact the groru:dwater
- Analyze the risk of -nt*inuter traveling down to the Navajo SandstoneQifer through cracks between
well casings and the native rock.
-Provide documentation of consultation with the White Mesa Ute community.
Section 7
-Attach DEQ's comments on the Draft EA
- The Technical Evaluation Report should be part of the EIS. NRC's decision to issue it as a separate
document.makes the reader wonder if the NRC is trying to marginalize, minimalize, and negate the State of Utah's
efforts to protect the Waters of the State
-Attach the letter from EPA Region 8 concurring with the NRC's interpretation that the lead sulfide sludge should
be classified as a "source materiaf'ore and is, therefore, excluded by definition as a solid and hazardous waste under
RCRA
-Analyznwhether the lead sulfide sludge should be classified as a hazardous liquid.
(2) Possible adverse environmental effects-
The lead content of the Molyco{p waste, and the fact that the waste is in a semi-liquid state, infoduce the potantial
for a distinct new threat of harm to Shundahai Network members, the general public, and the environment. The
May 1979 FES, the Septanber 1985 EA, the February 1997 EA, and the February 2000 EA did not evaluate the
possible adverse environmental effects oftransporting, receiving, possessing, processing, or disposing oflead-
contaminated waste or semiJiquid waste.
The proposed action will subject Shundahai Network members living in Las Vegas, Nevada; St. George, Utatr;
Ced; Ciry, Utah; Moab, Utah, and other small cities along the proposed transportation corridor to a distinct new
threat ofharm from transportation accidents
In the past (as discussed in the May 1979 FES) the owners of the White Mesa Mill maintained ore-buying stations in
Blanding and Hanksville, Utah. The transportation routes from those ore-buying stations passed through largely
uninhabited desert areas, not through the cities of Las Vegas, St. George, Cedar City, or Moab. Therefore, it is
inappropriate and inadequate to rely on the analysis of transportation concems in the 1979 FES.
The May 1979 FES arralyzedthe risk of accidents related to the tansportation of ore to the mill; however, it did not
analyze the risk of accidents related to the tansportation of non-ore material to the mill.
Without a new EIS that compares and analyzes the risks of transporting lead-containing, semi-liquid, non-ore
material along different fansportation routes than those analyzed in the lvlay 1979 FES, and that analyzes the
cumulative impacts of the hansportation of feed material from many different locations to the White Mesa mill,
through urban areas such as Las Vegas, St. George, Cedar City, and Moab, the Shundahai Network cannot be
assured that the proposed transpffitation of lead sulfide sludge will not cause sigrificant incremental radiological or
not-radiological risk ofharm to its memberq the public health and safety, or the environment.
The extremely large quantity of lead in Molycorp's lead sulfide sludge will also intoduce a sigrrificant new risk of
harm to human health and the environment when the material is processed and disposed in IUC's tailings cells. The
Shundahai Network requests that the NRC evaluate whether any ofthe elements and chemicals present in the lead
sulfide sludge will react with any of the elements and chemicals present in the Cotter waste, Tonawanda waste,
Heritage Minerals waste, W.R Grace waste, and Maywood, New Jersey waste that IUC has requested to receive and
in some cases has already received. The EIS also needs to assess whether any such chemical reactions would
produce toxic compounds that would pose a new threat to human health or the environment.
The Shrmdatrai Network is very concerned that contaminants from IUC's mill will get into the groundwater. The
fact that IUC has already contaminated the groundwater with chloroform shows that our concern is not unfounded.
The State of Utah has analyzed IUC's tailings cells and found that the liner construction methodology is antiquated
and the tailings cells are certain to leak. Seventy-six groundwater applicatiors within a five-mile radius of the
facility represent a lot of people who rely on the groundwater for domestic consumption, stockwatering, and
irrigation. We are especially concerned about the health and safety of the residents of the White Mesa Ute
Reservation, whose domestic water supply is entirely down-gradient of the mill.
We are concerned that the low permeability Morrison Frmation and Summerville Formatior between the Burro
Canyon aquifer and the Entada/Navajo Sandstone aquifer have been punctured by wells. The interfuces between
well casings and the native rock provide cracks through which contaminants from the mill could enter the
Entrada/Navajo Sandstone *it.l" porosity of the Entrada/Navajo Sandstoneu0,o*, water to move easily
through it.
Contaminants from the mill could enter the Burro Canyon aquifer through the improperly constructed tailings cells,
spread through the Burro Canyon aquifer just as the plume of chloroform has spread, havel down the cracks beside
well casings into the Entrada/Navajo Sandstone aquifer, and end up in the drinking water of White Mesa
Reservation residents only 4.5 miles downgradient. In fact, dala from the two White Mesa Reservation wells may
indicate that this has already happened. That is wtry the Shundahai Network is requesting that the NRC provide
monitoring data from the wells on the White Mesa Reservation.
We are also concerned that contaminants from the mill in the Burro Canyon aquifer could surface in springs located
2 to 5 miles downgradient and negatively impact the health of both wildlife and humans who use the springs for
drinking water.
The EIS should analyze whether IUC should be required to monitor the groundwater and soil for lead. The EIS
should describe the groundwater and soil monitoring protocols
The EIS should contain a maximum length of time during which IUC can store the lead sulfide sludge on the
bermed concrete pad prior to processing in order to ensure that the mill site is not a de frcto dump.
(3) Possible Altematives-
The December 2000 EA does not present an adequate range of altematives, nor does it adequately analyze the tlree
alternatives that it presents. There have been many court cases regarding what constitutes an alternative and what is
an acceptable range of alternatives.
The rest of this letter discusses the ways in which the Shundahai Network believes the EA does not adequately
analyze Altemative l. The EA also does not adequately analyze Altemative 2. A proper analysis of Alternative 2
would compare and contrast various conditions that could be imposed on the license amendment to protect public
health and safety and the environment. The EA does not analyze Alternative 3, denial of the request, at all. This is a
viable altemative that deserves careful analysis. The NRC is under no obligation to grant IUC's license amendment
request. On the contra4r, the NRC is obligated to protect the public health and safety and the environment, and
denyng the request would do exactly that. Thus, the EIS should analyze this No Action altemative in depth.
Further altematives that should be analyzed include ways to dispose of the Molycorp material other than by hauling
it to White Mesa.
(a) The relationship between short and long term effects-
The December 2001 EA does not contain any analysis ofthe relationship between short and long-term effects which
would justify the NRC's decision to issue a FONSI. Such an analysis must consider the cumulative impacts of
transporting, receiving, possessing, processing, and disposing of lead sulfide sludge at White Mesa mill.
The September 1985, February 1997, and December 2001 EAs each address a given source material without any
assessment ofthe cumulative effects oftransporting, receiving, possessing, processing, and disposing of each of
those materials in relationship to the materials addressed in the other EAs and in relatiurship to other materials
already present at the White Mesa mill.
One cumulative effect of transporting all these wastes through Moab is deterioration in the quality of life. Residents
encounter sigrificantly more truck traffic in their daily lives. Moab's only grocery store, both of its pharmacies, one
of its hardware stores, and most of its gas stations are on Highway l9l . Pedestrians are exposed to radioactive and
toxic waste when they cross the highway. This is true both when a waste hauling truck is stopped at a stoplight and
because trucks have left White Mesa mill contaminated with radioactive and toxic mud, which has been deposited
onto the surface of Highway l9l. Sierra Club Glen Canyon Group Chairman John Weisheit has measured elevated
levels of background radiation on Highway 191 and in the front portion of his place of business. This creates a
health hazard for him, his employees, and his customers.
The economy of Moab City depends heavily on tourism. If Moab City becomes stigmatized as a transportation
route for nuclear waste, the viability of its main industry - tourism - would be severely impacted.
The transportation of lead rufnt age from the Molycorp mine in Mountain ptufifo-ia, would increase the
cumulative radiological exposure of residents and tourists in Moab. The lead in the sludge, and the fact that the
sludge is wet, would add a significant new risk of harm to human health and the environment all along the
fansportation route.
The December 2001 EA does not discuss the possible cumulative impacts on drinking water wells and springs of
introducing lead sulfide sludge into tailings cells which the State of Utah has determined are bound to leak.
(5) Any irreversible commifinent ofresource-
It was inappropriate to assume in the Decernber 2001 EA that because there has been no irreversible commitment of
resources to date, there will be no such irreversible commiunent in the future. The EA provides no data to support
that conclusion.
The lead sulfide sludge is proposed to be hauled on Highway 191 though several small communities to the White
Mesa mill. If there were a truck accident involving one of the trucks hauling the sludge, none of these communities
has the ability to effectively mitigate the incident. Communities cannot have a hazardous materials team unless they
have a full-time fire department. Neither the City of Moab nor Grand Cormty has a full-time fire department or a
hannatteam. Therefore, they would have to call in ahannat team from a larger community to mitigate any accident
involving lead sulfide sludge. Not only would this entail a six-hour delay in mitigation of the incident, causing
additional adverse impacts to the environment and human health, it would cause irreversible commitment of
resources when the City and/or the Coturty paid the larger community for the hazmat response. The City and/or the
County may also be required to compensate affected businesses, which would be another irreversible commitnent
of resources. These mitigation costs could well be more than the entire annual budget of the City or the County.
The NRC is required to address this potential impact under the Emergency Planning and Community RighftoKnow
Act (see below).
6) Coordination with policies, regulaticns and public laws ofthe United States (42 U.S.C.A. section 4332)-
The December 2001 EA does not reflect coordinatior with the following policies, regulations, and laws with respect
to IUC's proposal to haul Molycorp's lead sulfide sludge to the White Mesa mill:
-The EA provides no data regmding where liquid effluents from IUC's dust suppression program and runofffrom
rain and snow falling on the lead sulfide sludge will go. Once this data is obtained and analyzed, the NRC may be
required to coordinate with the Resource Conservation Recovery Act and/or other environmental statutes.
-The EA does not analyze whether tUC has set minimun and maximum operating condition levels with respect to
monitoring for emissions of hydrocarbons and heavy metals other than lea4 as required by the Clean Air Act of all
facilities requesting modification to their permits.
-The EA provides no evidence that the NRC consulted with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service regarding the
threatened and andangered species that may live in the vicinity ofthe White Mesa mill, as required by the
Endangoed Species Act.
-The EA provides no data on analysis with respect to the "Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know" Act
(42 U.S.C.A section 1101 to I1050). Such data and analysis are particularly relevant with regard to emergency
planning.
-The EA provides no data u analysis reflecting coordination with the Native American Graves and Repatiation Act.
-The EA provides no data or analysis with respect to Executive Order 13045, "Protecting Children from
Environmental Risks and Safety Risks."
-The EA provides no evidence that the NRC consulted with affected Native Americans, including residents of the
White Mesa Reservation and the Navajo Reservation, as required by Executive Order 13094, 'Consultation and
Correlation with Indian Tribal Governments."
-The EA provides no data or analysis of President Bush's Executive Order regarding anti-terrorism.
-The EA's analysis of Executive Order 12898 with respect to Environmental Justice is woefully inadequate,
especially when one considers that the proposed action would occur in a county where one fourth ofthe land is
I r -
Native Americans, antn*" the commwrity closest to the mill *ornt u"ly to be negatively impactedowned by
is a Native American community. By definition, any adverse impact that will result from this proposal, whether the
NRC believes there will be an impact or not, will have a disproportionately high effect on minority and low-income
communities, because the White Mesa facility is located in a minority and low-income community.
-The December 2001 EA provides no data to indicate that the NRC coordinated with the State of Utah's "Siting
criteria" (UAC 19-6-108). Under this state statug the proposed processing of lead sulfide sludge at ttre White Mesa
mill would be considered a'hew" process; ergo, compliance with the siting criteria is required.
ln conclusion, there seem to be sigrrificant unaddressed issues in regmd to the six general areas ofthe National
Environmental Policy Act. Therefore, the finding of no sigrrificant impact is unjustified.
Thank you for providing the opportunity to comment on this EA. We look forward to reading a more
comprehensive and better-documented EIS regarding [UC's request for a license amendment to receive and process
lead sulfide sludge from Molycorp's Mountain Pass mill, and also to attending public hearings in both Moab City
Utah, and Las Vegas Nevada on this proposal.
Sincerely,
Reinard Knutsen
Executive Director
Shundahai Network
Cc: William Sinclair, Division of Radiation Control, Department of Environmental Quality, State of Utah
StTRRACrug Glen Canyon Group
FOUNDED 1892 P.O. Box 622,MoabUT 84532
Explore, enjoy ond pratect the planet.
Ianuary 9,2002
Michael Lesar,
Chiefl Rules and Directives Branch
Division of Administrative Services, Office of Administration
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Washington, DC 20555-0001
Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff
RE: Environmental Assessment for International Uranium 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 Molycorp Alternate
Feed
Dear Mr. Lesar:
With this letter, the Sierra Club requests that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(NRC) withdraw its finding of no significant impact (FONSI) regarding the subject
Environmental Assessment (EA) and prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
to address the following concerns:
The EA does not provide sufficient data and analysis to support a FONSI. The
EA falls short in all six of the general areas that the National Environmental Policy Act
requires federal agencies to analyze: (1) the environmental impact of the actiorL (2)
possible adverse environmental effects, (3) possible alternatives, (4) the relationship
between short and long term effects, (5) any irreversible commitment of resources, and
(6) coordination with any public laws of the United States, polices and regulations (42
U.S.C.A. section 4332). This letter shall explain the inadequacies of the EA in each of
these six areas.
(1) The environmental impact of the action--
It is arbitrary and capricious for the NRC to assume that the May 1979 Final
Environmental Statement (FES) adequately analyzes the possible environmental effects
of the proposed action. The International Uranium Corporation (IUC) is proposing to
transport, receive, possess, process, and dispose of different materials than those that
were assessed in 1979 (lead sulfide sludge and thorium), and new environmental
standards have come into effect since the FES was prepared.
The May 1979 FES, the September 1985 EA, the February 1997 EA, and the February
2000 EA did not analyze the transportation, receipt, possessiorl processing, milling or
Jt;-ffi
A 1* )tn ':''
r4i'i:,1; ,,,, .,..,U ':
disposal of lead sulfide sludge at the White Mesa mill. Therefore, it is inappropriate to
rely on these documents in the December 2001 EA.
The May 1979 FES did not address accidents related to the transportation of uranium or
thorium byproduct materials, processing wastes, mining wastes, or other non-ore
materials to the White Mesa mill. The FES merely analyzed "Transportation of materials
to and from the mill [which] can be broken down into three categories: (l) shipments of
ore from the mine to the mill, (2) shipments of refined yellow cake from the mill to the
uranium hexafluoride conversion facility, and (3) shipments ofprocess chemicals from
suppliers to the mill. [FES, Docket No. 40-8681, NUREG-0556 (May 1979)1.
The NRC's September 1980 Final Generic Environmental Impact Statement [EIS] of
Uranium Milling did not arlarlyze accidents related to the transportation of uranium or
thorium byproduct materials, processing wastes, mining wastes, or other non-ore
materials to a licensed uranium mill. The 1980 EIS only addressed transportation
accidents related to (1) shipments of refined yellowcake from the mill to the uranium
hexafluoride conversion facility, (2) shipments of ore from the mine pit to the mill, and
(3) shipments of process chemicals from suppliers to the mill. [See Section 7.1.5, Volume
l, Final Generic EIS on Uranium Milling, UREG-07-6 (September 1980).1
Nor has the NRC developed a Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for its new
regulatory prograrn, i.e., the processing of uranium feed material other than natural ores
and the disposal of non-11e.(2) byproduct material at licensed uranium mills, as is
required by the National Environmental Policy Act. These activities now constitute the
primary, if not the sole, activity at currently operating conventional uranium mills. (See
Final 'Revised Guidance on Disposal ofNon-Atomic Energy Act of 1954 lle.(2)
Byproduct Material.")
At this time, there is no data available regarding the radiological or non-radiological risk
of harm to public health and safety or the environment from the transportatiorl receipt,
possession, processing, or disposal of all or any incremental portion of non-ore materials
at the White Mesa mill. There is no generic or site-specific EIS that has considered
(conceptualized, postulated, or arulyzed) the risk of harm to public health, safety or the
environment of the transportatiorl receipt, possessiorg processing, or disposal of non-
I le.(2) byproduct material, "alternate feed material," or thorium byproduct material
(l le.(2) and non 11e.(2)) at the White Mesa uranium mill.
Without an EIS and a Programrnatic EIS regarding the transportation, receip, possession,
processing and disposal of feed material other than natural ores and the disposal of non
1le.(2) byproduct material at licensed uranium mills, Sierra Club members cannot be
assured that these activities will not cause sigfficant incremental radiological or non-
radiological risk of harm to public healttU safety or the environment.
The EA or (preferably) EIS needs to provide the following data, either in the text or as
attachments, and a detailed analysis ofthe data:
Section I
-The concentration of lead in the material from Molycorp
-A detailed description ofthe bermed concrete pad where the lead sulfide sludge will be
temporarily managed, including the method of construction, where the pad will be
located, how high the berm will be, and how any liquid run-offfrom the pad will be
sequestered from the environment
-An engineer's drawing ofthe bermed concrete pad
-A map ofthe White Mesa facility showing the location of the bermed concrete pad
-A detailed analysis ofthe archaeological impacts of constructing the bermed concrete
pad, with specific references to Archaeological Excavations on Wite Mesa, San Juan
County (Jtah, by Laurel Casjens, et al., Antiquities sectiorl Division of State History,
State of Utalq Volume I (1979), Volume 2 (1980), Volume 3 (1980), and Volume 4
(1980) and to "An Intensive Cuhural Resource Inventory Conducted on White Mesa, San
Juan County, Utoh,- by Richard A. Thompson, Southern Utah State College, with a
ceramic analysis by Alan Spencer, Brigham Young University (1977)
-A detailed description of how any Native American graves in the vicinity of the bermed
concrete pad will be handled
-A detailed description of the milling of lead sulfide sludge
-Cltaracteization ofthe contents of the 36 drums of radioactive material
-Documentation showing that the State of California considers both the lead sulfide
sludge in Molycorp's ponds and the material in the 36 drums to be source material
-Molycorp' s California Radioactive Material License 3229 -3 6
-Molycorp's 1997 Closure Plan
Section 2
-A map of the White Mesa site and surrounding area within a five-mile radius, showing
groundwater flow direction, prevailing wind, isolated residences, Blanding, the White
Mesa Reservation, all springs, and all wells (both monitoring wells and drinking water
wells)
-Detailed information about the groundwater beneath the site (depth of the geologic
strat4 depth ofthe aquifers, number of aquifers, rate of artesian flow, rate of groundwater
movement to the south and southwest, quality of water in each aquifer, and a description
of each location where the groundwater surfaces in springs)
-Detailed information about all wells within a five-mile radius, including which wells are
completed in the Burro Canyon Formation vs. the Navajo Sandstone, how many wells are
down-gradient, where the down-gradient wells are located, and how many people rely on
the down-gradient wells for domestic water supply, irrigatiorl or stock watering
-Detailed information about all springs within a five-mile radius of the White Mesa mill,
including flow rate, whirch aquifer surfaces at each spring, use of each spring by humans
and animals, and vegetation present at each spring
-Water quality monitoring data from the well that IUC uses for showering and mill
operations
-Water quality monitoring data from the two domestic water supply wells on the White
Mesa Reservation
-Datathat provide the basis for the statement that the likelihood of bald eagles, peregrine
falcons and willow flycatchers utilizing the site is extremely low
-Data that provide the basis for the statement that the Mexican Spotted Owl is not
expected to be on the Mesa
-Data that provide the basis for the assumption that no California Condor would use the
area near the White Mesa mill when California Condors have been spotted 70 miles to
the north and 50 miles to the south
-Data indicating whether the Navajo Sedge grows around the several springs that occur
within a five-mile radius ofthe White Mesa mill
-A letter evidencing that the NRC consulted with the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service to
obtain a biological opinion regarding all ofthe threatened and endangered species that
may be present in the vicinity of the White Mesa mill.
Section 3
-Evidence that'the facility is currently in operation." As far as the Sierra Club can
determine, the facility has processed nothing since 1999.
-A table of monitoring data obtained over the last ten years from the tailings cells leak
detection system and the six monitoring wells
-The basis for the statement that'turrently there is no indication of groundwater impact
from the tailing cells based on the groundwater sampling." Since there was no standard
for uranium in groundwater until December 6,2000, what does this statement mean?
-An ana$sis of whether any contaminants have been detected by any groundwater
sampling at the White Mesa mill over the past ten years, whether any such detected
contaminants are above the limit for that contaminant, and which limit has been exceeded
-An analysis of whether the December 6, 2000 standard for uranium in groundwater (30
micrograms per liter) has been exceeded in the water tested by the leak detection system
and the six monitoring wells over the past ten years
-Analysis of the capacity of the four lined cells and evidence that there is enough room in
the existing cells for the lead sulfide sludge from Molycorp's Mountain Pass mine
-Analysis ofthe likelihood that the tailings cells will deteriorate over time (up to 10,000
years from now)
-A description of how IUC containVwill contain contaminated processing water and
water used for dust suppression.
Section 4
-The basis for the statement that *material from Molycorp does not contain any additional
chemicals that would pose an increase in threat to the groundwater resources above
conventional ore"
-The basis for the conclusion that *no surface water is expected to be impacted due to the
very long travel times of groundwater to surface water in the area"
-The date when the groundwater detection monitoring progftrm was implemented
-A description of how the lead sulfide sludge will be loaded onto trucks at the Molycorp
ponds, including what measures will be taken to ensure that no sludge is on the exterior
of any truck that pulls onto Interstate l5
-A description of how the sludge will be oflloaded at the White Mesa Mill, including
measures that will be taken to ensure that no sludge is on the exterior of any truck that
leaves White Mesa mill
-A description ofhow the 36 drums will be transported and stored at White Mesa mill
-Analysis of regulations pertaining to the storage ofthe drummed material
-A description of how IUC will contain the water runofffrom its dust suppression
program
-A descripion of how IUC will protect the lead sulfide sludge that is temporarily staged
on a concrete pad from inundation by monsoon rains, and what precautions IUC will take
to collect and contain storm runofffrom the bermed concrete pad
-The biological opinion from the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service that confirms that
exposure to lead sulfide sludge will present *no additional risk to endangered species"
-The basis for the statement that *no surface water is expected to be impacted due to the
very long travel times of groundwater to surface water in the area." The Sierra Club
understands that groundwater surfaces in springs within only 2 miles.
- A description ofthe precise method of construction of the concrete pad near the
trommell screen, how any liquid run-offfrom the pad will be sequestered from the
environment, an engineer's drawing ofthe pad, a map showing where the pad will be
located, a detailed analysis of the archaeological impacts of constructing the pad [with
specific references to Archaeological Excwations on White Mesa, San Juan County Utah
(1979 and 1980) and to "An Intensive Cultural Resource lruventory Conducted on White
Mesa, San Juan County, (Jtoh," (1977)1, and a detailed descripion of how any Native
American graves in the vicinity of the pad will be protected.
Section 6
-A description ofthe existing environmental monitoring program
-A history of all wells in the are4 including data from the monitoring wells
-The basis for the statement that "an acceptable environmental and effluent monitoring
program is in place to monitor effluent releases and to detect whether applicable
regulatory limits are exceeded", given that IUC does not monitor for lead in groundwater
or soil.
-The basis for the statement, "Radiological effluents from site operations have been and
are expected to continue to remain below the regulatory limits." Define the regulatory
limits and provide the data from IUC's monitoring from1979 to the present to support
this statement.
-The basis for the statement, "A groundwater monitoring program is in place to detect
potential seepage of contaminants from the tailings cells", given that IUC monitors the
groundwater only for chloride, potassiurn, nickel and uraniurn, not for lead.
-The State of Utah's monitoring data that show chloroform contamination ofthe
groundwater, and analyze whether this contamination indicates that the milling operation
does indeed negatively impact the groundwater
- Amlyzs the risk of contaminated water traveling down to the Navajo Sandstone aquifer
through cracks between well casings and the native rock.
-Provide documentation of consultation with the White Mesa Ute community.
Section 7
-Attach DEQ's comments on the Draft EA
- The Technical Evaluation Report should be part of the EIS. NRC's decision to issue it
as a separate document.makes the reader wonder ifthe NRC is trying to marginalae,
minimalize, and negate the State ofUtah's efforts to protect the Waters of the State
-Attach the letter from EPA Region 8 concurring with the NRC's interpretation that the
lead sulfide sludge should be classified as a "source material" ore and is, therefore,
excluded by definition as a solid and hazardous waste under RCRA
-Arnlyze whether the lead sulfide sludge should be classified as altazardous liquid-
(2) Possible adverse environmental effects-
The NRC needs to take alwd look at the possible adverse environmental effects of IUC
transporting, receiving, possessing, processing, milling, and disposing of lead sulfide
sludge from Molycorp's Mountain Pass mine.
The lead content ofthe Molycorp waste, and the fact that the waste is in a semi-liquid
state, introduce the potential for a distinct new threat of harm to Sierra Club members, the
general public, and the environment. The May 1979 FES, the September 1985 EA, the
February 1997 EL and the February 2000 EA did not evaluate the possible adverse
environmental effects oftransporting, receiving, possessing, processing, or disposing of
lead-contaminated waste or semi-liquid waste.
The proposed action will subject Sierra Club members living in Las Vegas, Nevada; St.
George, Utah; Cedar City, Utah; Moab, Utall and other small cities along the proposed
transportation corridor to a distinct new threat of harm from transportation accidents.
In the past (as discussed in the May 1979 FES) the owners of the White Mesa Mill
maintained ore-buying stations in Blanding and Hanksville, Utah. The transportation
routes from those ore-buying stations passed through largely uninhabited desert areas, not
through the cities of Las Vegas, St. George, Cedar City, or Moab. Therefore, it is
inappropriate and inadequate to rely on the analysis of transportation concerns in the
1979 FES.
The May 1979 FES amlpdthe risk of accidents related to the transportation of ore to
the mill; however, it did not analyz-e the risk of accidents related to the transportation of
non-ore material to the mill.
Without a new EIS that compares and arri$zes the risks of transporting lead-containing,
semi-liquid, non-ore material along different transportation routes than those arellyzedn
the May 1979 FES, and that analyzes the cumulative impacts of the transportation of feed
material from many different locations to the White Mesa mill, through urban areas such
as Las Vegas, St. George, Cedar City, and Moab, the Sierra Club cannot be assured that
the proposed transportation of lead sulfide sludge will not cause significant incremental
radiological or non-radiological risk of harm to its members, the public health and safety,
or the environment.
The extremely large quantity of lead in Molycorp's lead sulfide sludge will also introduce
a significant new risk of harm to human health and the environment when the material is
processed and disposed in IUC's tailings cells. The Sierra Club requests that the NRC
evaluate whether any ofthe elements and chemicals present in the lead sulfide sludge will
with any of the elements and chemicals present in the Cotter waste, Tonawanda
waste, Heritage Minerals waste, W.R. Grace waste, and Maywood, New Jersey waste that
IUC has requested to receive and in some crses has already received. The EIS also needs
to assess whether any such chemical reactions would produce toxic compounds that
would pose a new threat to human health or the environment.
The Sierra Club is very concerned that contaminants from IUC's mil will get into the
groundwater. The fact that IUC has already contaminated the groundwater with
chloroform shows that our concern is not unfounded. The State of Utah has analyzed
IUC's tailings cells and found that the liner construction methodology is antiquated and
the tailings cells are certain to leak. Seventy-six groundwater applications within a five-
mile radius of the facility represent a lot of people who rely on the groundwater for
domestic consumption, stockwatering, and inigation. We are especially concerned about
the health and safety ofthe residents ofthe White Mesa Ute Reservation, whose domestic
water supply is entirely down-gradient ofthe mill.
We are concerned that the low permeability Morrison Formation and Summerville
Formation between the Burro Canyon aquifer and the EntradaA.{avajo Sandstone aquifer
have been punctured by wells. The interfaces between well casings and the native rock
provide cracks through which contaminants from the mill could enter the EntradaA.Iavajo
Sandstone unit. The porosity ofthe Entrada./Navajo Sandstone unit allows water to move
easily through it.
Contaminants from the mill could enter the Burro Canyon aquifer through the improperly
constructed tailings cells, spread through the Burro Canyon aquifer just as the plume of
chloroform has spread, travel down the cracks beside well casings into the
EntradaA.{avajo Sandstone aquifer, and end up in the drinking water of White Mesa
Reservation residents only 4.5 miles downgradient. In fact, data from the two White
Mesa Reservation wells may indicate that this has already happened. That is why the
Sierra Club is requesting that the NRC provide monitoring data from the wells on the
White Mesa Reservation.
We are also concerned that contaminants from the mill in the Burro Canyon aquifer could
surface in springs located 2 to 5 miles downgradient and negatively impact the health of
both wildlife and humans who use the springs for drinking water.
The EIS should amlyze whether IUC should be required to monitor the groundwater and
soil for lead. The EIS should describe the groundwater and soil monitoring protocols
The EIS should contain a maximum length of time during which IUC can store the lead
sulfide sludge on the bermed concrete pad prior to processing, in order to ensure that the
mill site is not a de facto dump.
(3 ) Possible Alternatives-
The December 2000 EA does not present an adequate range of alternatives, nor does it
adequately analyze the three alternatives that it presents. There have been many court
cases regarding what constitutes an alternative and what is an acceptable range of
alternatives.
The rest ofthis letter discusses the ways in which the Sierra Club believes the EA does
not adequately ar:milyts Alternative l. The EA also does not adequately analyze
Alternative 2. A proper analysis ofAlternative 2 would compare and contrast various
conditions that could be imposed on the license amendment to protect public health and
safety and the environment. The EA does not analyze Alternative 3, denial ofthe
request, at all. This is a viable alternative that deserves careful analysis. The NRC is
under no obligation to grant IUC's license amendment request. On the contrary, the NRC
is obligated to protect the public health and safety and the environment, and denying the
request would do exactly that. Thus, the EIS should atnlyzn this No Action alternative in
depth.
Further alternatives that should be arulyzed include ways to dispose ofthe Molycorp
material other than by hauling it to White Mesa.
(a) The relationship between short and long term effects-
The December 2001 EA does not contain any analysis of the relationship between short
and long-term effects which would justify the NRC's decision to issue a FONSI. Such an
analysis must consider the cumulative impacts of transporting, receiving, possessing,
processing, and disposing of lead sulfide sludge at White Mesa mill.
The September 1985, February 1997, and December 2001EAs each address a given
sogrce material without any assessment ofthe cumulative effects oftransporting,
receiving, possessing, processing, and disposing of each of those materials in relationship
to the materials addressed in the other EAs and in relationship to other materials already
present at the White Mesa mill.
One cumulative effect oftransporting all these wastes through Moab is deterioration in
the quality of life. Residents encounter significantly more truck traffic in their daity
lives. Moab's only grocery store, both of its pharmacies, one of its hardware stores, and
most of its gas stations are on Highway 191. Pedestrians are exposed to radioactive and
toxic waste when they cross the highway. This is true both when a waste hauling truck is
stopped at a stoplight, and because trucks have left White Mesa mill contaminated with
radioactive and toxic mud, which has been deposited onto the surface of Highway 191.
Sierra Club Glen Canyon Group Chairman John Weisheit has measured elevated levels of
background radiation on Highway 191 and in the front portion of his place of business.
This creates a heahh l:6za1{ for hirrU his employees, and his customers.
The economy of Moab City depends heavily on tourism. If Moab City becomes
stigmatized as a transportation route for nuclear waste, the viability of its main industry -
tourism- would be severely impacted.
The transportation of lead sulfide sludge from the Molycorp mine in Mountain Pass,
California would increase the cumulative radiological exposure of residents and tourists
in Moab. The lead in the sludge, and the fact that the sludge is wet, would add a
significant new risk of harm to human health and the environment all along the
transportation route.
The December 2001 EA does not discuss the possible cumulative impacts on drinking
water wells and springs of introducing lead sulfide sludge into tailings cells which the
State of Utah has determined are bound to leak.
(5) Any irreversible commitment of resource-
It was inappropriate to'assume in the December 2001 EA that because there has been no
irreversible commitment of resources to date, there will be no such irreversible
commitment in the future. The EA provides no data to support that conclusion.
The lead sulfide sludge is proposed to be hauled on Highway 191 though several small
communities to the White Mesa mill. If there were a truck accident involving one of the
trucks hauling the sludge, none ofthese communities has the ability to effectively
mitigate the incident. Communities cannot have a hazardous materials team unless they
have a fuIl-time fue department. Neither the City of Moab nor Grand County has a full-
time fire department or altazmat team. Therefore, they would have to call in ahazmat
team from a larger community to mitigate any accident involving lead sulfide sludge.
Not only would this entail a six-hour delay in mitigation ofthe incident, causing
additional adverse impacts to the environment and human healtlU it would cause
irreversible commitment of resources when the City and/or the County paid the larger
community for the ttazmatresponse. The City and/or the County may also be required to
compensate affected businesses, which would be another irreversible commitment of
resources. These mitigation costs could well be more than the entire annual budget of the
City or the County. The NRC is required to address this potential impact under the
Emergency Planning and Community Right{o-Know Act (see below).
6) Coordination with policies, regulations and public laws of the United States (42
U.S.C.A. section 4332) -
The Decernber 2001EA does not reflect coordination with the following policies,
regulations, and laws with respect to IUC's proposal to haul Molycorp's lead sulfide
sludge to the White Mesa mill:
-The EA provides no data regarding where liquid efluents from IUC's dust suppression
program and ruriofffrom rain and snow falling on the lead sulfide sludge will go. Once
this data is obtained and analyzed, the NRC may be required to coordinate with the
Resource Conservation Recovery Act (RCRA) and/or other environmental statutes.
Similarly, the concentration of lead in the Molycorp material may be sufficiently high to
qualify it as a hazardous waste under RCRA.
-The EA does not atnlyze whether IUC has set minimum and maximum operating
condition levels with respect to monitoring for emissions of hydrocarbons and heavy
metals other than lead, as required by the Clean Air Act of all facilities requesting
modification to their permits.
-The EA provides no evidence that the NRC consulted with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service regarding the threatened and endangered species that may live in the vicinity of
the White Mesa mill, as required by the Endangered Species Act.
-The EA provides no data or analysis with respect to the "Emergency Planning and
Community Rigtrt-to-Know" Act (42 U.S.C.A section 1101 to 11050). Such data and
analysis are particularly relevant with regard to emergency planning.
-The EA provides no data or analysis reflecting coordination with the Native American
Graves and Repatriation Act.
-The EA provides no data or analysis with respect to Executive Order 13045, '?rotecting
Children from Environmental Risks and Safety Risks."
-The EA provides no evidence that the NRC consulted with affected Native Americans,
including residents ofthe White Mesa Reservation and the Navajo Reservation, as
required by Executive Order 13094, 'Consultation and Correlation with Indian Tribal
Governments."
-The EA provides no data or analysis of President Bush's Executive Order regarding anti-
terrorism.
-The EA's analysis of Executive Order 12898, "Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations", is
woefully inadequate, especially when one considers that the proposed action would occur
in a county where one fourth of the land is owned byNative Americans, and where the
community closest to the mill and most likely to be negatively impacted is a Native
American community. By definition, any adverse impact that will result from this
proposal, whether the NRC believes there will be an impact or not, will have a
disproportionately high effect on minority and low-income communities, because the
White Mesa facility is located in a minority and low-income community.
-The December 2001 EA provides no data to indicate that the NRC coordinated with the
State of Utah's "Siting criteria" (UAC l9-6-108). Under this state statute, the proposed
processing of lead sulfide sludge at the White Mesa mill would be considered a "new"
process; ergo, compliance with the siting criteria is required.
In conclusion, there seem to be significant un-addressed issues in regard to the six
general areas ofthe National Environmental Policy Act. Therefore, the finding of no
significant impact is urfustified.
10
Thank you for providing the opportunity to comment on this EA. We look forward to
reading a more comprehensive and better-documented EIS regarding IUC's request for a
license amendment to receive and process lead sulfide sludge from Molycorp's Mountain
Pass mill.
Sincerely,
'\f,*; hf,--Za-<-L
Victoria Woodard
Nuclear Wa*e Chair
Sierra Club Glen Canyon Group
Cc: Executive Director for Operations, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
/Williamsinclair, Division of Radiation Control, Department ofEnvironmental
Quality, State ofUtatr
Michelle RehnranrU International Uranium (USA) Corporation
ll
UNITED STATES
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSI
wASHtNGTON, D.C. 2055s-0001
)'..
December 1 1, 2001
Ms. Michelle Rehmann, Environmental Manager -'
lnternational Uranium (IUSA) Corporation '. '
lndependence Plaza, Suite 950 q).:'l'
1050 Seventeenth Street -:-:' -:' :': : '-''
Denver, Colorado 80265
SUBJECT: AMENDMENT 20 TO MATERIALS LICENSE SUA-1358 -- APPROVAL TO
RECEIVE AND PROCESS ALTERNATE FEED MATERIAL FROM THE
MOLYCORP SITE AT THE WHITE MESA URANIUM MILL
Dear Ms. Rehmann:
ln your letter dated December 19, 2000, and supplemental information in letters dated
January 29,2OO1, February 2,2001, March 20,2001, August 15,2001, October 17,2OO1,and
November 16, 2001; you asked that we amend your license for the White Mesa uranium mill to
permit the receipt and processing of material from the Molycorp site, located in Mountain Pass,
California. You propose to receive this material at your White Mesa uranium mill in Blanding,
Utah, use this material as alternate feed for the primary purpose of removing the uranium so
that it can be reused, and dispose of the process tailings in the mill's tailings pile. You estimate
the material amount to be up lo 17 ,75O tons with a uranium content of approximately 0.15
percent by weight, or greater. You have determined, based on your review of the HMI
information and use of your Listed Hazardous Waste Protocol, that this material does not
contain listed hazardous waste.
We have determined that your request to receive and process this material as alternate feed is
acceptable, and have amended your license accordingly. We have enclosed the amended
license and our Technical Evaluation Report that provides our bases for granting the
amendment. Our principal criteria for evaluating this request are contained in our guidance
entitled, "lnterim Guidance on the Use of Uranium Mill Feed Material Other Than Natural Ores"
provided in the NRC Regulatory lssue Summary 2OOO-23 that was mailed to uranium recovery
licensees on November 30, 2000. We also ensured that this request complies with our
requirements for uranium mills in 10 CFR Part 40, Appendix A.
As you requested in your submittal, this material cannot be received by the mill until it has been
determined that adequate cell space is available. ln approving the Molycorp request, we have
added the following license condition to your license:
10.17: The licensee is authorized to receive and process source materialfrom the Molycorp
site located in Mountain Pass, California, in accordance with statements,
representations, and commitments contained in the amendment request dated
December 19, 2000, and supplemental information in letters dated January 29,2001,
February 2,2OO1, March 20,2001, August '15, 2001, October 17, 200'1, and
November 16,2001.
aON
o
M. Rehmann 2
Prior to the licensee receiving materials from the Molycorp 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 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.
[Applicable Amendment: 20]
lf you have any questions regarding this letter or the NRC staff review, please contact the NRC
Project Manager, William von Till, at [phone]. ln accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the
NRC's "Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter will be available electronically for public
inspection in the NRC Public Document Room or from the Publicly Available Records (PARS)
component of NRC's document system (ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible from the NRC Web
site at http://www.nrc.gov/NRC/ADAMS/index.html (the Public Electronic Reading Room).
mII:L,A
Fuel Cycle Licensing Branch
Division of Fuel Cycle Safety
and Safeguards
Office of Nuclear Material Safety
and Safeguards
Docket No.40-8681
Enclosures: Technical Evaluation Report
Source Material License SUA-1358
cc: W. Sinclair, UT
Tom Rice, Ute Mountain Ute Tribe
Terry Brown, U.S. EPA Region Vlll
Loren Setlow, U.S. EPA Office of Radiation and lndoor Air (6608J)
DOCKET NO.:
LICENSE NO.:
LICENSEE:
FACILITY:
DATE:
PROJECT MANAGER:
TECHNICAL EVALUATION REPORT
REQUEST TO RECEIVE AND PROCESS
MOLYCORP SITE MATERIAL
040-8681
suA-1358
lnternational Uranium (IUSA) Corporation
White Mesa Uranium Mill
December 3, 2001
William von Till
TECHNICAL REVIEWERS: William von Till - RGRA and Groundwater
John Lusher - Health Physicist
Office of General Counsel - RCRA Exclusion
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS:
We have reviewed lnternational Uranium (USA) Corporation's (IUSA's) license amendment
application dated December 19, 2000, and supplemental information in letters dated
January 29,2001, February 2,2001, March 20,2001, August 15,2001, October 17,2001, and
November 16, 2001 , to receive and process uranium-bearing materials from the Molycorp
Lanthanide Division site, located in Mountain Pass, California. These materials would be used
as "dlternate feed material". We have reviewed IUSA's request using our formal guidance,
"lnterim Guidance on the Use of Uranium Mill Feed Material Other Than Natural Ores" provided
in the NRC Regulatory lssue Summary 2OAO-23 that was mailed to uranium recovery licensees
on November 30, 2000. We find the amendment request to be acceptable and have amended
the license so that IUSA may process this material.
DESCRIPTION OF LICENSEE'S AMENDMENT REQUEST
By its submittal dated December 19, 2000, IUSA requested that NRC amend Materials License
SUA-1358 to allow the receipt and processing of material other than natural uranium ore (i.e.,
alternate feed material) at its White Mesa uranium mill located near Blanding, Utah. The
proposed alternate feed materialwould come from the Molycorp site in Mountain Pass,
California.
IUSA proposes to receive contaminated materials from the Molycorp site for processing at its
uranium mill as alternate feed. The material is a partially dewatered sediment (sludge)
consisting of dense, finely divided solids including uranium. Based on HMI documents, IUSA
estimates the amount of material that it would receive under this amendment request to be
7,750 tons to 17,750 tons. ln IUSA's October 17,2OO1, submittal, they asked to include 35
additional drums of materialwith similar chemical, physical properties, and radiological
composition to the other proposed material. IUSA has determined that the material does not
contain listed hazardous waste as defined in the Resource Recovery and Conservation Act, as
amended, 42 U.S.C. Section 6901-6991.
lUSA has proposed that it will be a condition of the license that the mill shall not accept any of
the Molycorp material at the site unless and until the mill's Safety and Environmental Review
Panel (SERP) has determined that the mill has sufficient licensed tailings capacity. The tailings
capacity must be sufficient to permanently store:
(1) All 1 1e.(2) byproduct material, as defined under the Atomic Energy Act,
that would result from the processing of all of the material;
(2) All other ores and alternate feed materials on site; and
(3) All other materials required to be disposed of in the mill's tailings
impoundments pursuant to the mill's reclamation plan.
By letter dated November 16, 2000, IUSA developed a standard operating procedure entitled
"Tailings Capacity Evaluation".
a. Site and Material lnformation
The Molycorp site is located in Mountain Pass, California. This material consists of lead sulfide
sludges containing uranium stored in ponds. The material is a result of extraction of lathanides
and other rare earth minerals. Molycorp estimates the amount of material for this amendment
request to be up lo 17,75O tons. Molycorp has estimated that the material has an average
uranium content of approximately 0.15 percent, or greater.
Since 1951 , Molycorp has operated a surface mining and milling operation for the recovery and
chemical separation of lanthanides and other rare earth metals from bastnasite ores. From
1965 through 1984 Molycorp constructed and operated three lead sulfide ponds for the
evaporation of lead sulfides from the clarifier/thickener operation. The lead sulfide sludges
contain uranium, which is also precipitated in the thickener. The ponds were taken out of
service in 1984 and in 1997 Molycorp drafted a Closure Plan for the decommissioning of the
ponds which required the removal and off-site disposal or recovery of the lead sulfide sludges
contained in the ponds. This amendment request seeks authorization to process the lead
sulfide sludges for their uranium content.
IUSA's October 17,2OO1, submittal describes the additional 35 drums of material to be included
in this request. The drummed material is similar to the pond material in source, chemical
composition, radiological composition, and physical properties. The drummed material
originated from 1985 onward after the ponds were taken out of service. The material is the
same uranium-bearing lead sulfide stream that had previously been transferred to the ponds.
The State of California classifies the drummed material as Source Material and it is estimated
that the uranium content is greater than 0.05 percent total uranium and thorium.
STAFF TECHNICAL EVALUATION
We have reviewed IUSA's request in accordance with NRC staff guidance entitled, "lnterim
Guidance on the Use of Uranium Mill Feed Material Other Than Natural Ores" provided in the
NRC Regulatory lssue Summary 2000-23 that was mailed to uranium recovery licensees on
November 30, 2000, and 10 CFR Part 40, Appendix A requirements. The staff guidance
(referred to hereinafter as the "Alternate Feed Guidance") requires that we make the following
determinations in our reviews of licensee requests to process material other than natural
uranium ores:
(a) Whether the feed material qualifies as "ore" as defined in the NRC guidance;
(b) Whether the feed material contains listed hazardous waste; and
(c) Whether the feed material is being processed primarily for its source-material
content.
ln this evaluation, we discuss how IUSA has addressed each of these criteria in its application
to amend the license. We also discuss the other considerations that affect the granting of this
amendment.
a. t'
For the tailings and wastes from the proposed processing to qualify as 1 1e.(2) byproduct
material, the feed material must qualify as "ore." ln the Alternate Feed Guidance, we define
"ore" in part as:
"...any other matter from which source material is extracted in a licensed uranium
or thorium mill."
IUSA has proposed to use alternate feed material from the Molycorp site that contains varying
concentrations of uranium, a "source material" as defined by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954
(AEA). Uranium concentrations are estimated to be 0.15 percent by weight. Because IUSA is
proposing in this amendment request to extract the uranium from this material at their White
Mesa uranium mill, we find that the proposed feed material qualifies as "ore" as defined in our
guidance.
b. Determination of whether the feed materia! contains hazardous waste
Under RCRA, in order for a material to be classified as a hazardous waste, the material must
first be classified as a solid waste (40 CFR Part 261). Secondly, the material can become
hazardous by listing or by characteristic. The Molycorp material contains enough lead content
that it could be considered hazardous waste by characteristic under the toxicity testing.
However, the NRC would classify the Molycorp material as "source material" ore due to the
processing of uranium. Since the material would be classified as "source material" under the
Atomic Energy Act, it would be excluded as a hazardous waste under RCRA per 40 CFR Part
261.4 since the material would not be considered a solid waste. Part 261.4 states that "source,
special nuclear or by-product material as defined by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as
amended, 42 U.S.C. 2011 et seq" are "not solid wastes for the purpose of this part". Staff
evaluated the potential health and safety impacts associated with chemical constituents in the
material such as lead.
c. Determination of whether the feed material is being processed primarily for
its source-materia! content
Using our Alternate Feed Guidance, a licensee must show that potential alternate feed material
is being processed primarily for its source-material content. ln the Commission Memorandum
and Order of February 10, 2000, the Commission stated that the staff does not need to
consider the quantity of uranium in its review, only whether the feed material (ore) is being
processed primarily for its source content and that radiation safety is considered. IUSA has
provided a signed certification that the uranium-bearing material is being processed primarily for
the recovery of uranium and for no other primary purpose.
d. Conclusions concerning compliance with alternate feed material criteria
Based on the information provided by IUSA, the NRC staff finds that the Molycorp material
meets the criteria in the Alternate Feed Guidance, because (1) it qualifies as an "ore" as
defined by NRC guidance, (2) the material to be processed will not be or contain listed
hazardous wastes, and (3) it is being processed primarily for its source-material content.
ADDITIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS
a. Transportation Considerations
The material will be shipped using exclusive-use trucks from the Mountain Pass facility to the
mill in lined, covered, aluminum end-dump trailers and one or two trucks containing the
drummed material. The materialwill be manifested in accordance with U.S. Department of
Transportation (DOT) regulations. Molycorp estimates that it will ship approximately 60-70
trucks per week for an estimated period of less than sixty to 90 days. The transportation route
as proposed, will follow route l-15 and l-70 to U.S. Highway 19'l at Crescent Junction, Utah and
through Highway 191 south to the mill.
According to the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT, 2000), on an average day 6,675
motor vehicles (467 trucks total) traveled the stretch of State Road 191 on the south limit of
Blanding, Utah. Based on this information, an average of 10 additional trucks per day
represents an increased truck traffic load of 2.0 percent for approximately 3 months.
According to the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT, 2000), total motor vehicle traffic
through Moab, Utah on a daily basis is 17,075 (683 trucks total). Additional trucks transporting
the inter-modal containers for Heritage Minerals material would be approximately 1.4 on the
average per day, which is approximately 1 .5"/. of the total truck traffic or 0.008% of the total
traffic. Based on this information, a very minor increase in truck traffic from this action is
anticipated.
b. Handlinq and Processinq at the Mill Site
The material will be temporarily stored on the existing storage pad until a sufficient quantity of
material is available to begin processing. IUSA will utilize water sprays, as required, to
minimize dusting during dumping activities. The materialwill be processed utilizing an acid
leach, in existing mill equipment, to dissolve the uranium. The solution will then be advanced
through the mill circuitry with no significant physical modifications.
Airborne particulate samples will be collected and analyzed for gross alpha concentrations. lf
uranium airborne concentrations exceed 25 percent of the Derived Air Concentration (DAC),
full-face respiratory protection will be implemented during the entire sequence of material
dumping operations.
The drums will be temporarily stored on the existing ore storage pad until processed. The
drummed material will be introduced into the millvia the existing remote drum handling area,
which was previously installed to handle drums of other alternate feed materials described in
License Conditions 10.6, 10.7, and 10.8.
IUSA has proposed that it will be a condition of the license that the mill shall not accept any of
the Heritage material at the site unless and until the mill's Safety and Environmental Review
Panel (SERP) has determined that the mill has sufficient licensed tailings capacity. The tailings
capacity must be sufficient to permanently store:
(1) All 11e.(2) byproduct material, as defined under the Atomic Energy Act,
that would result from the processing of all of the material;
(2\ All other ores and alternate feed materials on site; and
(3) All other materials required to be disposed of in the mill's tailings
impoundments pursuant to the mill's reclamation plan.
By letter dated November 16,2000, IUSA developed a standard operating procedure entitled
"Tailings Capacity Evaluation". Staff evaluated the procedure and finds it acceptable.
RECOMMENDED LICENSE CHANGE:
Pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 40, Materials License
SUA-1358 will be amended by the addition of License Condition 10.17 as follows:
10.17 The licensee is authorized to receive and process source materialfrom the Molycorp
site located in Mountain Pass, California, in accordance with statements,
representations, and commitments contained in the amendment request dated
December 19, 2000, and supplemental information in letters dated January 29,2001,
February 2,2001, March 20,2001, August 15, 2001, October 17, 2001, and
November 16, 2001.
Prior to the licensee receiving materials from the Molycorp 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 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.
[Applicable Amendment: 20]
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT EVALUATION
An Environmental Assessment (EA) and Finding of No Significant lmpact (FONSI) was
published in the federal register on December 11, 2001.
REFERENCES:
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). Commission Memorandum and Order,
lnternational Uranium (USA) Corp., CLI-00-01, 52 NRC 9 (Feb. 10, 2000).
NRC "Final Position and Guidance on the Use of Uranium Mill Feed Material Other Than
Natural Ores" Federal Register, Volume 60, No. 184, Pages 49296-49297. September22,
1 995.
NRC "Final Environmental Statement" for the White Mesa Uranium Project, Energy Fuels
Nuclear, lnc. May, 1979.
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 20,2OOO.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
MATERIALS LICENSE
PAGE 1 OF 10 PAGES
Pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-438), and
the applicable parts of Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, Chapter I, Parts 19,20,30, 3l ,32,33,34,35,36,39,40, 51,
70, and 7l,and in reliance on statements and representations heretofore made by the licensee, a licensee is hereby issued
authorizing the licensee to receive, acquire, possess, and transfer byproduct, source, and special nuclear material designated
below; to use such material for the purpose(s) and at the place(s) designated below; to deliver or transfer such material to
persons authorized to receive it in aicordance with the regulations of the applicable Part(s). This license shall be deemed t
contain the conditions specified in Section 183 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and is subject to all
applicable rules, regulations, and orders of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission now or hereafter in effect and to any
nditions specified below.
. License Number -3. "siji_i 3d"'""^ Amend No. 20
Licensee
lnternational Uranium (USA) Corporation
[Applicable Amendments: 2]
6425 S. Highway 191
P.O. Box 809
Blanding, Utah 84511
[Applicable Amendments: 2]
4. Expiration Date March 31,2007
Natural Uranium
SECTIoN e: Administrative Conditions
9.1 The authorized place of use shall be the licensee's White Mesa uranium milling facility, located in San
Juan County, Uiah.
g.2 All written notices and reports to the NRC required under this license, with the exception of incident and
event notifications under 10 CFR 2A.22O2 and 10 CFR 40.60 requiring telephone notification, shall be
addressed to the Chief , Uranium Recovery and Low-Level Waste Branch, Division of Waste
Management, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.
lncident and event notifications that require telephone notification shall be made to the NRC Operations
Center at (301 ) 816-5100.
9.3 The licensee shall conduct operations in accordance with statements, representations, and conditions
contained in the license renewal application submitted by letter dated August 23, 1991, as revised by
submittals dated January 13, and April 7, 1992, November 22, 1994, July 27 , 1 995, December 13, and
December 31 , 1996, and January 30, 1997, which are hereby incorporated by reference, and for the
Standby Trust Agreement, dated April 29, 1997, except where superseded by license conditions below.
Whenever the word "will" is used in the above referenced documents, it shall denote a requirement.
[Applicable Amendment: 2]
9.4 A. The licensee may, without prior NRC approval, and subject to the conditions specified in Part B of
this condition:
(1) Make changes in the facility or process, as presented in the application.
(2) Make changes in the procedures presented in the application.
(3) Conduct tests or experiments not presented in the application.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
MATERIALS LICENSE
SUPPLEMENTARY SHEET
PAGE 2 OF 10 PAGES
License Number SUA-1358
Docket or Reference 40-8681
Number
Amendment No. 20
9.5
B. The licensee shall file an application for an amendment to the license, unless the following
conditions are satisfied.
(1) The change, test, or experiment does not conflict with any requirement specifically
stated in this license, or impair the licensee's ability to meet all applicable NRC
regulations.
(2) There is no degradation in the essential safety or environmental commitments in the
license application, or provided by the approved reclamation plan.
(3) The change, test, or experiment is consistent with the conclusions of actions analyzed
and selected in the EA dated February 1997.
C. The licensee's determinations concerning Part B of this condition, shall be made by a "Safety
and Environmental Review Panel (SERP).' The SERP shall consist of a minimum of three
individuals. One member of the SERP shall have expertise in management and shall be
responsible for managerial and financial approval changes; one member shall have expertise
in operations ancl/or construction and shall have responsibility for implementing any operational
changes; and, one member shall be the corporate radiation safety officer (CRSO) or
equivalent, with the responsibility of assuring changes conform to radiation safety and
environmental requirements. Additional members may be included in the SERP as
appropriate, to address technical aspects such as health physics, groundwater hydrology,
surface-water hydrology, specific earth sciences, and other technical disciplines. Temporary
members or permanent members, other than the three above-specified individuals, may be
consultants.
D. The licensee shall maintain records of any changes made pursuant to this condition until
license termination. These records shall include written safety and environmental evaluations,
made by the SERP, that provide the basis for determining changes are in compliance with the
requirements referred to in Part B of this condition. The licensee shall furnish, in an annual
report to NRC, a description of such changes, tests, or experiments, including a summary of
the safety and environmental evaluation of each. ln addition, the licensee shall annually submit
to the NRC changed pages to the Operations Plan and Reclamation Plan of the approved
license application to reflect changes made under this condition.
The licensee's SERP shall function in accordance with the standard operating procedures
submitted by letter dated June 10, 1997.
[Applicable Amendments: 3]
The licensee shall maintain an NRC-approved financial surety arrangement, consistent with
10 CFR 40, Appendix A, Criteria 9 and 10, adequate to cover the estimated costs, if accomplished by
a third party, for decommissioning and decontamination of the mill and mill site, for reclamation of any
tailings or waste disposal areas, ground-water restoration as warranted and for the long-term
surveillance fee. Within three months of NRC approval of a revised reclamation/decommissioning
plan, the licensee shall submit, for NRC review and approval, a proposed revision to the financial
surety arrangement if estimated costs in the newly approved plan exceed the amount covered in the
existing financial surety. The revised surety shall then be in effect within 3 months of written NRC
approval.
PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
PAGE 3 OF 10 PAGES
MATERIALS LICENSE
SUPPLEMENTARY SHEET
REGULATORY COMMISSION
License Number SUA-1358
Docket or Reference 40-8681
Number
Amendment No. 20
9.6
Annual updates to the surety amount, required by 10 CFR 40, Appendix A, Criteria 9 and 10, shall be
submitted to the NRC at least 3 months prior to the anniversary date which is designated as June 4 of
each year. lf the NRC has not approved a proposed revision to the surety coverage 30 days prior to
the expiration date of the existing surety arrangement, the licensee shall extend the existing surety
arrangement for 1 year. Along with each proposed revision or annual update, the licensee shall submit
supporting documentation showing a breakdown of the costs and the basis for the cost estimates with
adjustments for inflation, maintenance of a minimum 15 percent contingency fee, changes in
engineering plans, activities performed and any other conditions affecting estimated costs for site
closure. The basis for the cost estimate is the NRC approved reclamation/decommissioning plan or
NRC approved revisions to the plan. The previously provided guidance entitled "Recommended
Outline for Site Specific Reclamation and Stabilization Cost Estimates" outlines the minimum
considerations used by the NRC in the review of site closure estimates.
Reclamation/decommissioning plans and annual updates should follow this outline.
The currently approved surety instrument, a Performance Bond issued by National Union
Fire lnsurance Company in favor of the NRC, and the associated Standby Trust Agreement, dated
April 29, 1997, shall be bontinuously maintained in an amount not less than $10,365,457 for the
purpose of complying with 10 CFR 40, Appendix A, Criteria 9 and 10, until a replacement is authorized
by the NRC.
[Applicable Amendments: 2,3,5, 13, 15, 19]
Therefore, this otfice must receive an updated surety in this amount within 90 days of this letter.
Standard operating procedures shall be established and followed for all operational process activities
involving radioactive materials that are handled, processed, or stored. SOPs for operational activities
shall enumerate pertinent radiation safety practices to be followed. Additionally, written procedures
shall be established for non:operational activities to include in-plant and environmental monitoring,
bioassay analyses, and instrument calibrations. An up-to-date copy of each written procedure shall be
kept in the mill area to which it applies.
All written procedures for both operationaland non-operational activities shall be reviewed and
approved in writing by the radiation safety officer (RSO) before implementation and whenever a
change in procedure is proposed to ensure that proper radiation protection principles are being
applied. ln addition, the RSO shall perform a documented review of all existing operating procedures
at least annually.
Before engaging in any activity not previously assessed by the NRC, the licensee shall administer a
cultural resource inventory. All disturbances associated with the proposed development will be
completed in compliance with the National Historic Preservation Act (as amended) and its
implementing regulations (36 CFR 800), and the Archaeological Resources Protection Act (as
amended) and its implementing regulations (43 CFR 7).
ln order to ensure that no unapproved disturbance of cultural resources occurs, any work resulting in
the discovery of previously unknown cultural artifacts shall cease. The artifacts shall be inventoried
and evaluated in accordance with 36 CFR Part 800, and no disturbance shall occur until the licensee
has received authorization from the NRC to proceed.
The licensee shall avoid by project design, where feasible, the archeological sites designated
"contributing" in the report submitted by letter dated July 28, 1988. When it is not feasible to avoid a
site designated "contributing" in the report, the licensee shall institute a data recovery program for that
9.7
NRC FORM 374 (3-2000)TED ON RECYCLED PAPER
NRC FORM 374A
MATERIALS LICENSE
SUPPLEMENTARY SHEET
U.S. TIUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION PAGE 4 OF 10 PAGES
License Number SUA-1358
Docket or Reference 40-8681
Number
10.1
10.2
The licensee shall recover through archeological excavation all "contributing" sites listed in the report
which are located in or within 100 feet of borrow areas, stockpile areas, construction areas, or the
perimeter of the reclaimed tailings impoundment. Data recovery fieldwork at each site meeting these
briteria shall be completed prior to the start of any project related disturbance within 100 feet of the
site, but analysis and report preparation need not be complete.
Additionally, the licensee shall conduct such testing as is required to enable the Commission to
determine lf those sites designated as "Undetermined" in the report and located within 100 feet of
present or known future construction areas are of such significance to warrant their redesignation asi'contributing." ln all cases, such testing shall be completed before any aspect of the undertaking
affects a site.
Archeological contractors shall be approved in writing by the Commission. The Commission will
approve an archeological contractor who meets the minimum standards for a principal investigltor set
forth in 36 CFR Part 66, Appendix C, and whose qualifications are found acceptable by the SHPO.
9.8 The licensee is hereby authorized to possess byproduct materialin the form of uranium waste.tailings
and other uranium byproduct waste generated by the licensee's milling operations authorized Qyltlslicense. Mill tailings shall not be transferred from the site without specific prior approval of the NRC in
the form of a license amendment. The licensee shall maintain a permanent record of alltransfers
made under the provisions of this condition.
9.9 The licensee is hereby exempted from the requirements of Section 20.1902 (e) of 10 CFR Part 20 for
areas within the mill, provided that all entrances to the millare conspicuously posted in accordance
with Section 20.1902 (e) and with the words, "Any area within this mill may contain radioactive
material."
g.1 Release of equipment or packages from the restricted area shall be in accordance with "Guidelines for
Decontaminaiion of Facilities and Equipment Prior to Release for Unrestricted Use or Termination of
Licenses for Byproduct, Source, or Special Nuclear Material," dated May 1987, or suitable alternative
proc_edures approved by the NRC prior to any such release.
9.1 The final reclamation shall be in accordance with the May 1999, Reclamation Plan Revision 2.0,
Attachment A submitted on June 22,1999, and Revision 3.0 submitted on July 7,2OOO. Prior to the
placement of alternate feed material, the licensee shall determine that adequate cell space is
available for that additional material. This determination shall be made by a SERP approved
procedure.
9.11 The final reclamation shall be in accordance with the May 1999, Reclamation Plan Revision 2.0,
Attachment A submitted on June 22,'1999, and Revision 3.0 submitted on July 7, 2OOO. Prior to the
placement of alternate feed material, the licensee shall determine that adequate cell space is
hvailable for that additional material. This determination shall be made by a SERP approved
procedure.
SECTIoN to: Operational Controls, Limits, and Restrictions
The mill production rate shall not exceed 4380 tons of yellowcake per year.
All liquid effluents from mill process buildings, with the exception of sanitary wastes, shall be
returned to the mill circuit or discharged to the tailings impoundment.
NRC FORM 374 (3-2ooo)PRINTED ON
MATERIALS LICENSE
SUPPLEMENTARY SHEET
License Number SUA-1358
Docket or Reference 40-8681
Number
Amendment No. 20
'10.3
'10.4
10.5
10.6
10.7
10.8
Freeboard limits for Cells 1-1, 3, and 44, shall be set periodically in accordance with the
procedures set out in Section 3.0 to Appendix E of the approved license application, including
the October 13, 1999 revisions made to the January 10, 1990 Drainage Report. The freeboard
limit for Cell 3 shall be recalculated annually in accordance with the procedures set in the
October 13, 1999 revision to the Drainage Report.
[Applicable Amendment: 16]
Disposal of material and equipment generated at the mill site shall be conducted as described
in the licensee's submittals dated December 12, 1994 and May 23, 1995, with the following
addition:
A. The maximum lift thickness for materials placed over tailings shall be less than 4-feet
thick. Subsequent lifts shall be less than 2-feet thick. Each lift shall be compacted by
tracking of heavy equipment, such as a Cat D-6, at least 4 times prior to placement of
subsequent lifts.
ln accordance with the licensee's submittal dated May 20, 1993, the licensee is hereby
authorized to dispose of byproduct material generated at licensed in situ leach facilities, subject
to the following conditions:
A. Disposal of waste is limited to 5000 cubic yards from a single source.
B. All contaminated equipment shall be dismantled, crushed, or sectioned to minimize void
spaces. Barrels containing waste other than soil or sludges shall be emptied into the
disposal area and the barrels crushed. Barrels qontaining soil or sludges shall be
verified to be full prior to disposal. Barrels not completely full shall be filled with tailings
or soil.
C. All waste shall be buried in Cell No. 3 unless prior written approval is obtained from the
NRC for alternate burial locations.
D. All disposal activities shall be documented. The documentation shall include
descriptions of the waste and the disposal locations, as well as all actions required by
this condition. An annual summary of the amounts of waste disposed of from off-site
generators shall be sent to the NRC.
The licensee is authorized to receive and process source materials from the Allied Signal
Corporation's Metropolis, lllinois, facility in accordance with the amendment request dated June
15,1993.
The licensee is authorized to receive and process source materialfrom Allied Signal, lnc. of
Metropolis, lllinois, in accordance with the amendment request dated September 20, 1996, and
amended by letters dated October 30, and November 1 1, 1996.
The licensee is authorized to receive and process source material, in accordance with the
amendment request dated March 5, 1997.
[Applicable Amendments: 1]
PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
PAGE 6 OF 10U.S. ]iiUELEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
License Number SUA-1358
Docket or Reference 40-8681
Number
1O.g The licensee is authorized to receive and process source materialfrom Cabot Performance Materials'
tacifity near Boyertown, Pennsylvania, in accordance with the amendment request dated April 3, 1997,
as amended by submittals dated May 19, and August 6, 1997.
[Applicable Amendments: 4]
10.10 The licensee is authorized to receive and process source materialfrom the Ashland 2 Form.erly
Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP) site, located near Tonawanda, New York, in
accordance witn the amendment r6quesi dated Miy 8, 1998, as amended by the submittals dated
May 27, June 3, and June 1 1, 1998.
[Applicable Amendment: 6]
10.1 1 The licensee is authorized to receive and process source material from Cameco Corporation's Blind
River and Port Hope facilities, located in Ontario, Ganada, in accordance with the amendment request
dated June 4, 1gg'8, and by the submittals dated September 14, September 16, September 25,
October 7 , and October 8, 1998.
However, the licensee is not authorized to receive or process from these facilities, the crushed carbon
anodes iOeniitieO in these submittals, either as a sepdrate material or mixed in with material already
approved for receipt or processing.
10.12 The licensee is authorized to receive and process source material from the Ashland 1 1nd Seaway
Area D Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP) site, located near Tonowanda,
New York, in aicordance with statements, representations, aRd commitments contained in the
amendment request dated October 15, 1998; as amended by letters dated November 23, 1998,
November 24,1998, December23, 1998, January 11, 1999, January 27,1999, and February 1, 1999.
[Applicable Amendment: 10]
10.13 The licensee is authorized to receive and process source materiatfrom the St. Louis Formerly Utilized
SiteS Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP) site, in accordance with staternents, representations, and
commitments contained in-the amendmeni request dated March 2, 1999, and as amended and
supplemented by submittals dated June 21, 1999; Jlnq 29, 1999 (2); and July 8, 19.99. Prior to the
lic6nsee receiving materials from the St. Louis FUSRAP site, the licensee must make a determination
that adequate taiiings space is available for the tailings produced. from the processing of this material.
This determination Snati Oe made based on a SERP approved internal procedure.
[Applicable Amendments: 13, 14]
10.14 The licensee is authorized to receive and process source materialfrom the Linde Formerly Utilized
Sites RemeOijtRction Program (FUSRAP) site, in accordance with statements, representations, and
commitmenis contained in-the amendment request dated March 16,2000, and as amended and
supplemented by submittals dated April 26,20b0, May 15,2000, June 16,2000, June 19,2000, June
23,2000.
prior to the licensee receiving materials from the Linde FUSRAP site, the licensee must make
a determination that adequaie tailings space is available for the tailings pro^du_ced from the
processing of this materidl. This determination shall be made based on a SERP.approved
internat pr"ocedure. Design changes to the cells or the reclamation plan require the licensee to
submit an amendment request for NRC review and approval.
CYCLED PAPER
PAGE 7 OF 10 PAGES
MATERIALS LICENSE
SUPPLEMENTARY SHEET
License Number SUA-1358
Docket or Reference 40-8681
Number
Amendment No. 20
Prior to the licensee receiving materials from the Linde FUSRAP site, the licensee must require
that the generator of the material certify that the material does not contain listed hazardous
waste aJdefined under the Besource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) per a
Radioactive Material Profile Record.
[Applicable Amendment: 14]
10.15 The licensee is authorized to receive and process source materialfrom the W.R. Grace site located in
Chattanooga, Tennessee, in accordance with statements, representations, and commitments
contained i-n the amendment request dated April 12,2000, and as amended and supplemented by -submittals dated April24,2OOO,.April 26, 2OOO, May 5, 2000, November 16, 2000, and December 18,
2000.
Prior to the licensee receiving materials from the W.R. Grace site, the licensee must make a
determination that adequatelailings space is available for the tailings produced from the processing of
this material. This deteimination Snalibe made based on the SERP approved standard operating
procedure for determination of tailings capacity. Design chqn_ges to the cells or the reclamation plan
i'equire the licensee to submit an amendment request for NRC review and approval.
Prior to the licensee receiving materials from the W.R. Grace site, the licensee must require that the
generator of the material certify that the material does not contain listed hazardous waste as defined
Inder the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) per a Radioactive Material Profile
Record.
[Applicable Amendment: 17]
10.16: The licensee is authorized to receive and process source materialfrom the Heritage Minerals
lncorporated siite, in accordance with statements, representations, and commitments contained in the
ameridment request dated July 5, 2OOO, and as supflemented by submittals November 16, 2000, and
December 18,2000.
Prior to the licensee receiving materials from the Heritage Minerals lncorporated 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 the
bf np approved stdndard operating procedure for determination of tailings capacity. Design
changed io the cells or the reclamalion plan require the licensee to submit an amendment
request for NRC review and approval.
Prior to the licensee receiving materials from the Heritage Minerals lncorporated site, the
licensee must require that the generator of the material certify that the material does not
contain listed hazardous waste as defined under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
(RCRA) per a Radioactive Material Profile Record.
[Applicable Amendment: 18]
10.17: The licensee is authorized to receive and process source materialfrom the Molycorp site located in
Mountain Pass, Calilornia, in accordance with statements, representations, and commitments
contained in the amendment request dated December 19, 2000, and supplemental inf_ormation in
letters dated January 29,2001, February 2,2001, March 20,2OO1, August 15, 2001, October 17,
2001, and November 16,2001.
PAGE 8 OF 10 PAGES
License Number SUA-1358
Docket or Reference 40-8681
Number
Amendment No. 20
Prior to the licensee receiving materials from the Molycorp 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 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.
[Applicable Amendment: 20]
SECTIoN 11: Monitoring, Recording, and Bookkeeping Requirements
11.1 The results of sampling, analyses, surveys and monitoring, the results of calibration of equipment,
reports on audits and inspections, all meetings and training courses required by th's license and any
subsequent reviews, investigations, and corrective actions, shall be documented. Unless otherwise
specified in the NRC regulations all such documentation shall be maintained for a period of at least
five (5) years.
11.2 The licensee shall implement the effluent and environmental monitoring program specified in
Section 5.5 of the renewal application, as amended by the submittal dated June 8, 1995, and as
revised with the following modifications or additions:
A. Stack sampling shallinclude a determination of flow rate.
B. Surface water samples shall also be analyzed semiannually for total and dissolved U-nat, Ra-
226, and Th-230, with the exception of the Westwater Creek, which shall be sampled annually
for water or sediments and analyzed as above. A sediment sample shall not be taken in place
of a water sample unless a water sample was not available.
C. Groundwater sampling shall be conducted in accordance with the requirements in License
Condition 11.3.
D. -. The licensee shall utilize lower limits of detection in accordance with Section 5 of Regulatory
Guide 4.14 (Revision 1), for analysis of effluent and environmental samples.
E. The inspections performed semiannually of the critical orifice assembly committed to in the
submittal dated March 15, '1986, shall be documented. The critical orifice assembly shall be
calibrated at least every 2 years against a positive displacement Roots meter to obtain the
required calibration curve.
[Applicable Amendment: 5]
11.3 The licensee shall implement a groundwater detection monitoring program to ensure compliance to
10 CFR Part 40, Appendix A. The detection monitoring program shall be in accordance with the report
entitled, "Points of Compliance, White Mesa Uranium Mill," submitted by letter dated October 5, 1994,
and the following:
A. The licensee shall sample monitoring wells WMMW-s, -1 1, -12, -14, -15, and -17, on
a quarterly basis. Samples shall be analyzed for chloride, potassium, nickel, and uranium, and
the results of such sampling shall be included with the environmental monitoring reports
submitted in accordance with 10 CFR 40.65.
ln addition, the licensee shall implement a monitoring program of the leak detection systems
for the disposal cells as follows:
PRINTED ON RECYCLED
MATERIALS LICENSE
SUPPLEMENTARY SHEET
PAGE 9 OF 10 PAGES
License Number SUA-I358
Docket or Reference 40-8681
Number
Amendment No. 20
B.The licensee shall measure and record the "depth to fluid" in each of the tailings disposal cell
standpipes on a weekly basis. lf sufficient fluid is present in the leak detection syste.m (LDS) of
any cbli, the licensee shall pump fluid from the LDS, to the extent Leasonably possible, and
reiord the volume of fluid recovered. Any fluid pumped from an LDS shall be returned to a
disposal cell.
lf fluid is pumped from an LDS, the licensee shall calculate the flow rate by dividing.the
recorded'volume of fluid recovered by the elapsed time since fluid was last pumped or
increases in the LDS fluid levels were recorded, whichever is the more recent. The licensee
shall document the results of this calculation.
Upon the initial pumping of fluid from an LDS, the licensee shall collect a fluid sample 3nd _.analyze the fluid for pH and the parameters listed in paragraph A of this license condition. The
licensee shall determine whether the LDS fluid originated from the disposal cell by ascertaining
if the collected fluid contains elevated levels of the constituents listed in paragraph A of this
license condition or has a pH level less than 5.0. lf either elevated constituent levels or a pH
less than 5.0 is obserued, the licensee shall assume that the disposal cell is the origin of the
fluid.
lf the LDS fluid is determined not to have originated from the disposal cell, the licensee shall
continue with weekly measurements of "depth to fluid" in the LDS standpipes. The licensee
shall confirm, on an-annual basis, that fluid from the disposal cell has not entered the LDS by
collecting (to the extent possible) and analyzing an LDS fluid sample for the above stated
parameters.
Upon indication that the LDS fluids originated from the disposal cell, the licensee shall
d6termine the flow rate through the liner by the calculation method in paragraph B of this
license condition. lf the flow iate is equal to or greater than one gallon per minute, the licensee
shall:
1. Evaluate the cause of the liner distress and take appropriate and timely actions to
mitigate the leak and any consequent potential impacts;
2. Continue to measure and record LDS "depth to fluid" measurements weekly; and
3. Notify NRC by telephone within 48 hours, in accordance with License Condition 9.2,
and iubmit a written report within 30 days of notilying NRC by telephone, in accordance
with License Condition 9.2. The written report shall include a description of the
mitigative action(s) taken and a discussion of the mitigative action results.
lf the calculated flow rate is less than one gallon per minute, the licensee shall continue with
weekly measurements of "depth to fluid" in the LDS standpipes.
All sampling, analysis, and evaluation of LDS fluids shall be documented and retained onsite
until license termination for NRC inspection.
[Applicable Amendment: 8]
C.
D.
E.
YCLED PAPER
MATERIALS LICENSE
SUPPLEMENTARY SHEET
License Number SUA-1358
Docket or Reference 40-8681
Number
Amendment No. 20
11.4
11.5
11.6
Annually, the licensee shall collect, during mill operations, a set of air samples covering eight
hours of sampling, at a high collection flow rate (i.e., greater than or equal to 40 liters per
minute), in routinely or frequently occupied areas of the mill. These samples shall be analyzed
for gross alpha. ln addition, with each change in mill feed material or at least annually, the
licensee shall analyze the mill feed or production product for U-nat, Th-230, Ra-226, and Pb-
210 and use the analysis results to assess the fundamental constituent composition of air
sample particulates.
[Applicable Amendment: 7]
Calibration of in-plant air and radiation monitoring equipment shall be performed as specified in
the license renewal application, under Section 3.0 of the "Radiation Protection Procedures
Manual," with the exception that in-plant air sampling equipment shall be calibrated at least
quarterly and air sampling equipment checks shall be documented.
The licensee shall perform an annual ALARA audit of the radiation safety program in
accordance with Regulatory Guide 8.31.
SECTION 1 2: Reporting Requirements
12.1 DELETED by Amendment 13.
[Applicable Amendment: 13]
12.2 The licensee shall submit a detailed decommissioning plan to the NRC at least twelve (12) months
prior to planned final shutdown of mill operations that includes a deailed Quatity Assurance Plan. The
plan will be in accordance with Regulatory Guide 4.15, "Quality Assurance for Radiological Monitoring
Programs," and NUREG-1575, "Multi-Agency Radiation Survey and Site lnvestigation Manual
(MARSSIM), or equivalent most current guidance.
[Applicable Amendment: 1 3]
'ruF":r*^TORYCOMMSSON
Melvyn N. Leach, Chief
Fuel Cycle Licensing Branch
Division of Fuel Cycle Safety
and Safeguards
Office of Nuclear Material Safety
and Safeguards
P"1" l'\"\"
NRC FORM 374 (3-2000)PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
DIVISION OF SOLID AND HAZARDOUS WASTE
Michael O. l.eavin 288 North 1460 WestGovemor P.O. Box l44gg0
Dianne R. Nielson, Ph.D. Salt take City, Utah 84114-4880
Executive Director (g0t) 53g-6170
Dennis R. Downs [phone] FaxDirector (8ol) 536-4414 T.D.D.
www.deq.state.ut.us Web
IN.Iay 2,2001
/w
WSr7r+I *nt.;
v,,-v; Jn! 4 S/'s/or,
etta)l {,,,u,"^ Da^ Yunl>n
A\sn
David C. Frydenlund
Vice President and General Counsel
International Uranium (USA) Corporation
IndependencePlaza
1050 Seventeenth Street
Suite 950
Denver, CO 80265
RE: Alternate Feed Material From The Molycorp Site
Dear Mr. Frydenlund:
This letter is concerning White Mesa's proposal to receive alternate feed material from the
Molycorp site that contains high levels of lead. In reviewing both EPA's letter to Mr.Von Till of
the NRC and the memo from Parsons, Behle and Latimer, several questions have arisen. In the
EPA response, it indicates that the Molycorp waste could be considered a by-product if it is
legitimately reclaimed. EPA has also provided, in the past, a list of questions to help determine
if the reclamation is legitimate. In order to help the Division understand how this reclamation is
legitimate, the following questions will need to be adequately addressed prior to receiving the
Molycorp alternate feed material:
l. Please explain what type of material will be received from Molycorp. Is it all one waste
stream or are there several?
2. Will any lead be recovered and recycled?
3. How does the amount of lead found in the alternate feed compare to the amount found in
typical ore?
4. How will this alternate feed be processed at the mill? Is this different from processing typical
ores?
5. One of the issues to be considered when reclaiming a hazardous waste is the value of the
material to be reclaimed versus how much it costs to process the material. What is the value of
May 2,2001
PageZ
this alternate feed? Is there a sufficient amount of uranium to pay for the processing of this
alternate feed?
6. How will the lead effect the processing of the alternate feed?
7. Do you know if the waste generated from processing this alternate feed will still fail the
characteristic of a hazardous waste? Will this waste be similar in concentration to the lead
already found in your tailing ponds?
8. Will the processing of this alternate feed likely release hazardous constituents that are
different from or greater than the processing of typical ore? If so what are they?
9. Will the final product be used to produce anything that will be applied to the ground or used
to produce a fuel?
10. An NRC guidance memo indicates that processing characteristic hazardous waste alternate
feed according to the guidance is acceptable to EPA. Please provide a letter from EPA that
indicates they are in concurrence with the NRC guidance.
We appreciate your response to these questions. If you have any questions concerning this letter,
please contact Don Verbica at 538-6170.
Sincerely,
Dennis R. Downs, Executive Secretary
Utah Solid and Hazardous Waste Control Board
DRD/DGV/ts
c: Bill Sinclair, Utah Division of Radiation Control
William Von Till, NRC
C:\TEMRwhitemesa.wpd
0.,.o*
"
JJilli;&Tlo* *, r0*
wASHTNGTON, D.C. 20ss5-0001
November 30, 2001
Ms. Michelle Rehmann, Environmental Manager
lnternational Uranium (USA) Corporation
lndependence Plaza, Suite 950
1050 Seventeenth Street
Denver, Colorado 80265
SUBJECT: AMENDMENT REQUEST TO MATERIALS LICENSE SUA-1358 -- TO RECEIVE
AND PROCESS ALTERNATE FEED MATER]AL FROM THE MOLYCORP SITE
AT THE WHITE MESA URANIUM MILL
ENVI RONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
Dear Ms. Rehmann:
ln your letter dated December 19, 2OOO, and supplemental information in letters dated January
2g', 2001, February 2, 2001, March 20, 2001, August 15, 2001 , October 17, 2001, and
November 16, 2OO1; you asked that we amend your license for the White Mesa uranium mill to
permit the receipt and processing of material from the Molycorp site, located in Mountain Pass,
balifornia. You propose to receive this material at your White Mesa uranium mill in Blanding,
Utah, use this material as alternate feed for the primary purpose of removing the uranium so
that it can be reused, and dispose of the process tailings in the mill's tailings pile' Enclosed is
the Environmental Assessment (EA) for this action. The conclusion of the Environmental
Assessment is a Finding of No Significant lmpact (FONSI) for the proposed licensing action.
Once we publish the FONSI in the Federal Register, we will complete the licensing action.
lf you have any questions regarding this letter or the NRC staff review, please contact the NRC
Pioject Manager, William von Till, at [phone]. ln accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the
NRb's "RuleJof Practice," a copy of this letter will be available electronically for public
inspection in the NRC Public Document Room or from the Publicly Available Records (PARS)
component of NRC's document system (ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible from the NRC Web
site at http://www.nrc.gov/NRC/ADAMS/index.html (the Public Electronic Reading Room).
'%uu1
Melvyn N. Ldach, Chief
Fuel Cycle Licensing Branch
Division of Fuel CYcle SafetY
and Safeguards
Office of Nuclear Material SafetY
and Safeguards
Docket No. 40-8681cc: W. Sinclair, UT
Tom Rice, Ute Mountain Ute Tribe
Terry Brown, U.S. EPA Region Vlll
Loren Setlow, U.S. EPA Office of Radiation and lndoor Air (6608J)
Paul Giardina, Radiation Program Manager, U.S. EPA, Region 2
7>\,g\,o\
I
as rilzU-;>-
::
|,t.^ ZWt
ENVI RONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
FOR
TNTERNATIONAL 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
MOLYCORP ALTERNATE FEED
PREPARED BY
THE U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
DIVISION OF FUEL CYCLE SAFETY AND SAFEGUARDS
OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY AND SAFEGUARDS
ENVI RONM ENTAL ASSESSM ENT
FOR THE
MOLYCORP ALTERNATE FEED REOUEST
INTERNATIONAL URANIUM CORPORATION'S URANIUM MILL SITE
WHITE MESA, SAN JUAN COUNTY
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background and Need for the Proposed Action
This action is to evaluate the potential environmental impacts of the proposalfor lnternational
Uranium (USA) Corporation's (IUSA) White Mesa Uranium and Tailings Mill (White Mesa mill)
to receive and process materialfrom the Molycorp Lanthanide Division facility (Molycorp facility)
located in Mountain Pass, California. The mill site is located in San Juan County, Utah
approximately 8 kilometers (km) (5 miles) south of Blanding, Utah. IUSA submitted a license
amendment application dated December 19, 2000, and supplemental information in letters
dated January 29,2001, February 2,2001, March 20,2OO1, August 15, 2001, October 17,
2001, and November 16, 2OO1, to receive and process uranium-bearing materials from the
Molycorp facility. These materials would be processed as "alternate feed material" (sources of
uranium and thorium that are not natural ore), and would generate materials that have similar
chemical, physical, and radiological waste as compared to conventional mill tailings. A
separate Technical Evaluation Report (TER) will be completed by the NRC using the formal
guidance, "lnterim Guidance on the Use of Uranium Mill Feed Material Other Than Natural
Ores" provided in the NRC Regulatory lssue Summary 2OOO-23 that was mailed to uranium
recovery licensees on November 30, 2000.
The White Mesa mill is licensed by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (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.
1.2 Previous National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Actions
A Final Environmental Statement (FES) was prepared by the NRC for the original 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 IUSA's reclamation plan in February 2000.
1.3 Proposed Action
The proposed action is for the White Mesa mill to receive materials from the Molycorp Facility
and process the material as "alternate feed" for its uranium content. The material may be
temporarily staged until a sufficient quantity is received to run the mill. Waste from the
processing will be disposed in the mill's tailing cells. Reclamation will be in accordance with the
approved reclamation plan (NRC,2OO1). Environmental impacts dealing with the milling
operation have already been addressed under prior NEPA actions.
1.4 Molycorp Site and Material lnformation
The Molycorp site is located in Mountain Pass, California. The materialfrom Molycorp consists
2
extraction of lathanides and other rare earth minerals. Molycorp estimates the amount of material
for this amendment request to be up to 17,750 tons. Molycorp has estimated that the material has
an average uranium content of approximately 0.15 percent.
Since 1g51 , Molycorp has operated a surface mining and milling operation for the recovery and
chemical separation of lanthanides and other rare earth metals f rom bastnasite ores. From 1965
through 1984 Molycorp constructed and operated three lead sulfide ponds for the evaporation of
lead s-ulf ides f rom ihe clarif ier/thickener operation. The lead sulf ide sludge contains uranium, which
is also precipitated in the thickener. The ponds were taken out of service in 1984 and in 1997
Molycoip drafted a Closure Plan for the decommissioning of the ponds which required the removal
and off-site disposal or recovery of the lead sulfide sludge contained in the ponds' This
amendment request seeks authorization to process the lead sulfide sludge for its uranium content'
Through submittals dated October 17 and November 16, 2001 , IUSA also requested to receive and
process 3G drums of the same type of processed material. This drummed material is covered
under a Radioactive Material License (3229-36) through the Radiological Health Branch,
Department of Health Services, for the State of California. lt is NRC's understanding that California
considers this material to be classified as source material as well as the material in the ponds.
1.5 Review Scope
ln accordance with 1O CFR Part 51 , this EA serves to: (1) present information and analysis for
determining whether to issue a Finding of No Significant lmpact (FONSI) or to prepare an
Environmental lmpact Statement (ElS); (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
The area surrounding the facility has an arid climate with an annual precipitation of 30 centimeters
(cm) (12 inches) and a mean temperature of 9 degrees centigrade (50 degrees Fahrenheit).
Runoff in the project area is directed by the general surface topography either westward into
Westward Creek, 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 lndians. 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
oi LanO Management (BLM), the U.S. National Park Service (NPS), and the U.S. Forest Service.
Primary land uies include livestock grazing, wildlife range, recreation, and exploration for minerals,
oil, and gas. A quarter of the county is lndian land owned by either the Navajo Nation or the Ute
3
Tribe. The land within 8 km (5 miles) of the site is predominantly owned by residents of Blanding.
The White Mesa mill site encompasses approximalely 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'Entrada/Nivajo Sandstones form one of the most permeable aquifers in the region. _The aquifer
is separated irom the Burro Canyon formation by the Morrison formation and Summerville
formation. Water in this aquifer is under artesian pressure and is used at the mill for industrial
needs and showering. Recharge to the aquifers occurs by infiltration along the f lanks 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.
Seventy-six groundwater applications, within a 8 kilometer (5 mile) radius of the site, are on file with
the Utah Stale 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. No wells are completed within the perched groundwater of the Burro Canyon formation
within five miles downgradient of the site. 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.
ln the vicinity of the site, the presence of six animal species and one plant species classified as
either endangered or threatened could occur. These include: (1)the bald eagle (haliaeetus
leucocephatus); (2l1the American peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinis anatum)i (3)the black-footed
ferret (Musteta nigripes);(4) the Southwestern willow flycatcher (Empidonax traillii extimus); (5)
California Condor (Gymnogyps californianus); (6) the Mexican Spotted Owl (Sfrx occidentalis
lucida), and (7) the Navajo Sedge (Carex specuicolaXplant species). 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 occur any longer in the area. The California Condor, Mexican Spotted Owl,
and Navajo Sedge have been added to the list since the 1997 EA. NRC staff contacted wildlife
biologists from the Bureau of Land Management and the Utah Wildlife Service to gather local
information on the occurrences 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.
No populations of fish are present on the project site, nor are any known to exist in the immediate
area of the site. Four species of fish designated as endangered or threatened occur in the San
Juan River 29 km (18 miles) south of the site. There are no discharges of mill effluents to surface
waters; therefore, no impacts are expected for the San Juan River due to operations at the mill.
4
3.0 OPERATIONS
The White Mesa uranium mill was developed in the late 1970's by Energy Fuels Nuclear, lnc. (EFN)
as an oulet for the many small mines that are located in the Colorado Plateau. After about two and
one-half years, the mill ceased ore processing and entered atotal shutdown phase. ln 1984, a
majority ownership interest was acquired by Union Carbide Corporation's (UCC) Metals Dvisiol,
which later became Umetco Minerals Corporation (Umetco), a wholly-owned subsidiary of UCC.
ln May of 1997, IUSA purchased the assets of the EFN and is the current owner and operator of
tne facitity. The mill has gone through operation and shut down periods throughout the 1980's and
1ggg's. The current license specifies a maximum production rate of 4380 tons of yellowcake per
year. The facility is currently in operation and since early 1997, the mill has processed 58,403 tons
from several additional alternate feed stocks.
The tailings facilities currently consist of four lined cells with leak detection systems (LDS) and a
groundwJter detection monitoring program consisting of six monitoring wells. These wells are
iampled quarterly for chloride, potassium, nickel, and uranium. These constituents are indicator
parameteis to deiect 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
The material will be manifested in accordance with U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT)
regulations. Molycorp estimates that it will ship approximately 60-70 trucks per week for an
esiimated period of less than sixty to 90 days. The transportation route as proposed, will follow
route l-15 and l-70 to U.S. Highway 191 at Crescent Junction, Utah and through Highway 191
south to the mill.
According to the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT, 2000), on an average day 6,675
motor vehicles (467 trucks total) traveled the stretch of State Road 191 on the south city limit of
Blanding, Utah. Based on this information, an average of 10 additional trucks per day represents
an increased truck traffic load of 2.0 percent for approximately 3 months. 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.
The material will be shipped using exclusive-use trucks f rom the Molycorp f acility to the White Mesa
mill in lined, covered, aluminum end-dump trailers. The following measures will be taken to prevent
leakage during transport to the mill:
1. Prior to loading materials at Molycorp, each end-dump trailer will be lined with pre-fitted,
durable, 6-millimeter liners, which will serve as the primary containment for both potential liquid
and dust.
2. "Free liquids" will be decanted from materials prior to the materials being placed in the trailers
for transport.
5
3. The durable liners will be closed and sealed around the material in a "Burrito Wrap"
configuration, which will fully contain all materials'
4. The "Burrito Wrap" will be protected by permanently attached 18-ounce vinyl tarpaulin, which
is very effective in keeping moisture out of the trailers during precipitation events, and also
protects the "Burrito WraP".
5. Preventative maintenance, consisting of installing new rubber gaskets, using silicone caulking
around the gasket surface and adjusting the air operated tailgate locks in a manner that allows
the tightest seal, will be performed on each end-dump trailer immediately prior to startup of the
project.
6. An inspection checklist will include visual inspections of all transport equipment (including
tarpaulins) related to the DOT regulations.
7. Each transport unit will be checked for DOT compliance prior to loading materials at Molycorp
for shipment to the White Mesa mill.
4.2 Handling and Processing at the Mill Site
At the White Mesa mill, the material will be temporarily managed on a bermed concrete pad until
a sufficient quantity of material is available to begin processing. IUSA will utilize water sprays, as
required, to minimize dusting during dumping activities. The materialwill be processed utilizing an
acid leach, in existing mill equipment, to dissolve the uranium. The solution willthen be advanced
through the mill circuitry with no significant physical modifications.
Environmental monitoring will continue and has been evaluated under previous NEPA actions'
This includes monitoring of surface water, groundwater, airborne particulates, radon, soils, and
vegetation, according to the existing License Conditions. As an added precaution, during initial
off-loading of the material, IUSA will analyze breathing zone and airborne samples for total lead to
ensure that the values obtained are below the Occupational Safety and Health Administration
(OSHA) Permissible Exposure Limit (PEL) ol (0.05 mg/m3) and Action Level of (0.03 mg/m3) for
lead.
IUSA willcontinueto conduct a Dust Suppression program in accordance with the License Renewal
Application for the White Mesa Mill, sections 2.0 and 4.0 (Umetco, 199'l), and the September 1 1 ,
1997 Utah Division of Air Quality Approval Order for White Mesa Mill (Air Quality Permit
Conditions).
Risks to endangered species from mill operations have been previously evaluated under prior
NEPA actions. No additional risk to endangered species is expected due to this action. Material
is handled and processed in a similar manner to conventional ore.
4.3 Groundwater Effects
Potential environmental effects to groundwater have already been evaluated for operations at the
mill in previous NEPA documents. Material from Molycorp does not contain any additional
6
chemicals that would pose an increase in threat to the groundwater resources above conventional
ore. Tailings f rom the Molycorp material processing will be disposed in the lined tailings cells along
with other process tailings. A groundwater detection monitoring program has been implemented
to determine if any leakage from the tailings cells occurs. No surface water is expected to be
impacted due to the very long travel times of groundwater to surface water in the area'
As an additional precaution, the Molycorp material will be placed on a concrete pad that will be
bermed around the edges to contain moisture. ln addition, a concrete pad will be used near the
trommel screen. These measures will reduce the potentialfor groundwater contamination f rom the
management of this material. Should conditions warrant, IUSA will consider using additional
mitigation such as covering the piles with reinforced plastic'
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 as submitted;therefore the alternatives with equalor
greater impacts need not be evaluated. The staff considers that Alternative 1 is the appropriate
alternative for selection.
6.0 coNcLUSloN
Based on an evaluation of the environmental impacts of the IUSA amendment request, the NRC
has determined that the proper action is to issue a FONSI in the Federal Register. The following
statements support the FONSI and summarize the conclusions resulting from the EA.
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 potentialseepage 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 Molycorp material will be placed and temporarily stored on
bermed concrete padto reduce groundwater contamination and an existing dust suppression
program will be implemented at the Mill to reduce the potential for airborne contamination.
7
2. Present and potential environmental impacts from the receipt and processing of the Molycorp
material were assessed. No increase in impacts has been identified as a result of this action,
therefore, the staff has determined that the risk factors for health and environmental hazards
are insignificant.
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 Safely and Safeguards
Policy and Procedures Letter 1-50, Revision 1 , is not warranted.
7.0 STATE CONSULTATION
The NRC sent a Draft EA, dated April 12,2001, to the State of Utah. NRC also contacted the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the State of California for the preparation of this EA.
Comments on the Draft EA were submitted from William Sinclair, of the Department of
Environmental Quality (DEO) for the State of Utah, by letter dated May 16, 2001. Supplements to
the original submittals by IUSA, dated October 17 and November 1 6, 2001 were received by the
NRC which was not included in the draft EA. These letters ask the NRC to add 36 drums
containing similar materialthan what was originally evaluated in the draft EA. NRC staff reviewed
these sup-plements and conclude that this material is similar to the material already evaluated in
regardsto environmental impacts. Anothersubmittal from IUSA, dated August 15,2001, was
received by the NRC and deals strictly with a legal opinion regarding classification of the material.
One comment focused on NRC's review of IUSA's proposal in terms of the NRC Alternate Feed
Guidance. This evaluation will be conducted in a Technical Evaluation Report separate from this
assessment.
IUSA addressed several of NRC and DEQ's comments in its March 20,2001 submittal. IUSA
committed to manage the Molycorp material on a bermed concrete pad to reduce the potentialfor
groundwater contamination. IUSA also committed to take additional steps to reduce airborne lead
exposure during transport and handling at the Mill.
DEQ commented on potential hazardous waste issues related to the Molycorp material. NRC staff
have determined that the Molycorp material should be classified as "source material" ore and is,
therefore, excluded by def inition as a solid and hazardous waste under the Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act (RCRA) (see 40 CFR Part 261.4). NRC staff consulted with EPA region I staff
who concurred with this interpretation. Secondly, the State of California (Radiological Health
Branch) considers the material to already be classified as source material. Staff concluded that
the material in question can be classified as licensable source material. There are two reasons for
this conclusion: (1)the uranium content of the material in question, i.e.,0.15%, makes this
licensable source material; and (2) as an ore, the material could be legitimately recycled by IUSA
which will process the materialfor its uranium content. Under EPA regulations, source material is
not considered a solid waste for purposes of RCRA. lf the material is not a solid waste, it cannot
be classified as a hazardous waste (see, 40 CFR 261.+(a)). This is true even if the material
contains a hazardous characteristic if the material is legitimately reclaimed. NRC staff has
evaluated health, safety, and environmental aspects of the Molycorp material and with the
additional commitments made by IUSA in their March 20,2OO1 letter, find that no significant
8
impacts will occur. Since the Molycorp material will be classified by the NRC as source material
ore and therefore exempt f rom RCRA, speculative accumulation of hazardous waste do not apply.
8.0 REFERENCES
lnternational Uranium (USA)Corporation's (IUSA), "Reclamation Plan, White Mesa Mill, Blanding,
Utah, Revision 2.0", MaY 1999.
IUSA, ,,Groundwater lnformation Report White Mesa Mill, Blanding, Utah", submitted to Utah
Department of Environmental Quality (UDEO) Divisions of Water Quality (copy to NRC), May 28,
1 999.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), "Final Environmentalstatement related to operation
of White Mesa Uranium Project, Energy Fuels Nuclear, lnc., " NU-REG-0556, May 1979'
NRC, ,,Environmental Assessment for the Renewal of Source Material License No. SUA-1358,
Energy Fuels Nuclear, lnc., White Mesa Uranium Mill, San Juan County, Utah", February 27 ,1997
NRC, ,,EnvironmentalAssessment Prepared bythe 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, ,'lnterim position and Guidance on the Use of Uranium Mill Feed MaterialOtherThan Natural
ores" NRC Regulatory lssue summary 2000-23, November 30, 2000.
Umetco Minerals Corporation, 1991, "1991 White Mesa Mill License Renewal," 4 vols.,
August 1 991.
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 2A,2000.
!
UNITED STATES
M
NU.LEARfffi:lHrprlk"*s,oN
6fr,;lr,:.,,,
wiriam J. sincrair, Director Apri 1 t2' 2ool 6' ,^ffi, t)f
Division of Radiation Control lX '@';f jfl
Department of Environmental Quality \E n Wf jl
168 North 1950 West \to V' .a'-/i
P.O. Box 144850 Y2.,.
satt Lake city, UT 84114-4850 rs{!'rgl-"y
SUBJECT: CONSULTATION REQUEST ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR
THE RECEIPT AND PROCESSING OF MATERIALS FROM THE MOLYCORP
FACILITY LOCATED IN MOUNTAIN PASS, CALIFORNIA, FOR THE WHITE
MESA URANIUM MILL
Dear Mr. Sinclair:
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff is conducting a review of lnternational
Uranium (USA) Corporation's (IUSA's) amendment request, dated December 19,2000, and
supplemented by letters dated January 29,2001, February 2,2001, and March 20, 2001 , to
receive and process materials from the Molycorp facility located in Mountain Pass, California.
The NRC staff determined that an environmental assessment (EA) was necessary to document
potential environmental impacts to this proposed action. NRC is submitting the enclosed
preliminary draft NRC EA as part of the consultation process of the National Environmental
Protection Act. Please review this document and provide any comments within 30 days of
receipt of this letter. lf we have not heard from your office in that time period, the NRC will
assume that the Utah Department of Environmental Quality has no comments and NRC will
finalize the EA.
lf you have any questions concerning this letter, please contact the NRC Project Manager for
the White Mesa site, William von Till, at [phone].
Fuel Cycle Licensing Branch
Division of Fuel Cycle Safety
And Safeguards, NMSS
Enclosures: Draft Environmental Assessment
Docket No: 40-8681
License No: SUA-1358
cc: M. Rehman, IUSA
t, li'a
DRAFT ENVI RONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
FOR
TNTERNATTONAL URANTUM (USA) CORPORAT|ON',S URANTUM MtLL SITE
WHITE MESA, SAN JUAN COUNTY, UTAH
IN CONSIDERATION OF AN AMENDMENT TO
SOURCE MATERIAL LICENSE SUA-I358 FOR THE
RECEIPT AND PROCESSING OF THE
MOLYCORP ALTERNATE FEED
PREPARED BY
THE U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
DIVISION OF FUEL CYCLE SAFETY AND SAFEGUARDS
OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY AND SAFEGUARDS
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSM ENT
FOR THE
MOLYCORP ALTERNATE FEED REQUEST
INTERNATIONAL URANIUM CORPORATION'S URANIUM MILL SITE
WHITE MESA, SAN JUAN COUNTY
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Backqround and Need for the Proposed Action
This action is to evaluate the potential environmental impacts of the proposal for the White
Mesa Uranium and Tailings Millto receive and process materialfrom the Molycorp facility
located in Mountain Pass, California. The mill site is located in San Juan County, Utah
approximately 8 kilometers (km) (5 miles) south of Blanding, Utah. lnternational Uranium
(USA) Corporation (IUSA) submitted a license amendment application dated December 19,
2000, and supplemental information in letters dated January 29,2OO1, February 2,2001, and
March 20,2001, to receive and process uranium-bearing materials from the Molycorp
Lanthanide Division site, located in Mountain Pass, California. These materials would be used
as "alternate feed material", materials that have similar chemical, physical, and radiological
composition to conventional mill tailings. A separate Technical Evaluation Report (TER) will be
completed by the NRC using the formal guidance, "lnterim Guidance on the Use of Uranium
Mill Feed Material Other Than Natural Ores" provided in the NRC Regulatory lssue Summary
2OOO-23 that was mailed to uranium recovery licensees on November 30, 2000.
The IUSA site is licensed by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (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.
1.2 Previous National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Actions
A Final Environmental Statement (FES) was prepared by the NRC for the license application in
May 1 979, 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.
1.3 Proposed Action
The proposed action is for the White Mesa mill to receive materials from the Molycorp Facility in
Mountain Pass, California and process the materialfor its uranium content. The material may
be temporarily staged until a sufficient quantity is received to run the mill. Waste from the
processing will be disposed in the mill's tailing cells. Reclamation will be in accordance with the
approved reclamation plan (NRC, 2000). Environmental impacts dealing with the milling
operation have already been addressed under prior NEPA actions.
1.4 Molycorp Site and Materia! lnformation
The Molycorp site is located in Mountain Pass, California. The materialfrom Molycorp consists
of a lead sulfide sludge containing uranium stored in ponds. The material is a result of
extraction of lathanides and other rare earth minerals. Molycorp estimates the amount of
2
material for this amendment request to be up to 17,75O tons. Molycorp has estimated that the
material has an average uranium content of approximately 0.15 percent.
Since 1951 , Molycorp has operated a surface mining and milling operation for the recovery and
chemical separation of lanthanides and other rare earth metals from bastnasite ores. From
1965 through 1984 Molycorp constructed and operated three lead sulfide ponds for the
evaporation of lead sulfides from the clarifier/thickener operation. The lead sulfide sludge
contains uranium, which is also precipitated in the thickener. The ponds were taken out of
service in 1984 and in 1997 Molycorp drafted a Closure Plan for the decommissioning of the
ponds which required the removal and off-site disposal or recovery of the lead sulfide sludge
contained in the ponds. This amendment request seeks authorization to process the lead
sulfide sludge for its uranium content.
1.5 Review Scope
ln 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 lmpact (FONSI) or to prepare an
Environmental lmpact Statement (ElS); (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.O SITE CHARACTERISTICS
The area surrounding the 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
Fahrenheit). Runoff in the project area is directed by the general surface topography either
westward into Westward Creek, 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 lndians. 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 lndian 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 approximalely 202 hectares (ha)
(500 acres).
Groundwater beneath the site mainly occurs in three stratar the Dakota Sandstone, the Burro
Canyon formation, and the Entrada/Navajo Sandstone. The Burro Canyon formation hosts
3
perched groundwater over the Brushy Basin Member of the Morrison formation. 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. Water in this aquifer is under artesian pressure and is used at the mill
for industrial needs and showering. 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.
Seventy-six groundwater applications, within a 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. No wells are completed within the perched groundwater of the Burro Canyon
formation within five miles downgradient of the site. 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.
ln the vicinity of the site, the presence of six animal species and one plant species classified as
either endangered or threatened could occur. These include: (1) the bald eagle (haliaeetus
leucocephalus); (2) the American peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinis anatum); (3) the black-
footed ferret (Mustela nigripes);(4) the Southwestern willow flycatcher (Empidonax traillii
extimus); (5) California Condor (Gymnogyps californianus); (6) the Mexican Spotted Owl (Sfrix
occidentalis lucida), and (7) the Navajo Sedge (Carex specuicola)(plant species). 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 occur any longer in the area. The California Condor,
Mexican Spotted Owl, and Navajo Sedge have been added to the list since the 1997 EA. NRC
staff contacted wildlife biologists from the Bureau of Land Management and the Utah Wildlife
Service to gather local information on the occurrences 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.
No populations of fish are present on the project site, nor are any known to exist in the
immediate area of the site. Four species of fish designated as endangered or threatened occur
in the San Juan River 29 km (18 miles) south of the site. There are no discharges of mill
effluents to surface waters; therefore, no impacts are expected for the San Juan River due to
operations at the mill.
3.0 OPERATIONS
The White Mesa uranium mill was developed in the late 1970's by Energy Fuels Nuclear, lnc.
(EFN) as an outlet for the many small mines that are located in the Colorado Plateau. After
4
about two and one-half years, the mill ceased ore processing and entered a total shutdown
phase. ln 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. ln 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. The current license specifies a maximum production
rate of 4380 tons of yellowcake per year. The facility is currently in operation and since early
1997, the mill has processed 58,403 tons from several additional alternate feed stocks.
The tailings facilities currently consist of four lined cells with leak detection systems (LDS) and a
groundwater detection monitoring program consisting of six monitoring wells. These wells 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.O ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
4.1 Transportation Considerations
The materialwill be manifested in accordance with U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT)
regulations. Molycorp estimates that it will ship approximately 60-70 trucks per week for an
estimated period of less than sixty to 90 days. The transportation route as proposed, will follow
route l-15 and l-70 to U.S. Highway 191 at Crescent Junction, Utah and through Highway 191
south to the mill.
According to the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT, 2000), on an average day 6,675
motor vehicles (467 trucks total) traveled the stretch of State Road 19'1 on the south limit of
Blanding, Utah. Based on this information, an average of 10 additionaltrucks per day
represents an increased truck traffic load of 2.0 percent for approximately 3 months. 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.
The material will be shipped using exclusive-use trucks from the Mountain Pass facility to the
mill in lined, covered, aluminum end-dump trailers. The following measures will be taken to
prevent leakage during transport to the mill:
1. Prior to loading materials at Molycorp, each end-dump trailer will be lined with pre-fitted,
durable, 6-millimeter liners, which will serve as the primary containment for both potential
liquid and dust.
2. "Free liquids" will be decanted from materials prior to the materials being placed in the
trailers for transport.
3. The durable liners will be closed and sealed around the material in a "Burrito Wrap"
configuration, which will fully contain all materials.
The "Burrito Wrap" will be protected by permanently attached 18-ounce vinyltarpaulin,
which is very effective in keeping moisture out of the trailers during precipitation events, and
also protects the "Burrito Wrap".
5. Preventative maintenance, consisting of installing new rubber gaskets, using silicone
caulking around the gasket surface and adjusting the air operated tailgate locks in a manner
that allows the tightest seal, will be performed on each end-dump trailer immediately prior to
startup of the project.
6. An inspection checklist will include visual inspections of all transport equipment (including
tarpaulins) related to the DOT regulations.
7. Each transport unit will be checked for DOT compliance prior to loading materials at
Molycorp for shipment to the mill.
4.2 Handlinq and Processinq at the Mill Site
The material will be temporarily managed on a bermed concrete pad until a sufficient quantity of
material is available to begin processing. IUSA will utilize water sprays, as required, to
minimize dusting during dumping activities. The material will be processed utilizing an acid
leach, in existing mill equipment, to dissolve the uranium. The solution will then be advanced
through the mill circuitry with no significant physical modifications.
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. As an added precaution, during initial
offloading of the material, IUSA will analyze breathing zone and airborne samples for total lead
to ensure that the values obtained are below the Occupational Safety and Health Administration
(OSHA) Permissible Exposure Limit (PEL) of (0.05 mg/m3) and Action Level of (0.03 mg/m3) for
lead.
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).
Risks to endangered species from mill operations have been previously evaluated under prior
NEPA actions. No additional risk to endangered species is expected due to this action.
Material is handled and processed in a similar manner to conventional ore.
4.3 Groundwater Effects
Potential environmental effects to groundwater have already been evaluated for operations at
the mill in previous NEPA documents. Material from Molycorp does not contain any additional
chemicals that would pose an increase in threat to the groundwater resources above
conventional ore. Tailings from the Molycorp 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.
i
6
As an additional precaution, the Molycorp material will be placed on a concrete pad that will be
bermed around the edges to contain moisture. ln addition, a concrete pad will be used near the
trommel screen. These measures will reduce the potentialfor groundwater contamination from
the management of this material. Should conditions warrant, IUSA will consider using
additional mitigation such as covering the piles with reinforced plastic.
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 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
Based on an evaluation of the environmental impacts of the IUSA amendment request, the
NRC has determined that the proper action is to issue a FONSI in the Federal Register. The
following statements support the FONSI and summarize the conclusions resulting from the EA.
'1. An acceptable environmental and effluent monitoring program is in place to monitor effluent
releases and to detect whether applicable regulatory limits are exceeded. Fladiological
effluents from site operations have been and are expected to continue to remain below the
regulatory limits.
2. Present and potential environmental impacts from the receipt and processing of the
Molycorp material were assessed. No increase in impacts has been identified as a result of
this action, therefore, the staff has determined that the risk factors for health and
environmental hazards are insignificant.
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 Safely and
Safeguards Policy and Procedures Letter 1-50, Revision 1 , is not warranted.
7
7.0 STATE CONSULTATION
****To be completed after consultation, draft EA to Utah DEQ***
8.0 REFERENCES
lnternational Uranium (USA) Corporation's (IUSA), "Reclamation Plan, White Mesa Mill,
Blanding, Utah, Revision 2.0", May 1999.
IUSA, "Groundwater lnformation Report White Mesa Mill, Blanding, Utah", submitted to Utah
Department of Environmental Quality (UDEO) Divisions of Water Quality (copy to NRC),
May 28,1999.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), "Final Environmental Statement related to
operation of White Mesa Uranium Project, Energy Fuels Nuclear, lnc., " NU-REG-0556, May
1979.
NRC, "Environmental Assessment for the Renewal of Source Material License No. SUA-1358,
Energy Fuels Nuclear, lnc., 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, "lnterim Position and Guidance on the Use of Uranium Mill Feed Material Other Than
Natural Ores" NRC Regulatory lssue Summary 2000-23, November 30, 2000.
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 20,2OOO.
LTNITED STATES OF AMERICA
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD
Before Administrative Judges:
Alan S. Rosenthal, Presiding Officer
Dr. Richard F. Cole, Special Assistant
)
IN THE MATTER OF: ) Docket No. 40-8681-MLA-9
)
INTERNATIONAL URANIUM (USA) ) ASLBP No. 0I-789-01-MLA
CoRPoRATTON )) March 14,2001
(Source Material License Amendment) )
)
INTERNATIONAL URANIUM (USA) CORPORATION'S
REPLY TO THE GLEN CANYON GROUP'S REQUEST
FOR A IIEARING AND PETITION FOR LEAVE TO INTERVENE
I. INTRODUCTION
A. Background
International Uranium (USA) Corporation ("IUSA") operates, in accordance with Source
Material License No. SUA-1358 issued by the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission
("NRC"), a uranium recovery facility called the White Mesa Mill (the "Mill") near Blanding,
Utah. The Mill processes uranium-bearing materials to extract the uranium therefrom. The
residuals from this process, or'tailings," are defined as "11e.(2) byproduct material," and are
disposed of in an NRC-licensed "cell" or impoundment at the Mill. IUSA's Mill is regulated by
the NRC, pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended by the Uranium Mill Tailings
Radiation Control Act of 1978, ("UMTRCA"), as effectuated by NRC regulations set forth at 10
C.F.R. Part 40, including Appendix A and applicable guidance documents.
B. Procedural History
On December 19,2000, IUSA submitted to NRC a request for a license amendment
specifically allowing IUSA to accept for processing up to 17,750 tons of "alternate feed
material" from the Molycorp Site located in Mountain Pass, Califomia. Notice of IUSA's
application was published in the Federal Register on January 9,2001. 66 Fed. Reg. 1702.
Sometime on or about February 7,2001, the Glen Canyon Group of the Sierra Club (the
"Group") submitted, pursuant to 10 C.F.R . Part 2, Subpart L, a letter requesting a hearing on
IUSA's application (the "Petition") and requesting to be granted status as an intervenor. As the
Petitioner referenced but failed to include various affidavits, on February 22,200l,IUSA filed a
request that the Petition be denied or in the alternative, that the time within which to respond to
the request be extended to fifteen days after IUSA's receipt of the affidavits. On February 17,
2001, the NRC received one of the missing affidavits (the Affidavit of Loren Morton), from the
Glen Canyon Group and confirmation that the Group did not intend to submit the other missing
affidavit (Affidavit of Ken Sleight). Consequently, on February 28,2001, the Presiding Officer
issued an order (1) accepting the AfEdavit of Loren Morton as a supplement to the hearing
request, (2) directing that the Sleight Affidavit will not be considered and need not be addressed
by IUSA in its response, and (3) extending the time within which IUSA must respond to and
including Wednesday, March 14, 2001.
On March 6,2001, the NRC staff filed a Notice indicating that it does not intend to
participate as a party to this proceeding.
II. ARGUMENT
As discussed below, to establish organizational standing to intervene in this proceeding
the Group must allege that there is injury in fact, within the zone of interest of the statute at
issue, to either (l) the organization's interest, or (2) the interests of its members. The Group has
failed to do either. The Group has failed to "show a harm that is distinct and apart from that
caused by the initial licensing of the facility." See e.g., International Uranium (USA)
LBP-99-8, February
19,l9gg (citing Energy Fuels. Inc., LBP-94-33, 40 NRC 151, 153-54 (1994). Although in this
proceeding, the Group alleges that a distinct harm is posed by supposed "listed hazardous
wastes" contained in the Molycorp alternate feed material, this allegation is unfounded and
utterly without merit. Further, the remainder of the Group's allegations are based on general
operations at the Mill. These allegations do not constitute injury in fact resulting from the
proposed license amendment. Therefore, this license amendment proceeding is not the proper
venue for such generalized grievances and the Group lacks standing to intervene.
Before tuming to a discussion of the merits of the Group's arguments, or lack thereof,
below is a summary of the NRC's Alternate Feed Policy, which provides the basis for the
requested license amendment.
A. Summary of NRC'S Alternate Feed Policy
The Alternate Feed Policy (the "Policy") was developed by NRC to establish a set of
criteria to be used in evaluating whether feed materials that are not conventional ores can be
processed at uranium mills such that the tailings and wastes generated from such processing will
be considered I le.(2) byproduct material. The Policy establishes four criteria that must be
satisfied before uranium-bearing materials other than conventional ores may be processed at a
licensed uranium mill. First, processing the alternate feed material (and disposal of the tailings
and wastes associated with such processing) must conform with the requirements of l0 C.F.R.
part 40. Second, the altemate feed material must not contain any listed hazardous wastes (i.e.,
any wastes listed under 40 C.F.R. $$ 271.30-33 or under comparable state law provisions) or
residues that constitute hazardous waste from any wastewater treatment process. However,
.,[fleed material exhibiting only a characteristic of hazardous waste (ignitable, corrosive,
reactive, toxic) would not be regulated as hazardous waste and could therefore be approved for
recycling and extraction of source material." 60 Fed. Reg. at 49,297 . Third, the alternate feed
material must qualiff as an "ore."l And, finally, the alternate feed material must be processed
primarily for its source material content.
In developing its Alternate Feed Policy, NRC recognized that the physical, chemical, and
radiological characteristics of alternate feed materials may vary widely in comparison to
conventional ores. Accordingly, the Altemate Feed Policy sets out a number of criteria intended
to ensure that wastes generated from processing alternate feed material will qualifu as 11e.(2)
byproduct material and will not otherwise be subject to dual or multiple jurisdiction. Thus, for
example, the policy requires a licensee to ensure that processing an alternate feed, and disposing
of the resulting tailings and wastes, will not compromise a mill's ability to comply with the
regulatory requiranents contained in l0 C.F.R. Part 40. See 60 Fed. Reg. at49,296.
Also, in order to avoid the possibility that wastes from processing an alternate feed might
be regulated as a mixed hazardous and radioactive waste, the Altemative Feed Policy provides
that an alternate feed material must not contain any listed hazardous wastes or residues that
I Consistent with Congress' intent to include a broad range of materials within the scope
of the term "ore" (and, thereby, to encompass a wide range of materials within the regulatory
program for 11e.(2) byproduct material), NRC defines "ore" for purposes of the Alternate Feed
irolicy to mean: "a natural or native matter that may be mined and treated for the extraction of
any of its constituents or any other matterfrom which source material is extracted in a licensed
uranium or thorium mill." 60 Fed. Reg. at 49,296 (emphasis added).
constitute hazardous waste from any wastewater treatment process. 60 Fed' Reg. at 49,296-97.
This requirement recognizes that many altemate feed materials are the residues or wastes from
other processing activities that might, unlike conventional ores, introduce listed hazardous
wastes into the tailings and wastes generated from processing the materials thereby creating
mixed wastes. However, as stated above, feed material exhibiting characteristics of hazardous
wastes (i.e. characteristic waste) may be processed under the Policy. See supra at 3; 60 Fed.
Reg. at 49,297.
B. The Gten Canyon Group Lacks Standing to Intervene in this Matter
The Glen Canyon Group lacks organizational standing to intervene in this proceeding
because it has failed to allege injury in fact, within the zone of interest of the statute at issue, to
either (1) the organization's interest, or (2) the interests of its members. Both of these methods
of establishing organizational standing will be discussed in turn below.2 Moreover, the Group's
areas of concern are applicable to the operations of the Mill generally and are not germane to the
Molycorp license amendment.
1. Applicable Legal PrinciPles
Under 10 C.F.R. $ 2.1205 of NRC's regulations, interested persons may request a hearing
on the grant of an amendment to a source or byproduct materials license under the informal
hearing procedures set forth at l0 C.F.R.Part2, Subpart L. NRC's Rules of Practice provide
that, in ruling on a request for a hearing, the Presiding Officer:
2 Specifically, section II.B.2 below discusses the Group's claim to standing based on the
organization's interest while section II.B.3 addresses the Group's claim with regard to the
specific interests of its mernbers. As discussed, both claims lack merit.
shall determine that the specified areas of concem are germane to
the subject matter of the proceeding and that the petition is timely.
The presiding officer also shall determine that the requester meets
the judicial standards for standing and shall consider, among other
factors.
The nature of the requester's right under the [Atomic Energy Act]
to be made a party to the Proceeding;
The nature and extent of the requestor's property, financial, or
other interest in the proceeding; and
The possible effect of any order that may be entered in the
proceeding upon the requestor's interest.
10 C.F.R. $ 2.1205(h) (emphasis added).
Standing is not a mere legal technicality, it is in fact, an essential element in determining
whether there is any legitimate role for a court or an agency adjudicatory body in dealing with a
particular grievance. Westinshouse Electric Corporation, 39 NRC 322,331-32 (1994). Judicial
concepts of standing should be applied by adjudicatory boards in determining whether a
petitioner is entitled to intervene. Portland General Electric Co., 3 NRC 804 (1976); see also,
Niaera Mohawk Power Corp., l8 NRC 213,215 (1983) (contemporaneous judicial concepts
should be used to determine whether petitioner has standing to intervene). Thus, the propriety of
intervention involves both "constitutional limitations" on an adjudicatory body's jurisdiction and
"prudential limitations" on its exercise. Coalition of Arizona.Il.{ew Mexico Counties for Stable
Economic Growth v. Department of Interior , lggT U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4212, *6 (l0d' Cir. 1997),
citins, Warth v. Seldin, 422 U .5. 490, 498 ( I 975).
The "irreducible constitutional minimum" standing test requires a potential litigant to
dernonstrate that: 1) it has suffered actual or threatened injury, 2) that is caused by, or fairly
traceable to, an act that the litigant challenges in the instant litigation, and 3) that is likely to be
redressed by a favorable decision." b Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 560-61
(lgg2);Florida Audubon Society v. Bentsen, 94 F.3d 658, 663 (D.C. Cir. 1996) (en banc)
(citations omitted); Georgia Institute of Technoloey, 42 NRC 111, 115 (1995): Envirocare of
Utah. Inc., 35 NRC 167,174-175 (1992). These three elements are commonly referred to as
injury in fact, causation, and redressability. See Coalition of ArizonaA'{ew Mexico Counties for
Stable Economic Growth v. Department of Interior,1997 U.S. Dist. LEXIS at *6.
Beyond the constitutional standing test set forth above, prudential limitations are also
imposed on a potential intervenor's standing. Prudential considerations include a party's not
being permitted to assert a generalized grievance and a party's not being permitted to assert the
rights of third parties. See Warth v. Seldin , 422 tJ .5. at 499 . Specifically, prudential standing
requirements require a showing that the injury is arguably within the "zone of interests"
protected by statutes goveming the proceeding. Assoc. of Data Processing Serv. Orgs.. Inc. v.
Camp,397 U.S. 150 (1970);Metropolitan Edison Co., l8 NRC 327,332 (1983); Gulf States
Utilities Co., 40 NRC 43,47 (1,994).
With regard to injury in fact, the alleged injury, which may be either actual or threatened,
must be both concrete and particularized, not conjectural or hypothetical. As a result, standing
should be denied when the threat of injury is too speculative' sequo)'ah Fuels corp' and General
Atomics, 40 NRC 64,72 (1994). To show the required injury in fact based on an assertion of
future harm, NRC has held that that future harm "must be threatened, certainly impending, and
real and immediate." Babcock & Wilcox,1993 NRC LEXIS 6, **7-8 (1993)' A "generalized
grievance" shared in substantially equal measure by all or a large class of citizens will not result
in a distinct and palpable harm sufficient to support standing. Metropolitan Edison Co., l8 NRC
327,333 (1983).
An organization can establish standing by demonstrating injury to itself as an entity or
injury to its members. Coalition of ArizonaA.{ew Mexico Counties for Stable Economic Growth
v. Department of Interior,1997 U.S. Dist. LEXIS at x8-9. In order to establish organizational
standing, an organization must allege: (l) that the action will cause an injury in fact to either (a)
the organization's interests or (b) the interests of its members; and (2) that the injury is within the
zone of interests of the statute at issue. Yankee Atomic Electric Co., 39 NRC 95, 102 n. l0
(tee+).
An organization may meet the injury in fact test for standing by either: (l) dernonstrating
an effect upon its organizational interest or (2) alleging that its members, or any of them, are
suffering immediate and threatened injury as a result of the challenged action of the sort that
would make out a justifiable case had the members themselves brought suit. Houston Liehtine
and Power Co., 9 NRC 644,646 (1979). If injury to a member is the basis for the assertion of
standing, it must be remembered that the mere interest in a problem without a showing that a
member will be affected is insufficient to give an organization standing. Allied General Nuclear
Services, 3 NRC 420 (1976). "Ult is clear that an organization may establish its standing
through the interest of its members;but to do so, it must identiff specifically the name and
address of at least one affected member who wishes to be represented by the organization."
Detroit Edison Company, 8 NRC 575, 583 (1978), see also, Sequoyah Fuels Coro. and General
Atomics,40 NRC 64,72 (1994) (an organization seeking to obtain standing in a representative
capacity must demonstrate that a member has in fact authorized such representation).
Additionally, the interests to which injury in fact are alleged, must be germane to the
proceeding at hand. See 10 C.F.R. $ 2.1205(h); see also International Uranium (USA)
Corporation (Source Material License Amendment), LBP-01-08, Docket No. 40-8681-MLA-8,
February 28,2001.
Z. The Glen Canyon Group Has Failed to Demonstrate Standing
to Intervene in Its Own Right
As discussed above, an organization can establish standing to sue in its own right under
the same standard applicable to individuals. First, it must establish that has a legitimate interest
in the proceeding. Second, it must demonstrate injury in fact to that interest. It is well
established that an organization's injury must be more than a "mere interest in a problem."
Sierra v. Morton,405 U.S. 727,73g (1972). Again, the injury must be concrete, particularized,
and actual or imminent. Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. at 560; Babcock & Wilcox,
1993 NRC LEXIS at7-8. It cannot be conjectural or hypothetical. Sequoyah Fuels Corp. and
General Atomics,40 NRC at72. Furthermore, an organization's alleged area of concern must be
germane to the subject matter of the proceeding. See 10 C.F.R. $ 2.1205(h). The Glen Canyon
Group has failed to: (a) demonstrate sufficient interest in the proceeding; (b) show injury in fact
to a legitimate interest; and (c) show that any of its alleged interests are germane to the
proceeding.
a. The Group has Failed to show sufficient Interest in the
Proceeding
The Glen Canyon Group contends that it has an interest in the proceeding because
members of the Group live, work, and recreate in and around the vicinity of the White Mesa
Mill. More generally, the Group asserts that it has an interest in the various natural resources
0.e. the land, water, air, wildlife) that would be affected by the requested license amendment'
Such a generalized interest in the environment of the area is insufficient to establish standing.
See Sierra Club v. Morton, 405 U.S. 727,734-35 (1972); see also Cleveland Electric
9
Illumination co. (Perry Nuclear Power Plant. Unit l), cLI-93-1, 38 NRC 87 (1995). Petitioner
further alleges that it has a strong interest in and directly benefits from compliance with various
state and federal laws. Such an assertion of a general interest in regulatory matters is insufficient
to establish standing. See Transnuclear Inc ., CLI-77-24, 6 NRC 525,531 (1977); Metropolitan
EdisonCo. (ThreeMilelslandNuclearStation.Unit l),CLI-83-25, 18NRC 327,333 (1983)'
In fact, as discussed in detail below, the Group has failed to credibly allege that granting
the requested license amendment would cause injury in fact in any way to any of the "interests"
enumerated by the Group. Furthermore, the Group's allegation that the license amendment
would result in violations of state or federal laws are equally as spurious. Finally, the areas of
concern raised by the Group apply to the operations of the Mill generally, and are not germane to
the subject matter of the proceeding.
b. The Group has Failed to I)emonstrate Injury in Fact
The Group has failed to show that the granting of the requested license amendment would
cause injury in fact to the interests articulated. The Group's allegations of injury in fact are
based entirely on speculation and conjecture, are not gernane, and are an insufficient basis on
which to grant standing to intervene.
(l) The Alternate Feed Material From Molycorp is
not Hazardous Waste, Results in No Violations
;1$:tri:l*'i'ffi ilL',Tlfl ? :j:f *' a n d
In support of standing in its own right, the Group contends that the alternate feed material
from Molycorp that IUSA is proposing to process at the Mill"may contain listed hazardous
waste or characteristic hazardous waste from water treafinent residues." Petition at 4 (ernphasis
added). Specifically, the Group alleges that the materials may contain lead, as well as chernical
l0
separators, solvents, and other organics and metals. Therefore, the Group concludes that were
IUSA to process the "alternate feed material" from Molycorp, IUSA would be in violation of
RCRA. Furthermore, the Group asserts that the transportation of the falsely alleged'hazardous
waste" would cause negative "cumulative effects on the communities in the transportation
corridor routes," that the storage and processing of the materials at the Mill would be "injurious
to the group," and that byproduct disposed of in the tailings cells has the potential to discharge
to groundwater. Petition at 4. The Group's contentions are without merit.
(a) Molycorp Material is Not Listed
Hazardous Waste, Results in No Violation
of RCRA, and Poses No Threat to the
Group
As detailed in the Federal Register notice, in 1951 , Molycorp began a surface mining and
milling operation for the recovery and chernical separation of lanthanides and other rare metals
from bastnasite ores. Three lead sulfide ponds for evaporation of lead sulfides from the
clarifier/thickener operation were operated from 1965 through 1984. It is this lead sulfide
sludge, which is estimated to contain approximately 0.15% uranium, which is the subject of the
license amendment.
The Group makes the unsupported assertion that the lead sulfide sludge "may contain
listedhazardous waste." Petition at 4 (emphasis added). Molycorp has certified that the lead
sulfide sludge does not contain RCRA listedhazardous waste as defined in 42 U.S.C. Section
690l-699l. As stated in the license amendment application, this has been confirmed by IUSA's
own analysis. The Group's purely conjectural assertions do not in any way undermine the
veracity of Molycorp's certification, and IUSA's confirmatory analysis, that the materials are not
listed hazardous wastes.
ll
Furthermore, IUSA has a vested interest in ensuring that the Molycorp materials do not
contain listed hazardous wastes, because if listed materials ended up in the Mill's tailings cells, it
would create a mixed waste and possibly subject all of the materials in the cells to regulation by
the EPA (or State) under RCRA. See 60 Fed. Reg. at 49,296. Indeed, to avoid this outcome,
IUSA has established a protocol, acceptable to the State of Utah and NRC, which is used to
ensure that potential alternate feed materials contain no listed hazardous waste. The Mill has
also put in place procedures to determine if incoming materials contain listed hazardous wastes,
and if so the materials are not processed. In addition, prior to granting the requested license
amendment both the State of Utah and NRC will review the Molycorp license application to
ensure to their satisfaction that the materials do not contain listed hazardous wastes. Therefore,
there is no risk that any listed hazardous waste materials from Molycorp, or any other source,
might end up in the Mill's tailing cells.
The Group's concern that processing the Molycorp materials would violate RCRA due to
their characteristic nature is unfounded. Pursuant to the Altemate Feed Policy described above,
uranium mills are expressly allowed to process ores and/or alternate feed materials containing
characterislic wastes, without being subject to the requiranents of RCRA. The tailings from the
processing of these materials are properly regulated as I le.(2) byproduct material. Therefore, to
the extent that the materials have characteristics of hazardous waste due to their lead content or
otherwise, they will be processed at the Mill in full compliance with RCRA and applicable NRC
regulations.
The Mill is a chemical processing plant that uses acids and organic chernicals to process
conventional ores and alternate feed materials for heavy metals and radionuclides. Conventional
ores have contributed millions of pounds of lead to the existing tailings, and various other
t2
alternate feed materials for which the Mill has received license amendments contain significant
quantities of lead. The uranium that is not recovered in the Mill process and that ultimately is
disposed of permanently in the tailings facility will eventually decay into lead. Finally, these
tailings facilities satisff the generally applicable standards under l0 C.F.R. Part 40 and provide
protection for non-radiological hazards, such as lead, equivalent to that provided by EPA's
RCRA standards. See AEA $ 275(b),42 U.S.C. S 2022(b). In short, the addition of the lead
contained in the Molycorp materials to the Mill circuit will not pose any additional hazards, over
and above those contanplated by normal Mill operations.
The Molycorp materials are not significantly different from the other conventional ores
and other altemate feed materials containing lead and other characteristic materials permitted for
processing at the Mill. Therefore, processing these materials at the Mill would be in compliance
with all the applicable regulations covering a NRC-licensed mill found at l0 C.F.R. Part 40,
Appendix A and RCRA, and most importantly, would pose no unique and distinct incremental
risk separate from conventional ores or alternate feeds that have been licensed to be processed at
the Mill.
Moreover, even if the processing of the Molycorp materials were to somehow result in a
violation of RCRA, the group has failed to show that such a violation would result in injury in
fact to a legitimat e areaof concern. As stated above, a general interest in regulatory compliance
is not a legitimate area of concern sufficient to establish standing. Therefore, since the Group
has failed to articulate a specific harm that might result from a supposed violation of RCRA, they
have failed to establish standing.
13
(b) The Transportation, Storage, and
Disposal of the Materials Pose No Threat
to The Group
Since the Molycorp materials do not contain listed hazardous waste and are not
qualitatively different from conventional ores and other alternate feed materials being processed
at the Mill, transportation, storage and disposal of the materials pose no distinct and unique
incremental threat to the Group. As with other materials transported to the Mill, the Molycorp
materials will be transported in exclusive-use trucks with lined, covered, aluminum end-dump
trailers, as "strong tight containers" in accordance with all applicable DOT regulations. It is
estimated that Molycorp will ship approximately 60-70 trucks per week for an estimated period
of 60 to 90 days. 66 Fed. Reg. 1702. The transportation poses no substantial negative effects to
the environment from noise, increased highway danger from collision and exposure, or reduced
community aesthetics. Indeed, in a recent Memorandum and Order denying a Hearing Request
in another IUSA alternate feed license amendment reques! the Presiding Officer found that the
alternate feed material, was "not significant such that it would produce an 'obvious potential for
offsite consequences during its transportation' through Moab" and that the petitioner's
"proximity to the transportation route [was] not sufficient on its own to grant [petitioner]
standing." International Uranium (USA) Corporation Gource Material License Amendment.
LBP-01-08, Docket No. 40-8681-MLA-8, February 28, 2001.
Moreover, any hypothetical risk the Group could dream up is neither concrete nor is
different than the risk posed by the transporting and processing of traditional ore or the other
licensed alternate feed. Therefore, contrary to petitioner's allegations no significant
environmental impact from transportation exists.
t4
The Group also makes the unsubstantiated claim that storage, processinS, and disposal of
the Molycorp material s may lead to new waste streams that could contaminate the "waters of
interest" to the Group. No physical changes to the Mill circuit are required to process this
material. Once again, since the Molycorp materials are not substantially different from other
materials currently being processed at the Mill, the Group's charges are without merit.
Additionally, the Group has made no concrete and particularized showing that the Molycorp
materials would be subject to inadequate storage, processing, and disposal methods. Further,
they fail to identiff the specific'\vaters of interest" and explain how those waters will be
harmed, and in turn, how that harm will affect the Group. Without more, this generalized
grievance fails to satisff the requirernents of standing.
According to the Group, the Mill's "tailings cells have the potential to discharge to
groundwater." Petition at 5. The Groups's allegations with respect to the tailings cells are
generalized and fail to show how any additional dangers from the Molycorp alternate feed
material tailings will result. Indeed, processing the Molycorp material will not require IUSA to
enlarge the Mill's tailings' disposal facilities or require IUSA to change them in any way. The
crux of the Group's argument concerning groundwater is based on a 1994 hydrogeologic
evaluation of the White Mesa Mill and the 1998 affidavit of Loren Morton.3 The Group's
complaints in this regard are not germane, since the tailings cells currently contain materials
'IUSA notes that the Morton affidavit upon which the Group relies was originally filed
in 1998 in support of the State of Utah's challenge to IUSA's processing of the Ashland 2
FUSRAP rnutiriutr. During the course of that litigation, which IUSA prevailed in, the issues
raised by Mr. Morton were ultimately resolved in favor of IUSA.
15
similar to the Molycorp materialsa, and the Molycorp materials do not in any way threaten the
integrity of the tailings cells or the groundwater.
The White Mesa Mill operates in strict compliance with all applicable laws and
regulations and collects all required water quality data. There is not, and has never been, any
indication that the Mill is discharging any pollutants into the groundwater and the Group does
not specifically allege otherwise. Likewise, the Group's allegations regarding the Mill's tailings
cells are baseless and wholly irrelevant to the instant proceeding. In fact, the Mill's tailings cells
have synthetic liners and leak detection systans. As many as 23 monitoring wells have
monitored the tailings cells since 1980 and have yielded no evidence that the tailings cells have
discharged to the underlying formation. All monitoring is conducted in the first perched
groundwat er zone,which is approximately I 10 feet below the tailings cells. This perched zone
is separated from the regional aquifer by approximately l,2OO feet of nearly impermeable rock'
Thus, any release from the tailings cells would be detected in the perched zone long before it
even could approach the aquifer, if ever it could. The Mill's tailings cells are NRC-licensed and
were designed and constructed in accordance with NRC requirernents. See AffEdavit of Samuel
Billin (attached). Processing the Molycorp materials in accordance with the proposed license
amendment at issue will effect no material change in the volume or composition of materials in
the cells from that attributable to processing conventional ores and other alternate feeds. The
Group makes no attempt to identifo specific harm to specific groundwater and attribute it to
processing the Molycorp materials. Therefore, the Group has failed to establish injury in fact.
o As discussed above, the byproduct material in the Mill's tailings cells currently contains
significant amounts of lead.
16
(2) The Materials Subject to the Amendment
Request Meet the Definition of "Alternate Feed
Material"
The Group contends that the materials to be processed from Molycorp do not meet the
definition of "alternate feed material," are of a different composition than the materials currently
received, processed, and disposed of at the Mill, and that because of that the Group will suffer an
injury in fact to its interest in adherence to and enforcement of applicable laws. Specifically, the
Group contends that the material does not meet the definition of "alternate feed material"
because it may contain listed hazardous waste, it is not an "ore," and it is not being processed
primarily for its source content. The Group's contentions are incorrect.
As discussed above, the Altemate Feed Policy establishes four criteria that must be
satisfied before uranium-bearing materials other than conventional ores may be processed at a
licensed uranium mill. First, processing the alternate feed material (and disposal of the tailings
and wastes associated with such processing) must conform with the requirements of l0 C.F.R.
Part 40. Second, the alternate feed material must not contain arry listed hazardous wastes (i.a,
any wastes listed under 40 C.F.R. $$ 261.30-33 or under comparable state law provisions) or
residues that constitute hazardous waste from any wastewater treatment process. Third, the
alternate feed material must qualiff as an "ore." And finally, the alternate feed material must be
processedprimarily for its source material content.
As explained above, the materials from Molycorp do not contain any listed hazardous
wastes.
Next, the Group simply makes the unsupported assertion that Molycorp materials are not
"ore." The Group further states that "[u]nless NRC intends to allow ANY material to be
t7
processed at a uranium mill, there comes a time when NRC must question the integrity of its
definition of ore." NRC's definition of the term "ore" is clear and the Molycorp materials are
well within its bounds. Consistent with Congress' intent to include a broad range of materials
within the scope of the term "ore" (and, thereby to encompass a wide range of materials within
the regulatory program for 11e.(2) byproduct material), NRC defines "ore" for purposes of the
Alternate Feed policy to mean: "a natural or native matter that may be mined and treated for the
extraction of any of its constituents or any other matterfrom which source material is extracted
in a licensed uranium or thorium milt. 60 Fed. Reg. at 49,296 (emphasis added).
The Group alleges that IUSA is interested in processing the Molycorp materials for the
disposal fee, rather than for its 0.15% uranium content. The Group's views of the economic
viability of processing the Molycorp materials are irrelevant. According to the Commission, the
economic motive of the Mill is irrelevant, the only test of whether the Molycorp materials will be
processed primarily for its source content is whether it will in fact be processed for its uranium
content.
Docket No. 40-8681-MLA-4 at 9, February 10, 2000 (ffirming LBP-99-5). IUSA is not a
..nuclear waste dump", but a uranium mill, licensed to process andior recycle various uranium-
bearing feeds and to dispose,in an NRC-regulated, on-site containment cell, the tailings and
wastes therefrom. Petitioner has made no allegation (because it cannot) that IUSA does not
intend to process the Molycorp material for its source material content. In fact, the material will
be processed precisely for that reason -- to recover uranium. Accordingly, the definition of
alternate feed material is satisfied.
l8
(3) An Additional EIS is Not Required
The Group makes an outlandish request for an EIS for the entire Mill prior to the granting
of the requested license amendment. According to the petition:
The study would also evaluate any releases that have already
occurred from all previous impoundments. The preparation of and
EIS would ensure that (l) any significant adverse effects on the
human environment from the White Mesa Mill would be identified
and analyzed, (2) alternatives to the license would be identified
and analyzed, (3) the public would have the opportunity to
comment on the potential adverse effects, and (a) any adverse
effects could then be mitigated.
Studies should be undertaken to prepare for the eventual rernoval
or disposition of the present wastes already brought and stored at
the White Mesa Mill under previous license amendments. The
creation of acres [ofl waste in this sensitive region aggravates
future developments and uses of the lands. To move the pile
would rightly follow that of the Atlas tailings pile near Moab.
Petition at 11.
The Group's request for an EIS for the entire Mill is bizaneand not germane to this
proceeding. An Environmental Staternent was prepared for all operations at White Mesa, prior
to granting the original license. Environmental Staternent Relate to Operation of White Mesa
Uranium Project. Enere.v Fuels Nuclear. Inc., Docket No. 40-8881, May 1979. Additionally, in
1985 and again in February 1997, a additional environmental assessments of the Mill were
undertaken pursuant to a license renewal. Environmental Assessment for Renewal of Source
Material License No. SUA-I358, Docket No. 40-8581, February 1997. Clearly, all NEPA
requiranents regarding license SUA-1358 were satisfied. To the extent that the Group wishes to
challenge the environmental assessment of the entire facility, that matter is not at issue in this
license proceeding but rather was the subject of licensing of the facility some 20 years ago and
facility license renewal in 1997. Therefore, the Group's general request for a new EIS for the
l9
entire Mill is not germane to this proceeding nor has the Group showed a harm "that is distinct
and apart from that caused by the initial licensing of the facility." See International Uranium
(USA) Corporation, supra at 3.
To the extent the Group atternpts to assert that an Environmental Report (ER) should
have been submitted for the Molycorp material license amendment specifically, the Group's
claim lacks merit. l0 C.F.R. Part 5l sets out NRC's NEPA requirements for licensees.
Specifically, l0 C.F.R. $ 51.600)(2) provides that an ER must be completed by applicants for
license amendments under Part 40 when certain criteria are met. Here, since the processing of
the material will not result in (1) a significant expansion of the Mill site; (2) a significant change
in the types of effluents; (3) a significant increase in the amount of effluents; (4) a significant
increase in individual or cumulative occupational exposure; or (5) a significant increase in the
potential for or consequences from radiological accidents because the materials are similar in
volume and kind to the materials processed at the Mill generally and will be disposed of in
existing impoundments, an ER was not required. See l0 C.F.R. $ 51.60(b)(2). IUSA notes that
it has obtained twelve license amendments to process altemate feed material. On each of these
occasions, IUSA was not required to submit an ER as it was exernpted from doing so under Part
51. In any event, even if IUSA were somehow required to submit an ER here and failed to do so,
the Group has failed to point to any immediate cognizable injury in fact that has resulted from
that failure.
20
c. The Group's Specified Areas of Concern are not
Germane to the Subject Matter of the Proceeding
To show that the areas of concern are germane to the subject matter of the proceeding,
the party requesting the hearing must show that the activity to be allowed by the licensing action
at issue - in this case approval of the Molycorp Alternate Feed Material Amendment - will affect
that party adversely in a way different from the activities previously authorized at the IUSA Mill.
IUSA submits that processing the Molycorp materials at the Mill is not significantly
different in any way than processing conventional ores and other alternate feeds which NRC has
approved. Processing the Molycorp material would not result in (l) a significant change or
increase in the types or amounts of effluents that may be released offsite, (2) a significant
increase in individual or cumulative occupational exposures, (3) a significant construction
impact, or (4) a significant increase in the potential for, or consequences from, radiological
accidents.
The Group is in effect questioning the ability of the Mill to process alternate feeds, to
process conventional ores, and to operate the Mill generally. The Mill's NRC license was
granted in 1980 and renewed in 1985 and in 1997, and the Mill has been processing conventional
ores since 1980 and alternate feeds since 1993.
In order to demonstrate that its concerns are germane to the regulatory action at issue, the
Group must demonstrate that it is likely to suffer injury resulting from the Molycorp amendment
and not from the operation of the Mill generally. Presiding Officer Peter B. Block, ruling in
response to a similar request for a hearing in connection with the processing by IUSA of another
alternate feed stated it this way:
21
Because the license to operate the White Mesa Uranium mill is not
at issue in this proceeding, a petitioner's standing must not be
based on harm resulting from the license to operate. The only
issues that may be raised must relate to the specific actions
proposed to be taken under the license amendment. To show
standing, an individual or an organization must show how they
may be harmed ("injury in fact") by the amendment.
In the Matter of Energy Fuels Nuclear. Inc., Docket No. 40-8681-MLA.
The Group's vague allegations of injury in fact, if they have any merit at all, apply
equally well to processing conventional ores and to processing other altemate feeds. Therefore,
any alleged injury does not result from this amendment, but from the general operation of the
Mill in accordance with its license.s
3. The Group has Failed to Demonstrate Standing to Intervene
on Behalf of lts Members
In addition to failing to have standing to "intervene in its own right," the Glen Canyon
Group has failed to allege injury in fact to a legitimate interest of one its members. Therefore,
the Group lacks standing to intervene "on behalf of its members."
As discussed above, an organization's standing to sue "on behalf of its mernbers"
requires that the organization meet the injury in fact test by either alleging that its mernbers, or
any of them, are suffering immediate and threatened injury as a result of the challenged action of
5 The Group makes other unfounded assertions, which are not germane to the proceeding,
concerning perceived threats to "Native American cultural resources, human health and
economic stability." Petition at 10. The Group is concemed that the needs of the Navajo and
White Mesa Ute people have not been considered and that important cultural and archeological
resources are threatened. Id. The Group does not suggest that any member of the Sierra Club is a
Ute or a Navajo or that it has been ernpowered to act on behalf of the Ute or Navajo tribes.
Moreover, petitioner's complaint in this regard appears related to the White Mesa Mill or the
nuclear industry generally, both of which long predate and are not germane to the license
amendment petitioner purports to want to challenge.
22
the sort that would make out a justifiable case had the members themselves brought suit.
Houston Lighting and Power Co., 9 NRC at 646. Importantly, to establish standing through the
interest of its mernbers, the organization must identifu specifically the name and address of at
least one affected member who wishes to be represented by the organization. Detroit Edison
Company, 8 NRC at 583, see also, Sequoyah Fuels Corp. and General Atomics, 40 NRC at 72
(1994) (an organization seeking to obtain standing in a representative capacity must demonstrate
that a member has in fact authorized such representation).
First, the Group looks to Ken Sleight as an affected mernber of the Group who wishes to
be represented by the organization for purposes of the petition to intervene. Ken Sleight, the
signatory for the newly formed Glen Canyon Group, is no stranger to IUSA license amendment
proceedings. Mr. Sleight has attempted to intervene in numerous previous license amendment
proceedings including the Ashland 1, Ashland2, and St. Louis FUSRAP alternate feed material
proceedings. International Uranium (USA) Comoration (Receipt for Material from Tonawanda.
New York), Docket No. 40-8681-MLA-4, December 17, 1998; International Uranium (USA)
Corporation (Receipt of Additional Material from Tonawanda. New York), LBP-99-8, February
19,1999; International Uranium (USA) Corporation (Receipt of Material from St. Louis.
Missouri), LBP-99-24, June 25, 1999 (attached). On each occasion Mr. Sleight was found to
have no standing to intervene because he failed to "show a harm that [was] distinct and apart
from that caused by the initial licensing and continued operation of the facility." See e.g..
International Uranium (USA) Corporation (Receipt of Additional Material from Tonawanda.
New York), LBP-99-8, February 19,1999 (citing Energ.v Fuels. Inc., LBP-94-33, 40 NRC 151,
153-54 (1994). Despite his best efflorts, Mr. Sleight, using the vehicle of the newly formed Glen
Canyon Group, has yet again failed to establish standing to intervene. As noted in the
23
Memorandum and Order (Extendine Time for Response), issued February 28,2001, the Ken
Sleight affrdavit will not be forthcoming and will not be considered by the Presiding Officer in
determining the standing issue. Therefore, Ken Sleight cannot be considered as a potentially
affected member for purposes of standing.
Next, the group looks to W. Herbert McHarg. McHarg alleges in his affidavit that while
biking and riding in his vehicle along highway 191 past the Mill he passes "countless truck-
trailers hauling materials to be dumped, stored and processed at the White Mesa Mill" and that
"[m]aterials and dust from such trucks has blown onto and into the windows of [his] vehicle, or
onto [his] face, body, and into [his] eyes, nose and mouth." McHarg AfEdavit, paragraph 3. He
further states that such materials have cracked his windshield and that the dust irritates his skin,
eyes, and nose. He fears that similar dust from transportation of the Molycorp alternate feed
materials would be harmful to his health. McHarg also claims that he may be affected by
blowing materials from the Mill itself, and that the Molycorp materials may potentially affect the
water he drinks. McHarg Affidavit, paragraph 4.
McHarg's allegations are not valid. All alternate feeds that are processed at the Mill must
be transported to the Mill in a "strong tight package" that does not ernit dust. Accordingly, the
Molycorp materials will be transported in strong tight containers in accordance with DOT
regulations. Furthermore, as discussed above, there is no incremental risk to groundwater
associated with processing these materials. Nevertheless, as with the Group's claims in support
of standing in its own right, even assuming that Mr. McHarg's allegations are true, they are not
distinct and unique to transportation, storage and disposal of the Molycorp materials. Rather,
McHarg's complaints are generalized and are at bottom, related to the general operation of the
Mill. The alleged adverse effects experienced by McHarg are linked by the Group to handling
24
practices for all materials being processed at the Mill. The allegations of blowing materials from
trucks bound for the Mill or from the Mill property, and of water contamination of unidentified
waters are insufficient to establish injury in fact due to the proposed license amendment.
Therefore, as discussed in detail above, McHarg's allegations are not germane to this proceeding
and this license amendment proceeding is not the proper forum for such general concerns.
For the reasons stated above, the Group has failed to dernonstrate standing to intervene
on behalf of its mernber McHarg.
III. CONCLUSION
IUSA has been licensed to operate the White Mesa Mill since 1980, without doing harm
to public health or the environment. The Group has failed to present any facts demonstrating
how the material from Molycorp will be compositionally different from materials, whether from
conventional ores or alternate feed materials, previously or presently processed and disposed of
at the Mill under the existing license, or how the tailings from such processing represent an
increased health or safety hazard,it has failed to show how it will be harmed by the amendment
or how the licensing amendment fails to satisff NRC regulatory requirements. See In the Matter
of International Uranium (USA) Corporation, 46 NRC 55,1997 NRC LEXIS 17, *3 (1997)'
The Group has failed to raise any issue germane to this license amendment and has failed
to articulate any injury in fact occasioned by the license amendment at issue. For the
aforernentioned reasons, IUSA respectfully submits that the Glen Canyon Group lacks standing,
either in its own right or on behalf of its members, to obtain the hearing it requests to challenge
the requested amendment to IUSA's Source Materials License SUA-1358. Accordingly,IUSA
25
respectfully requests that the Glen Canyon Group's Request for Hearing and Petition for Leave
to Intervene be DENIED.
Respectfull
Anthony J. Thompson, Esq
David C. Lashway, Esq.
Michele B. Morhenn, Esq.
Shaw Pitnnan
2300 N. Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20037
(202\ 4s4-70e8
Counsel to International Uranium (USA)
Corporation
Document #: 1087993 v.4
itted,
,a)/- c.
26
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD
Before Administrative Judges :
Alan S. Rosenthal, Presiding Offrcer
Dr. Richard F. Cole, Special Assistant
IN THE MATTER OF:
INTERNATIONAL URANruM OSA)
CORPORATION
(Source Material License Amendment)
Docket No. 40-868 l-MLA-9
ASLBP No. 0l -789-01-MLA
March 14,2001
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that copies of the foregoing International Uranium (USA)
Corporation's Reply To The Glen Canyon Group's Request For A Hearing And Petition
For Leave To Intervene in the above-captioned matter to be served, first-class mail and as
indicated by asterisks, by facsimile and/or electronic mail, on this l4th day of March, 2001 to:
Judge Alan S. Rosenthal *
Administrative Judge
One White Flint North
11555 Rockville Pike
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Rockville, Maryland 20852
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board
Panel
One White Flint Norttr
11555 Rockville Pike
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Rockville, Maryland 20852
Judge Richard F. Cole *
Administrative Judge
One White Flint North
I1555 Rockville Pike
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Rockville, Maryland 20852
Office of the Secretary *
Attn: Rulemakings and
Adjudication Staff
One White Flint North
11555 Rockville Pike
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Rockville, Maryland 20852
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Office of the General Counsel
I1555 Rockville Pike
Rockville, MD 20852
John Weisheit, Chairman *
Glen Canyon Group, Sierra Club
P.O. Box 1270
Moab, utah 84532
Mr. Ken Sleight, Chairman *
Nuclear Waste Committee
Glen Canyon Group, Sierra Club
Post Office Box 1270
Moab, utah84532
SHAW PITTMAN
2300 N Street, N.W
Washington, DC 20037
Tele: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
COI.'NSEL TO INTERNATIONAL
URANTUM (USA) COPJORATION
Document #: 1 089629 v. 1
Anthony J. Thompson, Es{'.
David C. Lashway, Esq.
AFFIDAVIT OF SAMUEL J. BILLIN. P.E,
I, SAMUEL J. BILLIN, being duly sworn upon oath, depose and state as follows:
I am a Registered Professional Engineer in the State of Utah, license number 95-180588.
I received a bachelor of science degree in civil engineering from Brigham Young
University in l99l with an emphasis in water resources and hydraulics. I received a
master of science degree from Utatr State University in civil engineeringin 1992 where I
studied groundwater hydrology and chemical transport. I have more than seven years of
experience assisting the mineral industry with permitting new facilities, permit
amendments, and remediation of hazardous waste sites.
At the request of International Uranium (USA) Corporation (IUC), I have directed a
multi-disciplinary team of scientists in evaluating the operation of tailings cells at the
White Mesa Mill and review of pleadings filed in opposition to IUC's proposed license
amendments. These team reviews have included geochemists, groundwater hydrologists,
and mining geologists familiar with both the uranium mineral industry and permitting of
mineral facilities with both state and federal agencies.
Our reviews have resulted in several observations that are significant in responding to
pleadings concerning the amendment of IUC's Source Material License. These technical
evaluations are as follows:
Reviewing the performance of the tailings cells in use by the mill (cells No. l, 2, and 3)
indicates that there is little potential for tailings solution to impact the perched water zone
underlying the site or the deep Entrada/l.Iavajo bedrock aquifer located some 1,300 feet
below the site.
The existing tailings cells were lined with synthetic materials and contain leak detection
systems. Quality control and assuranoe was provided by oversight and inspection by
multiple parties including registered professional engineers and representatives of the
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (USNRC). Since the cells were
constnrcted in the early 1980's, there have been no indications that tailings cells in use
were or are discharging tailings liquid to either the leak detection systems or the
underlying formation.
The site is underlain by several geologic formations. The uppermost bedrock formation
is the Burro Canyon/Dakota Sandstone. The Morrison Formation is a grouping of several
similar rock types forming an aquitard (i.e., a barrier to vertical groturdwater flow) from
I l0 feet to 1,300 feet below the site. A significant regional aquifer, the Entrada/Navajo
Sandstone Formation, is located below the Morrison Forrration.
We performed infiltration and grormdwater flow modeling based on observations
documented throughout the facility life (Letter report to Anthony Thompson dated
November 23,1998). These calculations indicated that very low quantities of liquid
could permeate the PVC liner system and potentially infiltrate the formation. Thesequantities would be considered "de minimis" and inherent for PVC liners according to
guidance documents provided by the United States Environmental Protection Agency(usEPA).
Based on our modeling, potential discharges from the tailings facilities cannot reach the
perched water zone for a minimum of 1,300 years. Even then, impacts to water quality
are unlikely due to closure of the facility, regional changes in groturdwater hydroiogy,-
and attenuating processes occurring in slow moving groundwater.
A-s impacts to the perched zone 110 feet below the site are highly unlikely, the likelihoodof any impacts to the Entrada/1.{avajo aquifer, some 1,300 feet bltow the site, are even
more remote.
The existence of a perched water zone beneath the facility significantly limits thepotential for operation of the tailings cells to impact the Entrada/l.lavajo aquifer.
Monitoring of the perched zone has been performed since 1980, prior to constnrction of
the tailings cells. This rnonitoring program has included up to 2j we[s in the Burro
Canyon/Dakota Formation. Potential for contamination ofttre Entrada/l.lavajo aquiferwould certainly be preceded by detection in the perched water zone.
The conclusion that the Entrada/tlavajo Formation is contaminated below the site isunwarranted based on the one sample result indicated in the filing of the Concerned
Citizens of San Juan Co. Utah.
The filing cites a chemical analysis of a single sample collected December 14, 1994 fromEnergy Fuels Well #5 as an indication of contamination of the Entada/l.Iavajo aquifer inthe vicinity of the White Mesa mill. The filing notes that the reported "on""it "tion of
lead in this sample was greater than the action level for lead (li (ug/L) established by theUtah Division of Drinking Water (Rule R309-103). The filing furtherimplies that suchindicated contamination has resulted from activities of the White Mesa Mill. Any claims
of contamination in the Entada/l.lavajo aquifer, based on the chemical analysis of tnit
single sample are unwarranted by virtue of the following facts.
No records of sample collection are provided including well purging methods andquantities, methods of sample handling, methods of sample pres-rvation and cleantinessof sample containers. These methods have been developed io assure that reported
chemical analyses do, in fact, represent chemical conditions within the water body inquestion.
Regardless of what procedures were or were not followed, extensive scientific evidence
has shown that no single ptlrging schedule a priori produces accurate samples ofgroundwater. A series of samples collected during purging with subsequent analysis is
required to determine a puging volume and schedule that will produceionsistent results.
One sample of any geologic media, especially a mobile media such as groundwater, has
an undefined reliability. Multiple samples are required to establish the natural amount of
variability due to seasonal aquifer fluctuations and sampling methods.
Trace element (e.g., lead) concentrations in water are notorious for their sensitivity to
collection and handling methods as well as their heterogeneous distributions in aquifers.
In no way can one sample be considered an accurate indicator of grotrndwater
concentrations.
Contamination of the Entrada/l.lavajo aquifer can only be defined in the context of
backgrourd water quality in the regional aquifer. Constituent concentrations may
natwally exceed such criteria. I am aware of no evidence to substantiate a claim that
groundwater has been contaminated by the White Mesa Mill.
Background data presented in the Final Environmental Statement (U.S.NRC, May 1979)
include regional surface water and groundwater quality analyses collected prior to the
constntction of the mill. These data include analyses reporting up to 20 ug/L total lead
for a sample taken in the Navajo Sandstone on July 25,1977. Water quality analyses
from nearby strearns indicate lead concentrations up to 150 tgtL. These samples indicate
the potential for background concentrations of lead, prior to mill constnrction, to be
greater than the Utah Division of Drinking Water action levels.
FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NOT.
I swear under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct to the best
of my knowledge.
DATED tlirs $aay of December 1998.
Voluntarily signed and sworn to before me this day of December 1998, by the
signer, whose identity is personally known to me or was proven to me on satisfactory
evidence.
Residing at:
My Commission expires:
,ba>*r
NOTARY PUBLIC
LBP-99-8
February 19. 1999'99 F:! i9 D I :.-;
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD PANEL
Before Administrative Judges :
Peter B. Bloch, Presiding Officer
Richard F. Cole, Special Assistant
In the matter of
INTERNATIONAL URANIUM (USA)
CORPORATION
(Receipt of Additional Material from
Tonawanda, New York)
$Hi{Vfil-IFEB le Pa.q
Docket No. 40-8681-MLA-5
Re: Material License Amendment
ASLBP No. 99-758-02-MLA
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
(Dismissing Certain Petitions)
On December 29,1998, the Presiding Officer issued an order authorizing petitioners Ken
Sleight, Navajo Utah Commission, and the Concerned Citizens of San Juan County (CCSJC) to file
amended petitions in response to objections to their petitions raised by International Uranium (USA)
Corporation (IUSA) and the NRC Staff (Staff). Memorandum and Order (Amended Petitions to
Intervene), served December 29, 1998, citing NRC Staff Notice of Intent to Participate and NRC
Staff Response ro Requests for Hearing Filed by Ken Sleight, Navajo Utah Commission, Concerned
Citizens of San Juan County, dated December 17, 1998, ^t 4'9.
Specifically, the Presiding Officer stated that "it was imponant non-sovereign Petitioners
show that they will suffer personal injury or environmental effect, given the many miles that seParate
them from the IUC site." Order at l-2. In response to a request by CCSJC, in an E-mail, dated
-2-
January 5, 1999, the Presiding Officer extended the deadline for filing amended reurns to a receipt
date ofJanuary 15, 1999.
In a filing dated January 12, 1999. served by first class mail on that.date, CCSJC filed an
amended petirion.r Concerned Citizens of San Juan County Response to NRC and IUSA Opposition
to Petition, dated January 12, 1999 (Amended Petition). None of the other petitioners filed the
authorized response. For the reasons stated below, I have determined that none of the non-
governmental petitioners has shown a particularized injury. Accordingly, all the non-governmental
petitions are dismissed.
In our Constinrtional, representative government, the first line of defense of any citizen is that
the legislature and the government officials elected or appointed to execute the laws will act
reasonably and wittr due respect for private rights. In addition, citizens have been given the right to
intervene in formal or informal proceedings when they are personally aggrieved by a governmental
action. This additional protection is available only when there is a personal grievance.
It is fundamental that any person or group intervening in a Commission proceeding must
demonsrrate that ttre proposed action will cause 'injury in fact" to its interests and that those interests
are arguably within the "zone of interests" protected by the statutes governing the proceeding'
E.g., Georgia Power Co. (Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, Units I and 2), CLI-93-16, 38 NRC 25'
32 (1993); Pubtic Seryice Co. of New Hampshire (Seabrook Station, Unit l), CLI-91-14, 34 NRC
261,266 (1991), citing Three Mile Island, l8 NRC 327,332 (1983).
rWhile the Staff did nor receive this filing until January 19, 1999, and the service list indicates
that a copy was served on the Office of the Secretary, the Staff has addressed the merits of CCSJC's
amended filing.
-3-
The amended petition filed by ccsJc does not show an injury to its organizational interests
and does not identify a member, by name and address, who will suffer injury as a result of the
proposed amendmenr. see Houston Lighting & Power co. (south Texas Prqject. units I and 2)'
ALAB-549, 9 NRC 644,64647 (1979), aff',d, LBP-79-10, 9 NRC 439,447-48 (1979)' In addition'
ccsJc has not shown that a named member (with standing in an individual capacity) has authorized
the organization ro represenr his or her interests in the proceeding , id.; Houston Lighting and Power
Co. (Allens Creek Nuclear Generating Station, Unit l), ALAB-535, 9 NRC 377 ' 393-94' 396
(1979): Babcock and Wilcox Co. (Pennsylvania Nuclear Services Operations, Parks Township'
Pennsylvania), LBP-9 44, 39 NRC 47, 50 (1994). Gene Stevenson, the Bluff Water Manager who
signed the petition and the amended petirion, has not shown that he is authorized to file a request for
hearing on behalf of the organization2.
The surface and drinking warer concerns discussed further in the amended petition, see e'8',
Amended petition at Z-4, indicate that CCSJC has grievances about the operation of the White Mesa
Mill in general, particularly that the mill "is not required to apply for a Utah groundwater permit"'
id. at 3. CCSJC does not parricularize an injury stemming from the proposed amendment' Such
concerns fall short of demonstrating that the organization or its members will suffer distinct and
palpable harm as a result of ttre proposed amendment . See Mletropolitan Edison Co' (Three Mile
-t
Island'iuclgrr Sration, uqit 1), c1-l-gl-25, 1g NRC 327,333 (1983), citing, Transnuclear Inc-,
cLl-77-24,6 NRC 525,531 (1977) (a "generalized grievance- shared in substantially equal measure
by all or a large class of citizens will not result in distinct and palpable harm to support standing);
,
2 See Detoit Edison Co. (Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant, Unit 2), LBP-78-37, 8 NRC 575, 583
<f 97S)l see also Georgia Power Co. (Vogrle Electric Generating Plant, Units I and 2), LBP-90-29' 32
NRC 89, 92 (1990).
-4-
International Uranium (USA) Corp.,CLI-98-6,47 NRC ll6 (1998) 1a petitioner must show an
injury that is "distinct and palpable, particular and concrete, as opposed to being conjectural or
hypothetical"), citing Steel Co. v. Citizensfor a Beuer Environmett,
-U.S.-,
I l8 S. Ct. 1003'
1016 (1998); Wanh v. Seldin, 422,490,501, 508, 509 (1975); Sequoyah Fuels Corp. (Gore,
Oklahoma Site), CLI-94-12,40 NRC 64,72 (1994).
In essence, because CCJSC has failed (l) to show a harm that is distinct and apart from that
caused by the initial licensing and continued operarion of the facility, see Energy Fuels, Inc.,
LBP-94-33, 40 NRC 151, 153-54 (1994), and (2) to show organizational standing based on an injury
to its organizational interest or to a member (identified by name and address) who has authorized the
filing of the petition on his or her behalf, its petition is denied. CCSJC failed to particularize an
injury on which its standing might be based.
With respect to the other petitioners, application of the standards for intervention (in the
eonrexr of the acrion challenged) indicates that Mr. Sleight and the NUC also do not have
- standing to intervene as a party to the proceeding. Each has failed to demonstrate that, as a
result of the amendment, it will likely suffer injury that is "distinct and palpable, particular and
concrete, as opposed to being conjectural or hypothetical. " See International Uranium (USA)
Cor?., CLI-98-6, 47 NRC I l6 (1998) , citing Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Environment,
I 18 S. Ct. 1003, 1016 (1998); Wanh v. Seldin, 422 490,501, 508, 509 (1975); Sequoyah Fuels
Corp.(Gore, Oklahoma Site), CLI-94-12, 40 NRC 64,72 (1994). They have not shown a
harm that is distinct and apart from that caused by the initial licensing and continued operation
of the facility. See Energy Fuels, Inc., LBP-}4-33,40 NRC 151, 153-5 4 (1994). They were
-5-
invited to cure this weakness in their petirions but they failed to amend their petirions to establish
standing.
While Mr. Sleighr menrions rhe processing and storage of material from the Ashland I
(as well as the Ashland 2) site, the injuries claimed stem from general concerns about
operarions at white Mesa and general objections ro nuclear-related activities in the region and
its perceived effect on his business, his other activities in the region, the local economy' and
cultural resources. such general ,.injuries" are nol caused by the contested license amendment
and are not sufficient to supporr standing. sei:e cleveland Electic llluminating co' (Perry
Nuclear Power Plant, unit 1), cLI-93-1, 38 NRC 87 , 95 n.10 (1993) (standing requires more
than general interests in the cultural, historical, and economic resources of a geographic area),
citing, sierra club v. Monon,405 u.s. 727,734-35 (1972). Moreover, Mr' Sleight's claims
of harm from the processing of the Ashland I material are speculative since he does specify a
credible means by which the proposed action could directly harm him, and thus' he fails to
describe an injury that is ..distinct and palpable" from his general concerns about the continued
operation of the facility. See International Uranium (USA) CoTP" CLI-98-6' 47 NRC at ll7'
118; Sequoyah Fuels Corp.,.CLI-94.12, 40 NRC at 72; Energy Fuels, Inc., LBP-94-33,
40 NRC at 153-54.
The lriavajo utatr commission of the favajo council states that it is a local governing
body designated by the Intergot'ernmental Relations commission (IGR) of the Navajo council
that, by resolution, has "the authority to review all maner affecting the communities in the
-6-
seven chapter areas of utah. making appropriate recommendations to, and requests of. the
Navajo Nation and other pertinent agencies'- NUC Petition at 1'
The NUC is located in Montezuma Creek which is approximately'40 miles from White
Mesa. While Native Americans have a unique relationship with the Federal government' they
must satisfy NRC requirements for standing in order to be admitted as a party to an NRC
proceeding . Hydro Resources, Inc., LBP-g8-g, 17 NRC 261 ,272 (1998)' citing', umerco
Minerals CorP., LBP-94-18, 39 NRC 369 (1994). The resolution and the comments in the
petition amount to a generarized grievance concerning the operation of the white Mesa mill
and do not identify a distinct and palpable harm from the proposed licensing action' see
MetropolitanEdisonCo.,CLI-83-25,18NRCat333.Thefearofnuclearmaterialsand
concerns about the cumulative impacts of nuclear activities and testing unrelated to the proposed
amendmenr cannot provide a basis for standing in this proceeding' In addition' NUC has not
identified (by name and address) the particular Navajo people who have authorized NUC to
represent their interesrs and who wil likery be harmed as a resurt of the proposed amendment
see Houston Lighting & Powerco.(South Texas Project, units I and 2), ALAB-549' 9 NRC
644,646.47(1979).Moreover,NUChasnotshownthatthemillingtobeauthorizedbythe
proposed amendment will result in railings that are more hazardous than that already authorized
under the license . see Internarional [Jranium (usA) corp', LBP-97-14' 16 NRC 55' 56
(1997), aff'd,cLl-98-6, 47 NRC I 16, 177 (1998). Therefore' the NUC Petition is denied'3
3lf the NUC can demonstrate that it is a recognized governmental entity, the presiding officer'
could exercise his discretion and auow Nuc admission as a l0 C.F.R. g 2.121 I (b) panicipant if another
intervention petition were granted'
-7-
ORDER
For all the foregoing reasons and based on the entire record in this.matter, it is, this l9th
day of February, 1998
ORDERED
l. The Petitions for a Hearing filed by Ken Sleight, the Concerned Citizens of San
Juan County (CCSJC) and the Navajo Utatr Commission (NUC) of the Navajo Utatr Council
of San Juan County are dismissed.
2. Appeals of this Order may be filed pursuant to l0 C.F.R. $ 2.1205(o). Any appeal
musr be filed within ten (10) days of service of this Order and may be taken by filing and
serving upon all parties a statement that succinctly sets out, with supporting argument, the
errors alleged. Any other party may support or oppose the appeal by filing a statement within
fifteen (15) days of the service of the appeal brief.
Peter B. Bloch, Administrative Judge
Presiding Officer
Rockville, Maryland
UilITED STATES OF AI.IERICA
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COIII{ISSIO}I
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that copies of the foregoing LBP-99-8 DISIIISSIIIG..PETITI0iIS
t.r" beln servei upon ttrl totlowing persons by U.S. mail, first class, excep!--
is otnerwise noted'and in accordanie'with the requirements of l0 CFR Sec. 2-712,
Administrative Judge
Peter B. Bloch
Presiding 0fficer
Atomic Sifety and Licensing Board Panel
l,lai I Stop - T-3 F23
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission
tlashington, DC 20555
tlitzi A. Young, Esq.
0ffice of the General Counsel
I'lail Stop - 0-15 Bt8
U.S. Nucleir Regulatory Cormission
l{ashington, DC 20555
Fred G l{elson, Esq.
Denise Chancellor, Esq.
Utah AttorneY General's 0ffice
160 East 300 South, sth Floor
P.0. Box 140873
Salt Lake CitY, UT 84114
In the llatter of
INTERNATIOI{AL URANIUITI (USA)
C0RP0RATI0N (IUSA)
(Request for I'laterial License
Amendment)
0ffice of Comission APPellate
Adjudi cati on
U.S. iluclear Regulatory Cormission
Ilashi ngton, DC 20555
Administrative Judge
Richard F. Cole
Special Assistant
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
I'lai I Stop - T-3 F23
U.S. iluclear Regulatory Cormission
l{ashington, DC 20555
David J. Jordan, Esq.,lill 1,1. Pohlman, Esq.
Stoel Rives LLP
One Utah Center, llth Floor
201 South llain Street
Salt Lake CitY, UT 84111
Clarence Rockwell
Executive Director
Navajo Utah Cormission
P.0. Box 570
Itontezuma Creek, UT 84534
Docket ilo. (s ) 40-8681-t'lLA-5
Gene Stevenson
Concerned Citizens of San Juan County
P.0. Box 261
Bluff, UT 84512
Docket No. (s)40-8681-l{LA-5
LBP-99-8 DISIIISSIilG. . PETITIO}IS
Ken
P.0.
I'loab,
Sl ei ght
Box 1270uT 84532
Dated at Rockville, ild. this
19 day of FebruarY 1999
Anthony J. Thompson, Esq.
Shaw, Dittman, Potts & Trowbridge
2300 N Street, iltl
l{ashington, DC 20037.
LBP-99-24
June 25, 1999
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
NUCLEAR REGU I.ATORY COMMISSION
ATOMIC SAFEW AND LICENSING BOARD PANEL
Before Ad min istrative Judges:
Peter B. Bloch, Presiding Officer
Richard F. Cole, SPecialAssistant
ln the matter of
TNTERNATIONAL URANIUM (USA)
CORPORATION
Docket No. 40-8681 -MLA-6
Re: Material License Amendment
ASLBP No. 99-766-06-MLA
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
(Dismissal of Kenneth Sleight)
on June 2, 1999, Mr. Ken Sleight submitted by fax a Request for Hearing
challenging the Nuclear Regulatory Commission'S ("NRC") amendment of
lnternational Uranium (USA) Corporation's ("IUSA") Source Material License
suA-135g to allow for the receipt and "processing" of uranium-bearing material
from a site being managed under the Formerly Utilized Sites RemedialAction
Program ("FUSRAP") near St. Louis, Missouri'1
Mr. Sleight,s petition bares a distinct resemblance to the petition he also filed in
an earlier amendment case involving IUSA, Docket No. 40-8681-MLA-S. ln that
case, we permitted Mr. Sleight to amend his petition to meet the NRC's standing
requirements. LBp-gg-8, February 19, 1999. !n particular, he was advised that in
an amendment case, such as this, he must show how he is injured by the
(Receipt of Material from
St. Louis, Missouri
amendmenf rather than by the operations that were already authorized by the
license that is being amended. Accordingly, Mr. Sleight is on notice of the
standing requirements and it is appropriate to act now to determine the merits of
his petition.
After reviewing Mr. Sleight's petition in light of legal requirements, I reach the
same conclusion I reached in the earlier case. Mr. Sleight has not demonstrated
the standing required to obtain a hearing on his concerns. ln particular, since the
disposal of tailings is already authorized under an existing license, the question of
possible injury to Mr. Sleight is whether he will be injured because the tailings from
the milling authorized by this amendment will be more hazardous than tailings
already authorized under the license. lntemational lJranium (USA) Corporation
(White Mesa Uranium Mill), LBP-97-14,46 NRC 55, SO (1997). As lwrote in
lntemational Uranium (USA) Corporation (Receipt of Additional Material from
Tonawanda, New York), LBP-99-8,49 NRC 131,133-134 (1999):
With respect to . . . Mr. Sleight[,] . . . [he does] not have standing to intervene
as a party to the proceeding. [He] . . . has failed to demonstrate that, as a result of
the amendment, it will likely suffer injury that is "distinct and palpable, particular
and concrete, as opposed to being conjectural or hypothetical.' See International
Uranium (USA) Corp., CLI-98-6, 47 NRC l16 (1998), citing Steel Co. v. Citizens
for a Better Environment, ll8 S. Ct. 1003, 1016 (1998); Warth v. Seldin,
422 490,501, 508, 509 (1975); Sequoyah Fuels Corp. (Gore, Oklahoma Site),
CLI-94-12, 40 NRC 64,72 (1994). [He has] . . . not shown a harm that is
distinct and apart from that caused by the initial licensing and continued operation
:1i. facility. See Energy Fuels, Inc., LBP-94-33,40 NRC 151, 153-54 (1994).
While Mr. Sleight mentions the processing and storage of material from the
Ashland I (as well as the Ashland 2) site, the injuries claimed stem from general
concerns about operations at White Mesa and general objections to nuclear-related
activities in the region and its perceived effect on his business, his other activities
in the region, the local economy, and cultural resources. Such general "injuries'
are not caused by the contested license amendment and are not sufficient to support
standing. See Cleveland Electric llluminating Co.(Perry Nuclear Power Plant,
Unit l), CLI-93-1, 38 NRC 87, 95 n.l0 (1993) (standing requires more than
general interests in the cultural, historical, and economic resources of a geographic
area), citing, Sierra Club v. Morton,405 U.S. 727,734-35 (1972). Moreover,
Mr. Sleight's claims of harm from the processing of the Astrland I material are
speculative since he does speciff a credible means by which the proposed action
could directly harm him, and thus, he fails to describe an injury that is "distinct
and palpable" from his general concerns about the continued operation of the
facility. See International Uranium (USA) Corp., CLI-98-6, 47 NRC at 117-118;
Sequoyah Fuels Corp., CLI-94-L2,4fr NRC at 72; Energy Fuels, Inc-,
LBP-94-33, 40 NRC at 153-54.
Accordingly, for the same basic reasons expressed in LBP-99-8, Mr. Sleight's
petition in this proceeding is dismissed.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Peter B. Bloch, Administrative Judge
Presiding Officer
Rockville, Maryland
December 17, 1998
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMSSION
ATOMIC SAFETY A}ID LICENSING BOARD PA}.IEL
Before Administrative Judges :
Peter B. Bloch, Presiding Officer
Richard F. Cole, Special Assistant
In the matter of
INTERNATIONAL URA}IIUM (USA)
CORPORATION
(Receipt of Material from
Docket No. 40-868 l -MLA4
Re: Material License Amendment
ASLBPNo. 98-748-03-MLA
Tonawand4 New York
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
(Mr. Sleight's Petition for Leave to Intervene)
In his petition, Mr. Sleight has set forth a variety of allegations that he is damaged by
the disposal of nuclear wastes by International Uranium (USA) Corporation (IUC), which
already is licensed to dispose of nuclear wastes. Mr. Sleight has not addressed directly the
subjectofthis hearing, alicenseamendmentpermitting IUC to receivetheAshland2 materials,
being shipped to it from Tonawand4 New York. Because he has not said anything about these
materials, Mr. Sleight has not demonstrated that he has suffered "injury in fact" from the
amendment application and he has not, therefore, shown that he is entitled to become a party
to this hearing, in which the State of Utatr is a participant seeking to contest the amendment.
In an earlier proceeding involving IUC, I stated:
(
t -2-
The relevant question for standing purposes is the composition of-the 'tailings" or
waste materij after the Cotter CJncentrates has been processed. Singe the disposal
of tailings is atreaOy authorized under an existing license, the question of possible
injury to the petitioners is whether the uilings from the milling authorized by this
amendrnent *itt u. more tuzardous than tailings already authorized under the license.
petitioners have not provided any infonnation, beyond conjecture, that the tailings
represent an increased health or safety h^zard'
International Uranium (USA) Corporatioi, 46 NRC 55 (1997) at 56. By analogy, the
important question in this case is whether the activities covered by the amendment concerning
Ashland I materials represent an increased health or safety hazard or are otherwise illegal. The
harm alleged by Mr. Sleight must relate to this particular amendment'
Mr. Sleight could be permitted to make up for this deficiency by filing an amendment
to his petition. However, the State of Utatr already is diligently ptrsuing its position that the
amendment concerning the Ashland 2 materials is improper.r There is, therefore, an ongoing
proceeding that could protect Mr. Sleight. I therefore choose to deny Mr. Sleight a discretion-
ary opportunity to amend his petition. Accordingly, his petition for a hearingis denied.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Peter B. Bloch, Administrative Judge
Presiding Offrcer
Rockville, Maryland
lState of Utah's Brief in Opposition to International Uranium (USA) Corporation's
Source Material License Amendment, December 7, 1998.
IFedera1 Register: March 5, 2007 (Volume 66, Number 43) ]lNoticesl
IPage 13355]
Erom the Federal Register Onli-ne via GPO Access Iwais.access.gpo.gov]
IDOCID: fr05mr01-94 l
[ [Page 1335s] l
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
IDocket No. 40-8681-MLA-9,' ASLBP No. 01-789-01-MLA]
Internationaf Uranium (USA) Corporation; Designation of PresidingOfficer
Pursuant to delegation by the Commission, see 37 FR 28710 (Dec. 29,l9'l 2), and the Commission's reguJ-ations, see 10 CFR 2.1207, 2.L20'1 ,notice is hereby given that (1) a singJ-e member of the Atomic Safetyand Licensj-ng Board Panel- is designated as Presiding Officer to ru.l-e onpetitions for leave to intervene and,/or requests for hearing,. and (2)
upon making the requisite findings j-n accordance with 10 CFR 2.1205(h),the Presiding Officer wil-I conduct an adjudicatory hearj_ng in thefollowing proceeding:
rnternational uranium (usA) corporation (source Materiar License
Amendment )
The hearing will be conducted pursuant to 10 CFR part 2, Subpart L,of the Commission's Regulations, "Informal Hearing procedures forAdjudications in Material-s and operator Licensing proceedings. " Thisproceeding concerns a February 7, 2007 request for hearing submitted bythe Glen Canyon Group of the Sj-erra C1ub. The request was filed 1nresponse to a request from Internationaf Uranium (USA) Corporatj-on(IUSA) to amend its source materia1 license to recei_ve and processal-ternate feed material-s at its Blanding, Utah Whj-te Mesa Uranium Mil-ffrom the Molycorp site located in Mountain Pass, Cal-i-forn-ia. The noticeof receipt of the amendment and opportunity for a hearing was publishedi-n the Federal- Register on January 9, 2001 (66 ER 7i02) .The Presiding Officer j-n this proceeding is Administrative JudgeA]an S. Rosenthal . Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CER 2 .'722, 2.1209,Administrative Judge Richard F. col-e has been appointed to assist thePresiding Officer in taking evidence and in preparing a suitabl-e recordfor review,
A11 correspondence, documents, and other materials shal_I be filedwith Judges Rosentha.l- and Col-e in accordance with 10 CFR 2.7203. Theiraddresses are:
Administrative Judge Al-an S. Rosenthal, Presiding Officer, AtomicSafety and Licens.ing Board Panel, u.s. Nucl-ear Reguratory commissj-on,Washington, DC 20555-0001.Dr. Rlchard F. co1e, speciat Assistant, Atomic safety and LicensingBoard Panel, u.s. Nucl-ear Regulatory commission, washington, DC 20555-0001.
Issued at Rockville, Maryland, this 27th day of February 2001.G. Pau-I Bollwerk IfI,chief Administrative Judge, Atomic Safety and Llcensing Board panel-
IFR Doc. 01-5214 FiJ-ed 3-2-01; 8:,45 am]
B]LL]NG CODE 7590-01-P
Page I
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=2001_register&docid:01-5214-filed 31712001
o
g/ea/n/rro,rE
t
Ofr.,ftary o/il4"//oo,/tyrg.g.€.
122519th Street, NW., Suite 200
Washington, DC 20036
202-496-0780
Fas< 202-496-0783
August 15,2001
Mr. Melvyn Leach
Fuel Cycle Licensing Branch
Division of Fuel Cycle Safety and Safeguards
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Mail Stop T-8A33
Washington, D.C. 20555
Re: IUSA's License Amendment to Receive and Process Alternate Feed
Material from the Molycorp Site
Dear Mr.
The purpose of this letter is to follow up on our previous discussions with your
staffregarding International Uranium (USA) Corporation's ("IUSA's") proposed
amendment to Nuclear Regulatory Commission ('NRC") Source Material License SUA-
1358, which would permit IUSA to receive and process at its White Mesa Mill (the
"Mill") up to 17,750 tons of altemate feed material derived from Molycorp,Inc.'s rare
earths facility located in Mountain Pass, California ("Molycorp"). During the course of
the discussions, the question was posed as to whether the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency ("EPA"), or a state that has been delegated authority by EPA under the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act ("RCRA"),42 U.S.C. $$ 6901 et seq., has RCRA
jurisdiction over the Molycorp materials if the materials exhibit a hazardous
"characteristic" pursuant to RCRA regulations, 40 C.F.R. $$ 261.21-33 (Attachment A).1
IUSA's answer to the question posed is that once NRC issues an alternate feed
material license amendment to IUSA to process the Molycorp materials as source
material ore at its licensed uranium mill, and the materials are destined for processing at
the Mill pursuant to that amendment, neither EPA nor a state with delegated RCRA
authority has jurisdiction over the materials under RCRA.2 In [ght of all the points and
I The hazardous waste "characteristics" under RCRA are ignitability, corrosivity, toxicity and
2 An Atomic Energy Act ('AEA') license amendment issued by an Agreement State or a
determination by a licensee pursuant to its performance based license condition criteria would also be
suffrcient.
dt"o\
No
8,,i
sqer4lteq#"t
'ggoe4.
authorities provided herein, IUSA respectfully requests that NRC issue the requested
license amendment as expeditiously as possible.
I. FACTUAL BACKGROT]ND
As discussed inNRC's Federal Register Notice dated January 9,2001,66 Fed.
Reg. 1702 (Attachment B), IUSA filed an application to amend Source Material License
No. SUA-I358 to allow the Mill to receive and process certain material from Molycorp
as alternate feed material pursuant to NRC's Alternate Feed Policy.3 Specifically, IUSA
seeks to process certain uranium-bearing materials from Molycorp for the recovery of
uranium through use of the Mill's existing acid leach process. As is the case with all
altemate feed materials processed at the Mill, the residuals resulting from processing the
Molycorp materials will be managed as l1e.(2) byproduct material in the Mill's NRC-
licensed tailings cells.
The Molycorp materials consist of up to approximately 17,750 tons of lead sulfide
sludge containing uranium. The materials resulted from the extraction of lanthanides and
other rare earth materials and are currently being stored in ponds at the Molycorp facility.
Molycorp has estimated that the materials have an average uranium content of
approximately 0.15%. The lead content in the materials is a natural component of the ore
(similar to many ores processed by IUSA) and is at levels such that the materials might
not pass EPA's Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure ("TCLP"). Consequently,
unless exempted from RCRA, the materials potentially could be subject to regulation as a
RCRA characteristic hazardous waste. The materials do not contain any listed hazardous
waste as defined in RCRA. See 40 C.F.R. $$ 261.30-33 (Attachment A).
In a letter received by NRC on February 12,2001(Attachment E), EPA expressed
concerns regarding IUSA's application. Specifically, EPA advised NRC that according
to EPA's Region 9 Office, the Molycorp materials are currently regulated under RCRA
as a "characteristic" hazardous waste and have been classified by the State of Califomia
as such.4 EPA further stated that it is "unclear whether RCRA jurisdiction would apply
to some components of the waste after it is licensed as a source material," and, in
particular, questioned IUSA's analysis, as stated in the license amendment request, that
once NRC has determined the waste to be deemed source material it can be removed
from the Molycorp facility as a "recycled mineral waste." In the letter, EPA requested
that NRC meet with EPA to clariS this point and to work with EPA to reach a consensus
3 See Final Position and Guidarrce on the (Jse of Uranium Mill Feed Materials Other than Natural
Ores,60 Fed. Reg. 49296 (September 25, 1995) (Attachment C), as amended by Regulatory Issue
Summary 2000-23 (Nov. 2000) (Interim Position and Guidance on the Use of Uranium Mill Feed Material
Other than Natural Ores) (Attachment D).
o ruS.A understands that while the State of California has previously classified a lead precipitate
stored in drums at the Molycorp facility as hazardous waste, it has never asserted jurisdiction over the lead
sulfide sludge that is the subject of this amendment. Moreover, under EPA guidance, 54 Fed. Reg. 36597
(September l, 1989), because the lead sulfide sludge materials have not been actively managed since the
mid-1980's, IUSA understands that they are not subject to regulation as hazardous wastes.
on the issue. In a follow-up letter received by NRC on April 5, 2001 (Attachment F),
EPA advised NRC that the determination as to whether the Molycorp materials are
hazardous waste requires resolution of several issues, including whether the materials in
question are "solid wastes." EPA noted that generally materials are not classified as
"solid wastes" when they are legitimately reclaimed, and therefore such materials are not
considered hazardous wastes under Subtitle C of RCRA. The letter further states that
EPA has authorized the State of California and the State of Utah to implement their State
RCRA programs in lieu of the Federal RCRA program and thatNRC should obtain the
views of Califomia, Utah and Nevada (through which the Molycorp materials will be
transported) on this matter. In discussions with the State of Utah Division of Solid and
Hazardous Waste ("UDSHW"), UDSHW advised IUSA that it interpreted the April 5,
2001 EPA letter as EPA defening to the State with respect to whether the processing of
the Molycorp materials as an altemate feed material is exempt from RCRA. UDSHW
advised IUSA that, based on the letter from EPA, UDSHW would apply standard RCRA
guidance to determine whether or not the Molycorp materials would be legitimately
'orecycled" at the Mill, and hence exempt from RCRA pursuant to 40 C.F.R. $ 261.2(e)
(Attachment G).
As discussed below, the primary issue here is not whether the materials are to be
"recycled" and, therefore, are not hazardous waste, but rather whether the materials are
source material ore arrd hence are not solid waste and, therefore, not regulated under
RCRA. As explained below, it is unnecessary to engage in a RCRA recycling analysis
with respect to these materials. It should be noted, however, that in order for the
Molycorp materials to be licensed for processing at an NRC licensed uranium mill as
source material ore they must meet the definition of source material and satisfy the
criteria of NRC's Alternate Feed Policy which addresses many of the issues that are
fundamental to a RCRA recycling analysis, while taking into consideration the unique
nature of materials containing radionuclides.
With this letter, IUSA is requesting that the NRC Staffgrant the license
amendment by concluding that the Molycorp materials satisft the definitionof source
material ore andthe requirements of NRC's Alternate Feed Policy and, therefore, are
not a solid waste and are exempt from RCRA. IUSA notes that EPA also sees value in
NRC resolving this issue. In a meeting between IUSA and EPA Region 8 on May 2,
2001, EPA Region 8 personnel advised IUSA that it is their opinion that it is within
NRC's authority and responsibility to determine whether the Molycorp materials are
source material ore and, hence, exempt from RCRA. Moreover, during a recent meeting
between Molycorp and the State of California Radiation Health Bureau ("RHB"), RHB
personnel expressed support for processing the lead sulfide sludge from Molycorp at
IUSA's NRC licensed mill, pursuant to the proposed licensed amendment.
Should the NRC fail to make this determination,IUSA is concerned that
confusion will continue and quite possibly, unmanageable dual jurisdiction (including
perhaps retroactive application of RCRA to previous IUSA activities) over the Molycorp
materials, and other materials that have been processed at the Mill, may result.
II. LEGAL BACKGROUNI)
To adequately address the issue of whether the Molycorp materials are subject to
regulation by EPA and/or an authorized state under RCRA, a brief review of the
applicable law is provided.
A. Source Material Ore Is Expressly Exempted From RCRA
Only "solid wastes" may be regulated as "hazardous waste" under RCRA. See 42
U.S.C. $ 6903(5) (Attachment H); 40 C.F.R. $ 261.3 (Attachment G). Source material is
expressly excluded from the definition of "solid waste." RCRA provides that the term
"solid waste" does not include:
source, special nuclear or byproduct material as defined by
the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, (68 Stat. 923)
[42 U.S.C. $$ 201t et seq.l.
42 U.S.C. $ 6903(27) (Attachment H); see also 40 C.F.R. g 261.a(a)(a) (Attachment G).
Consequently, since source material is not a "solid waste," it cannot be classified as
"hazardous waste." Therefore, source material is not subject to regulation by EPA or an
authorized state pursuant to RCRA.
Since RCRA must rely on the AEA definition of soarce material, arr
understanding of what qualifies as "source material" under the AEA is critical. See 42
u.s.c. $ 6903(27) (Attachment H); 40 c.F.R. g 261.a(a)(a) (Attachment G). The term
source material is defined to mean:
(l) uranium, thoriums, or any other material which is
determined by the Commission pursuant to the provisions
of section 61 to be source material; or (2) ores containing
one or more of the foregoing materials, in such
concentration as the Commission may by regulation
determine from time to time.
42 U.S.C. $ 20la(z) (emphasis added) (Attachment I). Since source material is defined
to include ore containing uranium, it is necessary to understand the definitionof ore.
Consistent with Congress' intent to include a broad range of materials within the scope of
the term ore (and, thereby to encompass an equally broad range of materials within the
regulatory control program for wastes from ore processing as 11e.(2) byproduct
material), NRC defines ore as:
a natural or native matter that may be mined and treated for
the extraction of any of its constituents or any other matter
5 Although uranium and thorium are both source material, this letter addresses only uranium
recovery.
from which source material is extracted in a licensed
uranium or thorium mill.
60 Fed. Reg. at 49,296 (emphasis added) (Attachment C).6 Licensable or licensed source
material ore must contain at least 0.05% uranium and/or thorium. See l0 C.F.R. $ 40.4
(Attachment K).
Thus, any material that satisfies NRC's definition of ore and contains 0.05% or
greater lnanium is source material and, therefore, is excluded from regulation under
RCRA.7
1. Alternate Feed Materials Are Source Material Ore And
Therefore Are Exempt From RCRA
The Altemate Feed Policy was developed by NRC to establish a set of criteria to
be used in evaluating whether feed materials that are not "conventional ores" can
properly be processed at licensed uranium mills such that the tailings and wastes
generated from such processing will still be considered 11e.(2) byproduct material. The
Policy establishes four criteria that must be satisfied before uranium-bearing materials
other than conventional ores may be processed at a licensed uranium mill. First,
processing the alternate feed material (and disposal of the tailings and wastes associated
with such processing) must conform with the requirements of l0 C.F.R. Part 40. Second,
the altemate feed material must not contain any "listed" hazardous wastes (i.e., any
wastes listed under 40 C.F.R. $$ 271.30-33 (Attachment A) or under comparable state
law provisions) or-residues that constitute hazardous waste from any wastewater
treatment process.8 However, "[f]eed material exhibiting only a characteristic of
hazardous waste (ignitable, corrosive, reactive, toxic) would not be regulated as
hazardous wastes and could therefore be approved for recycling and extraction of source
material." 60 Fed. Reg. at 49,297 (Auachment C). Third, the alternate feed material
6 The Commission approved the broad definition of ore in its various decisions regarding alternate
feed materials, including In the Matter of International (Jranium Corporation (Receipt of Materialsfrom
Tonqwanda, New York) CLI-00-01 (Feb. 10, 2000) (Ashlandll) (Attachment I). Furtherrnore, the same
defurition has been relied upon by the Staffand licensees to determine whether the wastes from processing
particular materials satisS the definition of 1le.(2) byproduct material. Therefore, the same defrnition
mustbe used in defining source material ore.
' Sour"" material ore is not a solid waste and,as noted above, is exempt from regulation under
RCRA and is under the sole jurisdiction of NRC. Technically speaking, mixed waste (amixhre of AEA
low-level radioactive waste and hazardous waste) by contrasq is subject to EPA jurisdiction with respect to
the hazardous constituents and NRC jurisdiction with respect to the radionuclides. Since, as explained
herein, the Molycorp materials are source materiql ore and not mixed waste,EPA has no jurisdiction over
the materials. See EPA, Guidance on the Definition and ldentification of Commercial Mixed Low-Level
Radioactive and Hazardous llaste, Question I (http://www.epa.sov/radiation/mixed-waste/mw pg25.htn)
(Attachment L).
8 However, the Interim Position and Guidance on the {Jse of Uranium Mill Feed Material Other
Than Natural Ores (Attachment D), indicates that materials containing listed hazardous waste may be
licensed as alternate feed material with approval from EPA or an authorized state.
must qualiff as an "ore." Fourth, the alternate feed material must be processed primarily
for its source material content.
The determination of whether or not a material is processe d primarily for its
source material content is inextricably linked to the definilion of "ore" quoted above.e
See Ashland II. The Commission's decision interpreting the Alternate Feed Policy,
effectively adopts the Policy's definition of ore and establishes that a material will be
presumed to be processed primarily for its source material content if it is processed for
the extraction of uranium in a licensed uranium mill that is part of the nuclear fuel cycle,
rather than in a non-fuel cycle facility as part of a secondary, side-stream recovery
operation. As the discussion of the definition of "ore" in the preamble to the proposed
Alternate Feed Policy stated:
Two major considerations that went into this proposed
definition of ore were:
1. It is broad enough to include a wide variety of feed
materials.
2. The definition continues to be tied to the nuclear fuel cycle.
Because the extraction of uranium in a licensed mill remains the
primary purpose of processing the feed material, it excludes
secondary uranium side-stream recovery operations at mills
processing ores for other metals. Thus, tailings from such side-
stream operations at facilities that are not licensed as uranium or
thorium mills would not meet the definition under I le.(2) of
byproduct material.
57 Fed. Reg. at 20,525 (emphasis added) (Attachment M).
Finally, the phrase "processed primarily for its source material content" was
interpreted by the CommissioninAshland II to mean that it must be reasonable to expect
that the material will in fact be processed at a licensed uranium mill and that uranium will
be recovered, regardless of the economics of the transaction. In developing its Alternate
Feed Policy, NRC recognized that the physical, chemical, and radiological characteristics
of alternate feed materials may vary widely in comparison to conventional ores.
Accordingly, the Alternate Feed Policy sets out a number of criteria intended to ensure
that wastes generated from processing alternate feed material will qualiff as I le.(2)
byproduct material and will not otherwise be subject to dual or multiple jurisdiction.
Thus, for example, the policy requires a licensee to ensure that processing an altemate
feed, and disposing of the resulting tailings and wastes, will not compromise a mill's
e That determination (and the expansive defrnition of ore) is also inextricably linked to the
expansive defurition of I le.(2) byproduct material which includes all wastes (radioactive and non-
radioactive) generated by the extraction or concentration ofuranium from "any ore."
ability to comply with the regulatory requirements contained in 10 C.F.R. Part 40. See 60
Fed. Reg. at 49,296 (Attachment C).
Based on the foregoing, any uranium-bearing material that satisfies the broad
definition of ore, does not contain a listedhazardous waste, and that will be processed
primarilyfor its source material content at a licensed uranium mill meets the definition
of altemate feed material. Furthernore, because alternate feed material must be an ore,
an altemate feed material with an uranium content of 0.05% or greater is source material
ore. For the reasons stated above, such sozrce material ore is exempt from regulation
under RCRA.
B. 11e.(2) Byproduct Material Is Regulated By NRC And Is Expressly
Exempt From RCRA
As noted above, the wastes that result from processing sozrce material ore
primarily for its source material content at a licensed uranium mill are I le.(2) byproduct
material, which is defined as:
...the tailings or wastes produced by the extraction or
concentration of uranium or thorium from any ore
processedprimarily for its source material content.
42 U.S.C. $ 2014e.(2) (emphasis added) (Attachment I).
Like source material,l le.(2) byproduct material is excluded from the definition
of "solid waste" and, therefore, is excluded from regulation under RCRA. See 42 U.S.C.
$ 6309(27) (Attachment H); 40 C.F.R. g 261.a(a)(4) (Attachment G).
C. Congress Intended For NRC To Have SoIe Jurisdiction Over Source
Material
Congress gave NRC the authority to regulate both the radiological and
nonradiological aspects of source material ore andbyproduct material, in conformity
with standards set by EPA. The AEA, as amended by UMTRCA, requires NRC to
regulate wastes from processing source material based on standards that provide
equivalent protection to EPA standards, and, as a result, no permit is required under the
Solid waste Disposal Act for the "processing, possessing, transfer, or disposal of
byproduct material." Section 275 b.(2) (Attachment 19. In Section 84 of the AEA
(Attachment O), Congress directed the NRC to regulate both the radiological and
nonradiological components of mill tailings in conformance with the manner in which
EPA manages hazardous waste under RCRA. Specifically, EPA promulgated standards
that NRC relied on when promulgating its l0 C.F.R. Part 40, Appendix A criteria.
However, unlike the EPA standards, NRC criteria include additional protections and
slight variations to address the unique issues associated with the presence of
radionuclides in source material ore and, byproduct material.
NRC, not EPA, is charged with active implementation of UMTRCA generated
requirements including ensuring that the standards promulgated pursuant to RCRA, set
forth at 40 C.F.R. Partl92, Subpart D (Attachment P), are applied "during and following
processing of uranium ores." 40 C.F.R. $ 192.30. Similarly, the applicable surface
impoundment design standards and groundwater protection requirements for Subtitle C
facilities are incorporated into Appendix A, which includes the requirements applicable
to mill tailings impoundments and the operations of uranium mills generally. See 40
C.F.R. S 192.32 (Attachment P). For example, since the long-lived nature of
radionuclides pose an additional potential threat beyond mere characteristic waste, the
Appendix A criteria" incorporating the 40 C.F.R. Partl92, Subpart D standards, have
unique features such as passive contols for 1000 years through an engineered
encapsulation system and a mandatory governmental custodian licensed in perpetuity by
NRC, which provide additional protection above and beyond that provided by a state-of-
the-art RCRA impoundment.
Congress in adopting the AEA, as amended by UMTRCA, delegated to NRC
exclusive jurisdiction oyer source material and I le.(2) byproduct material. Had it been
intended that EPA should have jurisdiction over these materials, either of which could
and both of which frequently do contain hazardous constituents, Congress would not
have exempted them from RCRA and provided that where there is a conflict between
AEA and RCRA, RCRA yields.l0 Therefore, it is only proper that alternate feed material,
which NRC determines to be source material ore, is exempt from regulation as hazardous
waste under RCRA. If NRC does not assert its sole authority over these materials, it
could result in an entangled web of dual jurisdiction of the very type Congress intended
to avoid.
D. A Separate RCRA Recycling Analysis Is Redundant And Creates The
Potential For Inconsistent AEA And RCRA Determinations And Dual
Jurisdiction
The application of RCRA requirements to processing alternate feed material that
is source material ore at an NRC licensed uranium mill would not only be contrary to
law, but would be duplicative and unnecessary. NRC has determined what constitutes
"processingprimarily for uranium" and, hence, what type of ore processing creates
ro Congress has made it clear that, in the event of a conflict between RCRA and the AEA, RCRA
requirements must yield. RCRA $ 6905(a) (Attachment Q) provides that:
Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to apply to (or to authorize
any State, interstate, or local authority to regulate) any activity or
substance which is subject to ... the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 except
to the extent that such application (or regulation) is not inconsistent
with the requirements of such Acts.
lle.(2) byproduct material. Furthermore, as noted above, NRC regulates the creation and
disposal of I le.(2) byproduct material in conformance with EPA standards.ll
From the standpoint of environmental protection, RCRA recycling management
requirements are duplicative ofNRC's license amendment process and could lead to
confusion or conflicts as a result of the application of two similar, yet distinctly different,
regulatory programs.12 The ultimate objective of the RCRA analysis is the same as the
analysis NRC performs under the AEA when evaluating whether to approve an alternate
feed license amendment-to evaluate whether materials proposed for
recycling/processing will indeed be recycled/processed to produce a valuable product
(e.g. yellow cake) and to assure that all wastes generated will not avoid appropriate
regulatory controls, and will be used and managed in a manner that is protective of
human health and the environment.
As discussed above, Congress has given NRC the sole authority to regulate
source material and the radiological and nonradiological components of I 1e.(2)
byproduct material. NRC should avoid the potential for inconsistent AEA and RCRA
results by designating the Molycorp alternate feed materials, which have a uranium
content of greater than 0.05% and which by definition are source material ore, not
subject to RCRA. If a separate RCRA analysis must be performed for each alternate
feed, the potential for inconsistent results exists not only prospectively but also perhaps
retrospectively. As noted above, a number of alternate feeds processed since l992hive
displayed characteristics of hazardous waste and have not undergone a separate RCRA
analysis. If NRC were to conclude today that a RCRA analysis is necessary for these
materials, and some materials were to become subject to RCRA controls, this could
subject licensed uranium milling facilities to dual AEA/RCRA jurisdiction, thereby
raising questions about whether DOE would be required by UMTRCA to accept long
term stewardship of the site. In no circumstances to date has EPA or an authorized State
required that RCRA recycling guidance be applied by NRC, or any other party, in
connection with the approval of any alternate feed material for processing at a licensed
uranium mill; to do so now would be unwarranted and improper.
rr It is worth noting that, the 1984 Amendments to the Solid Waste Disposal Acl which set forth
specific requirements for RCRA surface impoundments, state that nothing in the amendments should be
construed to require changes in the regulatory progftlm for mill tailings under UMTRCA, which provides
that certain standards promulgated under UMTRCA for the regulation of uranium mill tailings should be"consistent" with the standards of the Solid Waste Disposal Ait, as amended. pub. L. 9g-61; $703(Attachment R). See also,l3O Cong. Rec. 520845 (daily ed. July 25, 1984) (statement of Mr. n*aopny(Attachment S).
- - "_ lo. example, RCRA recycling guidance considers economics as a factor (although
acknowledging that all mineral recovery recycling does not necessarily have to be profitablJto belegitimate). See generally, 63 Fed. Reg. 28,556 (May 26,1998). The Commission however, as explained
supra, has determined that the economics of uranium recovery at a Mill are irelevant to valid r"cyiling ^long as uranium can reasonably be expected to be (or is) extacted at a mill.
III. CONCLUSION
The Molycorp materials satisff the definitionof source materiol ore andthe
criteria of the Alternate Feed Policy: they are estimated to contain an average of
approximately 0.l5Yo uranium, therefore they are licensable source material ore;they do
not contain any listed hazardous wastes; they will be processed and their wastes disposed
of in accordance with the requirements of 10 C.F.R. Part 40, Appendix A; the wastes
meet the definition of l1e.(2) byproduct material; source material will be extracted from
the materials at a licensed uranium mill; and, the material will be processedprimarily for
its source material content. As source material ore the Molycorp materials are exempt
from RCRA under 40 C.F.R. 5261.4 (aX4) (Attachment G), regardless of whether the
materials exhibit a hazardous characteristic. In other word s, whether or not the Molycorp
materials are potentially subject to state and/or EPA jurisdiction under RCM, once a
license amendment is issued by NRC and the materials are destinedfor processing at theMill as an alternatefeed material pursuant to an NRC alternatefeed miterial
amendment, the materials are source material ore, arrd,thus are regulated solely by NRC
and not by EPA or an authorized state under RCRA.I3
This analysis is consistent with NRC's application of the Alternate Feed Policy
over the last decade and NRC Staffneed look only to the Alternate Feed Policy, NRi's
regulations, and prior Commission decisions to approve IUSA's license ameniment
request. The Alternate Feed Policy provides that alternate feed materials may be
processed at a licensed uranium mill if they exhibit characteristics of RCRA Lazardous
wastes. The Policy does not require EPA or EPA authorized state approval for any
materials that contain characteristics of RCRA hazardous wastes. 'o-
-Sin."
the Molycorp
materials are exempt from RCRA as licensed (or licensable) source material ore and,
NRC is charged with implementing the AEA, including the meaning of such AEA terms,NRC Statrcan approve the license amendment without applying a nCRe recycling
analysis, which is not only unnecessary but potentially detrimental to UMTRCA's-
mandated long term custodial control requirements.
13 In fact, while not applicable here, it is important to note tlat an alternate feed material
containing less than 0.05 yo uranium that is processed for its uranium content is subject to AEAjurisdiction. As such, it is a primary raw material feedstock for AEA and RCRA p,i.por"r, ceases to
become a solid waste and therefore ceases to be regulated under RCRA.
ra As noted in footnote 8, in NRC Regulatory Issue Summary 2OOO-23 (Interim position and
G_uidance on the Use of Uranium Mill Feed Material Other Than Naiural Ores) iAttachment D), the
Commission suggests broade{ng the scope of the alternate feed guidance to per;it processing alternatefeeds containng listedhazardous waste where approvals are obtained from EPA and/or an auirorized state
and the long term custodian (r.e. DOE). However, this suggestion is not relevant here because theMolycorp materials merely exhibit a hazardous characteristic and do not contain listed hazardous waste.
10
IUSA urges NRC to license the Molycorp materials as alternate feed material and
to affirmatively recognize that as source material ore they are not solid waste and are
exempt from regulation by EPA under RCRA.
Suite 200
Washington, D.C. 20036
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Counsel to International Uranium (USA)
Corporation
cc: Dennis Downs, DSHW
John S. Espinoza, Molycorp
David Frydenlund, IUSA
Richard Graham, Region 8, EPA
Ron Hochstein, IUSA
Gary Janosko, NRC
Eileen Nottoli, Counsel to Molycorp
John H. Pugh, Molycorp
Allen C. Randle, Molycorp
Michelle Rehmann,IUSA
William L. Sharer, Molycorp
Maria Schwartz, NRC-OGC
Loren Setlow, EPA
William J. Sinclair, UDRC
Don Verbica" DSHW
William von Till, NRC
Michael F. Weber, NRC
11
d;h
,e sdd:,*f j
Attachments
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
.%t.p
wasto lf he has neasoa to belleve that
lndtvldual waEte6, wtttrrla the class ortype of waste, typlcally or frequently
are bazandoug under 6[6 dsfrnlflou ofhazerdsus waste found iu section
1m4(5) of the Act.(c) The ddrnlnlsh.stor wtll use thecrlterla for ltstlagi apeclfled in thls sec-tlon to egtab[sh the excluslsu tirnrhrefemed to ln $261.S(c).
tt ry-ryU9, May f9, f900, as emended at 55FB, l8llzi, May 4, 19q); SZ fn, fl,-J"o--i, fgg:
Subpod C-Choroclerisllcs ofHqzordous Wosle
0261-2p General.
(a) A solld wast€, as deflned in S261.2,whlch ie not excluded from reeulationas a hazarrlous waste under S2tii.*(U), isa hazardous waste if it exhilits-aDy otthe characterlstics idenHfi;a- in thissubpart.
[Cotnment: $Z6Z.U of this chapter seta forththe generator's responsibiliti to a"i"*ri"uwhether his wast€ exhibits oue-or more ofthe characteristlcs ldentifled i" tni, subpartl(b) A hazardous waste which ls lden_tified by a characteristic in ihis sub-p:urt is_ assigned everXr EpA HazardousWaste Number that is appticaUie as setforth in this subpart. -fhis--DumUer
must be used in complying w.ith the no_tification requirements of secCion gOfOof the Act and all applicaUte -record-
keeping and reportin! ""qoi""*.ot.ulder parts 262 througth 26S, iOg, ana
"70of this chapter.
^
(c).For purposes of thls subpart, theAdrnlnistrator wfll consiaer ; iampteobtailed using aDy of tUe appficablesampling methods specified in -aipenAix
r.to be a representative ,rrpG-iitui"the meaning of part 2ffi of tnis LUapter.lColtmmt: Slnce the appendlx I samplingmethods are not being io-rmatiy aaopiea fythe Attminietrator, a persoD who deslres toemploy an altemative samplins m;tioa isnot required to demonstrate the-eqoio"f"o"V
9f Sq method under tne proceaurli sei fortnh $$Z0O.ZO and 260.21.1
lf {I--ry!9, Mav le, 1e80, as amended ar ElIT^{ggBqNov. ?, rs{; ss Fn-ziull-Juou r,1990; Se FR Ag16, Jan. 81, 19911
,%1.21 Characterietic of igrdtability.
(a) A solld waste exhibits the char-acterlsflc of ienitability lf a rlpresent_
u .O CfR Ch. I O-t{n r*O,j
lFvg ea,mple of the waste has anv -tJre followiag. properties:
(2) It ls not a liquid and ls capable,,under stsndard temperatura
"oa' pr"n
lH9-9{ cau$ns fire through m"ir-oi,aDsorpfion of molsture or spontaneoq!:l=T"ll changes -and, rrh6;-isrxftedDurn8 Bo vlgoro-usly ?ad persiJtenttithat it creates a hazard.(3] Lt is an isqBltg-compreBged garas defined in 49 CFR t?9.900 and as de rtermlned by the test methoas O&crtfr;ln .t_hat regulatlon or equlvalent teet imethods approved by [Ue eamfnic ituiol under S$260.20 anA ZOO.Zr.---__-' i
_ 14t ft is an oxidizer as deflaed lD {gcFR,173.151. I
- (b) e soUd waste that e-htbits thecharacteristic of ignitabiliW h;upe nazaraoor-ir."t" Number of Offil i
(f) It ia a liquld, other ilran an aon^ous solution contal.ning less than'Tpercent alcohol by volume and -l"J
{r"h polDt less thau 60 oC <fm;flJ
8i::ffifr' r"3*", ild"'trT#H:liod speclfled ln ASTM StanAara it-fror D-9&80 (lucorporated by referxee $260.u),';; Sebftash CtoseaeHlTester, uslns: the tqr 1n9!_h_"q ;e";iiilln ASTM Standard Lg2trFiB -(to.o*
porated by rpference,.Eee $260.11), or qdeteruined by an equivale-nt t ii met\od - approved by tUe eOninfstrata,,under proceduree set forth i"-SSZe0.iland 260.21.
(a) A solid waste exhibits the char_acteristic of corrosivity if a rlpreseut
1-tiv9 gample of rhe wasre Uas iiii"r otthe following properties:
. - (1) It is aqueous and has a pII lessthan- or equal to 2 or g""i"" ii.o o,equal to 12.5, as tt_elgrmfaea-Uy a pUm-ete-r using Method 9040 in "fes[ Meth_
9ds for EvaluatihE Sotid Wasi;; ih"r-lcaUOhemical Metlods," Epi-frirr""_
:l:l"i[iffib. ff "iffi r""#;".". u, ""r-
.^(?>_I_t-^is a llquid ana co-rrodes steel(SAE 1020) at a rate g-""i""-ti; O.B5
I1T.(0.250 lolUl per year at a test tem-perature of 55 .C (180 .F) as determfnedby the test method specrfi"O-G-iiiaCU
L4l I1.1g119, May 19, 1980, as amended at * IFR 35242, Joty Z, t9g1; 5s'fn Zml, .f,ri" i I
,2il.A1 Characteristic of comocivlty.
il
!b,.ro-t-o
si#ff* raq &DD
;,:lln'H r,:so.#Hi#r*Htn.i" od'6;r*6ii,,5
:-._lg*skl_M.,rt"3,Ht**"i:'lqfr\*TM staDdard ifi;T.Prated trw roco-^14&?1iLl,",Ti:["S
;T'ffi,Tgfry.:slt
gqi
:: "lf?^h?g-0fi:l:?,3::"$-fl:?'--o' q,
i.!{3"eH:fft{[ft forth i" SSi6H
entlfrfrnrl Prcoec{lon AglencY
. --ar Assoclatlon of Corroslon Tln-
Aatlilstandard rM-014 as stalrd-tLgao'i'tn "Test Methods for Evalu-'i$touo*d Waste, PhysiceJ/Chentcal
,W ^;;" EPA Pub[catlon SW{46, asl2YJTiwd by reference ln $260J1 of
ffiijti-"""d waste that e-htbtts tJre
-Yli-turttti" of corrosivity has the
ffffg"*rdous waste Number of Do02'
-,. r,l'R. g3119, May 19, 1980, as amended at 46
'#ff1,a'txlil?i,lisT 2268{' r,De I'
ag1l.fi Chsrast€ristic of reactivit5r.' r,.r A solld waste exh{blts tbe char-
^nF.lrlstic of reactivity if a representa-
ffi" rtnple of the waste \as ong of the
..ifowing proPerties:'-fU ft ls norurally unstable and read-
itj unAgrgoes violent change without
detonaErDg.- e)lt reacts violently with water.
igl It forms potentially explosive
mixtures with water.
(4) When mixed with water, lt gen-
erates toxlc 8:ases, vapors or fumes ll1 a
ouantity gufficient to present a danger
to human health or the environment.
(5) It is a cyanide or sulfide bearing
waste which, when exposed to pE con-
ditions between 2 and 12.5, can generate
toxic g:ases, vapors or fumes ln a quan-tity sufficient to present a danger to
human health or the environment.
(6) It is capable of detonation or ex-
plosive reaction if it is subjected to a
strong initiating source or if heated
under confinement.
(7) It is readily capable of detonatlon
or explosive decompogition or reaction
at standard temperature and pressure.
(8) It is a forbidden explosive as de-
fined in 49 CFR 173.51, or a Class A ex-plosive as defined in 49 Ctr'R 173.53 or a
Class B exploslve as defined in 49 CFR
173.88.(b) A solid waste that exhlbits thecharacteristic of reactivity has theEPA Hazardoug Waste Number of D003.
[45 FR ili]119, May 19, 1980, ag amonded at 55FR 22684, June 1, 19901
,281.24 Toricity characteristic.
(a) A solid waste exhi[lts the char-acteristic of toxicity lf, uslng the Tox-icity Characterlstlc Leachiug Proce-
dure, test Method 1811 ln "Test Methodsfor Evaluating Soltd Waste, PhyslcaU
s261.24
Chemlcal Methodg," EPA Publication
SW-846, as lncorporated by reference ln
S260.11 of thls chapter, the extract froma representative sample of the waste
contalns any of the contamlnants llst-
ed ln table 1 at the concentratlon equalto or greater than the respectlve value
Elven ln that table. Where the waste
coutatns less than 0.5 perceut flIterable
solids, the waste itseU, after fllterlnguelng the methodology outllned lu
Method 1311, ls considered to be the ex-tract for the purpose of thts aectlon.(b) A solid waste that e-htblts the
characterlstlc of toxictty has the EPA
Eazardous Waste Number speclfled tnTable I whlch cotresponds to the toxicconta,rrlnant causlngi it to be haz-
ardous.
TAa..E l--il^xnilil CoNcEl.rR Ttoil or Conrrnn$as roe
r Hezardous weStc numbor.2Chcmical abctracts aeruice numbcr.
luid and is capabto
l,*r?"'Hio?$"'r,:'$
;ure or _spontaaeorf,3d, when igniha
I_3"d nersistentt];ard.
l'id3ffi,fir"* [T.:neLhods describeq
+:H',""'f*,1:::and.2ffi.2t.
-.r asr defined in 4g
lla.t.-9xhibfts rhe
#KX'*'Jr":?t,T
33';iBr??:ff:f
i of comoeivity.
xhibits the char-ty if a represent_
aste has either ofes:
rd has a pH less
direater than orrmined by a pH
4o in .Test fvfefl-lid Waste, phvs-
i," EPA publica-
aorated by ref_
ft3*[;s steerreater thau 6.gEur at a test tem_") as determinedrclfied in NACE
t
55
Tr{E ToxcnY CH n clERlsnc
EPA }I}V
No. r Contarnanant GAS l.lo.2
Rcgrt'm.ylovcl(ngtr)
om4
mos
D018
Dm6
D019
Dmo
D@1
Dou,
D007
D@3wl
Dm5
DO26
DO16w7
DO28
D029
Dolto
D012
DOs1
DGI2
D033
D034
om8
D013
D009
Dot4
D035
D036
D037
D038
oo't0
D011
m39
D015
0040
D(xlw2
DO17
D04tt
Atsenic
llcr{rra
744(F3F274{K}-g
71-f3-974/HU
5ec3=567-7H10re767S-3
7440-474
95-48-710FgF4
rG44-5
5.0
1(x).0
0.5
1.0
0.5
0.03
100.0
6.0
5.0.200.0
.4D.0.an.o
.aD.o
10.0
7.5
0.5
0.7!0.13
0.@
0.008
30.13
0.5
3.0
5.0
0.,1
o.2
10.0
20o.0
2.O
1@.0s5.0
1.0
5.0
0.7
0.5
0.5
.f00.0
2.O
1.0
o.2
Fanrrm
Carbon t€trechloride .....
Chbdane
Chlorobenzene
Chlorolom
Chpmium
o-Crcsol .:.......................
nfracal
fCreeolllE l
2,+D .............
1,rl-Dir*ilorcbenzene ....,
1,2-tlrchbroslhan€ ........
1,1 -Dic|tlorooihybn€ .....
2,4-Dinitrctolrcns ..........
Frvl"ih
*7*7
106-4S7
1074&.27*35if
121-14-€,72-M7W
11F.74-.l87{&3
67-72-1743H2-t58+H
7.(19-074
72-,4%
78-9$3
98-95-g87-8H
11H&-1
7:7824F.2
7440..224
127-18.{
8o0r-3s279{1-€95-9!48&S-2
sF72-17'O1-l
l'lepilacfilor (and hs ee
oxide).
Flexacfiloroberuene ......
l,lexacilorobutadiene ....
lbxacfiloroethqn€ .........
Undanc
llamrrru
Mdroxychlor
ilethyl ethyl ketono .......
Nilrobenzene
Pentacfi lorophenol .......hrir{im
S-1,.6h
€iihor .............
Totrachloro€&ylene ......
Tonphene
Trkhboefiylono ...........
2,4,STdctrlcrophenol ....
2,4,STrichloroph€nol ....
2,4,$TP (Sllvex) ...........
Mny' cfrlodde
a
t
t
o
t
t
I
I
a
t
o
30s26r.
3Ouantitation limit is greater than the calcuhted rogulalory
lovol. The quantiialion limit therelore b€comes th€ rogulatory
level.4lf G, m-, and pcresol concantrations cannot b€ difler€n-
tialed, th€ lotal cresol (D026) concentralion is us€d. The regu-
htory levol ot total cresol b 200 mgn.
t55 FR 11862, Mar. A, f990, as amended at 55
FR,22684, June 1, 1990; 55 FR 26987, June 29,
1990; 58 FR,46049, Aug. 31, 19931
Subport D-Lists of Hozordous
Wostes
026130 Genetal.
(a) A solid waste is a hazardous waateif it is listed ln this subpart, unless it
has been excluded from this list under
$S260.20 and 260.22.(b) The Adminietrator will indicate
his baais for listing the classes or types
of wastes listed in this subpart by em-ployruC one or more of the following
IJa,tafi. Codes:
Ignitable Waste (I)
Corrosive Waste (C)
Reactive Waste (R)
Toxicity Characteristic Waste ... (E)
Acute Ilazardous Waste (II)
4{, CFR Ch. I (7-l-m EdHon)
Toxic Waste (T)
Appendix VII identifies the constltuent
which caueed the Administrator to list
the waste as a Toxicity Characteristic
Waste (E) or Toxic Waste (T) in SS261.31
and 261.32.(c) Each hazerdous waste listed in
this subpart is aasigned an EPA Haz-
ardoue Waste Number which precedes
the name of the waste. This number
must be used in complylng wttb the no-
tification requlrements of Sectlon 3010of the Act and certain recordkeeping
and reporting requiremeuts under parts
Zi2 through Zt5, 268, and part 2|70 of this
chapter.(d) The following hazardous wastes
listed in $261.31 or $tr1.32 are subiect tothe exclusion llmits for acutely haz-
ardous wastes establlshed ln ! 261.5:EPA Ilazardous Wastes Nos. FO20,
FO21, FO29, FOUI, FO26, and FOfi.
t45 FR 3t1119, May 19, 1980, as amended at 48
FR 1{294, Apr. l. 1983; 50 FR ZX)0, Jan. 1'1,
1985; 51 FR, {0636, Nov. ?, 1986; 55 FR 118&1,
Mar.29, 19901
!2613f Eazardous wastea from non-epecific oounoea.
(a) Tlhe following solid wastes are lieted hazardoug wastes from non-epeciflc
Bources unless they are excluded under S5260.20 aad, ?.ffi.2 and listed ln appeudlx
rx.
lndusry and EPA hazsrdous
wasb ]to.
Hlzard
code
Tho ,ollowing Epenf habgonat€d sohcnts uscd in &gtuttiltg: ToiradtlofootlyLnc,
flcf*ilo€fiylono, rn€6y,lono cfilorke, 1,1,'l-tri$loro€ffian€, ca6on btracrforirc,
and ctrlodnaled fruorccaoons; all 6ponl solwnl mixtunclbbcb l,3cd in degr.aslttg
contahirq, belore use, a total ot ton parrnt or lnor! (by Yohme) ol onc or tmrr
ol tho aboro halogenated Eolv€ntB or lho6e sd/cntu lbbd in F(x}2, F(xX, End
F005; and slill bottorB lrom tho r€covory ol fl.se spont sohrstils end 8p.nf EoI
t,€nl mHurG.
Tho tollowing sp6nt haloglenslod solv€nts: Tetrachloro!fiy,lonc, melhy{cne cfilofira,
trhhloroothylon€, 1,1,1-ldcfilorcedrane, cfilorobonzeno, 1,1,2'fichlolo'i,2,2'
trilluorcelirane, orhcdichlorobonzene, tri$lotoffmtomilunc, and l,l,2.ttichlom-
ethane; all spont solvent mixlures/bbnds oniaining, bolore usc, s lotd ol ten por'
coril or anoro (by volum€) of one oilnot€ of tho abot t hsbgDnslrod sofircrltB ol
fioso list€d h F0o1, F0O4, or F005; end still bottom trcm tE r€cowry o, ficcc
spont solvoniE and sp€nt solvont mixtures.
The hllowing spont non-halogpnated solvontB: Xyfenc, acotono, oth:y' acdab, cthyl
b6nzono, e0ry' elher, mottyl bobttyl katono, n{ulyl alco}tol, c}rabhcxmone, end
rnefianol; all speni solveni mixtuor/blon& contelning, bcioc u8o, onty thc ebo\re
spent non-halogEnatod sohrents; and 8ll 6pent son ont mbtutes/Ucttds confainlng,
belore use, ono or moI€ of tho above non-halogcnded cohronts, and, a Elel ol tcn
peroont or more (by volumc) ol one or more ol tlpoe sohonts lk;lctl in F01, Ffi)2,
F004, and F005; and gtlll bottoms lrom the reoov.ry ol fheso sPant sohrenb md
spont sohr€nl mixlures.
The lollowing spent non-halogonat d solvonE: Grceob attd dssyfic tcid, 8nd
nilrobonzono; all sponl solvonl mixturEs/blen& containing, belols tr3e, a toLl ol
lon porconl or moro (by volume) ol one or more ol the sboro non-halogcnaH sol''
venls or thos€ solventB lisl€d in F001, F0o2, and F005; and sdll bottorls lrorn fre
rooovery of ti€6o sponl sohronts and sponl eolvont mixtul€s.
I
56
t
tnvlrcnmenlol Prolecllon AgencY
rnargtrv and EPA hazardous' wasle No.
The lollowing sporti non-halog€naied soh'€nts: Tolu€l€' mafiyl ethyl ketone' carbon";Jffi:' ffi.,t"*l' pyrioi-ne, uenzeno, 2€thoryothanol' and 2'nitropopane; all
;;;1.;d;i;i,,t t;#tot ds containirq, belore use' a totttl ol lon p€rcenl or more
(bil volufl€) ol on€ omor"-ot rr" alire nat hatogemtod solvents or thce sol-
l,li,tl'iilJi"'roor, roe, o, Foo4: and sfrlt bottoms trom rhe re@very ol ihese
sponl solvonts and spent solvent mixiu'€s'
wiiewater treatment sludgE t on, ebcrroplating oporatbns oxcept trom th€.loF"ffiilft;G;irl surirrr add anodEing ot atuminum; (2) tin dating on.caroon
;;i5iil pt"tnd tsegreealod bais) 9n 91+on sioel; (4) aluminum.or zirrc-alu-
,inriri-irat6g'on "irtor,-.t5i: (5) dc;ing/sfipping associat€d with tin, zirrc and
;ffii;.fi16i,r, * ""Oon s;ei; and (6) c+rim*t otching and milling ot alu'
minum.
Speni cyankte phring bath sohnions hom obcftoplaling operations
il",i,rs 6"f, residueJ fiom the botiom ol pbtirp baths hom €l€c-troplating oporations
where cyanirles are rsed in the process'
Sporil siripPing and cleaning bath solutions ftorn el€ctroplatirB operations whera
cyanid€s are used in tho Prccass.
orirr*rirrg bath rcsidues lrom oil baths lrom motal h€at treating operations whor€
cyanfoles are used in ih€ Procass.
qpinr
"f"nlO"
solrrtions hom salt bath por cbsning hom m€ral heai Iteating opor'
si..,
Hazatd
code
(R, T)
(R, T)
(R, T)
(R, T)
(R. T)
o
m
(H)
0,r)
t
t
l:012
alions.
o$nctrirrewastswalo,t'€atmonislidgoslmrnlnolalheait'eatingoperationswhere
cyanidss aro us€d in lhe Eocass.
Wtewater troatnent sh.rdgps lrc,1t tho cfiemiral cotwo]sion coaling ol.alu6nu.m.:x-"il;; rt*r,ir. pf,oipf,ating in aluminum can washing when such phosphating
is 8n exclusiv€ conw]sion coSling plocass'
wastos (except wastewatat at$ spont catbon fiorn lYdtSgn +19ry9 p'qfql"6 il prdo,rctofi or manulactudng g! (asa roaci.nt, cfior*:al intermedhle,.or
;;F;ffi irr;tormul8thg procossiO rri or rerachtofophonol, or ol int€rm€diates
,6i to proo.rc" trelr pe&t6a oeiivawc' (Ihb lisling-ooos.11-'P:f-.:11::
fro. tt" irroO,r"Uor, d lbxactrlorophene lrofit highly pudfied 2'4'tirichbropnenor')'
wa8t6(orc.plwarilewalefandspo]rlca'bonl'omhyd'ogEnchlo]id€purificalion)
i,oln 0ie pdducffon or manuhctr;ing y$- (as ! roac{ant, cfiemi€l intonnodiate'.or
;r,t*;;i-i" ;-o,-rrao'g poccisl ot pontactl'rophenol' o' of intermedhles
used to Ptoduce itE dorivaliv€s'
Wast€6 (exept wast€{doI and sPcnt cato! ItoP hy&ogen chhride purification)-
tto|n t; minr*actudng ,* t* d roac{8nt, ctrembal intermediate, or component in
;1.ffi-ht"ilr*"""fa t r"-,ponta-, or hexac,hlorobenzenes under alkaline con-
dilions.
waslos (oxcepr waato$,al6r and sponl "ryb"t !*, !4S"1 *Pq-p:ff]?lto", lhs Prothrcfion ot .nslorials on equipment previously *td ]1-ry^ryTTY
- r*narti"frring use (as a reactant. cherrdcsl intotm€di8te' or compon€il ln a lor-
"irrfr;g'-d;;l d rF and taraaruroptrenors.. (Ihis tisring doos not includ€
wastes-rrim equi'pmenr used only ror the goducton or uls€ ol H€xachlorophen€
fiom highly purified 2,4,$trk*rlorophonol.)'
P]ocasswaaes,irrdudingbdnollimitodto,disltillationrcsidues,h€aliy€nds'iars'
and rsactor cloandit wastos. from lhc ploduc0on d certain chlorinatod aliphatic
h,d;;o,r" Uv tree raCcat c8tahJz6d drocosscs. Th€so chlorinst€d aliphatic hy'
;il;;;;ili#;;;itts caod. atdin bnsilhs nrqing lror.r.one lo€nd irrclr'ti-
ino fwe. with vsryins allEunts an<t pocitkns ol cfilodne substiluton' (lnls lsllng
;ilil' ;i il rd" '*"it"*a"t", waaerrater tsaatm€nt sludgres, spent catalysts' and
wasl€s lisled in 9261'31 or S281.32.).
Con&ttsod lighl onds, cpent nnets and fflier akts' and sponi dosi@ant wastos lrom- il;;;r"fu or cirriin chtodnerod atiphatic hydmcarbons, by lree radical cata-
r-J.,"""""es. These chbdnatod aliphatrc ]rydroc86ons ate thosa having car'
ffi;#i, t""jfu ."gtt. L. one to ind irrctudiry toe' wio' varying amunts and
poslforls ol c{rlo,rine $b6litution-
Wasbo (oxctrpt wastowater and sPent carbon fiom hF 9en qqlq?'ry.H)
trom Uro pr6Oualon ol mato.iab on €quipmont peviously ':1^Y ry^1*:11":
turfng d (as a reactant, chemkal iltt€rrrdiate, or compon€nt in a totmunung
pto"is"l a iara', ponta-, or hexactlilob€nzeno under alkaline oonditions'
D6"rd"d unused brmulalions containing td-, tetra-, or p€nl,achbrophenol or. dis'-;rd"d- rmlrs€d fromuhtions containing compoun6 dorived trfii 61€s€
;ffi;h"tt"b. -ot,b listing &os nI .itryS. brmulalions containing
ti;;d;k .p,.*' svrt ".lrro
-t m prepurified 2,4,$rricfitoro/rnol as the sole
component.).R""id; rcculling trom 61e incinoralton or thermal Iteatnont of soil contaminated' ' *rt ipl Xar"frous Waste No6. FO2O, Fc21 , F0?2, FU23' F026' aftd Ft27 '
(H)
(H)
t
(H)
(H)
t
a
I
57
o
.31s26t
a
lndusfiy and EPA h,-ardous
wasl€ No.
40 CFR Ch. I (7-t-m Edmon)
Hazr,!
codo
I
t
t
t
a
I
I
a
a
I
(b) Listing Specific Definitions: (1) F or the purposes of the F03? and F 038 list
ings, oiUwater/solids is defined as oil and/or water and,/or solids.(2) (i) For the pur-
poses of the F037 and F038 listingi's, a8i'g:ressive biological treatmeut unlts are de-fined as units which employ one of the following four treatmeut methods: acti-
vated slud.ge; trickling filter; rotating biological contactor for the continuous a,c-
celerated biological oxidation of wastewaters; or high-rate aeration. High-rate
aeration is a system of sur{ace impoundmentg or tanks, ln which intense mechan'ical aeration is used to completely mlx the wastes, enhance biological activity,
aad (A) the units employ a minimum of 6 hp per million gallons of treatment vol-
ume; and elther (B) the hydraulic retention time of the unit is no longer than 5
days; or (C) the hydraulic retention time is uo longer than 30 days and the unlt
does not generate a sludgie that is a hazardous waste by the Toxicity Char-
acteristic.(ii) Generators and treatment, gtorag:e and disposal facilities have the burden
of proving that their sludges are exempt from listing as F03? and F038 wastes
Waslewalo6 (exc€pl thoso thal have not com€ into contact with process oontBmi-
nants), procoss r€siduals, pres€rvative drippag€, and spenl lo.mulalions trom wood
preserving proossslgs generated al plsnts that drronty uso or have prevkrusly
used chlorophenolic lormuhtions (oxcapl potontially cnoss.contaminatod wastes
that have had the F032 wast€ cod€ del€tod in accordance with 5261.&5 ot this
chaptor or potontially cross-contaminated wastos ihat aro otherwise cunently regu-
ht€d as hazardous wastos (i.o., F034 or F035), ancl wtrere the gpnorator doos not
resumi or initiate us€ ol chloroph6nolic formulations). This listin-g does nol indu(b
K001 bottom sodiment sludg€ lrorn the troatnont ol wastowater trom tvood pro-
serving processes thal us€ creo€altg andor pontachlorcphonol.
Wastewate6 (gxcept those that hav€ not com€ inlo conlacl with procoss contrami-
nants), procoss rosiduals, prosorvalivo drippag€, and spont lormulations flom wood
prosarving prooess€s generated at plants that us€ croosote tomulations. This list-
ing does not indude K001 bottom sodiment sludge from lh€ troetment of waste.
wator Itom wood preseMng processes that us€ croosote andor pontactlorophenol.
Waslowalors (except those thal hav6 not cotne into contact with process contami-
nants), process rssiduals, pres€rvalivo drippage, and sp€nt tormulations lrom woodpreserving prooossos generated ai planls lhat use inorganic prosorvalivos @n-
taining aGonic or c-hromium. This listing do€s not indude K001 bottom sedirnonl
sludge lrom th€ trsatrnent of wastowalor lrom wood prosorving processos that uso
croosote and/or pontadllorophenol.
Petroleum relinery primary oil flator/solids separation sludgre-Any sludge generated
lrom th€ gravitational separalion ot oihflal€r/soliG dudrE th6 storagB or ireaimont
of process waslewators and oil cooling wastewaters trom potrolaum refinorbs.
Srrch slrJdgos indude, bui aro not limiled lo, those gpn€ratod in oilArater/sofids
s€paraloE; tanks and impoundments; ditches and olhor convoyanc€s; sumps; and
stormwatsr units receMng dry westher flow. Sludge gonoratod in slorrMatgr unib
lhal do not receive dry wsatlrer frow, sludges gEno.alod lrom nonontact onco-
thro4h cooling walo6 sogregat€d lor troat.nont trom othor prcoess or oily cooling
walers, sludges gon€ratod in sggressivo biobgbal foatmonl unib as defined in
S261.31(bX2) (includi]rg sludges generated in on€ or more additional unils after
was{ewaters have boon troatod in aggrossive biologbal trcatrn€nt units) and K051
wast€s are nol indud€d in this listing. This lisling do€s indud€ reskiuals gonerat€d
lrom processing or rocyc-ling oil.bearing hazardous s€condary matorials oxclud€d
uncler S261.4(aXf 2XD, il ttrose residuals arE to bo dispocod ol..
Petroloum refinery secondary (emuhifi€d) oilA'yater/solids separation sludge-Any
sludg€ and/or float gsnoratod lrom lho phlrsical and/or chomical separaton ol oiU
wat€/solids in proc€ss wasl€watoE and oily cooling wastewalers lrorn p€troloum
refineries. Sucrh wasites includo, but are not limited to, all sludges and floats gon-
€rated in: induced air flolation (lAF) units, tanks and impoundmonts, and all
sludges generated in DAF units. Sludges g6norat6d in stomwator units lhat do not
rocei\ro dry weathor flow, sludg€s g€n€rated lrom non.contact once-through cool-
ing wate6 s€gregatod lor troatm€nl from olher prooass or oily cooling walors,
sludgos and lloats generated in aggressive biological troatrnont uniE as defined in
S261.31(bX2) (induding sludges and ffoats gsneratod in one or morc additbnal
units atler wastowateE have been treatod in aggrossirre biolosical troatmonl uniis)
and Fff17, KO48, and K05l wasles aro not indud€d in thb listing.
L€achat€ (lQukts that have porcolalsd through land disposod wasles) resuliing lrom
th6 disposal of mor€ lhan one reslrid€d wasto dassifiod as ha'ardous und6r sub-
part D of this part. (Loachate r€sulting trom the disposal ot ons or rroro ol tho iol-
lowing EPA l.lazardous Was!6s 8nd no othe. Hazardous Wasios retains its EPA
Hazardous Waste Number(s): F020, F021 , F02. Ftfi, FO27, andor FO28.).
58
{ndor this definition. Generators and treatment, storage and disposal facilities
rilur[ maintain, in their operating or other onsite records, dOcuments and data
rutflclent to prove inat: til tUe unit is aD aggressive biological treatment unit
m rtofined in thls subsection; and (B) the sIudEGs sought-to be exempted from the
,loflnltions of F03? and./or F038 were actually ienerated in the aggressive biologi-
' rl ireatment unit.
rill(i)ForthepurposesoftheF.0S?listinSi,sludgesareconsideredtobe
rrruod at the *o*riioi aeposition in the unit, where deposition is defined
;e*t & temporary cessation-of lateral particle movement'
itl ) For the purposes of the F038 listing'
{ A ) Bludges ,r" "ooiiaered to Ue gene-rited at the moment of deposition in the
,.htL, where Oeposition iJ OetneO as at least a temporary cessatiotl of lateral par-
ftMrcnmenlol Prclecllon AgencY s26r.s2
rtt.lo movement and
rltl floats are cousidered to be generated at
tfi[r of the unit.
t PIr 461?, Jau. 16, 19811
the momeut theY are formed in the
r-trl.N)RrarJ NoTE: For FEDERAL REGIS"I'En, citatioas affecting s261'31, see the List of cFR sec-
,,.,rrn Affected in the Fiuding Aids section of this volume'
I f lJz Eazardoug wastce fton apecific aouFcea'
gen-
as at
'l'h6 following solld wastes are llsted hazardous wastes from specific sources un-
,,".'r,nlv ""e eicfuaeA *4"" $5260.20 and,260.D and listed in appendix D('
r....try .nd EPA hazaldous
wE8le No.
Bottom s€dirn€nt sludg€ fuom the troaitnenl ol wastewators from wood Ptoserving
procassos lhet use Creosote andor pontachlorcphenol'
Hazard
cod€
*.t lxrmrvatlon: K00'l
6*u.nlc pigmonts:
rtrf.l m
(r)
(r)
m(r)
(r)
(r)
cr)
tr)
(R, n(R, r)
m
tr)o(n
(r)
rr)
cr)
rr)(T)
(r)
cr)(r)
CI
(R, T)
t(nt,
lcnl,lmlmlcnlm
)
a
I
t
rrrll
.. r{
litn
I trn
]t't I
trrll
*ari.*{rll
t{,lo
aol I
trrl I
ttlt a
t,,t i1.to
ast,
Gttll
mr9
}rlr$
rtf Ir.rirqtl
r*tra
trl,f.
r.rtA
wl|#t
Wsslewaior tr€atmeni sludgo lrom th€ produdion ol chrorn€ yellow and orange ptg-
monts.
w""t"*"t"'t'""r.*lsludgDl'o'nth€p'oduc,tiono!molybdargorangEpigments..'...W"i"*ttet trearnont stude from the production o' zinc yellofl pigrn€nts
W""i"*"ti, tr""tn"nf str.@ hom tho proOuaion ol clrrorne gr€€n_pigments ...........-
wJi*"r"t toatmont srrxfo trom the prodrr{ion of clrrome oxide green pigments
(anhydrous and hydrate<l).
Wisi'iaer treatno,m stuoge tlom the podrrcrbn ol iron blue pigmonts
6ven rasirlue lrom th€ prcduaion ot cfirome oxido gr6€n pigm€nts
Disliltation Miolrrs ftom th€ prodrrtion ol aelaldohyde lrom ethylene
Di"ti'latb"sidoctlislromthop]odwlionolacetaldehyde'romethylene'.':........'.........
BottoflistroamtIolntlowastowatersldpporintheproduc-tiono'acrylonitril€
Bonom slream lrom lh€ aetonitril€ @lumn in tho ptoduction of actylonitril€ ...:."...""'
aot*r" fro, the acetonitdle pudfication column in the plodw'tion of acrylonitrilo """'
Stll bottorns lrom lhe dislillation of benzyl cfilodd€ """""'x.a* inOe or distitlation .6k uos lrom -thc ptodwtlon ol carbon tetrachlork o """""'
iiilri -J.0"-'r.di uotromsl trom tho purificarion cotumn in th€ producrion of
opi$lorohydrin.He;t e^c hom m hac-tionarbn column in c{hy' cfibtide production "."'1".""""":""'
i1!il;n63 t16n1 dr" distithtion ol ethylene di.$lo]id€ in elhylono dichloride ptoduc-
$on.
t *"v "nds trorn tre disrilstion ol vi]tyl chbrido in vinyl chlorid€ monomer production
mue6us Sgont antimony cetilyst wasio lrom fluorornolhanes production
otu"ii"t i,otiom tars trom tri ptoduc{ion ol ph€noyacatone trom cumene
Dd;1"iil ligti-;"ds L|n tre pioouaionot pitq:tc lnny$oe tuom naplrthaleno """
Di.ilit"tk t 6mrns tron the proaralon ol pft$alh anhydri<b lrom naphthalene .".""'
O,"iffai- boiloms lrom the proOuafn ot nitrobonzon€ by ihe nilralion of benzene "'
StrlpplrU still lail6 rrom the ptoduction ol mothy €Otyl pyddin6
Celifit i.- ""0 OMltation dsiO,rs trom toluone diisocyanate produc{ion ...-...:..:.:......
Sffi Afu)6 f.,n to hydrochlorinatof re""1or in lhe produc{ion ol 1,1'1-triciloro
othan€.
waste lrorn tho poducr s|oam sitipPer in lh€ iloduction ol'1,1,1'lrichloro€than€ """"
column bottoms or hoavy onds irom 11o comurpd Fodrrciion ot irichloro€ihylone
and parcfilorc€Ory'l,ono.
Disusafion Mtoms f rom aniline Produc-tion "" " " " "" " " "'.""'
Obtllail"" or tracfionaion cotunin bottorns lrorn x1e produc'lion ol chlorobenzenes ""'
Oi.ilfiil tigitt-;ndr ho, tho prodt*tionof .pht.lic Th,,grid" lrom ortho'rylene ..'.'.
Di.fiit"ik , fifiorrrs t om the p;drrcfton of p6talic anhyddrie hom orlho-xylone ...'.....
Dbtllhtbn bottorns ftom th€ poducfion of I'1,1-ltk$loroothan€ """""""""
r{!
r{D
r-t
IdFt{t,t-a.r(G
59
o
t.32
a
s26
lndustry and EPA hazardous
wasle No.
40 CFR Ch. I (7-l-m Edffion
H6aW ends from th€ heavy ends column lrom the production ol 1,1,1-trichloro€than€
Pro@ss residugs from aniline extraction from lhe produclion of aniline
Combined wastewator streams gon€rated from nirobenzen€/anilan€ produc{ion .........
S€parat€d agueous str€am from the reactor product washing step in the production
of chlorob€nz€nes.
Column botioms from prcdtrcl separation from the produc{ion of 1,i{imethyl-hydra-
zine (UDMH) from catorylic acid hydrazines.
Condensed column overh€ads from producl soparation and condens€d reacior ventgases from the produclion ol l,1{imethylhydrazine (UDMH) from carboxy'ic acid
hydrazides.
Spent filter cariddgss from produc{ purification from the production ot 1,1-
dimethy'hydrazine (UDMH) lrom cadorylic acid hydrazid€s.
Condensed column overheads trom inlermediate separation trom lhe produclbn of
1, 1 dimethy'hydrazine (UDMH) trom carborylic acid hydrazides.
Produci washwaters from the prcduc{ion of dinitrotolueno via nihation ol toluene .......Reaciion by-product water from the drying column in the production ol
toluenediamine via hydrogenation of dinitrotoluene.
Condensed liquid light ends lrom the purification ol tolu€nediamine in the production
of toluon€diamin€ via hydrogenalion ol dinitrotoluene.
Vicinals lrom the purification ol toluenediamine in the production of toluen€diamine
vh hydrogenation of dinilrotoluene.
Heavy ends kom the pudfication oI ioluenediamine in th€ production o,
toluenediamine via hydrogonaiion of dinitrotolu€ne.
Organic condensate trom the solvont recovery column in the produc-tion of loluono
diisocyanat€ via phosgonation ot toluen€diamine.
Wastewater hom the roac{or vont gas scrubb€r in tho produc{ion ot othylone
dibrcmide via bromination ol ethene.
Sp€nt adsobent solids ,rom purilirntion ol ethylene dibromide in the prcduction of
eihylene dibromijo via bromination ol ethene.
Still bottoms from the purifirztion ot othrene dibromid€ in th€ production of ethylene
dibromide via brominalion of ethen€.
Distillation bottoms lrom the prcduction of alpha- (or methy'-) chlorinated tolu€n6s,
ringttlcrinat€d toluenes, benzoyl chlorides, and compounds with mixlures ol lhese
func{ional goups, Ohis waste does not includ€ still bottoms trorn the distillation ol
benzyl chloride.).
Organic residuals, excluding sp€nt carbon adsortent, trom the spent chlorine gas
and hydrochloric acid recovery proooss€s associalod with the production of alpha-
(or methyl-) chlorinated toluen€s, ringrhlorinated loluenes, benzoyl chlorides, and
compounds with mixtures of these functional groups.
Wastewater lreatm€nt sludges, excluding n€utralization and biological sludg6s, gen-
erated during tho tr€almenl ot wast€waters trom the produclion ot alpha- (or meth-
yl-) chlorinated toluen€s, ringrhlorinat€d toluenes, benzoy' chlorides, a.rd com-
pounds with mixturos ol these furrclional groups.
Organic wast6 (including hearry ends, still bottoms, light 6nds, sp€nl solvonts, fil-
trates, and d€cantates) lrom the production ol carbamales and carbsmoy' oximos.(Ihis listing does noi apply to wastes goneratod from lhe manulac{ure of &iodo-2-
propyny' ntuty'carbamate.).
Waslowat€rs (including scrubber wat6ls, cond€nser watsrs, washwators, and sopara-
tion wators) lrom lhe produc,tion ol carbamates and carbamoyl oxirnes. fthb lisling
does not apply to wasl€s gEnerat€d lrom the manutacture ol 3-i(,do-2fropynyl n-
bdylcatbamate.).
Bag house dusts and filter/separation solids ,rom the production ol carbamates and
catbarnoyl oximes. (this lisling <!,oes not apply to wastes genorated lrom lho ,nan-
uliacturo ot 3-iodo-2fopyny' n-butylca6amate.).
Organhs lrom the lIeatm€nt of thiocarbamate wasles ............
Purifietircn solids (including filiration, €vaporation, and centrifugation solids), bag
house dust and lloor swoopings kom the produc-iion ol dithiocarbamate adds ard
their saltrs. (Ihis listing does not inclu& K125 or K126.).
Brine pudfication muds from the mercury c6ll procoss in chlorine production, srhero
separately pregrdlied brin€ is not usod.
Chlorinal€d hydrocaoon ryas{€ trom the purilication step of the diaphagrn cell proc-
ess using graphit€ anodes in cfilodne produc{ion.
Waslowato. treatmont sludge from ihe mercury coll process in chlorine ptodrc{ion ....
By-produci salts generated in the production ol MSMA and cacodylic ac*, ..................
Wastowator treatrnont sludge lrom the produclion of cfilodane
Waslowater and scrub waler from the chlorination of cyclopontadion€ in tho flodlrc-tion of ctlordane.
Filter solitls lrom the tiltration ol hexachlorocydopentadieno in lhe prodrrc{bn of
chlordane.
Wastewator treatmant sludges generaled in the produclion ol creosole
Still bottoms hom tolu€ne r€clarnation distillation in tho prcduction ol disulloton .........
Hazar
cod,
t
t
G)
F)
cr)
o)
(c,r)
(l,r)
t
F)
fi)
G)
tr)
CN
m
fi)
t
o
ir)
m
(c,r)
(r)
CO
cr)
t
cr)
cr)
(r)
(R,T)
cr)
m
CN
cr)
cr)
cr)
G)
(r)
fi)
a
t
I
60
a
s26ttr,loornenbl hoilecllon AgBncy
ta-y.nd EPA hazerhsr.fr ltb.
rlx7 .....rrtun '.hirg:rnaarolrffi
rr[:ttttrrrro.
rrrt
broryiil....Ld:
tts
v-.rrary pharmDeJucab:
n(ta ..
r.32
lt zrd
coda
*nIE
Eao
tcat
sa8
ttx
r troortra
rttt
itr
F)o(r)
fi)(r)
F)
F)fi)
oo
F)
(c, r)
o
rat.. tI.'a ETC
r rr:t
(R)
(n)
(r)
(R)
ooofi)(r)
(r)
F)
0,r)
I
walbryilr tcrtn{rt Cudg.a lrcrn lha Fodrcton d (hriobn
Werbrrbr lrom fr wa$ing.ttd lrp;*tg d phord. Poducdo.tFhr c.f. iom lhc ffion ol @ttaphorodttt,ioac ..id h $e prodtErkn of
pho.il.w..mrbEtncnt slrrdg. fiqnfl. podrdion d phord.
Wttffir trdtr.nt sfrdf t[qnftc poOtcton ortqeph.n
lbryr.n& oi d.tldoo ,tlailr.s fiom lh. ffibiioo d tr0rd$robcttzcnc an tho
trodrcton d41,*T.
2,&Dicrrbrophapl wes lrun lhc fodrc0on d2,&
Vanrn a$pet CrauCc Itun tt cftbd!'! cfiblhdor h th. prcducfion ol
draoflEr.
Ufiaabd pE ruhEbrltu,l tha prodrcdon ol bxtphana
t ntu d rerb*rier lun fp foddoo d 2,+O
Pmc.. ffir Gcfrdne a.lP.trfiq llffic,3rd r.dttr.bt!) ftotn ih. pro-
ddon ol tlltylotobbfriocltb.rdc d ttd n! ra[Rdr utf lcnaber wilr ltun thc prodrcto.t d e0ryf.rrbbdttaotbemf: add
.nd li! !.Ieffin, cl,epordo,t, and ocntfrtdon !oll* tun fi. ProdJcilott d
cOytrnObfrllqOu* d.nd it! t Is.
Alghor dddllootruoplne h mf1 filpedtrOhgog.remftutt th. prc
drcJon d brnd.lbn ol cllllyl..r.D.dlhbc.tt rttac ecld ild lt3 !dtB.
Ummbr lrilr fi. 116r std !p.nr rlnr& d ftun lh. d drF ftom lh. pro
ddondm.rybon*b.
Sp.nt.boltqll and rerlrfr s.p.re. mb lrcm ih. proildon of mrory{ bro
ri.b.
Wffir !..tnsd s&rdg.. flqn ll! trl,Iffirhg ud pmiif ol odchtc
SFnl carton rroor thc trfrrrrnt ol rracmlr conlrhtuf osloahra.
UUemxr b.dtlnt *rdgE turr lh. mrruhctrfp, tqmlelbn and lo.fie ofldbo.d mfigdnpoutd..Pil/ndErllqnlilT O.rdm.
Dirla,rtloarihn (DAR tlodtrunfic potoaam rltrlhg hd!ily
Sop of m5on toto frun tt potobt{rl rfihe hdulty|ld dlngr btxlr do*p *rdg. rrun O! poOonrn tefrthg itdrrry
API ..p.re.lfdlr trunfi. pcud.m dtfrg indrtry
T.r* bolbnr. (b.eo trun lh. pdoaam t#ttg h(lrtty
Cnd. d tbrrgp Lrk..*rUrt rtul prtoaun rtmlg opcrdorBCffi.frry oI tml rdn.rt grdor ltlnc tncr/lcpenton !oI& lrorn pstiolartt
Irfrrhg oP.rdorrB.
Spon tty<lArfig#fiqtr pato..im ]lftrhg ope.dorlt! lnctlfig grEd b.(b
u!a.l b d.afirl2. hcc b dfr c.hi/tc r!.frts (Orb Llirg do.E nor hdudeM appo,l m.e).
Segl ttytmmg ry iolll p.bob.rm trmtO oPemolll, hcfrfrte gu.rd b.C
trrd b dafirtse b.A b olh.r c.trlytlc tt cbtt (hb Hp dil rd Hu&
h.rf amorl !n d.).
Eradon catool drulfdg. lrqn lh. p*mry ploa,don ol d..l h Cecficluns
SFnt pEd. tqr.Fr gilrod by !b.a mrfte op.rdon ot lxil0.8 x,ffl.n tp hon
.nd d!.1 hltmy (SlC Co.X.331 .nd C}2).
Sp.rrt pffr.rllrqn ptnery ef,llfim 'tdrcffon
EnbCoo cqllrol drrulfrdg. iun rerhry lced rmctthg[ (t{ore Thb Wtg b
d.y!d rdnlffitdy lo. .ludge gcn d tun !.con<hry acld rcn5bcr cys
afli. Th. .i.y ul rsnah h cn d ulill n of,r !.fnhaltrldhr! ..ilon b tlt n. It
EP d.r fufi.r..don clhctttg tt5 fiy, EPA wfll Flblbh t no&. ol th. acdon
hihc Frdrrl fCC.ttd Laafiho rlutlon lrun dd L.cfing of crlsbn coned duet/dudge lrom sc
drLry le, !fl.fir$
tilffirtndncnl lfrdgc gctt rild Ar'llg lhe Prodrcilon ol t.bdnsy phlttn -
cailEab fiulr rutb or o.!r loarlanb cdnpomda.Dffion t , rddr6 fiqn lhc Cfldon ot.r*Irbasod coflpounds in thc Plo
drdon ol vcbrhary ptrmpumaf fiom ananh or orpdrD'ar$riic compounG.
Focadr lIur lhc urc ol ectivdctl catbon br dGlortzdion h the prodrcfion ol wl.
cmery ptrmuldcaf rom at!.nb ororloo-rr8cnic colttPoudb.
(r)
(c, r)
(r)
0,T)
F)(c,r)
m
a
F)
F)
F)
o
t
61
o
.33
a
I
I
t
I
t
t
t
t
a
I
Kl44
t46 FR 11618, Jan. 16, 19811
EDrToRrAr NoTE: For FEDEnAL REGTsTEB, citetious affecting: S26f .32, see the List of CFR, Sec-
tions Affected in tbe Finding Aids section of this volume.
s26t
lndustry and EPA hazardous
wasle No.
02613:l Dircaded commercial cheE-icd pnoducts, ofi-epecification qre-
ciee, container neeidues, and spill
nesiduee thereof.
T1re following materials or items are
hazardous wastes if and when they are
discarded or intended to be discardedas described in $261.2(a)(2)(i), when
they are mixed wlth waste oil or used
oil or other material and applied to the
land for dust suBpressioD or road treat-
meut, when they are otherwise appliedto the land in lieu of their original in-
tended use or when they are contained
in products that are applied to the land
in lieu of their original intended use, or
when, in lieu of their original intended
use, they are produced for uae as (or as
a component oO a fuel, distributed for
use as a fuel, or burned as a fuel.(a) Any commercial chemical prod-
uct, or manufacturing chemical inter-
mediate havlng the generic name listed
in para8raph (e) or (f) of this section.(b) Any off-specification commercialchemical product or manufacturing
chemical intermediate which, if it met
specifications, would have the generic
name listed in paraeraph (e) or (f) of
this section.(c) Any residue remaining in a con-tainer or in an inner liner removed
fforn a container that has held any
40 CFR Ch. I (7-l-m EdHon)
commercial chemical product or manu-
facturing chemical intermediate hav-
ing the generic Dame listed in para-
graphs (e) oi (f) of this section, unless
the container is empty as defined in
S261.7(b) of this chapter.
lComment: Unless the residue is beiug
beneficially used or reused, or legiti-
mately recycled or reclaimed; or being
accumulated, stored, transported or
treated prior to such uge, re-use, recy-
cling or reclamation, EPA considers
the residue to be intended for discard,
and thus, a hazardous waste. An exam-
ple of a legitimate re-use of the residue
would be where the residue remaing in
the container and the container ls used
to hold the same commercial chemical
product or manufacturing chemical ln-
termediate it previously held. An ex-
ample of the discard of the residue
would be where the drum is sent to a
drum reconditioner who reconditions
the drum but discards the residue.l
(d) Any residue or contaminated soil,
water or other debris resulting from
the cleanup of a splll into or on eny
land or water of any commerclal chem-
lcal product or manufacturlng chem-
ical intermediate baving the generic
Dame listed in para8raph (e) or (f) of
Hazard
cod6
mm(r)
G)
m(r)
Sohront wastros arld sludgos, caustic washes and sludgs6, or wate. w8shes and
sludgps frrom doaning tub6 and equiPlnont used in the lormulatfurn ol ink trom flg-
ments, dri€rs, soape, and stsl*lizgE containing chrodum end l€acl.
Ammonis slill irno sln<lge hom coking operations ......................
D€canter tank tar sludgp ftorn coking operstions
Process rosiruos ftorn th€ recovory ot coal tar, induding, bul not limited to, coll€cting
sump resiJu6 from tlo productbn c[ ooke hom coal or the tocovery ot coko by-
prodrrcts produced ftom coal. This listing does not indud€ KO87 (d€canter tank tar
sludg€s |rofii coldng oporaliofls).
Tar storage tank rosiduG trom tho prodrc{ion of coke from coal or fmm tho r€covory
ol coke byarodncts produced lom coal.
Procsss residu€s from the rocovery ol light oil, induding, bui nol limiled io, tlross
gsnoratod in sililb, d€canle]s, and wash oil r€covery units lrom lhe recovery ol
coko bytrroducts goducod lrom coal.
Waslewalor sump r€siduos trom light oil refining, including, hjt not limitod io, inlor'
capting or contaminatbn sump sludg€s trom lho re,covory ol coke by-products pro-
duced from coal.
RasiduG frorn naphthalon€ collec-tion strd rocove.y oporatbns lrom the ]ocor,ory of
coke bygrodncts ptoduoed lrom coal.
Tar storagp tank rosidu€s hom coal tar rofining
Reskluos from coal tar disillladon, including hJt nol limit€d to, still boltoms
62
a
s26
o
t
I
t
a
t
t
t
a
e
t
t nvlronmenlol Proiecllon AgencY
tlrls section, or any residue or contami-
lnl.rrd soil, water or other debris result-
r'rf: from the cleanup of a spill, into or
,,n rlry land or water, of any off-speci-
ttt rr,tlo[ chemical product aud manu-
t;rct,uring chemical intermediate
*trtch, if lt met specifications, would
lrrrvc th€ generic name listed in para-
5r irph (e) or (f) of this section.
,.,,rnrnent! The phrase "commercial chemical
1.r,,luct or manufacturing chemical inter-
,'r,,,1ifl,t€ having the generic name listed in .'' refer€ to a chemlcal substance which is
,,,rrrrrfactur€d or formulated for commercial., rrrrrnufacturingi use whicb consists of the
'"rrrrnercially pure grade of the chemical'
"r,,,' Lechnlcal grades of the chemical that.r" t)roduced or marketed, and all formula-
, i,,nH in which the chemical is the sole active
,,,|: r',.(lient. It does not refer to a material'
..r, lr os a manufacturing process waste, that
,,rrt ruiDS any of the substancos listed iu para-
t r ,r ph (e) or (f). Wbere a manufacturing proc-
,.,,il wrLete is deemed to be a bazardous waste
r.,t l I
a\ttl
ntl,
r! tU
r-r! I
Fr lll
r rill
r.3s
because it conteins a substance listed in
paragraph (e) or (f), sueh waste wlll be listed
in either $261.31 or $261.32 or will be identi-
fied as a hazardous waste by tbe characteris-
tics set fortb in subpart C of tbis part.l
(e) Tlre conrmercial chemical prod'
ucts, manufacturiDg chemical inter-
mediates or off-speclfication commer-cial chemical products or mauufac-
turing chemical intermediates referred
to iu paragxaphs (a) through (d) of this
section, are identlfied as acute haz-
ardous wastes (H) and are subiect to be
the small quautity exclusion defined in
S 261.5(e).
lContrnent: For the convenience of the regu-
lated communlty the primary hazardous
properties of these materials have been indi-
cated by the tetters T (Toxicity), aDd R (Re-
activity). Absence of a letter indicates that
the compourd only is listed for acute tox-
icity.l
Tlrese wastes and their correspoDding
EPA Ilazardous Waste Numbers are:
Subslance
107-2H
591{F2
64Gl$.762-7H
s91<)&-2
107424
1 16-06-3
164H8-4
309-0G2
107-18-6
2085S73-B
2763-9F4w2+5
131-744
7803-65{5H1-67778.*1
1327-6h3
13/JrJ-.2e-2
't3{J&'2F.2
1327-5H
69242-2
696-28{
151-56-4
75-55-8il242-1
106-47{,oHll+1G4l-7
51-03-4
122{$-8
108-98-6
1563{6-257+7
t 8r-81-2
10/)_4/-7
744041-7
598-31-2
357-57-3
Acetald€hyd€, cfilore,
Acatamicb, N-(aminothioxomethyl)'
Acotamade, 2-fluoro
Acetic acirj, fluoro-, sodium sah
1-Acelyl-2-lhiourea
Acrolein
Aldicarb
Aldkxrb sulfone.
Aldrin
Allyl alcohol
Alunrinum ptrcsphide (R,T)
$(Aminomethy')-$isoxazolol
4-Arninopyrk ine
Ammonium picrate (R)
Amnonhrm vanadalo
Arganrat€(tr, bis(cyanoc)-, potassium
Arsenic acft, H3 AsOl
Arsenic oxitle Asz Or
Arsenic oxide Asz Os
Arsenic pentoxid€
Ars€nic triork e
Arsino, di€thyl-
Arsonous dit*tlorkte, phenYl-
Azidttine
Mridine, 2-tneh/l-
Barium cyanlr€
Bcmenamine, 4-chlorc
Bonzenamino, 4-nitro-
Benz6no, (chloromsthyl)-
1,2-Bsnzenediol, 4-[1-hydtoxy-2{methyhmino)ethy[" (R)'
Benzeneethanamine, alpha,alpha{im€thyl'
Benzonethid
7-Benzofuranol, 2,3.dirydro'2,24imelhyl'' methylca6amalo.
Benzoic acid, 2-hydrory-, comd. wiih (3aS+is)-1,2,3,3a,8,8a-hexahydro-'1,3a'&ltimethylpynolo[2,]
blindol-$yl melhylcarbamate estor (l :1 ).
2H-i-Benzqyran-i-one, 4-hydroxy.S(&oro-1-phenylbutyl)-, & s8lts, whon preoent at concentralions
grealor then 0.3%
Bonzyl chlorid€
Bory'lium powdor
Bromoa@tone
Brucine
63
o
t 26r.33
a
I1.,
aillirr
wttlo
Mr
PO45
P021
PO21
Pr89
P191
?192
Pl90
P127w.
Fogs
Pl89WBw24
P0a6w7
PO29
P(}29w
PO30
P001
P@3
PCI3
PO34
P016
PG'6
FfiI7
PGIS
P0.11
P(xO
PO€FilX
PO6o
PO37
P05r
P0{4
PO46
Pl91
P(x7
FO.A
P(}20
Pms
Pl11
PCB
F(xg
Pl85
PO50
F088
F051
POs1w2
PBT
Pr94
P066
Pt01
P(EI
F097
P0t6
P(xr
P(E8
Pl98
P197
PO65
F059
FO62
(,1-lr*.rl lllrlr.(:lr N(,
40 CFR Ch. I O-t-(X, Edltlon)
Subslance
2-Eulanono, 3,3{lmothy'- 1 -(rn€thylthio)-,
O-lmothy'amano)carbonyll oximo
Calcium cyanide
Calcium cyani& Ca(CN)z
Catbarnic acid, [(dihn/amino)- thio]methyl-, 2,Sdihydro-2,2dimethyl- T.benzolurany' ester.
Carbamic acid, dimelhyl-, 1-[(di.n€thy'-amino)ca6ony']- $met]ryFtH- pyrazot-3-yl ester.
Cabamic acir, dim€thyl-, 3-rnethyl-1- (1n€thytothyt)-lH- pyrazot-$yt 6stor.
Carbamic acii, methy,l-, 3-methylphenyl es1er.
Cabofuran.
Ca6on <lisumde
Cartonic dirhlorile
Cadosulfen.
Chloroecoteldehyde
PChloroaniline
1 {oChloropheny'}thiourea
3€hbropog*rnitrile
Copper cyanide
Copper cyankte Cu(CN)
m€umenyl m€t&arba,rate.
Cyankbs (soluble cyanide salts), not olhe.wis€ spocifi€d
Cyanogsn
Cyatrogon cftbr*te
Cyanogpn ctrlorido (CN)CI
2€ydotnxyl-{,6{infu opheriol
Dbirtoomathy{ elher
Dk*tlorophenylan:lne
Dbltlrin
D.€thy,lanine
Didryfr r'nilrophenyl ptrosphate
O,GDiofiyl Opyrazinyl phosphorcthioato
Difrpropylfl uoroptroophar @FP)l,4,S,Soimothanonaphthalono, 1,2,3,4,10,1Ghexa- (,lbro1,4,4a,5,8,8a,-hoxahydro,,
(1 ahha,4ahh8,.lab6ta,5abha,8alpha,8abet )-
1,4,s,&Umothanonaphthalene, 1,2,3,4,10,1O.h€xa-cfibrcl,4,rle,5,8,8a-hexahydro-,
( 1 alpha,,0alph8,4abctu,sbota,8beta,8abeta)-
2,7:3,o-Dimethanonaphth[2,3tloxiEno, 3,4,5,6,9,g-hoxachb'o-Ia,2,2a,3,6,6a,7,7a-6{ahydrc,,
(1 aahha,2bota,2aahha,3bota,6ib€ia,6a8lpha,7bota, Taahha)-
2,7:3,&Dimethanonaphfr [2,3-bhxirsn€, 3,4,5,6,9,9+oxacftlorc-1a,22a,3,6,6a,7,7a.oc,tahydro-,
(laalpha,2bota,2abeta,3alpha,6atpla,6ab€ta,h€ta, Taalpha)-, & metabolites
Dim€Oloato
ahha,elpha-Dim€lhy'phenothy'amino
Dim€ti]an.
4,$Dinihoocresol, & salts
2,4-Dinibophenol
Dinoccb
Diphoophoramkb, octarnofhy!
Dipttcphotic acir, totraothyl €stor
EXsulroton
Dithiotiurel
1,&Dithidane-2{atboxaldehydo, 2,4dirn€thy'-, O- (molhylamino)- cabony'loxime.
Endosullan
Endothall
Endrin
Erdrin, & rnotabolites
Ednophrine
Eihan€dinilrilo
Eflanirnidothioc acid, 2-(dimethy'amino)-N-l[(.nethy'amino) ca6ony'Joxy]-2oxo-, ntelrty' ost€r.
Elhanimidothioic add,
N-fl(methyhmino)ca]bonyl]oxyl-, tnolhyl ester
Elhy' cyanitle
Elhy4eneimine
Farlphur
Fluodne
Fluomacatamkle
Flrcoacefp acid, sodium salt
Fonnetanate hydrocfi lorida.
FompaEnalo.
Fulminic acid, mercury(2+) sall (R,T)
Hepracfilor
I'lsxaolhy' tetraphosphat€
I
a
I
a
o
I
I
t
a
t
39r96-r8-4
592-01-€
592{1+
5528+-14-8
644.44-1-11h?8{
11&41-5
1563S-2
7F1547W
55285-11-€'t07-H)
r0F47{5W-1il2-7b75//-a24w2-364-{}{
460-1H
5r.r*774*77413r-8{H
542-88-16S284ffi7-1
6}242-2
311<5-.5
29747-2
55-€1-{g)*G2
.16$73.5
GH7-1
172-M
6(H1-51224H
641-41.4rs}4{2-'l
51-28-5884$7
152-r6-€
107-49.3298{.F{
541-63-72f/1*7H11**7' 1.05-73-9
7z-?o-a72-M51{3-446F1H
231s5Fz.4
16732-77-5
10,-12{
151-5&45a{s7
778e.41-1
64G1F7e-7Hru2-5*
177@-37-7628+4
76-44-8757-*4
64
a
twlonmenlol Protecllon AgoncY
|Lr-r{oug
-drtb.$"
168
tio(l
rus
Fm6
;mo
?tgil
t"@foz,.ttf
Pt6t*ttu6,w
F(EI
r0t0
dii3
rte0
rt07
iuIS
rolle
rt0erffi
ffiyt
r$mmnrtm
Ft:,6
firn
r.o/3tlrun
mra
F0ra
F016
m16rlrl,
forf,
,r0 16
- FOriI'rnr
F{Jta
nlra
r.!fi
trot,
Fil,
mr$
t toa
l,.rrr,'n(rx
Ftra.i
FrX;
I'GI)rup
r. t:ri
"il9FiElf r;tt
l.TH
firr:t
FilX
t{I{r
flrui
nxt
,itt)
O,.rr,
lrr{a
79-1H
6(Fil.A
7a-€0{7ffi
7gB-61-246+73{
119-38{61,{)H276H6415*I9-3H
153F-38-3
62-3&4628+1e-75.€6a4{H
5'12-88-1
509-14-€7*7V7am$
1Tt@-57-7115-+7
7w
W7
1679-774613+'{
624-83-9
75-86,'5298..@1t*41-5
315-€-{86{8-01346HH
1316$€KH
557-19-7
55r-197
r 54-l l-5
101(P-43-91oHl{
10102444
101@-43.€
101112-4,44
55'€-o
e2-75-€
43r+40-o
152-16.€
zEl6-12-O
20fi6-1H)
1.lS7}-32313*Hw131-H
5r-28.6153442-1
88-8S7
s26r.33
Substance
I't/drazinecatohioamide
Hydrazitto, m.'fhyF
Fidrocyanic add
Hydrogon cysttid€
l-tdroSon phoephi&
lsodrin
lsolan.
$lsoprQylphony' N-methybarbamate
3(2H!.lsoxazolone,$(aminonefiy')' -,,Mlangan6o, tris(<tirneihylcarbamodithioato'S'S')''
Manganose dimeth/'ldithiocarbamat6.
Mettrrry, (acslaM)Ph€nYl-
M€rcury tulminato (R,T)
Mdranamino, N.tn€tt!/-N'nitroso-
M€than€, isocyanatc'
Methane, onDb{cfiloto
Mdlano, tetranitto (R)
Mdrandliol, trichlorc'
Msrhsnimk amido, N,Ndirn€thyl-N'&{l(m€dtylamino){8rbony'lorylphenyfl" monotrydrocnloritte.
Metranimklamide, N,Nditn€thil-N"t2'hethyl-4-tt(tttdty'lamino)ca6onyfloxylpheny+
6,9fioihano2,4,&benzodbxathiapin' 6'7'8,9, I 0'1 G
horadrt to-1,5,58,6,9,9a'hoxahydro, 3'oride
/t.7-ir6ilrano-1 Hinden€, 1,4,5,6,7,8'&hoPiachloro-
3a,4,7,7a-btrahYdro-
Motiriocatb.
MdtomytMry h/drazin€
Mettryl isocyanate
2-M€qy'hcionitrilo
M€th:/ paralhbn
M€tolcatb.
Moxacariate.dfi a-l laphthylthkxrrea
Ni*d carbon,
Nitrrel calboryl N(CO)& [r.4)'Ni*d cyanHe
Nk €l cynaido Ni(CN),
Nlcotino, & satts
Nitr'r oxile
pNitroaniline
Nilrogon dhide
Nittogpn oxtuie NO
Nilrogpn oxide NO:
Nirogty€.ine (F)
N-Nltro6odirElhybmino
|SNifosorrthy,lvinylamine
Garn€thylpyrophosphoramkle
Oeinium oxide OsOr, (I-4)-
Osmium tfroxide
7 O$W:y e{2.2. I lh€ptane'z,3dicatboxylic acid
Oxamyl.
Paraihkm
Phenol, 2<ltlohexYl-0,&dnitro
Phonol, 2,4dinitro.
Phenol, 2-rnatrya,6dinitrG, & satb
Ph6nol, 2{f {notlt:/propyl)'f ,6dinitro
Ph€nol, 2.4,&trinitro-, ammonium salt (R)
Ptt€no[ 4{dtrroftybmino)'3,Fdimethyl-, tnethylca]bamate (€sil€o'
Phonol, (3,5dirn€thyl-+(m€fr/Utio)', r€fi ylcatbatnate
Phenol, &(1 +ne0fle0q/)', mery cattamal€.
Ph€nol, Stnolhyl-S(t<noUrytethyt)-, m€Otyl c6rbamate.
131-Zt-831Fi8-4W76+G
261t1-S7-o
62a38-{
1G-85'6N2-27W
7809-51-2
311*15{
298-O.t-{
M2-2
6(Hl€
Phenylme'qrry acatate
Phenylhk urea
Phorate
Pttosg€ne
Phoaphineptrosptrort add, diofiy' 4-nifophony' €stel
Ptroophoroditrk c acid, O,Odidlyl
S{2-(sotylthio)€fty'l €slet
Plrsptotodttfiioic acid, O,O{lothy
S{(erhyilhio)meeryfl ester
prroiitroiocrtr'lolc ai*t, O,Oaimsttr, $t2'(tn€frylamim)-2oxoethy'l ester
t
65
o
.33 40 CFR Ch. I (7-l-m Edffion)s26r
Haz-
ardous
waste
No.
Substance
I
t
I
t
a
P043
P089
P040
P0t)7
P071
P20r'.
PI88
Pl10
P098
P098
PO99
P201
P070
P203
P101
PO27
P069
P081
P017
P102
P003
P005
P067
P102
P008
P075
P20/.
P114
P103
P104
P104
P105
Pl06
Pl06
PloS
P018
P108
P115
Pl09
P110
P1t 1
P112
P062
Pl13
Pl13
Pl14
Pl15
Pr09
P045
PO49
F014
Pl16
P026
PO72
Fos3
Pl85
P123
P118
P119
P120
P120
PO84
P00't
P205
P121
P121
P12.
P205
Phosphorofl uoridic acid, bis( 1 -melhylethyl) esler
Phosphorothioic acid, O,O{iethyl O-(4-nitroph€nyl) ester
Phosphorothioic acid, O,Odiethyl O-pyrazinyl esler
Phosphorothioic acid,
O-[4-[(dimethylamino)su]tonyl]phenyll O,O-dimethyl esler
Phosphorothioic acid, O,O,-dimethyl O-(4-nitrophenyl) ester
Physosiigmine.
Physostigmine salicylate.
Plumbane, tetraethyl-
Potassium cyanide
Potassium cyanide K(CN)
Potassium silver cyanide
Promeca6
Propanal, 2-methyl-2-(methylthio)-,
O-[(methylamino)carbonyl]oxime
Propanal, 2-methyl-2-(methyl-sulronyl)-, O-[(m€thylamino)carbonyl] oxime.
Propanenitrile
Propanenitrile, 3-chloro-
Propanenitdle, 2-hydrory-2-m€thyl-
1,2,3-Propanetriol, triniirate (R)
2-Propanone, 1-bromo-
Propargyl alcohol
2-Propenal
2-Propen-1-ol
1,2-Propylenimine
2-Propyn-1-ol
4-Pyridinamine
Pyridine, 3-(1 -methyl-2-pynolidinyl)-, (S)-, & salts
Pynolo[2,3-b]indol-Sol, 1,2,3,3a,8,8a-hexahydro-1,3a,8-lrimethyl-,
rnelhylcarbamate (6ste0, (3as{is)-.
Selenious acid, dithallium(1 +) salt
Selenourea
Silver cyanide
Silver cyanide A9(CN)
Sodium azide
Sodium cyanide
Sodium cyanide Na(CN)
Strychnidin-1Gone, & salts
Strychnidin-1 O-one, 2,3{imelhory-
Sirychnine, & salts
Sulluric acid, dithallium(1+) salt
Tetraethyldithiopyrophosphate
Tetraethyl l€ad
Tetraethyl pyrophosphate
Tetranilromethane (B)
Tetraphosphoric acid, hexaethyl esier
Thallic oxide
Thallium oxide Tl: Or
Thallium(l) selenite
Thallium(l) sullate
Thiodiphosphoric acid, telraothyl ester
Thiotanox
Thioimidodicarbonic diamide [(H, N)C(S)], NH
Thiophenol
Thiosemicarbazide
Thiourea, (2+hlorophenyl)-
Thiourea, 1 -naphthalenyl-
Thiour€a, phenyl-
Tirpate.
Toxaphene
Trichlorom€thanethiol
Vanadic acid, ammonium salt
Vanadium oxide V: Os
Vanadium p€ntoxide
Vinylamine, N-mothyl-N-niiroso-
Warlarin, & salts, when pr€sent at concentraiions grealer than 0.3clc
Zinc, bis(dimethylcarbamodithioato-S,S')-,
Zinc cyanide
Zinc cyanide Zn(CN)2
Zinc phosphide Znr Pz, when present at concentralions gr€ater than 10o/" (R,T)
Zkam.
5F91-4
56-38-2
29747-252{F7
298.{O{5747457+7
78.{O-z15r-5H151-5H
50641-62631-37{
116-.0F3
164&88-4
107*124il2-7t7
75+6-5
5Hs-O
598-31-2
107-1ts7107{2{
107-1847H$8
107-1$7il+-24.5
1 54-1 1-557474
12039-s24mrl14
506-64-9
50644-9
266,28-24
143-33-9
14F399157-244
357-57-3157-24-j
7446-18-6'
368S-24--57W-2
107-4$3
50s14-8757-W
1314-32-5l3l4{2-5
12039-52-074/,*1ffi
368ts24-5
3919F18-4
541-53-7
108-98-57r1H
5344-82-1
8648-4
103-8$5
26419-73+
8001-3$27t7V7
7803-5ffi't31442-1
131442-1
454ts4H
r 81-81-2
137-3(F4
557-21-1
557-21-'.|
1914-8l-.7
137-3F4
l CAS Number given lor parenl compound only
I
66
a
s26l
a
lComment: For the convenience of tbe regu-
lated community, the primary hazardous
properties of these materials have been indi-
cated by the letters T (Toxicitv)' R (Reac-
tivity), I (Ignitability) and C (Corrosivitv).
Absence of a letter indicates that the com-
pound is only listed for toxicity'l
These wastes and their corresponding
EPA Ilazardous Waste Numbers are:
30558-G17fr747H7-6
6244-253-9H1*7*7
141-784@1+2
563-68-€93-7H
67+17S05-€
98-€6-2src37S-5
79.{6-l79-1H
107-1$161{2-5
62-53-375{(F5
492-€H
I 15--O2{M7-7
101-27-9
22781-222961{2{
17804-.3*256-4H
225-514
98-87-3
23950-58-5sH'.3
5747-5
62-53-34c2{H
316$.9F3or11-7
95-534
106-494
101-14-4
636-2r-59S5H
714}.2s1(Fi54
101-5H3OH)H10H0-7
25376-45-8
1 17-81-7w7+2
844ts2
131-1 1-3
117-84-{)9*-1il1-7y1
106-{6-7
Environmentol Proleclion AgencY
(fl The commercial chemical Prod-ucts, manfactnring chemical inter-
mediates, or off-specification commer-
fctal chemical products referred to in
paragraphs (a) through (d) of this sec-
Lion, are identified as toxic wastes (T),
unless otherwise designated and are
subject to the small quantlty generator
cxclusion defined in 5261.5 (a) and (S).
I x"r-
ardous
wasit€
No.
r,394
r,001
(,034
r.,187a r,oos- tt240
{,1 12
1,1 44
r,214
rc€
F027
r,002
o llffi:
(,005
1,006
1,0O7
r,009
rxng
Uol 1
r()t2r lil?:
r,0t5
U0t0
(,:,8O
|,rlg
( t:t64
r,:,71| ,,rsz
t ,O.l 6
I l0,l 7
U t92
( ()18
rxR4
r,Ol2
UOt4r lffi:
r r.r2g
r t.ll)3
r,l5g
\t.'112
rlttll
r()t9r lili,[
r lr)35
r Hl:i7
I t,,:?l
i {)1rB
rxXig
r xltg
t l0Z
O,[07r x)/0
r()/l
\t012
Subslance
,',213.
Acctaldehyde (l)
Acelaldohyd€, trichloro-
Acetamk e, N-(4€lhoxyPh€nyl)-
A6tamid€, N-9H-lluoren-2-yl-
Acotic acid, (2,4dichlorophenory)-, salts & eslers
Acetic aciri €thyl 6ster (l)
Acalic ackl, lead(2+) sah
Acefrc acirl, thallium(1+) salt
Acstic acid, (2,4,tirichlorophenoxy)-
Aceron€ (l)
Aceionildle (l,T)
Acelophenone
2-Acetylaminotluoren€
Acetyl chloride (C,R,T)
Acrylamide
Acrylic acid (l)
Acryloniirile
Amitrole
Aniline (l,T)
A6inb acid, dimethyl-
Auramine
Azaserin6
Azirino[2,3'=3,4lpynolol1,2-arinctol6-4,7dion6, &amino€.[[(aminocarbonyl)ory]m€thyl]'1'1a'2'8'8a'8b-
hexahydroSa-methory'5'm€thyl-, [1 aS-(l aalpha' Sbeta'Saalpha,Sbalpha)]-
Barban.
Bendiocarb.
Bendioca6 phenol.
Eenomyl.
Benzfi]aceanthrylene, 1,2'dihydro'3'meihyl-
Benz[c]acridine
Benzal chloride
Benzamide, 3,sdichloro'N'(1,1'dimethyl'2'propynyl)-
Bonz[a]anthracene
B€nz[a]anlhracen€, 7,1 2dimethyl-
B€nzonamino (l,T)
Bonzenamine, 4,4'{arbonimadoylbis[N' Ndimethyl'
Benzenamine, 4-chloro-2'msihyl-, hydrochloride
Benzenamin6, N,Ndimethyl-4-(phenylazo)-
Benzenamine, 2-methyl-
Benzenamine, 4-mothYl'
B€nzenamine, 4,4'-molhyl€n€bis[2.chloro-
Eenzenamine, 2-methyl', hydrochlotide
Benzenamine, 2-m€thyl'5'niiro'
Banzene (l,T)
Benzeneaceiic acid, 4+hloro'alpha-(4-chlorophenyl)-alpha'hydrory-, ethyl esi€r
Benzene, 1 -bromo-4-phenory'
B€nzon€buianoic acid, 4'[bis(2thloroethyl)amino]-
Benzene, chloro-
B€nzonodiamine, ar-mothyl'
1,2-Bonzenedicarborylic acid, bis(2€thylhexy') 6ster
1,2-B€nzon€dicatorylic acid, dibutyl ester
1,2-Benz6nodicarborylic acid, diethy' ssl€r
1,2-B€nzonodicarborylic acid, dimelhyl esl6r
l,2-B€nzemdicarborylb acid, dioctyl est€r
Benzene, l,2dichlo.o-
B€nzon€, l,3dichloro-
B€nzono, l,4dichloro.
.3i!
I
67
o
.33
t
u201
u127
u056
u?20
u105
u106
u055
u169
u183
u t85
u020
uo20
u207
u061
u247
u023uzu
u021
u202
u278
u364
u203
u141
u367
u090
u0a{
u248
ug2,
u197
u023
u085
u021
u073
uog1
u095
u?2;5
u030
u128
u172
u031
u159
u160
u053
v074
Ul.l3
u031
u136
uoil2
u372
u271
u280
u238
u178
u373
u409
u097
u389
u387
ul14
s26l
Haz-
ardous
wasle
No.
40 CFR Ch. I (7-l-m Edilion
Substance
B€nzan€, 1, 1 L(z,2dichloroethylidone)bist4'chloro'
Benzene, (dichlorom€thyl)-
Benzene, l,3diisocyanatomethyl' (R'T)
B€nz€ne, dimethyF (l,T)
1,3-B€nzen€diol
B6nzene, h€xachloro-
Benzene, hexahydro' (l)
Benzene, methyl-
Benzene, 1 -rnethy'-2,4dinitro-
Benzene, 2-methyl- l,3dinitro-
Benzene, (1 -methylethyl)- (l)
Benzene, nitro-
Benzene, pentachloro-
Benzene, p€ntachloronitro'
Benzenesullonic acid chloride (C,R)
Benzenesullonyl chlodde (C,B)
Benzene, 1,2,4,5'ietrachloro
Benzene, 1,1'-(2,2,2-trichloro€thylidene)bisl4thloro-
Benzene, 1,1' -(2,2,2'lrtchloroethylidene)bis[4- methory-
Benzene, (irichloromethyl)'
Benzene, 1,3,5-trinitrc
Benzidine
1,2-Benzisothiazol-3(2H)-one, 1, 1 dioxide, & salts
1,3-Benzodioxol.4-ol, 2,2dimethyl-' melhyl catbamate.
1,3-Benzodioxol.4{1, 2.2dim€thy'-,
1,3-Benzodioxole, +(2f rop€nyl)'
1,3-Benzodioxole, 5-(l rroPenyl)-
7-Benzoluranol, 2,3dihydro'2,2dimethy'-
1,3-Benzodioxole, $Propyl-
B€nzo[rst]pentaphene
ii-f-d,iniop,rjn-2-one, 4-hydrory-g-(3-oxo-1-phonyFbutyl)-, & salts, when Present at concetrtralions
of 0.306 ot less
Benzo[alpyrene
p-Eenzoquinone
Benzotrichloride (C,R,T)
2,21Bioxirane
[1, 1'-Biphenyl]'4,4'diamine
[1,1'-Biphonyl]-4,4'diamine, 3,3'dichloro-
[1,1 lBiph6nyll-4,4'diamine, 3,3'dimethory-
[1, 1'-Bipheny'].4,4'diamine, 3,3'dim€thyl-
Bromoform
4-Eromophenyl Phenyl olher
1 ,3-Butadbn€, 1 ,1 ,2,3,4,4'hexachloro-
1 -Birtanamine, N-buM'N-nitroso'
1-Butanol (l)
2-Butanone (l,T)
2€utanon€, Peroxide (R,T)
2-Butenal
2-Butene, l,4dichloro- (l,T)
2-Bulenoic acid, 2-meihyl', 7{t2'3dihydrory-
2-( 1 -methoxyethy')-3-methyl' 1 {xobutorylmothyll-
2,3,5,7a-totrahydro-1 H-pyrrolizin'1'yl ester'
I 1 S-lt alpha(Z),7(2S',3R'),TaalPhall-
n-Butyl alcohol (l)
Cacodylic ack,
Calcium chromate
Cabamic ack , 'lH'b€nzimidazol-2'yl, mothyl ssler'
a;rila acid; t1-l(buty'amino)carbonylt'1H'b€nzimidazol'2'vl]-, methyl esler'
Calbamic aciO, (S'cnUroptrsny')-, 4{hloro-2-butynyl sster'
Carbamic acil, ethYl ester
Carbamic aciri, methylnitroso, €thyl €sler
Catbamic acid, phonyl', l'm€thylethyl 6stor.
Gabamic aclO, it,Z.itrenytenobis (iminoca6onothioyl)lbis-, dimethyl es{or'
Carbamic cfiloride, dimethy'-
CiOamotniorc acid, tlis(l'hethylethyl)', S-(2'3,3-tric'hloro-2froponyl) 6sier'
Cadamothioh acid, diPropy'" S-(phenylmethyl) ester'
Carbamodithioic acid, 1,2€than€diy'ttis-,
salts & oslers
Carbamothioic acid, bis(l'methylethy')', S'(2,3{ichloro'2fropony') ester
Carbary'.
Cadendazim.
Ca6ofuran Phenol.
t
a
I
I
t
t
I
a
u060
u017u23
u239
72-.v4
98-87-3
26r'7142-5
1330-20-7
10&116-3
1'.tu7+1
11H2-7
108+8-3
'121-1+-2
@ts2r.298{2{
98-9$3
608_93_582+84984H98-OH
95-94-350-2N724}69H7-7
9F35-4
9247-318147-2
22781-2v3
2296142-$
94-s97
12(H8-1
1563-38.{
94-584
18S-5F9i81+1-2
5132-8
106-51-4
98H7-7
1.16.{-53-5
92-87-5
91-9/Fl
11F9O-411H3-77*2*2101-5H
87{8-392+tH
71-36-3
78-93-3
1338-2.3-4r[rzo-so-s
764-414
3O3-3a-4
71-3H7sff
13765-1H
10605-21-7
1780+€5-2
101-27-951-7H
615-53-2
12242-9
2356++54
7'J-4/.-72*y17-5
52888...HI 111-54-6
2303-1ts46}2*2
10605-21-7
1563-3H
u062un9
u372
u367
t
I
68
o
Agency
o
s 26r.33tnvlrcnmenlol hobcton
H.z-
.nbtrs
?adot5.
$DstarEo
u2r5
rxxxt
rrt55
r1033
rPfi
tIB4
txxls
rxB6
r.@6
r.rB7
rxESr(pux2
tIx4
ux6t[{7
tDa8
rDa9r[t2
rffio
TTE'I
r.62
r&i3
r,ssw0
'.,, t 07rtr6
trr20
rn57
r.,l30
rt)58rn.o
r.,69
txtro(fr1
in62
rxxxt
rma
IJfr6
rmg
rn70
tI)71
w72
rm73
rI)7a
rn75
rp78
r[79
rm5
rM7rm4
rrGl
rxfz$Bt
rro85
tIoE
rr@8
u15
r.,(80
rm7
UO88
rr(EO
rro90rml
rl0g2
u003
rne4
rn95
tr00
rm7
uo98
6eI)-73-9
353.'50-{7**1353+{
56-23€
75-gr4
s5.{g-357-7H
'a9{X}-1r0-€(F7510-tHffi'7
11(F75-g67{6-3
1(r7-q>2
91-5F7s7-a
3165-CH
r378S-1H
218{r-0
131F77-ga'r7G{Hs,'@
5G.58-3r(Hl{110+758,.g
r(f,-e4.'l7:t171s(>r8{19+73-7
aB30{r-37M
50-29-3rel8t5$7(}31reoGIH8+71-295{Fr
5.1-71t-1r(F.aF7
9r-ga-l7H1-O7*71.47H$4156{H
11'l{4-a1(E{Fl
1r141-112G{}{
87-65-0
5aa-75{
146a-59.61*91-1
117{1-7
505F&1'r815-flF1
3a88-58-2W256.5}19a.{8tfig{Ft
121-4&3
6(Flr-757.{it41rH3-7
&15-97*7
57-1&7
C8rtonh acid, ttihalltum(t+) san
Cadonic dltprfb
CerDonodrlorilic add, IrE0tyl o3ter (l,T)
C.rbotr orry{luori& (R,T)
Ceroon Hrr filorko
Chloral
Chlora'nhrcf
Chaodanc, ahha & gEmtna isornem
Chlomphazh
Chbrobenzem
Cirlorobondarep€|tom+ctGd
20tlotodry,l vtry' eltnr
Chlorcbm
Ghloomfiyl mdty' ether
bo€htorqleptttlutens
ooltrcpnend
,f4iloro-o-bbk$ne, hrydrocftlod&
Chrorrb &i, lb Clo., calcium 38n
ChrylcmCludc
Cr€lol (Cr6!/Lc eid)
CrcOnaf$ytb
Cl.IIFn (l)
Cnnogoo bruttkb (CN)Br
2,5-C}*herEtitttt61,,ffine
Cldoh.Ilne (l)
Cydoheran, 1,2,3,4,5,&ho,o.hloro,
(t dphah2alpha,3bste,4slpha.5ahhe,6He)'
Qparxanone (t)
f ,3.cldoP.'t0idste. f ,23,a,5,$hcxacfibo-
Ctdoptrcphamide
2,tf-D, salts & osbts
Oatmfirdnu)o
DDT
Dhtbb
O5.n{a,htstrthreno
Db.nzola,itsyran
l,20lxqrp8.ddotopto9ano
OUIV ilUdaeoDl$lombenz.n
m-D-hlorobanane
trDtfibrot n 6no
3,3-Oicftlo.obcn fio
1,a-tXrforc-2{ubn (l,T)
Dihlorodiuorornothsno
1,1.l)ict{oro.fiytcoe
f ,2.oldrbro.llllloo.
Dichloroe0tyl o0ter
DIhlorotopropyl o0nt
Dactiorom.lho,Yy ofteno
2,+Dldrlorophonol
2,eDichlotoph.ttol
l,30icriloropropGne
1,23,+Ocpon[utane (1,T)
1,+Di.trybneor6eOmyncxyldttt ld.
Di.qd.ne glycol dcarbsmate.
N,if-Obirt/hr*azineO,GDidt, S{ndry,l dhiophooghale
WpttthElsLDL0rtfiilD.sLtol
Dhydoslrtob
3,Soirr0loxyocn dhe
Wtntlne(l)
FD&ra0ryL,rf noazobonzonc
7, I 2€imc$y$cn{alanlhrune
S,S0tndrylbenzidkte
ahta,dptu-OtndryDenzylhyOropercxite (R)
Dlrl.ttylcelbertoyl dtb.*re
l,lOfnGfiylffi.zinc
69
a
I
I
o
a
I
t
a
a
s261.3:l
Haz-
ardor.rs
waslo
l.lo.
40 CFR Ch. I (7-l-m EdHon)
Subsiance
l,2oimothylhydrazin€
2,4.Dimothylphenol
Dmethy' phthahte
Dimothy' sulfate
2,4-Dinitrotoluon€
2,SDinitrotoluen€
Di-n{ctyl phthahte
1,4-Dbxane
1,2-Diphenylhydrazine
Dipropyhmin€ (l)
Di-n-propy'nilroeamine
ESichlorohyddn
Etranal (D
Ethanamine, N,Ndiothy'-
Elhanamino, Nethy'-N-nitroso,
1,2-Ethanediamine, N,Ndimethy'-N'-2-pyddiny'-N'{2-thiony'rnohy)-
Ethane, 1,2dibomo-
Elhane, 1,l<lichloro.
Elhane, 1,2<fichloro-
Elhane, hexachloro-
Ehane, 1,1'-[melhy'on6bis(ory)lbis{2+hloro-
Ethane, 1,1'o4Pis-(l)
Ethan€, 1,1'{nftisl2drlrro-
Ethane, p€ntacrrloro-
Ethane, 1,1, 1,2-tetrachloro.
Ethan€, 1. l.2,2.tetrachloro-
Ethan€thioafi*re
Ethano, 1.1,1 -tichloro-
Ethane, 1, 1,2-l**rloro-
Ethanimidolhioic acid, N,N'- [hiobisl(mothylimino)ca6onylo,rylFis-, dirnothyl ester
Ethanimidothioic ack, 2-(dim€thylamino){.ltycloxy-2-oxo-, melhy' esler.
Ethanol,z€thory-
Etlanol, 2,7-(nitrosoiminolbis-
Elhanol, z,?o4fib-, dkarbamato.
Ethanon€, 1fh6ny'-
Elhene, chlorc.
Ethene, (2+hloroethoxy)-
Elh€n€, l.ldichloro-
Ethene, l,2dichloro-, (E)-
Elhono, letracilorc
Elhene, idchloro-
Ethyl ac€tato (l)
Ethyl acrylal€ o
Elhyl carbamats (ur€thano)
Ethy' ether (l)
Ethylonobisdithi@abamic acid, salts & esters
Ethylone dibromid€
Ethylono dichloride
Ethy,l,one glycol mono€thy' eth€r
Ethylon€ oxid€ (l,T)
Ethylenolhiurea
Ethylidon€ dichloride
Ethyl m€thacrylat€
Elhyl rnethanosuf onate
Fluoranthene
Formaldohyde
Fomic acid (C,T)
Furan (l)
2-Furancadoxaldehy<te 0)
2,SFurandion€
Furen, totrahydro-(l)
Furtural (l)
Futuran (l)
Glucopyranose, 2deoxy-2-($methy'-&nitrosoureido)-, D-
DGlucoce, 2deory-2-[(methy'nitroeoamino)-
ca6onyllaminol-
Gtyddyleld€hy&
Guaniline. N-melhy'-l.l'-nitro-N-nitroso.
Flexadrlorobenzene
Haxachlorobutrdbns
l.bxacif croq/dopentadbn€
Harachloroelhane
uo99
ur01
ur02
ur03
u't05
ut06
u107
u108
u109
ul10
ult1
u(x1
u001
u404
u171
uI55
u(r7
u076
uo77
u13r
u@4
ur17
uc25
ur84
u208
u2o9
u218U%u27
u410
u3p4
u359
u173
ugr5
u004
u0.|(t
uo/,z
u078
u079
u210
u?2,8
ur12
ul13
u238
u't17
ul14
u067
uo77
u359
ul15
u116
u076ulrS
u't19
u120
u12.
u123
u124
u125
u147
54{F734
10547-9
131-1 1-3Tt-7t1
121-1&-2
60G-2G-2
117-844
123-01-1122+7142+7621+7106{9{7fr74
121<,4-8
55-18-5
91-€(F5
106-9&-4
7+34-3
107-{E.2
67-72-1
1t1-91-1
6129-7'11144-4
76{1-7
63G2lH7*W
62-55-5
71-5547ffi
5966S26-{
3055&-43-1
110-€(H
1 I 16-54-7
5952-2e-'t98+275{1-1
110-75{7*3H1564(H
127-18-47H)1{
141-784
14H8-551-7H
80-29-7r 111-54-6
106-9$4
107-G2
1'to-80-57*214
96-4$-7
7S\34-g97+262-5H
206444sffi
6r+-18'611(W
98-O1-t108-3r{lOH(H
98{1-11r(#
18883-&4
18883-.66-4
76*{7b2*7
11&7{.1
87€8-3
77474
67-72-1
u213
ur25
u124
u206
u206
t
u126
u163
u127
u128
u130
u131
70
t
o
s26r
I
(lursa
u243
ul3il
rJ086
1J098
u09()
urff,
u134
rUH
u135
rxxxt
ut 16
ur37
ul90
ur40
U t/t1llwtzul€utu
ut46
ul45
Ut.16
ur29
UI68
rU[I
ur49
ul50
ur51
ul52
rxB2
rJ029
r",o45rffi
r/080
u075
ut38(I 1g
u21 1
ut53
vns
1.,o14
ur2r
rn36
t,tt t4
rr,t 5,5
rl12
\n17
t, I 5r4
rlffl
rXXS
0t56\rn6
r,l57
t.l l5g
u068
r,08O
Iut59ril6o
i,t3g
r,l6l
rI62
l,t0l
rll&4
r0l0
l,*,
!,t67
,, t88
7re4
1888-71-7
w241-21615{r1
57-1+7
54{F73+12-&7
7664-393
76A1-SF3T7glff-{.7783{,H
80-15-996-{$7
19139-5
8+4,4-978{3-1lAH&l
l.l3.6GO
303-31-{
301{'l-2133H2{7&27-7r33h32{
58-8H7b2b71o&31{
123-g+'10s7/-3t'18{2-3
7(XI€7-512H8-7
12.1-4(Fg
74-8il-97H7-3
107-3(F2
74-96-37fr9-27*7147W
62-50-{)
56-23-57H*17*2*267.ffi
7549-4
57-7H67-Sl
91-8(H
1.13-5o-o
7243.5
67-56-1
74-a3-95044-97H7-37*2-1
7r-554
5&-496
101-14{
7.t-9H7fr9-278-€H
l3it8-2&47&loslrt8(}{2{
1o&1(FlH4-2w7-7
2(HXH1-3
1*?€-791-6H
Envlonmentol Prctectlon Agency
Sdctanca
Flexacfibmphene
Fbxadtlcrogopene
Ffilrazine (R,T)
li|drazine, l2{bthyl-
l'idrazin6, 1,1 <Imefiy{-
l.lyd.azino, t3dm6dlyl-
l'Mrazine, l2{hh€nyl-
tlydrofr'Jorb &id (C,T)
ti^t,ogeo fruorido (C,T)
Ffircgen culfirhFt6lqen sulfide fh S
$trropeloxkte, 1 -methy'-l fh€nylothyl- (R)
2-lmirezolirinelhiono
lndomtl,2,3+dhfene
1,3-lsobonzdurandbn€
hobrny{ alcottol (l,T)
leoeafiole
l(epono
tasiocadne
l-ead acetstottad, bb(a6tam)brahydoxyti-
lrad pho6ph.t6
Laarl eubacetate
Undane
MNNG
Maleac anhydrido
Mabic hydrazid€
Malononifne
UehtuUn
llelqrry
frefnacqdonil.ile (1, T)
llehanarnin€, Nftthyl- (l)
lvle0nne, btome
lildrano, cfiloro- (1, T)
frethano, ctrlorornethoxy-
Mehano, dibromo-
il€lhan€, di$loro-
llelhane, dkirlorodiff uoro-
lJethane, io<b-
fiehancutbnac ead, dryl oster
M€thano, tetracfiloro
liiotrranothbl (1, T)
i/ielhano, tdnomo
l{ethane, ld*rloro-
lrehan€, trichlorcfr uoro-
4,7-tl6thano-t Fl-ind€no, 1,2,4,5,6,7,8,8-octaciloro-2,3,3a,4,7,7atexahydro-
Mahanol (l)
Metupyrilene
1,3,+Metheno-2H<ydobuta[ctflpentalon-2-ono, 1,1a,3,3a,4,5,5,5a,sb,Hocacibrooctahydro-
It,ethorychlor
irsftyl alcohol (l)
llet!y' bromiie
1 -frethylbtitadi€n€ (l)
MetM cfilorith (l,T)
[fe@ cfibrocaoonate (l,T)
ll€fiy4 cfilololom
$Methy,lcfiolanlhrene
4,4'-ti@netis(2rhloroanilin€)
M€hylono b,omichirbtryt ne chloride
Mery ory kebno UEn (l,T)
llethyl ethy' ketone peroxide (R,T)ilet$ bdide
ll€tty,l bobtny| kotono 0)iretryl mottacry{at€ (l,n
+llehyl-2*entanme (l)
ll€ilty,l|f1iqrted
Mllontyrin C
5,12+{aphtuconedimo, }acoty{-lC((3-anirc-2,3,Atideoxy)-alpha-L.lyxo-hcropyrarrcsy')oxyl-
7,8,9,1Gtetrahydro6,8,1 1 -tdhydory-l -molho,ry-, (8S<ie)-
1-Naphlhalenamine
2.i,laphthalenan*ne
.3i]
Haz-edous
waata
1,1o.
7L
a
o
.33
I
40 CFR Ch. I O-l-(l() Edltlon)s26l
llaz-
edous
wasle
ttlo.
Subciance
I
a
o
I
t
I
I
o
a
tffi
ul65t&7
ur66
u236
v279
ul66
u'r67
ur68
tn17
ut69
ul70utTt
v172
ul73
u171
ut76
u177
ul78ul7l
ul80
ut81ul93t(}'8
ul15
ut26u(rl
2
u183
utSa
u185Sa
F@t
ut61uls
ut87
u188
trc.t8
t GIg
tE81uf,a
rr(Eo
u10r
r1(E2
u132
t alr
ut70
SeeFVtSs
F@tSaFgtSe
F@t
ul5()
ul45
irc87
ut89
ul90
ur9t
ur79
u192urgt
ut11
ul10
trc60
1rc03
ul49
u171
rlg.L{f1
91-{0-3
91-58-713(>15rl
7M7-1
63-€F2
l3G-t5-{134-?-7
91-594101Hlt
98-€H10a4-7
7.F464
9il4-1&3
11't6-5a-7
5S18{75F734
684-CH
Et5-.59-2
l(xF7Fagl}s*
s-554
112G714
s(Fr8-0
7*21-4
765-g4raroffi
123Hf>7808..H7Hl-782{&€
87-tr-5
1(Fl(Fl
50'$6(H@+21(E-F29H7{5*7
lan-€3-2
87-G5-0
58-5$1
105{7-9rSrlz-37()-+4
11rF20-t1g}4-787-.H
5*2
95-F4
88-0&.2
1,18-82-37&n-7W213r'H)-3
86a1i01(B{E{
1(X)-75-aM8.6
107-r04el+7112+-706-tH78H74roFz-3HC-e
Naphlhalon8rnino, N,lf +b(2drloroolhy,l)-Xafifunnc
ilapttttslene, 2rnblc
t,+Naphthslonediono
2,7+{aphthalenedisullori: add, 3,3{(3,3-
d[melhyltt,t'ni*pryfH,l'{ryl)bis(azo)itbt$amano-4-hldro,ry}, totrasodum sall
I +{aphthalenol, rnet&arbarnat€.
I,a+{aphlhoquanone
dptE+epffirytsmine
baa+{aphtrylar*r
Nitric add, lhalhfl(l+) sstlNffi.n .rE (l,T)
emfophcnd
2-t{rogopano (l,T}
UmfoeoAf-n+utylamne
iSt{rbocodiclhanobrine
lSNibocodblhy{an*r*tttocott-emyma
|&Nifocail-rm0r!,lureaf&Ntlaol+metq/utetunei+f*Uocopiukftr
fSNileogylroltfr
S{ito-o-iolt*tn€l2ord$bnc,2,2&*b
2}+f ,32-OezaphcphodF2-er*8.N,Nt*t(2dtloro.Oryl[e0ahdro, 2-oxits
Odranc (t,T)
O*ranofuoxntOetryOo
Orirano, (6lomnt6thyl)-
Paraldohydc
Pcntecfilorcbenzene
m.fibrcedlane
P.'tErb'o'lirobenaene (FCNB)
Pcntachbrophenol
Pentaml, +md!/&
l,$PentaclerE (l)
Ptrnaccdn
Phrlol
Pherd,Zdrbre
Ptpnol, 4dilorelrndryl-
Plsrol, 2,4-ddiloro-
PtEml, 2,edcfiloro-
PtE lol, 4.'t'{t 2.defilr}l,2-olhon€dyl)bb-, (E)-
Ptpml, 2,+<fineftyl-
Prr.nol, rn€Orlr&
Ptrml. 2SrnotytenotF{3,4,&trhhbro-Pfrd, 2{1 +ndrylo0rotry)-, nolhylcarbsrn8io.
Ptpnol, 4-tritro,
PrE rol, pcntrrrlorq
Ptpnol, 2.3,4,&tahacfibro
PtEnol, 2,4,tlrirbrc
Phonol. 2,,l,Sticfibp
L-Ptrny,lalaninc, 4-lbb(2drloroothr)erntDlptrocptroAc etitl, lead(2+) salt (2:3)
Phcphorodilhi<ti: &id, O,O-die$yl $mdryl eobr
Ptoeptons sulfide (R)
Phthalb arhydri&
2-Pirolno
Pi,erfrane, l-oihose
Prcnar*te
1-Prcpanemine (l,T)
1 -Propenemlne, N.nfu oooN+ropyl-
f frcpanen*ne, Nflopyl- (l)
Prcp.n, I3-dbrcrnoS.drloF-
Prcpane, l!<Schloo-
Propenqflnfille
Prcpane,2-nitl} (l,T)
I
72
)
Environmenlol Prolecllon
Haz-
ardous
wastg
No.
O
Agency 26r.33
Substance
o
I
t
o
I
I
t
a
o
t
u0r27
u193
S€e
Fg27
u235
u140
u0(I2
u007
u084
u243
u009
u152
u0o8
ul 13
u118
u162
u373
u4'11
u387
u194
U08iil
U1/t8
u196
u191
u237
u164
t,180
(,200
u201
t)202
1,203
ttzod.
1,204
1.,205
r,205
1,015
I r)€
t027iml
r,:r08
I r:t)g
I t:,1 0
'is
| 027ll?t3
r 1., 1.1
U:,15
r t.,l 6
r t.'t ti|.'l /
L:'l B
r I.t l()
r r !.'3
r r.'4.1
r r.t(Xl
, t.'l 9
r.'.t4
, t,..,,1
, t t.,tl
I 1,,:l
I Il(l
ir! I
108.€(F1
112,l'F^7'.14
9.3-72-1
12*72-7
78-83-1
67-€4-17H6-1il2-7#
18,,8-.71-7
107-t3-1
12F.9F7
79-117r4{F8H
9745-28042+
122424114-F1
52888-8H
107-1(H
7847.-5
12H3-1
11H6-1
109.{r-8
66-7F1
56{/-2
930-5S.25H5-5
108-46-318147-2
94-5F77/83-OH77834H
748€-.56*4
748€-56-,4
115-02-6
9v72-1
18883-€6-4
T7-7V1
1314-{G3
93-76-5
95-94-3
63(FAH7ts3H
127-18{
58-9G2
1o(H(H
563"-684
6533-73-9
7791-124
7791-124
101(}2*4Fl
62-55-5
59669-264
74-€;J-^1
137-26{
235e+{5-8
62-56-6
137-26-8
108.€8-3
2537H5.€
?6{7142-5
Ss€3-4
106-{9.o
ff 6-21-5
23(lr}174
6r-82-57g..ffi
Propan€, 2,?-orybis[2+hloro-
l,SPropan€ suttone
Proparxic acid, 2-(2,4,5-trichlorophenoxy)'
I-Propanol, 2,&dibromo', phosphate (3:1)
1 -Propanol, 2-tnethyl- (l,T)
2-Propanon6 (l)
2-Propenamide
1 -Propen€, l,3diciloro'
1 -Prop€n€, 1,1,2,3,3,3+exachloro-
2-Propenenitrile
2-Prop€nenitrile, 2'methyl' (l'T)
2-Propenoic acid (l)
2-Prop€noic acid, ethyl ester (l)
2-Propenoic acid, 2-melhyl', 6thyl esler
2-Propenoic acid, 2-m€thyl-, m€thyl ester (l'T)
Propham.
Propoxur.
Prosullocao.
n-Propylamine (l,T)
Propy4ene diciloride
3,&Pyndazinedkrne, 1,2{ihYdro-
Pyridineq/rk in€,2-methyl-
2,4-(1 H,3H)-h/dmirjinedione, 5-[bis(2-
drloro€thyl)amino]-
4(1 H)-Pyrimidinone, 2,3dihydro&mothyl'2-thioxo-
rynolidin€, 1-nitroso-
Resepine
Resorcinol
Saccha.in, & salts
Salrole
Selenious acid
Selenium dioxide
Selenium sulfide
Selenium sulfide SeSz (R,T)
L-Serine, diazoacotaie (estor)
Sitvex (2,a,$TP)
Strsptozotocin
Sulfudc acid, dimethy' est€r
Sultur phosphide (R)
2,4,5-'r
1,2,4,$T€fachlorobenzen€
l, 1, 1,z-Tetrachlotoothane
1,'1,2,2-T6traciloroethan€
Tetracf'tlorc€thylene
2,3,4,&Tetrachloroph€nol
Telrahydroturan (l)
Thallium(l) aetato
Thaflium(l) calbonate
Thallium(l) chloride
Thallium cfibrtulo Tlcl
Thallium(l) nikate
Thioffitarnide
Thiodicao.
Thiondhanol (l,T)
Thinpero4pira6onic diami& (H, N)C(S)h 52, tetramethyl'
Thlopttanato-tnethyl.
Thiourea
Thiram
Toluone
Toluon€diatnin€
Tolu6n6 dibocyanate (R,T)
o-Toluidin€
pTduEin€
o-Toluidino hydrcctloride
Tdallale.
1 H-1,2,+Trisz+$arnan6
1,1 ,2-Tridrlo.odtane
73
{
a
a
t
I
t
I
I
o
t
a
I
5261
o
.35
Hlr-
aadous
warto
No.
40 CFR Ch. I (7-l-0 Edtfion)
Subctance
Tridrloroethylene
Trichloromonolluoromethane
2,4,5-Trichloroph€nol
2,4,&Tdctlorophenot
Triethylamin€.
l,3,STdnitrobenzene (R,T)
1,3,s-Trioxane, 2,a,&trirnethy'-
Tris(2,3dibromopropy') phoophats
Trnan blue
Uracil rnrstard
Uroa, N€thyl-N-nitroso-
Urea, N-meihyFN-nitroso,
Vinyl chloricle
Warfadn, & salb, when present at conc€ntratbns ol O.g7c or lessXylen€ (l)
Yohimban-lo'carboryric acid, 11,17dimeJhoxy-rg-(g,4,$trirEthoxyt€nzoyr)o)ry1-, mothyr oster,_ (3beta,l6tb6ta,t Tatpha,tsb€ta,2Oatpha)-
Zinc phosphide Znr Pz, when present at ooncenlralions of l(yo or less
u228
u121
S€o
Ft27
Se€
Ft27
u404
u23/.
u182
u235
u236
u237
ul76
u177
u04it
u24a
u239
u200
u249
I CAS Number given tor paronl compound only.
[45 FR, 78529, 78541, Nov. 25, 1980]
EDIToRIAI NoTE: FoT FEDERAL R,EGISIEB ci-tations affecting $261.8i1, Bee the List of CFRSections Affected in the Fiuding Aids sec_tion of this volume.
!%145 Deletion of certain hazardouswaste codeo following equipmentsl6qning and replaeem6nL - '
(a) Wastes from wood presen"ing
processles at plants that do Dot resumeor initiate use of chlorophenolic pre-
servatives will not meet the listing def-inition of F032 once the generator hasmet all of the requiremeDts of para-graphs (b) and (c) of this section. Ihesewastes may, however, continue to meetanother hazardous wafrte listing de-scriptioD or may exhibit one or more ofthe hazardous waste characteristics.(b) Generators must either clean orreplace all process equipment that mayhave come into contact withchlorophenolic formulations or con-stituents thereof, including, but notlimited to, treatment cyliDders, sumps,tankg, piping systems, drip pads, forklifts, and trams, in a manner thatminimizes or eliminates the escape ofhazardous waste or constituents, leach-ate, contaminated drippagle, or haz-ardous waste decomposition productsto the gronnd water, sur{ace water, oratmosphere.
(1) Generators shall do one of the fol-lowing:
, (i) Prepare and follow an equipmentcleaning plan and clean equipment inaccordance with this section;(ii) Prepare and follow an equipmentreplacement plan and replace equipment in accordance with tbis section;or(iii) Document cleaning and replace-ment in accordance with this section,carried out after termination of use ofchlorophenolic preservations.
(2) Cleaning Requirements.(i) Prepare and sign a written equipment cleaning plan that describes:(A) The equipment to be cleaned;(B) How the equipment will becleaned;
(C) TIre solvent to be used in cleaD-ing;
(D) How solvent rinses will be tested;and
(E) How cleaning residues will be dis-posed.(ii) Equipment must be cleaned asfollows:(A) Remove all visible residues fiomprocess equipment;(B) R.inse process equipment with anapproprlate solvent until dioxins anddibenzofurans are not detected in thefinal solvent rinse.(iii) Analytical requirements.(A) Rinses must be tested in accord-ance with SW-846, Method.g290.(B)'Not detected meaDs at or belowthe lower method callbration llmit(MCL) in Method 8290, Table 1.
74
79{t+
7H9-4
95-9$-4
8&OF2
121444
99\3S.4
123.6T7
12*72-7
72-57-1F75-1
75S73-9
684-93-5
75-01-{
r 8't-€1-2
133(F&7
5G65-5
1314.8/-7
o
o
o
o
a
o
o
o
o
o
oi
o
1.702 Federal Register/Vol. OO, No. 6/Tuesday, January 9, 2001 /Notices
o
a
t
a
I
a
t
t
I
Estimated time per response; 10
minutes.
Frequency of response: On occasion.
Estimated total annual burden hours:
867 hours.
Abstract: The information collection
is prescribed by 36 CFR 1254.72.The
collection is prepared by researchers
who cannot visit the appropriate NARA
research room or who request copies of
records as a result of visiting a research
room. NARA offers Iimited provisions to
obtain copies of records by mail and
requires requests to be made on
prescribed forms for certain bodies of
records. The National Archives Trust
Fund (NATF) Form 36 (S/00), Microfilm
Publication Order Form, is used by
customers/researchers for ordering a
roll, rolls, or a microfiche of a microfilm
publication.
Dated: December 29, 2000.
L. Reynolds Cahoon,
Assistant Archivist for Humon Resources and
Information Sewices.
IFR Doc. 01-515 Filed 1-H)1; 8.45 aml
BILLING CODE 75I!I'I-P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket No.40-8681]
lnternational Uranium (USA)
Corporation; Notice of Receipt of
Request To Process Alternate Feed
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Notice of Receipt of Request
from International Uranium (USA)
Corporation to Amend Source Material
License SUA-1358 to Receive and
Process Alternate Feed Materials; Notice
of Opportunity for Hearing.
SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that
the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission has received, by letter
dated December 19, 200O, a request from
International Uranium (USA)
Corporation (IUSA), to amend its NRC
Source Material License SUA-1358, to
allow its White Mesa Uranium Mill near
Blanding, Utah, to receive and process
up to 17,750 tons ofalternate feed
material from the Molycorp Site located
in Mountain Pass, California. The
material is a result of extraction of
lathanides and other rare earth minerals
and is presently being stored in ponds
as lead sulfide sludge. IUSA and
Molycorp estimate the amount of
material for this amendment request to
be up to 1.7,750 tons and the average
uranium content of the material to be
approximately 0.15 percent, or greater.
IUSA proposes to receive and process
the material for its uranium content and
dispose of the byproduct material in the
mill's tailings cells.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: MT.
William von Till, Fuel Cycle Licensing
Branch, Division of Fuel Cycle Safety
and Safeguards, Office ofNuclear
Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Mail
Stop T-8A33, Washington, D.C. 20555.
Telephone: [phone]s1.
SUPPLEMENTARY TNFORMATTON: By its
submittal dated December 19, 2000,
IUSA requested that the NRC amend
Materials License SUA-135S to allow
the receipt and processing of material
other than natural uranium ore (i.e.,
alternate feed material) at its White
Mesa uranium mill located near
Blanding, Utah. These materials would
be used as an "alternate feed material"
(i.e., matter t}rat is processed in the mill
to remove the uranium but which is
different from natural uranium ores, tle
normal feed material).
Since 1951, Molycorp has operated a
surface mining and milling operation for
the recovery and chemical separation of
lanthanides and other rare earth metals
from bastnasite ores. From 1965 t}trough
1984, Molycorp constructed and
operated three lead sulfide ponds for the
evaporation of lead sulfides from the
clarifier/thickener operation. The Iead
sulfide sludge contains uranium, which
is also precipitated in the thickener. The
ponds were taken out of service in 1984,
and in 1997 Molycorp drafted a Closure
Plan for the decommissioning of the
ponds which required the removal and
off-site disposal or recovery of the lead
sulfide sludge contained in the ponds.
This amendment request seeks
authorization to process the lead sulfide
sludges for their uranium content, IUSA
has determined that the material does
not contain listed hazardous waste as
defined in the Resource Recovery and
Conservation Act, as amended,42
U.S.C, Section 6901-6991. IUSA
proposes to temporarily store the
material on the existing storage pad
until a sufficient quantity of material is
available to begin processing. IUSA will
utilize water sprays, as required, to
minimize dusting during dumping
activities. The material will be
processed utilizing an acid leach, in
existing mill equipment, to dissolve the
uranium. The solution will then be
advanced through the mill circuitry
with no significant physical
modifications.
The material will be shipped using
exclusive-use trucks from the Mountain
Pass facility to the mill in lined,
covered, aluminum end-dump trailers.
Molycorp estimates that it will ship
approximately 6(F70 trucks per week
for an estimated period of 60 to g0 davs.
The transportation route as proposed,
will follow route I-15 and I-20 to U.S.
Highway 191 at Crescent )unction, Utah
and through Highway 191 south to the
mill.
This application will be reviewed
using NRC formal guidance, "lnterim
Guidance on the Use of Uranium Mill
Feed Material Other Than Natural Ores"
provided in the NRC Regulatory Issue
Summary 2OOO-23 (November 30,
2000). The NRC has approved similar
amendment requests in the past for
separate alternate feed material under
this license.
The amendment application is
available for public inspection and
copying at the NRC Public Document
Room, in the Gelman Building, 2720L
Street N.W., Washington D.C. 20555.
Notice of Opportunity for Hearing
The NRC hereby provides notice ofan
opportunity for a hearing on the license
amendment under the provisions of 10
CFR Part 2, Subpart L, "lnformal
Hearing Procedures for Adiudications in
Materials and Operator Licensing
Proceedings." Pursuant to S 2.1205(a),
any person whose interest may be
affected by this proceeding may file a
request for a hearing. In accordancewith S 2.1205(d), a request for hearing
must be filed within 30 davs of the
publication of this notice in the Federal
Register. The request for a hearing must
be filed with the Office of the Secretary,
either:
(1) By delivery to the Docketing and
Service Branch of the Office of the
Secretary at One White Flint North,
11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD
2OB52t or
(2) By mail or telegram addressed to
the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555,
Attention: Docketing and Service
Branch.
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.1205(0,
each request for a hearing must also be
served, by delivering it personally or by
mail, to:
(1) The applicant, International
Uranium (USA) Corporation,
Independence Plaza, Suite 950, 1050
Seventeenth Street, Denver, Colorado
80265; Attention: Michelle Rehmann;
and
(2) The NRC staff, by delivery to the
Executive Director for Operations, One
White Flint North, 11s55 Rockville
Pike, Rockville, MD 20852, or by mail
addressed to the Executive Director for
Operations, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555,
In addition to meeting other
applicable requirements of 10 CFR part
I
I
Federal Register/Vol. oo, No.6/Tuesday, |anuary 9,2001 /Notices 7703
I
t
t
I
a
I
t
a
t
2 of the NRC's regulations, a request for
a hearing filed by a person other than
an applicant must describe in detail:
(f ) The interest of the requestor in the
proceeding;
(z) How that interest may be affected
by t}le results of the proceeding,
including the reasons why the requestor
should be permitted a hearing, with
particular reference to the factors set oul
in S 2.120s(h);
(3) The requestor's areas of concern
about the licensing activity that is the
sublect matter of the proceeding; and
(a) The circumstances establishing
that the request for a hearing is timely
in accordance with S 2.1205(d).
The request must also set forth the
specific aspect or aspects ofthe subject
matter of the proceeding as to which
petitioner wishes a hearing.
In addition, members of the public
may provide comments on the subiect
application within 30 days of the
publication ofthis notice in the Federal
Register. The comments may be
provided to Michael T. Lesar, Acting
Chief, Rules Review and Directives
Branch, Division of Administration
Services, Office of Administration, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington DC 20555,
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 3rd day
of |anuary, 2001.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Daniel Gillen,
Acting Chief, Fuel Cycle Licensing Branch,
Division of Fuel Cycle Sofety e Safeguards,
Office of Nuclear Material Sofety and
Safeguards.
IFR Doc. 01-601 Filed 1-8--01; 8:45 aml
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
Reactor Oversight Process lnitial
lmplementation Evaluation Panel;
Meeting Notice
Pursuant to the Federal Advisory
Committee Act of October 6, 1972 (Pub.
L., 94-463, Stat.770-776) the U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC),
on October 2,2OOO, announced the
establishment of the Reactor Oversight
Process Initial Implementation
Evaluation Panel (IIEP). The IIEP
functions as a cross-disciplinary
oversight group to independently
monitor and evaluate the results of the
first year of implementation of the
Reactor Oversight Process (ROP). A
Charter governing the IIEP functions as
a Federal Advisory Committee was filed
with Congress on October 17, 2000, after
consultation with the Committee
Management Secretariat, General
Services Administration. The IIEP will
hold its third meeting on |anuary 22*23,
2001, at the Four Points by Sheraton
Bethesda Hotel. The Four Points by
Sheraton Bethesda Hotel is located at
8400 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda,
Maryland 20814 and can be contacted at
[phone]. The meeting will take
place in the Hotel's Ambassador II
Conference Room.
The IIEP meeting participants are
Iisted below along with their affiliation:
A. Randolph Blough-U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission
R. William Borchardt-U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission
Kenneth Brockman-U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission
Mary Ferdig-Ph. D. Candidate,
Organization Development Program,
Benedictine University; Ferdig Inc.
Organizational Research and
Development
Steve Floyd-Nuclear Energy Institute
David Garchow-PSEG Nuclear LLC
Richard Hill-Southern Nuclear
Operating Company
Rod Krich-{ommonwealth Edison
Company
Robert Laurie--{alifornia Energy
Commission
fames Moorman, III-U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission
Loren PIisco-U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission
Steven Reynolds-U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission
A. Edward Scherer-Southern
California Edison Company
|ames Setser-Georgia Department of
Natural Resources
Raymond Shadis-New England
Coalition on Nuclear Pollution
f ames Trapp-U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission
A tentative agenda of the meeting is
outlined as follows:
[anuary 22, 2OO7 Meeting
8:00 am Introduction/MeetingObiectives
and Goals/Review of Meeting Minutes hom
December 77-12, 2OOO Meeting
8:30 am Initial Prioritization oflssues
Identified Through the Panel
12:OO pm Lunch
1:00 pm Presentation by NRC Staff on (r)
Reactor Oversight Procoss Self-Assessment
Data and Insights, (2) Current Reactor
Oversight Process Initiatives and Status,
and (3) Status of Recommendations and
Issues Identified in the Pilot Program
Evaluation Panel Report and Commission
Staff Requirements Memorandum
5:00 pm Adlourn
f anuary 23, 2OOl Meeting
8:00 am Recap of Previous Day's Meeting/
Meeting Obiectives and Goals
8:30 am Presentation ofStakeholder Issues/
Views (lnvited parties)
12:00 pm Lunch
1:00 pm Initial Prioritization of Issues
Identified Through the Panel (continued)
3:oo pm Agenda Planning Session 4:o0 pm
Public Comments / General Discussion
5:00 pm Adjoum
Meetings of the IIEP are open to the
members of the public. Oral or written
views may be presented bv the members
of the public, including members of the
nuclear industry. Persons desiring to
make oral statements should notify Mr.
Loren R. Plisco (Telephone 404/562-
4501, e-mail [e-mail]) or Mr. John
D. Monninger (Telephone 301/415-
3495, e-mail )[e-mail]) five days
prior to the meeting date, if possible, so
that appropriate arrangements can be
made to allow necessary time during the
meeting for such statements. Use of still,
motion picture, and television cameras
will be permitted during this meeting.
Further information regarding topics
of discussion; whether the meeting has
been canceled, rescheduled, or
relocated; and the Panel Chairman's
ruling regarding requests to present oral
statements and time allotted, may be
obtained by contacting Mr. Loren R.
Plisco or Mr. |ohn D. Monninger
between 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. EST.
IIEP meeting transcripts and meeting
reports will be available from the
Commission's Public Document Room.
Transcripts will be placed on the
agency's web page.
Dated: January 3, 2001.
Andrew L. Bates,
A dvisory Com m i ttee Mo na ge me nt Off icer.
:[,il:"::::ililed 1-8-01'; 8:45 amr
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
Advisory Committee on Reactor
Safeguards; Subcommittee Meeting on
Thermal-Hydraulic Phenomena:
Revised
A meeting of the ACRS Subcommittee
on Thermal-Hydraulic Phenomena is
scheduled to be held on January 16-17,
2001, B:30 a.m., Room T-281, 11545
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland.
The meeting agenda has been revised so
that portions ofthe fanuary 16, 2001
session will be closed to discuss
proprietary information per 5 U.S.C.
ss2b(cXa) pertinent to the Electric
Power Research Institute (EPRI). Notice
of this meeting was published in the
Federal Register on December 28,2OOO
(65 FR 82410). All other items
pertaining to this meeting remains the
same as previously published.
For further information contact: Mr.
Paul A. Boehnert, cognizant ACRS staff
t
o
49296 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 184 / Friday, September 22, 1995 / Notices
t
o
t
I
t
a
a
I
a
t
Uranium Mill Facilities, Notice of Two
Guidance Documents: Final Revised
Guidance on Disposal of Non-Atomic
Energy Act of 1954, Section 11e.(21
Byproduct Material in Tailings
lmpoundments; Final Position and
Guidance on the Use of Uranium Mill
Feed Materials Other Than Natural
Ores
AGENGY: Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
AcrloN: Notice of final guidance.
SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission has finalized two uranium
mill licensing guidance documents after
consideration of comments received in
response to a request for public
comment in a Federal Register notice
published May 13, 1992 (57 FR 20525).
Only minor changes were made to the
proposed guidance documents titled,
"Revised Guidance on Disposal of Non-
Atomic Enerry Act of 1954, Section
l le.(2) Byproduct Material in Tailings
Impoundmenis" and "Position and
Guidance on the Use of Uranium Mill
Feed Materials Other Than Natural
Ores."
ADDRESSES: Copies of the comments and
the NRC staff responses, as well as
SECY-91-243, can be examined at the
Commission's Public Document Room
at 2120 L Street NW. (lower level),
Washington DC.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Myron Fliegel, Office of Nuclear
Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555; telephone (301)
4 l 5-6629.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :
Final Revised Guidance on Disposal of
Non-Atomic Energy Act of 1954,
Section I le.(2) Byproduct Material in
Tailings Impoundments
1. In reviewing licensee requests for
the disposal of wastes that have
radiological characteristics comparable
to those of Atomic Energy Act (AEA) of
1954, Section I le.(Z) byproduct material
(hereafter designated as " 1 le.(2)
byproduct material") in tailings
impoundments, staff will follow the
guidance set forth below. Since mill
tailings impoundments are already
regulated under l0 CFR part 40,
licensing ofthe receipt and disposal of
such material [hereafter designated as
"non- l le. (2) byproduct material r "l
should also be done under l0 CFR part
40.
t "non-l le.(2) byproduct material" u used here is
simply an encompassing term for source, special
nuclear, and I le.(l) byproduct materials.
2. Radioactive material not regulated
under the AEA shall not be authorized
for disposal in an lle.(2) byproduct
material impoundment.
3. Special nuclear material and
Section I le. (l) byproduct material
waste should not be considered as
candidates for disposal in a tailings
impoundment, without compelling
reasons to the contrary. If staff believes
that such material should be disposed of
in a tailings impoundment in a specific
instance, a request for approval by the
Commission should be prepared.
4. The I le.(Z) licensee must
demonstrate that the material is not
subject to applicable Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
regulations or other U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) standards for
hazardous or toxic wastes prior to
disposal. To further ensure that RCRA
hazardous waste is not inadvertently
disposed of in mill tailings
impoundments, the l1e.(2) licensee also
must demonstrate, for waste containing
source material, as defined under the
AEA, that the waste does not also
contain material classified as hazardous
waste according to 40 CFR part 261. In
addition, the licensee must demonstrate
that the non-l le.(2) material does not
contain material regulated under other
Federal statutes, such as the Toxic
Substances Control Act. Thus, source
material physically mixed with other
material, would require evaluation in
accordance with 40 CFR part 261, or 40
CFR part 761. (These provisions would
cover material such as:
Characteristically hazardous waste;
listed hazardous waste; and
polychlorinated biphenyls.) The
demonstration and testing should follow
accepted EPA regulations and protocols.
5. The I le.(2) licensee must
demonstrate that there are no
Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation and Liability
Act issues related to the disposal of the
non-l 1e.(2) byproduct material.
6. The 1le.(2) licensee must
demonstrate that there will be no
significant environmental impact from
disposing of this material.
7. The I le.(2) licensee must
demonstrate that the proposed disposal
will not compromise the reclamation of
the tailings impoundment by
demonstrating compliance with the
reclamation and closure criteria of
appendix A of l0 CFR part 40.
8. The I le.(2) licensee must provide
documentation showing approval by the
Regional Low-Level Waste Compact in
whose jurisdiction the waste originates
as well as approval by the Compact in
whose jurisdiction the disposal site is
located.
9. The Department of Energy (DOE)
and the State in which the tailings
impoundment is located, should be
informed of the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission findings and proposed
action, with a request to concur within
120 days. A concurrence and
commitment from either DOE or the
State to take title to the tailings
impoundment after closure must be
received before granting the license
amendment to the I le.(2) licensee.
10. The mechanism to authorize the
disposal of non- 1 le.(2) byproduct
material in a tailings impoundment is
an amendment to the mill license under
l0 CFR part 40, authorizing the receipt
of the material and its disposal.
Additionally, an exemption to the
requirements of l0 CFR part 61, under
the authority of S 61.6, must be granted.
(If the tailings impoundment is located
in an Agreement State with low-level
waste licensing authority, the State must
take appropriate action to exempt the
non-1 le.(2) byproduct material from
regulation as low-level waste.) The
license amendment and the S 61.6
exemption should be supported with a
staff analysis addressing the issues
discussed in this guidance.
Final Position and Guidance on the Use
of Uranium Mill Feed Material Other
Than Natural Ores
Staff reviewing licensee requests to
process alternate feed material (material
other than natural ore) in uranium mills
should follow the guidance presented
below. Besides reviewing to determine
compliance with appropriate aspects of
appendix A of l0 CFR part 40, the staff
should also address the following
issues:
1. Determination of Whether the Feed
Material is Ore
For the tailings and wastes from the
proposed processing to qualify as
I le.(2) byproduct material, the feed
material must qualify as "ore." In
determining whether the feed material
is ore, the following definition of ore
must be used:
Ore is a natural or native matter that
may be mined and treated for the
extraction of any of its constituents or
any other matter from which source
material is extracted in a licensed
uranium or thorium mill.
2. Determination of Whether the Feed
Material Contains Hazardous Waste
If the proposed feed material contains
hazardous waste, listed under subpart D
SS 261.30-33 of 40 CFR (or comparable
RCRA authorized State regulations), it
would be subject to EPA (or State)
regulation under RCRA. To avoid the
t
Federal Register / Vol, 60, No. 184 / Friday, September 22, 1995 / Notices 49297
I
a
t
e
a
I
I
a
t
I
complexities of NRC/EPA dual
regulation, such feed material will not
be approved for processing at a licensed
mill. If the licensee can show that the
proposed feed material does not contain
a listed hazardous waste, this issue is
resolved.
Feed material exhibiting only a
characteristic of hazardous waste
(ignitable, corrosive, reactive, toxic)
would not be regulated as hazardous
waste and could therefore be approved
for recycling and extraction of source
material. However, this does not apply
to residues from water treatment, so
acceptance of such residues as feed
material will depend on their not
containing any hazardous or
characteristic hazardous waste. Staff
may consult with EPA (or the State)
before making a determination of
whether the feed material contains
hazardous waste.
3. Determination of Whether the Ore is
Being Processed Primarily for its Source-
Material Content
For the tailings and waste from the
proposed processing to qualify as
1le.(2) byproduct material, the ore must
be processed primarily for its source-
material content. There is concem that
wastes that would have to be disposed
of as radioactive or mixed waste would
be proposed for processing at a uraniummill primarily to be able to dispose of
it in the tailings pile as lle.(2)
byproduct material. In determining
whether the proposed processing is
primarily for the source-material
content or for the disposal of waste,
either of the following tests can be used:
a. Co-disposa.l test'Determine if the
feed material would be approved for
disposal in the tailings impoundment
under the "Final Revised Guidance on
Disposal of Non-Atomic Energy Act of
1954, Section 1le.(2) Byproduct
Material in Tailings Impoundments," or
revisions or replacements to that
guidance. If the material would be
approved for disposal, it can be
concluded that if a mill operator
proposes to process it, the processing is
primarily for the source-material
content. The material would have to be
physically and chemically similar to
I le.(2) byproduct material and not be
subject to RCRA or other EPA
hazardous-waste regulations, as
discussed in the guidance.
b. Licensee certification and
j ustification fesf.' The licensee must
certify under oath or affirmation that the
feed material is to be processed
primarily for the recovery of uranium
and for no other primary purpose. The
licensee must also justify, with
reasonable documentation, the
certification. The justification can be
based on financial considerations, the
high uranium content of the feed
material, or other grounds. The
determination that the proposed
processing is primarily for the source
material content must be made on a
case-sPecific basis.
If it can be determined, using the
aforementioned guidance, that the
proposed feed material meets the
definition of ore, that it will not
introduce a hazardous waste not
otherwise exempted, and that the
primary purpose of its processing is for
its source-material content, the request
can be approved.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this l3th day
ofSeptember 1995.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commisslon.
Joseph J. Holonich,
Chief, High-Level Waste and Uranium
Recovery Projects Branch, Division of Waste
Management, Oflice of Nuclear Material
Safety and Safeguards.
IFR Doc. 95-23531 Filed 9-21-95; 8:45 aml
BILLING CODE 759O-OI-P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Rel. No. 1C-21362; No. 812-9602]
Golden American Life lnsurance
Company, et al.
September 15, 1995.
AGENCY: Securities and Exchange
Commission ("SEC" or "Commission").
ACTION: Notice of Application for an
Order under the Investment Company
Act of 1940 ("1940 Act").
APPLICANTS: Golden American Life
Insurance Company ("Golden
American"), Separate Account B
("Account B") and Separate Account D("Account D"-together with Account
B, "Separate Accounts"), and Directed
Services, Inc. ("DSI").
RELEVANT 1940 ACT SECTION: Order
requested under Section 6(c) ofthe 1940
Act granting exemptions from Sections
lZ(b), 26(a) (2) and 27 (c) (2) thereof and
Rule 12b-l thereunder.
SUM'TIARY OF APPLICATIOX: Applicants
seek an order permitting the deduction
of mortality and expense risk charges,
including an asset-based enhanced
death benefit charge, from the assets of
the Separate Accounts in connection
with the offering of certain variable
annuity contracts ("Contracts") and
certain other variable annuity contracts
("Future Contracts") issued in the future
by Golden American that are materially
similar to the Contracts. Applicants also
request that the order permit the
deduction of a mortality and expense
risk charge from the assets of any other
separate accounts ("Future Accounts")
established in the future by Golden
American in connection with the
offering ofthe Future Contracts.
FIL|NG DATE: The application was filed
on May I l. 1995, and amended on
August 29, 1995.
HEARING oR NoTIFICATIoN oF HEARING: An
order granting the application will be
issued unless the Commission orders a
hearing. Interested persons may request
a hearing by writing to the Secretary of
the Commission and serving Applicants
with a copy ofthe request, personally or
by mail. Hearing requests should be
received by the Commission by 5:30
p.m. on October 10, 1995, and should be
accompanied by proof of service on
Applicants in the form of an affidavit or,
for lawyers, a certificate of service.
Hearing requests should state the nature
ofthe requestor's interest, the reason for
the request, and the issues contested.
Persons may request notification of a
hearing by writing to the Secretary of
the Commission.
ADDRESSES: Secretary, Securities and
Exchange Commission, 450 5th Street,
NW., Washington, DC 20549.
Applicans, c/o Mitchell M. Cox, Esq.,
Vice President, Assistant Secretary and
Associate General Counsel, Golden
American Life Insurance Company,l00l Jefferson Avenue,4th Floor,
Wilmington, Delaware 19801.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Yvonne M. Hunold, Assistant Special
Counsel, or Patrice M. Pitts, Special
Counsel, Office of Insurance Products
(Division of Investment Management), at
[phone].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFoRMATIoN: The
following is a summary of the
application; the complete application is
available for a fee from the Public
Reference Branch of the Commission.
Applicants' Representation
l. Golden American is a stock life
insurance company authorized to do
business in alljurisdictions, except New
York. Golden American is a wholly-
owned subsidiary of BT Variable, Inc.
and a wholly-owned indirect subsidiary
of Bankers Trust Company.
2. The Separate Accounts were
established by Golden American as
segregated asset accounts to fund
variable annuity contracts. Account B is
registered under the 1940 Act as a unit
investment trust. Account D is
registered under the 1940 Act as a non-
diversified open-end management
company. Registration statements on
Form N-4 and Form N-3, registering the
Contracts as securities under the
o
o
o
o
o
a
o
o
t
t
e
a
I
I
a
o
I
NRC Regulatory Issue SUmmTZOOO-23: Recent Changes to Uraniutcovery Policy Page I of9
I-INITED STATES
,FFICE".NBBlBttffi"orIilHI3tX-erWT,iSSLEGUARDS
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-OOO I
November 30, 2000
NRC REGULATORY ISSUE SUMMARY 2OOO-23
RECENT CHANGBS TO URANIUM RECOVERY POLICY
a
a
a
o
o
ADDRESSEES
INTINT
BACKGROUND
P_.{BI l l.(liLl}rlA!:_LNA_G!ll i9 tllllD]ll(]!ALML]CTI!1ATERlALINTAlLIN(iSlN,1P()t'\D\,1[\TS
(sECY-9c)-011). PBQELSIINC; OF NIATERIAL OTHER THAN NATLIR\L LiRANIL'\4atl:r
o CILASSIIIC'ATION OF LIQLIID U'AS Ir,A.!!L_lTllS (S[('\'. G lslc-t:clt)-tt1i]. Ip-\CIBRENT .lLjRlSDI('TION OF NON-R{DIOLOGICAL HAZAI{DS O[ ['R \\lt r\4
\ttlL rqtt-trcs (.sIc'\ret77 ). .Trrrv.qRl aI r!!r-'trs
ADDRESSEES
All holders of materials licenses for uranium and thorium recovery facilities.
INTENT
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is issuing this regulatory issue summary @IS) to
inform materials licensees of the Commission's decisions on four Commission Papers prepared by the
Uranium Recovery staff and the Office of the General Counsel (OGC). All the policy decisions will
be codified in the l0 CFR Part 41 rulemaking that has been initiated. No specific action nor written
response is required.
BACKGROUND
NRC staff prepared four Commission Papers in 1999 to address various uranium recovery issues.
One Commission Paper (SECY-99-011, "Draft Rulemaking Plan; Domestic Licensing of Uranium
and Thorium Recovery facilities - Proposed New l0 CFR Part 4l ") addressed the need to revise and
update uranium recovery regulations, particularly with respect to in situ leach (ISL) facilities and
recommended the initiation of rulemaking to create a new Part 4l specific to uranium recovery. The
other three Commission Papers addressed issues raised by the National Mining Association 0{\4A)in its April 1998 paper, "Recommendations for a Coordinated Approach to Regulating the Uranium
Recovery Industry." The first of those papers (SECY-92-0-12, "Use of Uranium Mill Tailings
Impoundments for the Disposal of Other Than l le(2) Byproduct Materials, and Reviews of
Applications to Process Material Other Than Natural Ore") discussed the disposal of radioactive
waste, other than byproduct material, defined in section I le.(2) of the Atomic Energy Act (AEA) of
1954, as amended, in mill tailings impoundments, and the processing of material, other than natural
ore, for source material at licensed uranium mills. The second of those papers (SEEY:99-01.1,
"Recommendations on ways to Improve the Efficiency of NRC Regulation at In Situ Leach Uranium
:e2-1lll )
http ://www.nrc. govA.IRC/GENACT I GC /R112000/ri00023 .html 7lt2l200t
a
o
t
I
a
I
a
I
o
I
NRC Regulatory Issue SummU2000-23: Recent Changes to Uraniufcovery Policy Page 2 of9
Recovery Facilities") discussed the regulation of ground water at ISL sites and the issue of which
waste streams at ISL facilities come under NRC regulatory jurisdiction as I le.(2) byproduct material.
The last paper (SECY-99-277, "Concurrent Jurisdiction of Non-Radiological Hazards of Uranium
Mill Tailings") addressed the issue of concurrent jurisdiction (with States that do not have Agreement
State regulatory authority for 11e.(2) material under section 274 of the AEA) over the non-
radiological hazards of uranium mill tailings.
On July 13, 2000, the Commission issued a StaffRequirements Memorandum (SR-N4) on SECY-99-
01 1. On JuJy 26,2000, the Commission issued SRMs on SECY-99-012 and SECY-99-013, and on
August I l, 2000, the SRM on SECY-99-271was issued. -
The decisions and directions in these SRMs and the staff actions in response are discussed in sections
that follow.
PART 41 RULEMAKING (SECY-99-011)
SECY-99-011 approved the staffs recommendation to provide a draft Rulemaking Plan (RP) for
comment to the Agreement States, with the preferred option being the creation of a new Part 4l
dedicated to uranium recovery regulation. The Commission directed the staff to revise the draft RP to
reflect the Commission's guidance in the other uranium recovery SRMs.
On September 1l ,2000, the staff transmitted the draft RP to all States for comment. The staff sent
the draft RP to all States rather than just Agreement States because the issue of concurrentjurisdiction regarding non-radiologicalhazards primarily affects non-Agreement States, and the staff
wanted to give those States an opportunity to comment on the draft RP. Comments have been
received from several States. In addition, the NMA and two licensees provided comments on the draft
RP. The staff will consider all the comments received in preparing its final RP, which it expects to
issue in early 2001.
DISPOSAL OF NON-11e.(2) BYPRODUCT MATERIAL IN TAILINGS
TMPOUNDMENTS (SECY-g 9 -012)
In 1995, the staff published guidance, in the Federal Register (60 LR 49296), for the disposal, in
uranium mill tailings impoundments, of radioactive material that is not byproduct material, as defined
in section 1le.(2) of the AEA. The guidance consisted of 10 criteria to determine whether to approve
a proposed disposal of non-l le.(2) byproduct material in a uranium mill tailings impoundment. In its
1998 white paper, the NMA emphasized that the criteria were too restrictive, pointing out that no
requests for such disposals have been made since the guidance was issued. The Commission, in the
SRM for SECY-99-012, approved an option that would allow more flexibility in permitting non-l le.
(2) material to be disposed of in tailings impoundments. The NRC intends to incorporate the criteria
into the new Part 41. In the interim, the Commission directed the staff to implement the SRM.
To comply with the direction in the SRM, the staff is revising the 1995 guidance in the following
marlner:
The staff will remove the prohibitions, found in items 2,4, and 5, regarding non-AEA
radioactive material and material subject to regulation under other legislative authorities, such
as the Toxic Substance Control Act (TSCA) or the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
(RCRA).
The staff will add a criterion regarding approval from the appropriate regulators of TSCA,
RCRA, and non-AEA radioactive material for disposal of such material in the tailings
impoundment.
I
http ://www.nrc. govA{RC/GENACT I GC lRll2000iri00023 .html 71t212001
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
a
t
I
NRC Regulatory Issue Summ"Sf000-23: Recent Changes to Uraniumfcovery Policy Page 3 of9
. The staff will revise the criterion, in item 8, regarding approval by Low-Level Waste
Compacts, to allow for the situation in which material proposed for disposal does not fall under
the jurisdiction of Low-Level Waste Compacts (e.g., radioactive material not regulated under
the AEA).
. The Commission directed the staff to pursue a generic exemption to NRC's disposal
requirements for low-level radioactive waste in lQ CE&Bgrt 6_1, rather than having to grant an
exemption, under 10 CFR 61.6, as identified in i-tem 10.A generic exemption to regulations
must be issued through a rulemaking process. Therefore, the staff will pursue incorporating the
generic exemption in the new Part 41. In the interim, the requirement for a specific exemption
will remain in the guidance, with addition of a caveat for material not regulated under Part 61.
The staff therefore is revising its 1995 guidance. The complete revised guidance, is in Attae'hrnerlt I.
PROCESSING OF MATERIAL OTHER THAN NATURAL URANIUM ORES
(SECY-99-012',)
In 1995, the staffpublished its position and guidance, in the Federal Register (60 FR 49296), on the
use of uranium feed material other than natural ores (alternate feed material), in uranium mills. The
guidance identified three determinations that the staff had to make in order to approve an altemate
feed request. The third determination -- whether the ore is being processed primarily for its source
material content -- generated considerable controversy. This determination was required to address
the concern that wastes that would otherwise have to be disposed of as radioactive or mixed waste
would be proposed for processing at a uranium mill primarily to be able to dispose of them in the
tailings pile as I le.(2) byproduct material. This determination was essentially a determination of the
motives of the mill operator in requesting approval of a specific stream of alternate feed material. In
many cases it involved questioning the financial aspects of acquiring and processing the alternate
feed material, and selling the resultant uranium product.
In its 1998 white paper, the NMA emphasized that NRC should not be looking to a licensee's motives
in processing alternate feed material. After careful consideration of stakeholder comments and the
staffs analysis, the Commission, in the SRM for SECY-99-012, directed the staff to allow processing
of alternate feed material without inquiry into a licencee's economic motives, and referred to a
Commission decision (CLI-00-01 5l NRC 9) on a specific instance of proposed processing of
alternate feed, that was brought before the Atomic Safety Licensing Board and then appealed to the
Commission. The Commission also addressed the second determination in the 1995 guidance ( i.e.,
whether the feed material contains hazardous waste). It directed the staff to allow more flexibility
with regard to this issue consistent with its direction to the staff on the disposal of non-l le.(2)
byproduct material in tailings piles.
The Commission directed the staff to revise, issue, and implement final guidance on the processing of
alternate feed as soon as possible and to codify the guidance in the new Part 41.
To comply with the SRM, the staff is revising the 1995 position and guidance in the following
manner:
The staff will modifu the prohibition in item 2 on feed material containing hazardous waste, to allow
such feed material provided that the licensee obtains approval of the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) or the State, and a commitment from the long-term custodian to accept the tailings
after site closure.
The staff will revise the manner in which it determines whether the ore is being processed primarily
for its source material content, to focus on the product of the processing, and eliminate any inquiry
into the licensee's economic motives for the processing.
http :i/www. nrc. govA.,IRC/GENACT I GC lRl 12000/ri00023.html 711212001
t
t
I
o
o
I
a
t
o
a
NRC Regulatory Issue Summel,2000-23: Recent Changes to Uraniumffovery Policy Page 4 of 9
The staff therefore is revising its 1995 guidance. The complete revised guidance, is in Attrchnent l.
CLASSIFTCATION Or LIQUID WASTES AT rSL FACILITIES (SECY-99-013)
Before 1995, the staff practice for addressing the disposal of evaporation pond sludges at ISL
facilities relied on a broad reading of the definition of l1e.(2) byproduct material. This broad reading
only addressed discrete surface wastes capable of controlled disposal and did not distinguish between
wastes generated at various phases of an ISL operation. All waste materials generated during ISL
operations and ground-water restoration activities were designated l1e.(2) byproduct material and
disposed of at licensed uranium mill tailings impoundments, in accordance with 10 CFR Part 40.
Appendix A, Criterion 2.
The staff issued two guidance documents in 1995 to address issues raised by the industry in the
uranium recovery program. The first, "Staff Technical Position on Effluent Disposal at Licensed
Uranium Recovery Facilities" (hereinafter, the effluent guidance), was intended to ensure protection
of the environment and public, while providing uranium recovery licensees with flexibility regarding
the disposal of various types of liquid effluents generated during the operation of their facilities. In
issuing this guidance, the staff took a more narrow view of the definition of 11e.(2) byproduct
material. It differentiated between the various waste waters generated during ISL operations on the
basis of their origin and whether uranium was extracted for its source material content during that
phase of the operaticn. Waste waters and the associated solids produced during the uranium
extraction phase of site operations, called "production bleed," were classified as AEA Section I 1e.(2)
byproduct material and therefore subject to regulation by NRC. Conversely, waste waters and the
resulting solids produced after uranium extraction (i.e., during ground-water restoration activities)
were classified as "mine waste waters," and therefore were subject to regulation by individual States
under their applicable mining programs. These wastes were considered naturally occurring
radioactive material (NORM). However, because licensees often dispose of waste waters from
uranium extraction and post-extraction activities in the same evaporation ponds, the resulting solids
are a commingled waste consisting of 1le.(2) byproduct material and sludges derived from mine
waste water.
In the second guidance document, "Final Revised Guidance on Disposal of Non-Atomic Energy Act
of 1954, Section I le.(2) Byproduct Material in Tailings Impoundments" (hereinafter, the disposal
guidance), the staff identified l0 criteria that licensees should meet before NRC could authorize the
disposal of AEA material other than 1le.(2) byproduct material in tailings impoundments. One of
these criteria prohibited the disposal of radioactive material not covered by the AEA, including
NORM (see earlier discussion for policy revisions). This criterion was intended to avoid the
possibility of dual regulation of the radioactive constituents in the impoundments, since individual
States are responsible for radioactive materials not covered by the AEA.
The industry expressed concerns, in NMA's white paper, that, taken together, these two guidance
documents leave no option for the disposal of radioactively contaminated sludges from ISL
evaporation ponds. The reason for this concern is that the I le.(2) byproduct material was
commingled with a NORM waste, which the disposal guidance prohibits from disposal in a tailings
impoundment. The industry emphasized that the staffs waste classification, based on the origin of the
waste water (i.e., from the extraction or restoration phase) at an ISL facility, makes the disposal of
such sludges in a mill tailings impoundment, as required under Criterion 2 of l0 CFR Part 40,
Appendix A, impossible -- even though the sludges derived from waste waters produced throughout a
facility's life cycle are physically, chemically, and radiologically identical.
The staff analyzed several options in SECY-99-013 for addressing the industry's concerns. In the
SRM for SECY-99-013, the Commission determined that all liquid effluents at ISL uranium recovery
facilities are l le.(2) byproduct material. NRC takes the position that any waste water generated
during or after the uranium extraction phase of site operations, and all evaporation pond sludges
I
http :/iwww.nrc. govArlRC/GENACT I GC lRll 2000/ri00023 .html 711212001
t
a
a
t
o
a
I
I
a
o
t
derived from such waste waters, are classified as 11e.(2) byproduct material. The staff will make no
legal distinction among the waste waters produced at different stages in a facility's life cycle.
This revised policy is effective immediately. The staff intends to codifu this policy in the new
rulemaking for Part 41 and associated regulatory guidance.
GROUND-WATER TSSUES AT rSL FACTLTTTES (SECY-99-013)
Over the past several years, the industry has expressed concem that NRC's regulation of ground water
at ISLs is duplicative of the ground-water protection programs required by the Safe Drinking Water
Act (SDWA), as administered by EPA or EPA-authorized States. EPA and the States protect ground-
water quality through the Underground Injection Control (UIC) progftrm, under the SDWA. The
States often require additional measures in the UIC program that are more stringent than the Federal
program. As presented in NMA's white paper, the industry contended that NRC's review and
licensing activities are a duplicative form of regulation covering the same issues. Additionally, NMA
also expressed the view that NRC did not have authority to regulate ground water at ISLs.
Historically, NRC has imposed conditions on ISL operations to ensure that ground-water quality is
maintained during licensed activities and that actions are taken to ensure therestoration of ground-
watgr quality before the license is terminated. The specific conditions imposed in an ISL lidense have
typically been the result of NRC's independent review, as documented irrsafety evaluation reports
and appropriate environmental evaluations.
In addition to NRC's review, licensees must also obtain a UIC permit from EPA or the EPA-
authorized State before uranium recovery operations can begin. EPA or the authorized State conducts
many o.f th9 same_types of reviews as NRC. This is evidenced by NRC incorporating ground-water
protection limits from a State's permitting program into specific license requirementi, after
condu,cting its- own review of the licensee's groundwater protection program, including the use of
State-imposed_standards -- and staff routinely accepting ipecific methodologies and guidance
developed by EPA or States for ground-water monitoring programs and weil construition.
In the SRM for SECY-99-O13, the Commission approved the staff continuing discussions with EPA
and appropriate States to determine the extent to which NRC can rely on the EPA UIC program for
ground-water_prot-ection issues, thereby potentially minimizing duplicative review of ground-water
protection at ISL facilities. Part of the discussions with EPA and appropriate States should include
appropriate methods t9 jmplement any agreements, including Memoranda of Understanding (if
necessary) and potential requirements that could be incorporated in the new Part 41. In the inierim, it
is recognized that some NRC/EPA dual regulation of the ground-water at ISL facilities will continueuntil such time that NRC can defer to EPA's UIC program.
NRC has initiated a new round of discussions with the EPA since the Commission decision in July
2000, and discussions with the appropriate States should begin in early to mid 2001.
In February 1998, staff documented its review process for ISLs, including a detailed evaluation of
ground-water activities, in a draft Standard Review Plan (draft SRP) for ISL facility license
applcations (NUREG-I569), that was published for public comment. Following the comment period,
staff held a public workshop on the SRP to discuss tlie issues raised. The staff intends to use thb draft.
Snf_i_1 tlc_ensin_g,reviews until the rulemaking for new Part 41 (SECY 99-011) has been completed
and NUREG-1569 is finalized.
CONCURRENT JURISDICTION OF NON.RADIOLOGICAL HAZARDS OF
URANTUM MrLL TAILTNGS (SECY -99-27 7)
In 1980, the staff considered the issue of whether the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act
NRC Regulatory Issue Summa2000-23: Recent Changes to Uraniur$covery Policy Page 5 of9
http ://www.nrc. govA.{RC/GENACT I GC lRll2000/ri00023.html 7lt2/2001
o
a
a
I
a
t
t
a
o
NRC Regulatory Issue Summl2000-23: Recent Changes to Uraniumfcovery Policy Page 6 of9
(UMTRCA) preempts a non-Agreement State's authority to regulate the non-radiological hazards
associated with I le.(2) byproduct material and concluded that it did not. The NRC concluded that
NRC and the State both exercised this authority. As a result, the staff has followed the practice of
sharing jurisdiction of the non-radiological hazards with States.In its 1998 white paper, the NMA
questioned the 1980 staff interpretation of UMTRCA. The Commission, in the SRM for SECY-99-
0277 determined that NRC has exclusive jurisdiction over both the radiological and non-radiological
hazards of l le.(2) byproduct material.
As a result of this decision, the staff will implement its exclusive authority over the non-radiological
hazards of 11e.(2) byproduct material and not recognize State authority in this area.
SUMMARY OF ISSUES
The Commission has evaluated a range of uranium recovery issues and the staff evaluation and has
directed, through SRMs, the staff to take various actions that will ultimately be incorporated into the
new Part 4l rulemaking and existing uranium recovery SRPs.
In the interim, this RIS informs the licensees of the Commission's decisions. These are: 1) to allow
more flexibility in the disposal of non-11e.(2) material in tailings impoundments, subject to certain
considerations; 2) to allow alternate feed material to be processed for uranium (or thorium) without
any inquiry into a licensee's economic motives; 3) to classifu all waste water and sludges generated
during or after the uranium (or thorium) extraction phase of in situ leach operations as I le(2)
byproduct material; 4) to continue discussions with EPA and appropriate States to determine the
extent that NRC can rely on the EPA UIC program for ground-water protection at ISL facilities; and
5) to note that NRC has exclusive jurisdiction over both the radiological and non-radiological hazards
of l le.(2) byproduct material.
This regulatory issue summary requires no specific action nor written response. If you have any
questions about this summary, please contact the technical contact listed below.
/RA/
Michael F. Weber, Director
Division of Fuel Cycle Safety & Safeguards
Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards
Technical
Contact:
Attachments:
6DAMS
Kenneth R. Hooks, NMSS
30t-415-7777
E-mail: krhl(Onrc.gov
1. Irrtcrinr Guidancc Non-l lc.(2)
2. hrrc'rirn Position Alicrnaic I-I-cd: Liat_of _8.-ertlnirsq.lXBeR zulut"* lssue Summaries
I
ATTACHMENT I
I
http ://www. nrc. govA.{RC/GENACT/GC/RI/2000/ri00023.html 7/t2t2001
I
t
t
I
a
t
t
t
a
t
NRC Regulatory Issue Summ12000-23: Recent Changes to Uraniurrfcovery Policy Page 7 of9
Interim Guidance on Disposal of Non-Atomic Energy Act of
t954, Section 11e.(2) Byproduct Material in Tailings
Impoundments
l. In reviewing licensee requests for the disposal of wastes that have radiological characteristics
comparable to those of Atomic Energy Act of 1954, Section I le.(2) byproduct material
[hereafter designated as "l le.(2) byproduct material"] in tailings impoundments, the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission staff will follow the guidance set forth below. Since mill tailings
impoundments are already regulated under l0 CFR Part 40, licensing of the receipt and
disposal of such material [hereafter designated as "non-11e.(2) byproduct material"] should
also be done under l0 CFR Part 40.
2. Special nuclear material and Section 1le.(l) byproduct material waste should not be considered
as candidates for disposal in a tailings impoundment, without compelling reasons to the
contrary. If staff believes that such material should be disposed of in a tailings impoundment in
a specific instance, a request for Commission approval should be prepared.
3. The I le.(z) licensee must provide documentation showing necessary approvals of other
affected regulators (e.g., the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency or State) for material
containing listed hazardous wastes or any other material regulated by another Federal agency
or State because of environmental or safety considerations.
4. The 1le.(2) licensee must demonstrate that there will be no significant environmental impact
from disposing of this material.
5. The 11e.(2) licensee must demonstrate that the proposed disposal will not compromise the
reclamation of the tailings impoundment by demonstrating compliance with the reclamation
and closure criteria of Appendix A of 10 CFR Part 40.
6. The 1le(2) licensee must provide documentation showing approval by the Regional Low-
Level Waste Compact in whose jurisdiction the waste originates as well as approval by the
Compact in whose jurisdiction the disposal site is located, for material which otherwise would
fall under Compact jurisdiction.
7. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and the State in which the tailings impoundment is
located, should be informed of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission findings and
proposed action, with a request to concur within 120 days. A concurrence and commitment
from either DOE or the State to take title to the tailings impoundment after closure must be
received before granting the license amendment to the 1le.(2) licensee.
8. The mechanism to authorize the disposal of non-11e.(2) byproduct material in a tailings
impoundment is an amendment to the mill license under l0 CFR Part 40, authorizing the
receipt of the material and its disposal. Additionally, an exemption to the requirements of 10
CFR Part 61, under the authority of l0 CFR 61.6, must be granted, if the material would
otherwise be regulated under Part 61. (If the tailings impoundment is located in an Agreement
State with low-level waste licensing authority, the State must take appropriate action to exempt
the non-l le.(2) byproduct material from regulation as low-level waste.) The license
amendment and the l0 CFR 61.6 exemption should be supported with a staff analysis
addressing the issues discussed in this guidance.
t
ATTACHMENT 2
http ://www.nrc. govA.,lRC/GENACT I GC lRll2000/ri00023 .html 711212001
t
NRC Regulatory Issue Summ"S/2000-23: Recent Changes to Uraniumlovery Policy Page 8 of9
Interim Position and Guidance on the Use of Uranium MiIl
Feed Material Other Than Natural Ores
In reviewing licensee requests to process altemate feed material (material other than natural ore) in
uranium mills, the Nuclear Reguatory Commission staff will follow the guidance presented below.
Besides reviewing to determine compliance with appropriate aspects of Appendix A of l0 CFR Pat
40, the staff should also address the following issues:
1. Determination of whether the feed material is ore.
For the tailings and wastes from the proposed processing to qualify as l le.(2) byproduct material, the
feed material must qualiff as "ore." In determining whether the feed material is ore, the following
definition of ore will be used:
Ore is a natural or native matter that may be mined and treated for the extraction of any of its
constituents or any other matter from which source material is extracted in a licensed uranium or
thorium mill.
2. Determination of whether the feed material contains hazardous waste.
If the proposed feed material contains hazardous waste, listed under subpart D Sections 261.30-33 of
40 CFR (or comparable Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) authorized State
regulations), it would be subject to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) or State
regulation under RCRA. If the licensee can show that the proposed feed material does not contain a
listed hazardous waste, this issue is resolved.
Feed material exhibiting only a characteristic of hazardous waste (ignitable, corrosive, reactive, toxic)
would not be regulated as hazardous waste and could therefore be approved for recycling and
extraction of source material. However, this does not apply to residues from water treatment, so
determination that such residues are not subject to regulation under RCRA will depend on their not
containing any characteristic hazardous waste. Staff may consult with EPA (or the State) before
making a determination of whether the feed material contains hazardous waste.
If the feed material contains hazardous waste, the licensee can process it only if it obtains EPA (or
State) approval and provides the necessary documentation to that effect. Additionally, for feed
material containing hazardous waste, the staff will review documentation from the licensee that
provides a commitment from the U.S. Department of Energy or the State to take title to the tailings
impoundment after closure.
3. Determination of whether the ore is being processed primarily for its source-material
content.
For the tailings and waste from the proposed processing to qualify as l1e.(2) byproduct material, the
ore must be processed primarily for its source-material content. If the only product produced in the
processing of the alternate feed is uranium product, this determination is satisfied. If, in addition to
uranium product, another material is also produced in the processing of the ore, the licensee must
provide documentation showing that the uranium product is the primary product produced.
If it can be determined, using the aforementioned guidance, that the proposed feed material meets the
definition of ore, that it will not introduce a hazardous waste not otherwise exempted, or if it has been
approved by the EPA (or State) and the long-term custodian, and that the primary purpose of its
processing is for its source-material content, the request can be approved.
I
http ://www.nrc. govA.{RC/GENACT I GC lRll 2000/ri00023 .html 7/12t2001
Mav-15-01 07:31am From-IUCBLAI{Dltlc 801 578 ZZ21 1-ZZS P.050/051 F-577
I lJ_
4----t*
c{.J-2L-?Ea1. 17ru
1---'
uNtTED StATEs ENVIBoNuEI{TAL Pl::EcnoN AGENGY
WASHINGTON' D'C' 20450-nrto
sai6
c-6 -iO TYJ FEB I 2 TIIBI
aFFCEof
rlRAilDBADlTfE[
o
o
a
o
o
o
a
o
Mr. Wi[iam1'os Till
H*-Thlw:SF*:**"ii "Jlr"r* RegPlatory Commsson
ffi,?lH.ls"o,,,
'* *="
-.i***r*,rr"*, {r*,fi,#Hfi [I,fj#'ff#f 'if *'tii'"iq,,r'r*aniteroces
ffi.*:il#IJJ,fi [i!",:*L""ffi fl1i3iilffi rheprocessiry,{Xm:r'#*;..4'=-i$J#ilt$
matedal congstlt
and lr'r serics fi
trave concernt '"[Jing'ut ipplit*ion*'n"i "" uaio" require funher discl
aod NBC'
fn:H**;HHffi ffi{"3t#riffi d5$E#ff#iflm$*gpigt f;Yffi
fiom ts if needed')' l*'::::. :^;*; Irazarilous wa$e reguEuolrs :'-*-:;:;e componeltts";#i*'ii.j:ffii:d'#ffi##iffi il'#i:Jrfi"i,iru;;mp.n€
geatmeJlq BIro
of rhe'ua$e tn'iii+o'o'ud as a source matcdal'
s.urceHi*i'i;E-'*St:,;$:'ffi*ffi ffi'*Hi'g'#
ooa*r,e"g,?r"#"ffi "ffi ffi ;il=-,+m';**'ixgxim,
SrH,l#'1",J*"*1:l:fJf.i"}#,S;IGil ot."t yorrr earlicsr sotwerucncE r'{r' r..B r'r -- '
*
May-l5-01 07:3lam Fron-lUC BLAItDlttb _
fu-zt-mL Ltzu
801 678 Z2Z4 1-Z?g P.051/051 F-67i
t .arg
O
o
o
o
o
o
o
a
o
o
, Ttrank you for the opporoniry to coyamenr on this proposal_. prrye csntaEtlorcn salow
of my o6ce uZ*Z-idiOii ,o thatwe*utttttgt to haw this disa$ssrL
SincerdY,
.--r-: ,'n:r.** n diaion Protcction Division
AP.tlinealEPrOS\IIER
nlfi""tr=BA/OSu'ER-SHiet"tYfBA/OSUIER
IMcbaudlEPA/OGC
hU"tU"*'s/EPA/OGC
fng;"tingEPAlRegion I
TBro"rnEPAlReEioo t
{*5""61114eg1on t
ffi *O**ttOmf tr'l$'egion 9
BCoferlEPAlReeim 9
EFodnastr/EPA/ORIA
is"ttrrrl=PA/ORIA
TOTRL P.EB
o
o
a
o
o
o
o
a
2221oa
tlav-l 5-01 07:29am Fron-lUC BLAIiDIIIG
PR ',5-2u,,7
14:18
80r 678 T-Z2g P.012/051 ..F-'
-.ru.EE
Qb"s=1I \t"41g.u
O**
UNITEDSTATESE}N'IRONUE}ITALPEOTECTIONAGENCY
WASHNCTON. D.G. 20'60
Am :5 2001
a
o
o
o
O
a
a
o
o
a
OFFEEOF
^[rArD nrolAnd{
IY{r. Wllianvos Till
i"a Cy"f" LicErsilg Braocb;-##;fn el cyae sEfetv and safegoards
U.S. Nrclear Regulatory Comutusou
Ivlail StoP T-8A33
Washirgtos, D.C' 20555
Dear Mr- vm TilL
Th'isisafollow+rptoour4'Iry-Tl:sfFcbnrary12'zll0l'ThdtlttEr
ospressed *, "ooli,,6mtl"'ippr*ooo {Tg:=l UruinB Corporariou (rIJsA) to
aneod irs source "=tt! It*t* iin'r:Sf to recdve adproccss alteroate &ed maprials'
IUSA apptied ro have irs liaeose .ri;;; t* At ''" 6t*tte of alterrnatc feed mgtcrisl
;-.*i-,.t"s-"r I".d iilF;T -$;}ffiit*'ffif'* eroducts or the ua' nd
f.Ia se"ies &oo l[olyf'orp's Mouatar
The Ewironnemal Proteaim Agency qPQ}:Pquarters gt?P pusoaocl
discussed the kery reEBI asd f.sfial -"*J;r.d * n s.o's foopos"d pro.essloe ofthoMorvcorp
=ffi ;p"t*,i,ifr wherh",*-ilf"fliJm*H*jffi l;HTilil"HH"
mllx:,s*-#rri"?t"h*arai'rabretoilrfi;;ririg.ruar*o,.'r'
federll ro*JCo*.*aloo aoa R *;; *r 6ncnnlr*lcli"s rq,!.arions' rbe srurdsE
wo.ld be cras'fficd u eitherby-protilLiirrrae*.ui*r otilir o-n" oru"RcRAbazar'lous
wafle chnraeteristicr. Su.hby-produas aail studgoe " *J orotsificd 8s solid wastes wbeotbey
are regirioatery ;*rd-rd.-ridrt lr ftrh ;;.,rr sotid wilnes are Dot regulated as hszerdous
**ti uniler Subtitlc C ofRCRA
UndcrtbEfcdcrstrulEs!th!EDfitiGshandlhgrecycledTutq.l'arerespusiblefrr
degsflniniog wherher tegjtiEilercsytfi"g It o**i'g^a whethcrthe material is a solid w3slg
ffirrffiffir*ums#Jtrffi*:-
prinarily responsiblc for ,,is o*r,fi-f;tri' ttttlt ry' ft additioq "46ti'"d statc RCRA
proEraDs *, "*"t-o broader ir-.*p" or more t"itu."att* the fideral PfograE and may
--. r--d-.khdgEr.illmtl
I{av-l5'01 07:29an Fron-lUC BLAI{D
o L tlttl
-=
I l{G*G*801 678 2221 I-2?g P.013/05r
- -F-677
z
regurace uatcrials uot rcguls*d -1., rf' fedasl reguratisns Trus, we reco.ru'od tba3NRC'
s[tair ihe StEics' "iJ"by;;""ti"g tbe foilltruriqg irdividuah:o
o
o
o
a
o
o
a
o
o
Ivtr. Watsoo Gia
iiO"O Director, Ilaaardors Wasre
Masaeemctt Progra'u
;re"ilt* of Tfoc Substances Conrol
Mr. DoaVqbica
Divisiil of Solid & HazsillErrsWsste
P.O. Bu 1448t0
Salt I-ale CfrY, IrT s4 I I tL+t80
P.O. Bor 806
Sacra"oeotq CA 958 12-08t)6
As a pocednral Eatlcrr tbe NRc "lqtesb cruidaoce on Disposal of NcArouic EDErsl
Astdf1954.se5tioalle.(2)Bytroq:Tra.u"rigfrilingqlnporrndoemtrasd.IDltaiE
posirioo urd GuiilaJcc;;'&-ri;" orur"J-* #ruJM;Jrt orlo Thm Nrrrrar ores'''both
datedNorrcober30,2oo0,poviite|r.l""pprr'*.todemm$rateihstth!oarcrirlrobe
orocessed asd/or disposed in th. soill t tts"dilP*"d-"d Eot bc a listcd hazardous wase' We
zuggesrtbat IbrI,IRd E6dFTFtt*at oictomnmd &attbeapplican obtaiotbe viewr' as
described abovq ori,ioorizea ssrcs o,t"r" G rr,erial is otigilally fo,od and uacre the
satcrial isto be pro""r."a. We also toeg;G[p*+ constrtiwlU Statestbroughtr'hich
the netsials oay traver ou rheir *y .?. rcensei taairy tF* trir Easg we uourd rccmuaa
thuNRCcousrrlrwirbCatifoEil'Nc[Bd""oau.,r,)Ifthe-.arerialisagtraractcri*ioorlisred
hazardous u,a$e iu the stare of origio ";; *'*fot"-O1* RcR'Lrerylatirous rrorrld apPR to
sroraga ara trusponation. It ir or,, r,opr-rr"irl,ir *vhelg to expedire-firture such rpplicatioos'
Tb,sk yor frr tn ogPonuDity to coE}fnelt oa rhis proporel l'?* cootact, }ds Tccoa
wooreo ofEpA s oEcc of solid wr"tr "t zog-3ot- t?51; orlottq scdorr of 4r oftcs ,oaoE.'
il:g44i ifyru baveonyfirnher q,enioa onttis Eattsr.
X.adiarios Pruoaioo Division
D. VcrbicaA/'f, Division of Solid & Ilazardous Wasc
W. A;UCf' DcF. Toxic Sub*asees Comrol
[d, r ammeFglEPAlRegisa I
T. BrownlEPA/Reeion g
R Cnbara/EPA/Re$oE8
M. BeDdro$,tki/EPA eeior9
C. Nelsos/EPAnegioa 9
B. Cofer/EPAlRruid 9
rnrot P-43
a
o
o
a
a
o
o
o
a
o
a
EnvlrcnmenH Profiecllon AgencY
separatelv nroayc e! -!v-$f -'" :*""iil":Fffiil:'i'""iir* X^1,*:: "::lllTffi;% ?rti- r" dt-stluatiol-:31:H
bottoms. T'lre term does -uot include*a
l8lJlili""t^-tb;;;-e,1o.d"3."'1^-l?:",P..:co-pru*uuu vvqv -i" Ea 1' ordinarilygeneral publlc's 1'- ,- --^.,.aarr lrw r.heffi;^il f#?;; li-u Proouced bY the
s261.2
terlal of the Barne type (e'g" sIaSF from
;i;;L "-Lrtiog process) tbat ls recv-
cled tn the same iay ti'e" from wbicb
;l;;-*;iraieriar is- recovered or t'hat
ls used in the same way)' Materlals ac-'.,ir*-"rtii"g ln uuits that woul$Jg "t-Hil;;ffi "esulatio" under -S.261'4(c)ii-ooiio ue lncluded tn makins t'be
;;;iti;;.- -(Materiars that are al-
iliiv aiii"ed as solid wastes also are
;""?i";; i""roa"a i" maklns the cal-
ffi;;i";i rvt"t"ti,rt are no lonsrer in
thls catego"y oo"" t'hey are removed
ii&;fi;.iatlou for recycllnsi' how-
Drocesa."I+i"I'-"terlal ls 'reclaimfil if lt ls
procegsed to recover a usable Dro-duct'
[t U ft ls regenerated' Examples are re-
il;#;f G"d "Jo"t from sPen! b-at-
terleg and rogen"ottoo of speot sol-
"t"#;, material is'used or reused" lf it '"a"rl' *"Iuded screp metal' ls proc-
is either:(1)Employedasa'ulngredient(1n-"'"'a"""?P't*t"t'inprocess'edhome
cludlng n'e as "o'ii["iloi"t"l ,o ;; ,""tp metal''-La ""p":ocessed
prompt
rndugrriar proceBs To*-ii*- ilg:* t"1ft3 HS;"r"d s*Bp metal' ls scrap*c.;;;;i", dlstiuation tottgmg {31 -:th ;;";- h* ueLn- manuallv orffi;frffi'*"o as feedsto"k + 1
othei process). E;;;;-" -11"'ili ;ffifi""I1'I;tt"*a to either sepaxate it
w'I uor sarlsfy d;-;;'d[i"".q Oi?- iuio arsttnrc-u materlal. to enhance eco-
thct compoDents*oi t'Ue material ;;" nomic value *io i*p"ove the ha'ndllng
rrcovered * ""p*"*t" i',d p:odu",".ffi ;i"&;+1fi'-i"o""t"1d soap metal in-
when metar" *" "lior,JieoG"- -".ff *:gr";lf"'fu"8:"ltHff.i F"t"Jtr;iirHt:","""JH.1?Hffiij'r"il**:t"ti"'ru;rrqi"{"*,ru
nl}*:Ti*?*:,}"?#"",TfxlEltsi*,'J"*iihri'J'Ti'H?"i:"andre-
erq,qple, Bpent piJriiJ-uqio"- *"J'I i"t'"d materials which ha've beeu a,s-
Dhosphorous p""'"i-pit rt, -,nq:ru#'f,'.'#e"ii"S; .*i; H;t"ti,"r, iffi'dcondttioner tn wastewater treatm"ol)ot #;rfd;;d ;"ocEs""a scrap metal' Thev
fei"E"""P metal'is bltg end Plece
{etar parts r,.g.i iI*, i.,,-i'?', "i# Ii: ;}#tl,*t":"lfy"+!i?i"J"*!
$eets, wire) or metal nt9c9s .F!-'.^L ded crrcuri- ;ild;- being recvcled
Hr 4,1,"ffi;;g3 J;i.i:Uj:; %;E':g,, s*ap. re*t:^l: ::itl
i
,,
t
Lr
;;ili".,';i}ornEoi "r""), which yhen (u, .v're ,"i"tJa -by. steel- mille,
"ffi r xmxx:'ff"mv{th o f;#f, "i#,1"i;'nim,"ixl 'slsed, reuged, or reclaimed'
"III*F
i"ifl,l ;:"*m*gigi:: :rh;?#:lJ""iT, fr""H";l ;:H
*$Tiumifmj.tH"*l;:',*i*ffi:f*mxm':-s;
l[15f, "H5HE" f#'H.ffi[ ;";;"hr-
CI*T##ffi.tr,d#"EHiry:il,fi1triffi ffi HiiS:
mF*#*!-*#*tnm.""f l}.[ru'##tr' uiii ri' rsc?:
!.iiltolHi;; oitr," ano-nnr ot.H rT::, y"#T#J,:"ffiryarded
ffi:Si$};flSr#ffi #lf "ru+,i.*ffi$r
31
a
o
o
o
a
a
o
o
o
o
a
5?,r2
varlane,o gra.Dt€d uDder !5260'30 and
260.31.
(2) A disardel notaiol lB any Erato-
rlel whlch 1g:
(L) AbonM, as e-PleLued ln Pars-
graPh O) of thla Bectlon; or- <il nacYcld, I exDlalned ltr Pa'ra-
graph (c) of thls soctlon; or- tfiU boasldertd. ittutentty uastc'l.llen'
*;.U"t"od ln ParasraPl (d) of thts
eectlou; or
(1v) .d mitttrry munitiott ldentlfled as a
eolld wast€ lD $ CER' ffi-WZ.
O) Mst€rlals ar€ solld wast€ lf tJrey
are obortfunedbV belnei:
(1) Dlsposed of; or
(2) Buraed or lnclnerated; or
ig) ,tccumutst€d, atoltd, or t'roat€d
Oui uot recycled) before or.ln lleu of
il"f"g-tU-doaed by belns dlgposod of'
buroed, or lnclnereted.
(c) Materlals are eolld wastes tf t'lrey
arc trlcteAr accunulated, gtored, or
t*"tad before rocycllngl-as apectfled
G paragrsphs (c)(1) throwh (4) of thls
soctlon.
(L) Usd in a monn'er cottstltrttittg dis-
"ii6t. (t) M8t€rrah notod vlt'h a "r" lD-Cofumn 1 of Teble I are solld wast€s
when tJrey are:
(A) APPIfed to or Ptaced on the land
fn';'d;Der that constltut€e dlsposal;
or
..p*.ro-r-oEoooa
(B) UEod to Droduce Pro-ducts S"t a\
.iilri"a to or -ptacea on tJre land or a1a
oiierrte€ contemea ln products lhrt
are appued to or Placed oa t!9 IEnd (\
.ltci-c""er tbe product ltseU remal\
s solld waste).
(11) Eowever, commenclal chemlcq
proaucts llgted lD !261.-83 are uot sollq
iastes lf tbey are applled to t'he llqtr
and t'bet ls thelr ordlrary manlrer 0(
uBe.--(z> su'ring for elsrw r@ooerY' (t) U$
teilafe Dotod-wtth a ry ln column 2 s1
iaUt" 1 a.re soltd wastea wheu t'hey ane:
(A) BurDod to rucover snorSty;
igi Usea to produce E I\reI or are -ot'h'
"nil"t coutained lD fuels (tD whtch
il;-tue nrel tts€u remalns a sollo
waste).
(11) Eowever, commenclal chemlcal
p"of,o"t" ltstod ltl !261.33-are not-solld
iastes lf tJrey arc thenEelves flrelg'
@;-Ro"t"lrrild. Matertals not'od wlth e
"r'-G cotnmn 3 of Table I a'ne solld
wastea when reclatmed (erceDt 8!-ptc
vraed under {0 cFR 261'{(a)(17))' MBto-
rlats uotoat wlt'b g uJ ln column I ot
i"Uf" 1 are uot solld wastas when re'
JfdEeA (6rc€pt as provlded under {l
CFR 261.4(eX17)).-111 eui;lrlr"bted speculotiu-lv' MBto-
rtifl notnd wlth e ry ln column { ot
TEble 1 sre golld waat€E when accumu-
lated spoculetlvely.
(1) Earzat{ous Wedto Noe' Ftr20, F02f,
(nnlesg uaed as an lngredlent to m*: a
proauct at tbe slt€ of generatlon), FOZI,
FO23, F0rl6, aud F@8.
Env
(,
gox
sPl
ustle
forfol
(
,:L'
tI
AC
or
Ditr
frI
c
SErilLEIL
aidg.. (hd h .lO CFB Pnt 231.3'l d 26134
srroir ir,urto. dlat cbr* ol hrzrdol. ld """"*k.d. tno rr .o crn rl.31 or 231'&4-El;rndd idltaur ! dLt&t rilb ol lrredotr wrrtc
Cffi.d.t atorgl-goagr Lbd h lo CFR 261'33 ."""Sd-'"ili dr.r'h.tl .dutbd up mrtrl (rr
ooooI
o281.1(cx9))md.f .nd rpl@.d rnp mct.f r,. tbffi h
c26r.t.
(d\ Inlsrently wostc'lilcc tno|ariols' The
followtagl materlals ere solld waat€E
wheg tJrey are recycled lD eny manner:
TAar I
Radtndon
620r2(cxs))(oqtu
orcrdOd h,6r.{ilt7)br mhcnlprElltg
aaooardary ttt.rrd.l)
r)!!
c)r)(')
r)of)
c)
r)
c)(1
r)(')
(1
f)
92
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
a
o
o
a
Envlronmentql Probeton AgencY
(2) Secondery materialg fed to a halo-
gen actd fu::uace that e-h{blt e char-
acteristlc of a hazardous waate or are
Ustod as a ha.zarrloug waste as deflned
ln subparts C or D of thls part, except
16figmlnated materlal thst meets t'he
foUowinei crlterla:
(l) Ihe material must contaln a bro-
mine concentratlon of st leaat 45%; and
(li) The materlal must contei.u lessthcn g totcl of lo/o of toxlc oratanic
compounds Usted lD eppendtr VIII; aud
(1ll) The materlal ls processed contln-
uelly on-slte 1n the halogen acid fur-
nece vla direct couvoy&uco (hard plp
IDB).
(8) the Adrnlnlstm,t'or wlll use the
follorrlng crlterla to add waat€s to thatllrt:
(tXA) The materlalg are ordlnarlly
dtsDogeO of, bumed, or lnclnerated; or
G) The msterlals contain torlc cou-sfltuents Ust€d tn appendtr VIII of part& aad tbes€ consttiuents a,re not o-rdl-o.'uy found iu raw materials or Dmd_[ct8 for whlch the matorlals substltute(or arc fouad ln raw meterlala or prrod-
ucts ln snaller concentrattons) and are!0t used or reused durtDg the recycllngl
trocesE; aDd
. 0l) The motertal uray DoBe e gubstan-
Ual hazafil to hunan health and tJreoDt'lronment sheu recycled.(e) Motsrials tttat ore not solid uo;cbulwt rccleted. (L) Ma,torials are notroUd wastes when they can be shown totr r€cycled by betnei:
.-(t) UBed or neus€d as tngredtents ,r entldustrlal process to mare a product,unoflded the matertala are not belnglttclrthod; or(U) UeeA or reused as effectlve subItrtutes for covnrrerclal producta; or
*!ltl) not rred to the orlgtnal proooErp.u rutcu they ere geniretcd-, rlth-Ill lrst bolng reclalmed or leud dls.
l5d. fbe rnetertel.must be retumed
il r subUtute for teedstocts matortals.
't casos where t.he ortgilnal proceaa to
lTch the meterlal la returued ls E soc-vq08r'y DroceEs. the mstortala must b€
*^*ltged such that there ls ao placeIolt on the land,. In aasos rhere the'{et€rlds are generatad and reclalmed
r:'.9r the prtmary mlneral 1rocesslrg:luEtry, the condltloos of the erclu-
;l:1 tourd ar f 26t.r(a)(17) epply ratber*ru thts paraffapn.
s26r.3
(2) The followiug materlals are solld
wasteB, even lf the recycllng involves
uge, reuge, or returu to the ortsihal
proceBE (deecrtbed lu para*raphs (exl)(i) throueih (ili) of thlg sectlou):(l) Materlals used ln a manner consti-tutlng dlspossl, or used to produce
products that are applled to the laud;
or(tl) Materials burDed for enerjy re-
coverTr, used to produce a fuel, or coD-
ta.ined ln fuels; or(Ut) Mat€rials accu.Eulated spocula-
tlvely; or(lv) Materlals llat€d in paragraphs(dxl) and (d)(2) of thls sectlon.
Gl Doctmertttion of cloims tlwt ttutc-
riols arc not solid uostes or ote condi-tiotnllg uanryt fron rerylotion. Re-
spondenta ln ectlons to enforce reeula-
tlons lmplementlug subtltle C of RCRAsho ralse a clBlm thot a certaln mate-rial ls not a solid waat€, or 18 condl-tionally exempt from regulatlou, mugtdemonstrat€ that therc ts a known
market or disposltlon for the material,
and that tJrey meet the terus of the ex-
cluslou or eremptlon. In dolng so, tbey
must provlde approDrlat€ docu.menta-tlon (sucb as contractg Bhowlng thst a
aecond person uses the materiel as aD
lngredlent ln a productlon proceea) to
demonstrato that the materlal is uot a
wasto, or ls erempt ftom regulatlon. Ia
addltlon, owners or operators of faclll-
tl6g slrl"rtlng thet they actually are ne-
cycllngl ma,terlals must show that they
have tbe Decegsary equlpmeat to do go.
t50 Pn,08{, Jan. {, 1S5, as emended at 50 tr'R
335rlll, AtU:. !), 156; 56 ER,?lffi. Feb. 21, l99l;'56 fR &688, July U, 1001; 56 I'R{25U, AuS. tr,
1091; 57 FB 38584, Aus. 25, 1904 60 ER {$12,
Sept. 19, 190$ El FB 6651, I'eb. Ul, 1991; @ FR
6{ ER 3{518, May 11, 1S0l
!2E1.9 Ddnttlon of hr-.'rloo. wrsto.
(e) A golld west€, as deflned lD f 261.2,
ls a hsre.rdous waste lf:
(1) It ls not ercluded ftom regslatlon
as a hszardous wasto under !261.{0);
end
(2) It meets any of the followlng crl-
torla:(f) It erhlblts Bny of the che.racterla.tlcs of hgzerdous waste ldentlf,ed ln
aubpart C of thls Dart. Eoweverr erry
mfrture of a waste tom the exttractlou,
beueflcletlon,. eud processlngi of oree
:t3
a
o
o
o
o
O
a
a
o
a
o
s26t*S
e.Dd. rnlnsl2,ls erclud€d und€r
lZOf.<fXZ) and anv ot'ber -aoUil-q1teirnfUtUry a characterlEtlc or ry-
.m-oo" *-""te under subpart C ls a haz-
""dil wa"te only lf tt erhtblts a char-
act""fsUc t'hrt would not hgve been er-
UUft A by t'he ercluded waste aloue lf
scU -nfxlure bed not occulr€d, or tf tt
contfnue" to erhlblt any of the charac-
t"aiE"" erhlbtted by the non-excluded
wast,es prlor to mixture. I\rrther, for
til pudroses of aPPlYlns tbe TodcltY
Cliractlrtstlc to guch mlxtures, the
mtxt ue ls also a haza,rdous waste lf lt
exceeds the marimum concentratlon
for euy cont€.Elne.D't llsted ln table I to
gfii]..z4 t'h.et would not have been ex-
ieeded by the excluded waste alone lf
the mlxture bed not occurred or lf lt
contlnues to erceed the mrrtrnutll cou-
centratlon for any contemlnant er-
ceeded by the nonerempt waste prior
to mlxturc.
(U) It ls llst€d in subpart D of -tJdspait anrl bas not been excluded from
ihe liets la subpart D of this part under
S!260.20 and 260.22 of this chapter'
(iti) It ls a vnl-turo of a solld waste
aod a ha.zard,ous waste that 1g Usted in
suUpa"t D of tbls pa,rt solely-because lt
erntUits one or more of the characterls-
ticg of ha.zardous waste identified in
subpart C of thls part, ualess- lhe re-
sultant mixture no longer srhillts &Dy
characterlstic of hazardous waste iden-
tified in subpart C of thig part, or u:r-
Iess the eolld waste ls excluded from
regulation under S261.4OX7) and tlre re-
sultant mlxture no longer e-hlbits a'Iry
characterlstlc of hazardous waste iden-
tlfted ln aubPart C of thlg Part for
whicb the hnzardous waate Usted ln
aubpart D of thls part was llsted' (IIow-
eoei, uonrastewater mlxtures are stlll
subiect to the requiremelts of part 2i8
of thla cbapt€r, eveu lf they no longer
erhlblt a characterlstic at tbe polnt of
Iand dlslrogal).
(iv) ICla a mlrture of solld waste and
oDe or utone ba,zardous wastes listed ln
gubpart D of thig part and has-not-been
excluded from paraeraph (a)(2) of thls
s€ctlou under 15260.20 aad.Zil.D of thls
chapter; however, the following mir-
turog of solld wastes and hazardous
wastea Ust€d ln subpart D of this part
are not h.azardous wastes (ercept by aP,pllcatlon of para4raph (aX2) (1) or (ii)
of thls sectlon) lf tJre generator can
O,.o eFR ch. I O-l-{n Et[lbtE
demOnstA.t€ that the ,"rtvtnre CODSTIL
of wastewater tJre dtecharge of wbich tr 1
aubiect to rtgutetlon under elther aqi J
Uon ma or sectlon 3O7(b) of the CIeq
Water Act (tncludlng waatew&t€r 8t L
cllltles whlch hEve elrrnlnated tJre du
che,rge of wastewater) and:
(A) One or rnore of the fo[owlug aql.
veuts llet€d ln $261.31-+arbon tetry
chloride, tetrachloroetJrylene' tU.
chloroethylet*Ptottided, That t\
marlmum- total weekly uBafie of t'heq
solventE (otJrer tlrau tlre a,mounts thal
can be demonstrated not to be dh^
char8led to wastewater) dtvided by tht
everage weekly flow of waatewat€r tnh
tJre niadworkg of the faclllty's wasto
water treatment or pretrcatment sy!"
tem doeg not erceed 1 part per mlllloq
or(B) One or more of t'he foUowlag
sp€nt solventa llsted ln S261.31-met'h'yiene chlorlde, 1,1,1-trlchloroetJt&n0,
chlorobenzene, o-dlchlorobenzeDe,
cresolg, cresyllc actd, nltrobenzene,
toluene, methyl ethyt ketone, carboa
dlsulflde, lsobutanol, pyrldlne' s1rcut
chlorofluorocarbon solvents-prnovlded
that tJre maximum total weekly usafie
oi these eolvents (other tha^n the
a,mounts that can be demoustrated uot
tJUe AhcUauled to wastewater) dlvtded
by the average weekly flow of wast+
dater lnto the headworks of the faclll-
ty's wastewater trrsatment or
p-retreatment syatem does not exceed
25 parts Per mllllon; or
<C) Oo" of the followlng wastes llsted
lD 5261.32, provlded that t'he wastes ere
distba,rged to the reflnery oll recoverT
Eewer before primery olUwater/sollds
ieparatton-heit excha,uger - bundle
cl6anhg sludge from the pet'roleun re-
ftning Gaustry (EPA Ha,zardous-Waste
No. iOSOl, cnrde oll storage tank gedl'
ment from Petroleum 16flning oper'
"ttoot (EPC Eazardous Waste No
ffOg), ciartAea slurry oll tank s€dl'
m"oi' and/or ln-llne fllter/sepa'ratlor
sollds from petroleum reflntnB ol'er
*iioot (EPA Ilazardous Waste No
ffZO), apent hydrotreatlag--,catalyg'
(EPA. Ilazardous Wasto No' I(171)' anr
ip""t hydroreflnrng catalyet (EPA Eaz
ardous Waste No. K1?2); or
(D) A dlscarded commerctal chemlca
product, or chemlcal lnterzredlate llst
ia iu $261.3t|, arlslng trom & minimi
94
a
o
o
o
o
o
o
O
a
a
a
nvlronmenlol holecllon Agency
tsEeg of these materlals from mrnu-rcturing: operatious lD wbich theseraterlals are used as raw materlals or:e produced lD the rnanufapturl:xg
:.o!eBs. For prrrposes of this para€ireph
)(2)(1v11p1, "& minimig losses inOuaerose from normal material rrandliag
:eratlons (e.9., spllls from the unload-
ry or transfer of materlals f1.s6 lins:-other contalners, leaks from plpes,
rlves or other devlces used to transfer.aterlals); mlnsi leaks of proce.sluipment, storage tanks oi con-
'iners; leaks from well maintatnedrmp pacHnels aud seals; sampletrstngig; rcllef device dischargies; dts-targ:es Aom safety showers aud rlns-
.C - and slgnntng of personal eafetytuipment; and rlnstate from emptitntq,hers or from contalners tJut arendercd empty by that rlnsing; or(E) Wastewater resulilng from lab-'ctory operatlons contalnlag toxic (T)utes listed in subpart D of thia part,
0t i&d, That the annualized averagerw of laboratory wastewater does notceed one percent of total wastewater)B l:rto the headworks of the faclll-'8 wastewater tneatment or pre-oatment system or provided thelstes, combtned annu&llzed averagencentratlon does not erceed one partr milllon la the headworks of the fa-ilty's wastewater treatmeut o" p--latmetrt faclllty. Toxic (T) wastegeo in laboratories that are dem-.strated not to be dlscharT:ed toutewater are aot to be tnctuaea ml8 cslculailon: or[') Oue or more of the followlng:tstes lhted lD !261.82-wastewatei)h the producflon of carbamates andrua,moyl oxlmes (EpA rrazardougut€ No. Kt5?Fprovided that thelrlmum weekly uaagi'e of formalde-
,!e, methyl chloride, methylene chlo-llt ud trlethylamine (tnctudrrg all
lourts that cen not be demons*ted
-oe reacted ln the proceBa, degtroyed:ou8i! treatment, or ls recovefod,-.Phat is dlscha,r3ed or volattllzedi'ued by the avera4:e weekly flow oirc-eeB wastewat€r prior to auy dilu-
'qE ltrto the headworks of the faclli-
,8-P&Etewat€r treatment EyEtom dooBu erceed a total of E parts per mlllloa
-FeEht: ora) Wastewaters derlved tom the-4ErtreDt of oae or more of the fol-
s261.3
lowing wastee lieted lD SZfl.e}{rBanlcwaste (lncludlnei hearry euds, sillt bot-torrrs, light ends, Bpent solvents, fll-trates, and decantates) from the pro.ductloa of carbamates and carbadoyloxlmea (EPA Eazqrdous Waste No.K156).-Provlded, that the rnavtvnqvncoucentration of for.rcoatdehyde, methylchloride, methylene cbloride, aoatriethylamlne prlor to any dllutionsinto the headworks of the faclllty,ewastewater treatment system does aoterceed a total of 5 mlUlere.ms per llter.(v) Rebutta,ble pre.sumption foi tued oil.Used oll coDtailning more thn-n tffi ppatotal halogeng ls presumed to be a ir-^"-ardous waste because lt has been mlxedwtth hatogeneted hazerdous waste llst_ed ln aubpart D of part 261 of thls cb.apter. Persons nay rebut thls presnrnptlon by demonstraflnei thst thi usea oltdoes not contaln ha.z-douB waste (for
sxq.ynple, by uslDg an analyilcal meth-
o-d from SW{,{6, Third Edltlon, to showthat tJre used oil does not contatn elg-nlficaat concentrattons of h^alogenatedh4z.dous constituents listed tn eppen-qf !E of part 261 of ttrie chapt€r).EPA Publtcetton SW-€d6, Third- Edf-tlon, lg available for the coet of Ell0.mfrom the Goveranent Hnting Otflce,Superlatendent of pgsuvnesfs, pO Bor371954, Plttsburg:h, pA t5250-?9il. M512-1800 (document uumber 9SS00f-000G1).(A) Ite rebuttable preaunpHon doesnot apply to metalworlrtng oildfluldscontaining chlorluated parafflns, lftJrey ar.e proceaaed, through a tolllngagreement, to reclelm metalworkingoildfluids. The preau.mpflon doee applito metalwqikrng' oildflulds tf such oUdflulds are recycled in any other ma.D-ner, or dispoaed.(B) The rebuttable preaumpilon doesnot apply to used olls contamtnat€dw'lth chlorofluorocarbons (CX.Ca) ro-moved tom reffigeraflon nntf6 wherethe CE Cs are desHned for reclamation.The rebuttable presumpflou does Bpplyto used olle contaminstod w.lth CFCathat have been mtred wtth used olltom aoutces other than rcfiigeraflonuntts.(b) A solld waato whlch ls not er-cluded from regulaflon under De,ra.Srraph (E)(1) of thls soctlon becomeg ahazqndoug waste when auy of the fol-lorrlngieveuts occur:
35
En'
olof
oD
oe
t,Iti
61
c'.
c
a
rt
T(
,
I
o
s26r.s
(1) In tbe case of a waste 4eted ln
*ib..t p of tU" pa.rt, w-heu.t!9 wasle
f,-[;;t" tne uittng descrlPtlon sot
forth ln subPert D of t'hlg Part'
(2) In the oase of a mlrbure of aolld
wastc and one or rrloro Ilst€d ba'zerdous
,""i"", *li" a hazardous wast€ ltEtod
iit-""ub.tt-o ts Or"t added to the solld
waste.
(4, In the case of any otJrer wlBt€ (ln-
cfi-drns a waste mlxture)' when the
waste irhfuttg any of the characterlr
ttcs ldentlfled ln subDart C of thls pert'--ic) Untess a.nd untll tt meets t'he crl-
terla of paragrapU (d) of thls aectlon:
(1) A laza'rAous waste wlll renaln a
bazardoug waste.
(2)(f) Ercept as other"wlse provlded ln
parag-raph (c)@X11) of this sectlon' a'ny
ioUa waste geserated from the treat-
BeDt, EtoraSi€, or dlalnsal of a hez-
a.naoG saste, lncludlng aDy sludEie'
aptlt regldue, aED,, emlaEion- c-ont'rol
di"*,, or leanbste (but not tncludtng
precipltatlon rua-offt ls a -ba'zardousiaste. (Eowever, m&terlals thet are re'
clalmed from solld wasteg a.nd that are
used beneflcially are not solid wastes
a,nd hence ar€ Dot hezaadous wasteg
under thls provlglon unless the rs-
clalmed materlat lg buraed for euerly
r''Bcov€ry or used ln a manner constl-
tuttng disPosal.)
(fl) Itre iollowfng solld wast€e a're not
ha,zardous eveu though they aFe gen-
erated from the treatment, gtora8:e, or
dlsposal of a haza,rdous waste, u'xleso
they exhfHt one or more of the charac-
tertstlcg of hszardoug waste:
(A) Waste plckle llquor slu'rge geD-
eratea by ltms stsbl[zstlon of gDeut
pi"Xf" [quor from the lron and gt€el
tnAuetry (SIC Codes Stll and 3itr).
(B) Caste from burnlng any of the
materlels erempted from regulatlon by
! 261.6(8X3)([l) antl (1v).- (CXr) Nonwastewater reslduee, guch
as slag, resultl4l ffom hlgh tempera-
ture metsla ngcovery (EIMR) Droc-
essln8i of K061, K062 or F006 waste, la
untts tOeutlfled as rotalry klIDE, fla'me
roactorg, electrlc furnaces, plasma arc
funtacea, slag reactotrB, rota'rrr hear-th
firr:race/elect'rlc fur:'nace comblnEttons
or tndustrlal furaacee (as deflaed ln
paragraphs (6), (?), and (13) of the. defl--nfUou ior "fuOustrlal fumace' lu 40
Cfg ZeO.fO), tbat are dlslrcsed tn sub-
tltle D udts, provlded tDat theso resl-
.o crR?. I o-r-, Ed'q.,
dues meet the geuerlc exclusl-on lev61
ldentffleil ln t'be tebles ln thla pqa
copU for all coustltuents, and erhlbtt
no Lta.racterlctlcs of haza.rdoug walto.
Testhg requlrements must be lncor.
porat€a ln a factllty's- Issq mallth
ptan or a geD€rator's seU-lmplemeu\
Laste anelyals Plan; at s rntnlmu\
comlrcslte eamplea of resldueE ElrEt h
collCcted end analyzed quarterly a.n&ot
wben the Drocess or operatlolr Eorot\
etlng the waste changes. Pe^r"sou1
ctetmtn8 thls excluglon tn en enforco
ment actton wlll have the burdeu ot
provlng by clear a.ud convlnclngi evl'
ience -ttal tUe m.eterlal meets all ot
the ercluslou requlrements.
llexinrn lqn.lrd. cfisrssnpr-tCtp(mcl)
o
a
o
a
o
o
O
o
Gsrcft odrrlon bt.5 lor KGt urd K@ nondrt''
Cordirent
0.r0
050
7.6
o.0r0
0.cn0.3
0.150.o
r.0
0.rt0s
0.Gmm
Gcncrb crduiqr loirlb for Fffi nonmrbsrbr HTffR
,!tsuc
0.r0
0.50
7.C
0.0r0
0.(E0
0.3(l
1.t
0.16
0.@i.o
0.rt
0.8,
o.Gx,
70
(2) A one-tlme notlflcatlon and cer-
tfiicetton mugt be placed ln the factll-
tJ's flles and aeut to the EPA re8ilon or
a-utUorf^a gtate for K061, K062 or F006
ETI,IB. resldues t'hat meet the generlc
ixctustou levels for aU constltuents
t,uA ao not erhlblt a,ny cbaracterlstlcs
tnat ,"" sent to aubtltle D untts' Tbe
noiUfcatton and cer-btflcEtton that ls
placed la the generatora or treetera
36
HTllRtTiAE
o
o
o
O
a
o
a
o
a
o
o
s26l''r
,honrmntol Proneclton AgBncY
mmmwsmffi
ffi*$iHffiffi#
mffif-;r*UH#il1'?{"tr; ."1X**""lSS"ffiH" fif#tfm;;ffi ;i Jd'"*,rrf";H$:'f*1 H-: .B$l*f**;; ",irurt a ^ cha,r-
ffii'H""ff*'fi"tr* Tffi""effil ffiJ"i":.i" roentiiJa
-t"ou-o""t' c or
trogtablUw grouP(
:Hl,l*:"umr*i$ti-,6p4ffitr*ri#ff-r;f:**
the tnttlgl polnt or g-en;ratron' rbe'cer- % il#a;;ilutrt T 9{l:D"d t
uio*-* i*t b" ile;ifffL-l"F% ,,fi tr "*-.m ";;r; tr"t_rs u""o
L.d ;il;"oy""-_Tj 3[i-11ff* treated *r"s-o* oi tle requlred er-
tollowa:'I cerblfY t
Hmse'*r""*r#ffi ffiU **qt#Ht.S;
#l#:1;H:i13[,#**ts[-?",:lg3l{f;;;;&*rron-drlhrve
h$nod. r a,m E Erltuat thPre..*1.- iiiJi""a"o"i;;"bs bv clear and con-
nttrcant peueltiles- 6r sub,rtttns-a f,iios- 9"rA"1""":""t::i tbe msterlal
lrtse certilf,c8tiloD, 1osls.lrn8 tJr^ 3 nosal- ,|"Jt"= "u ";-;i"
-ercluston requlre-
ffifi+P:#iffiq+*rt"m j:-Bjlx ilt"#rbadr^ffi:
n:ffi$Tffi.t:T ff;il'-;'*ia"'t"s t'he eltenj orcon-
rsht en6s, sDont gorvents, .ryg?fr;'ffit::tle**ffiT*$"":J
ffiTlfl?"HiJffi"'rg;; sast€' r-- a 1o,* 5? trR 23ffi1, rune 1,SF.**ffi$ffifi *r,Ei;,ffi#m
ffi::*t#ffif#:ffim#*,
$fuk'ffi
mi.:LYt T3"t ll""ioul'"r"s *,,x, Domestrc seXffi;fi*:,"t"
f,t.mms"--un:+ d"
iH,*THH"","-"EHUI,ffi qft r*ffi ffiTH';
"s,{k:}dffi?ffi"# H*;:*'f'b.'i Ds 83
gl
o
o
o
a
o
o
o
o
o
o
S26trf
(2) Iudustrla,l wasteweter dlecbertles
tUat are polnt Eource dlscbargi'ea aub
lect to re8ulatlou under sectlon 402! of
lhe Cleen Water Act, as emended.
lComncttt; Tbls erctEston applles only to the
actu.rl p'olat source dtschargie. It docs Dot er-
clude lndustrlal wastewaters rhlle t'hey ane
boln8i coU€cted, storcd or tneated before dls-
ahrrge' aor doos lt erclude sludSi'os t'brt a're
geuergted by tldustrld waatosator trs8t
ment.l
(3) Irrfeatlon retu:m flows.(4) Source, slr€clel nuclear or bY-
Droduct materlEl as deflned bY the
Atomlc Energy Act of 19t1, as a,mend-
ed, ill| U.S.C. frLl et seq.(5) Materlels sublected to ln-gltu
rn{nlng technlques whlch are not re-
moved from the Slround as part of the
extractlou proce88.
(O Pufplng llquora (i.e., black liquor)
thet are reclalmed tn a pulptng llquor
FscoverTr fur:nace aud tJren reus€d ln
tJre pulptag proceBE, unleas lt ls accu-
mutEted speculatively es deflned lD
S261.1(c) of thts chapter.(7) Spent sulfirrlc acld used to
produce vtrgtn suUuric acld, ualess lt ls
accunulated sp€culetively as defined
i.n $261.1(c) of thlg chepter.
(8) Second,ary materials that are re-
clalmed a.rrd returned to the oriednal
procegs or processes lD which they were
generated where they are reused ln the
production process Provided:(l) Onfy tank etorage is iDvolved, and
the entire process tbrough completion
of reclamatiou ls closed. by beiug en-tirely connected with pipes or other
comparable enclosed meaus of convey-
aDce;(il) Reclamation does Dot luvolve
controlled flame combustion (such as
occurg in bollers, lndustrial furnaceg,
or incinerators);(iil) lbe secondary materials are
Dever accumulated lu such tBnke for
over twelve months wlthout being re-
claimed; and(iv) The reclalmed materlal is not
ueed to produce a fuel, or used to
produce products that are used ln a
manner constituting dleposal.
(9)(i) Spent wood preserrlng solutlonsthat h.*ve been reclalmed and &re re-
used for t'Irelr orlgiaal lntended pur-
pose; and(il) Wastewaters from the wood pra-
gervln& proceBs that have been re-
clalmed and are reuged to treat wood.
ao cfR
o
ch.I O-l-@ EfiorU
(ttt) Hor to reuse, the wood P1q
s€wtrg wasteweters aud aPent woq
presenrlng solutlons descrlbed ln psra"
graphE (eX9)(l) and (E)(9)(U) of thls 8oq
tlou, Eo loug as tbey meet ell of the fol-
lowlas condltlons:(A) Tbe wood PrcEervlng wast6wateq
and spent wood proserslD8i solutloq
aae reused on-slt€ at water bo6a
ptants ln the productlon procesa to1
thetr orteilne.l lntended purlrose;
(B) Prlor to rouEe, the wastewaton
and apent wood Drsgorvlnsi solutloDs
ans tilsna€ied to prevent rslease to el-
tJrer land or groundwater or both;(C) ADY urtt used to 'nn.na{3owast€watarE and/or spent wood pr$.
s€rvlng solutlons prior to reuse ca,n bevisually or otherrlse determlned to
prevent euch releaseg;
@) eay drlp pad used to mana€le the
wastewatera aud/or spent wood prs'
Eervlngi solutloDs prlor to reuse com-
plles wlth the stondards ln psrt 265,
subpert W of tbls chapter, regard,Ieas of
whetJrer the plant g€nerates a total of
IesB th.an 100 ks/mdnth of ha,za,nlous
waste; and(E) Hor to oPeratlnel Pursuaot to
thls ercluslorr, the plant owner or opor-
ator submlts to tbe approprlate Re'
gional Administrator or Stote Dlrectora one-tlme notlllcatlou stattng that
the plant lntends to clalm tJre exclu-
glotr, slving the date on which the
plant lntends to beeln operatlng under
the excluelon, a.nd contalnlng the fol-
Iowins laneruage: 'I have read the appll-
cable regulatlon establlshlng an erclu-
slon for wood preservlng wastewaters
and spent wood presenrinSi golutlons
and understand lt requtres me to com-
ply at all ttmes with the condltlons set
out ln the reSulation." The plant muat
malntaln a copy of that document lnits on-slte records for a period of no
Iess thau 3 years from the date epecl-
fied iu the notlce. Tlre exclusion aI>plies only eo lotrg: as the plant meetsall of the condltlons. If the plant goes
out of compllance with any condltlon,lt may apply to tJre appropriate Re-
gtonal ldmtnistsator or State Dlrector
f91 jstnrtatement. The Regioual Ad-
mlnlstrator or State Dlrector m&y re-
lnetete the excluslou upon flndlng that
the plant has returned to compllance
wlth all condltlons and that vlolatlons
are not likely to recur.
38
ctilt'
(10)
*;ff;
b!'9r
rf,dq'{o9
ID BE
ceou*ro
rooogtoctor
11rl'
beu
f,roItbe
o{e
ags
(:
drcroondrt
ot
u(
or
c(tI
aX4
t:g
c
c
I
I
1
t
o
o
o
O
o
o
c
o
o
a
Page 801
agement, resource recovery, and resource con-
serva,tion systems which preserve end en-
ha.nce the quality of air, water' and land re'
sources; and.
( 11) establishing a cooperative effort among
ttre Federal, Stat€, and local governments and
private enterprise in order to recover valuable
materials and energy from solid waste.
(b) National policy
The ConEress hereby declares it to be the na-
tional policy of the United States that, wherev'
er feasible, the generation of haaardous waste is
to be reduced or eliminated as,expeditiously as
possible. Waste that is nevertheless generated
should be treated, stored, or disposed of so as to
minimize the present and future threat to
human health and the environneart.
(Pub. L. 89-212, title II, ! 1003, as added Pub. L.
94-580, ! 2, Oct. 21, 1976, 90 Stat. 2798; a,mend-
ed Pub. L 98-616, title I, ! r01(b), Nov. 8, 1984,
98 Stat. 3224.)' FBroR PRovrsroxs
hovislons sinrila.r to those in thls section were con-
tained in section 3251 of this title, prior to the general
rmendment of the Solld Wastc Disposal Act by Pub. L
9{-680.
ArEtrDxExas
198,1-Subsec. (8). Pub. L 9H16, ! 101(b)(1), desis-
net€d exlsttng provlsioru 8s subsec. (a).
Subsec. (aX{) to (11). Pub. L 98-616, I 101(bX2),
struck out par. ({) which provided for regulatlng the
treatment, .stora{ie, transportatlorl 8nd dl8po88l of
hazardous wastes whlch have adverse effects on
health and the env[onment, added pars' ({) to (?)'
and redeslgnated tonner pars. (5) to (8) rs (8) to (11)'
rcspectlvely.
Subsec. (b), Pub, L 98-616, C 101(b)(1), added sub6ec.
(b)-
Ssczror Rp.nRtD To rr Offir Suclrorg
This sectlon ls referred to ln- sectiou 69E2 of thls
tltle.
6 6O03. Defrnitiong
As used tn this ctuipter:(1) The ter.tn "Admlnistrator" means the Ad'mirrlstrator of the Environmental Protectlon
ASiency.(2) The term "constructlon," wlth respest to
any prolect of construstlon under thl,s chagter,
mes.ns (A) the erectlon or bullding of new struc'
tures a.nd rcqulsltion of lands or lntercsts
thereln, or the acqulsltion, replacement, exllan'
aion, remodsling, alteratlon, modernlzetlon, or
extenslon ol existlng stnrctures, end (B) the ec'
quisltlon and lnstalletion ol tnltlEl equlpment
of, or requlred ln corurectlon wlth, new or newly
acqulred structures or the expanded, remod-
eled, altered, modernized or extended part of
exlsting stmctures (includlng trucks and other
motor vetrlcles, Bnd tractors, cranes, ;srld.other
machinery) neeessary for the proper utlllzatlon
and operatlon of the faclllty Efter completlonof the proJect; a,nd lncludes prellmlnery plrn'
nlng to deterzrlne the economlc and:englneer'
lng feasibillty e,nd the publlc heelth and srlety
aspects of the project, the englneerlng, archl'tectursl, legal, ftscat, a,nd economlc lnvestlgg.tions and studies, a,nd a,ny surveys, deslgns,
0 6903
plans, workiru drawings, specifications, gnd
other ection necessary for the carrying out of
the projeci, and (C) the inspection and supervi-
sion of the process of carrying out thE project
to completion.(2A) The term "demonstration" means the
initial exhibition of a new technology process
or practice or a significantly new combination
or use of technologies, processes or practices'
subsequent to the development stage, for the
purpose of proving technological feasibility and
cost effectiveness.(3) Ttre term "disposal" mea.ns the discharge'
deposit, injection, dumping, spilling, leaking' or
placing of any solid waste or hazardous waste
into or on any land or water so that such solid
waste or hazardous waste or any constituent
thereof may enter the environment or be emit'
ted into the air or discharged into any waters,
including ground waters.
(4) The term "Federal &gency" means any de-
partment, agency, or other instnrmentality ofthe Federal Government, any independent
agency or establishment of the Federel Govern-
ment includins any Government corporation,
and the Government Printing Office.
(5) The term "hazardous waste" means a solid
waste, or combination of solid wastes, which be-
cause of its qua.ntlty, concentration, or physi-
cal, chemical, or infectiow chsracteristics
may-(A) cause, or significantly contribute to an
lncrease ln mortelity or a.n increase in serious
irreversible, or incgpacitating reverslble' ill'
ness; or(B) pose a substantial present or potential
hazard to human health or the environment
when improperly treated, stored, transported'
or disposed of, or otherwise ma^naged.
(6) The term "haaardous waste generation'-'
mea.ns the act or proceiss.of producing hazard'
ous woste.
(?) The term "hazardous waste management!
mearui the systematic control of the collection,
Eource sepBration, stora,Sle' transportation, Dr(r-
esslng, treatment, recovery, and disposal-of haa.
erdous wast€s.(8) For purposes of Federal financial assist-
ance (otber than rural communities assistance),
the term 1'lmplemsltatlon" does not include
the acqulsltton, leaslng; constructlon, or modlfi'
catlon bt taclltttes or equipment or the acquisi'
tlon, leaslng, or lmprovement of la^nd-
(g) The tern "lntermuntcipal a8iency" rueana
an Bgency'estsblished by two or nu)ne munici'
pelltles wlth responslblllty for plannlng or ad-
mlnlstratlon of solld waste.
(10) The term "lnterstate agency" means an
&8ency ol two or more municipallties in dlffer'
ent Btates, or an agency establi:shed by two or
more Stetes, wlth autirorlty to provide for the
ms,tragement of soltd wastes a^nd senringdwo or
more munlclpaltties located ln dlfferent'fltates.
(11) The teru "long'term contraat" mea'ns,
s/trgn,used ln: relatlon to solid wsste supply, a
contract.of sufflctent duration to assure the vi-
ablllty of B. resource recovery facllity (to the
exteni thet such vlabillty depends upon solid
waste supply).
TITLE 42-TIIE PIIBLTC HEA],TE AND WET,FANEt
t
t
o
t
t
a
t
t
i:
il
I
lr
li
il
t
s6e03 ouII^E 42-TE{3 prrBlrc rrEALTrr ANUEIf,ARE Page 802
(12) The term ..menlfest,' means the .form (25) The term "resional authority" means ttre
,sed for identifying tf,I'i""Luii, *-pos-ition, authoritv e-stabllshed or designated under sec-
iliitir" ""igirr, iouti"i, "ia oestinatiol of haz- tion 6946 of this title'
ardous waste during iti'tii"iirl"tio? from the (26) The term "sanitary landfill" means a fa'
point of generation ir-it" -p"i"u of disposal, cility for the disposat of solid waste which
treatment, or storar"."" ** -----
^ . meeis the criteria published under section 6944-il'Jt-in; term 'municipalitv" (A)-.means a of ihis title'
city, town, boroush, ;;6;;-;ti"ri, ai"tti"t, ot (264) Ttre term "sludse" means anv solid'
other public UoAy created'Uv o. pursuant to semi:solid or liquid waste generated from a mu-
Siate law, witn respoililifity'foi t'he planning nicipal, commercial, or industrial wasiewater
or administration of solid waste mansgement-, trealment plant, water suppl.y. treatment plant,
or an Indi&n tribe or ."-tnotirua tribal oiganiza- or air pollution control facility or anv other
tion or Alaska Xatir"-viUaie oi otgatiotiot', such waste having similar characteristics and
"rra tSl Gcludes any rural community or unin- effects'
corporated town oryUf"i" oi e4v other public (2?) The term "solid waste" meansi any gar-
entity for which ,"t ti-ifiofi"" 1.61 assistance is bage, refuse, sludge from a waste treetment
made by a State o. p"ilti".f-""Udivision thereof. plant, water lupply treatment plant, or air pol-
(14) The term,,open';.."11f;rn""ro any facili- iution control facilitv and other discarded ma-
tyi" "iti-rirlii soria ;;6It aisposea oi which teriat, including solid' liquid'. semFolid' or con-
il ;;t;,""itarv ranaiiilw-t rcn rireets the crite- tained gaseous ma,teri&l resultins from industri-
il;;;-rf;i"a *ra.*i""iio"-osfl of this title al, commercjal, mining, and aericultural oper-'"iia"i,fiitr G ttot " f""ifiW iot disposal of haa- ations' and from communitv sctivities' but does
ardous waste. not include solid or dissolved material in domes-
(1i) The term ..person" mealxi an individual, tic sew&ge, or solid or dissolved materiels in irri-
tili; fir , joint -stock company, corporation gation return flows or industrial discharges
(includinc " eor"ro-Jnt corporalion), partner- wtrictr are point sources subiect to permlts
;i-p;;;tiio", St.l6, muiriciparity, iommis- under section 1342 of title 33, or source, specisl
"iii, p"fit]""f giUOrtsibn of a- State, or any nuclear, or byproduct m-aterial as defined bv
Gi"itiati u"ar ana snati include each depart- the Atomic Energv Act of 1954' as amended (68
;;;-;";;t; ""a instrumentality of the Sht. 923) t42 U.S.c. 2011 et seq.l.
United Sta'ves. (28) The term "solld waste management"
(16) The term...procurement item" means any means the systematic administration of activi-
aevrcL,- iooa. zubitance, material' product' or ties which provide for the collection' source
otfruiitE- wtrether real or personal property separation, stor&ge, transportation, iransfer'
;-5Ei, G-ttre suUject of a.nv purcUase, barter, or prbcessirng, trestment, and disposal of solid
otlrer exctranSe made to procure such item' waste.- iiZl 1'ne 1,grm .,procuring agency" means any (2g) The term 1'solid waste management facil-
Federal agency, or Bny State agency or agency ity" includes-
of a potiiicat subdtvision of a State which is (A) any resource recovery system or compo-
using appropriated Federal funds for such pro- nent thereof,
curement, or any-person contracting with anv (B) any system, program, or facility for re-
such agency with respect to work performed source conservation, and
unairsucntontract. (C) 8ny facility for the collection' source--ii8l ttr" term "recoverable" refers to the ca- separation, siorage, transportation, transfer'
p"Uilitv ""0 likelihood of being recovered from pi'ocessing, treatment or disposel of solid
iolid waste for a commercial or industrial use' *".ter, inctuaing haaardous wqstes, whether--itSl fne term "recovered material" means such facility is associated with facilities gen-
waste material and byproducts which have been erating such wastes or otherwise.
recovered or diverted from solid waste, but such
term does not include those materiar. *a'il] (39] Tl:-t_":r" "solid waste plannins", "solid
products generated from, and commonly tJu;Ja wastg InqltaFement"' a'nd "comprehensive plan-
wtthin, an original manufacturirrg p"o""*.'""* ning" includi planning or'management respect-
(20) The term "recovered resources" means ing resource.recovery and resource conserva-
material or energy iJcovereO from solid waste' tion'
(21) The term "resource conserva,tion" mffi (31) The term "State" means any of the sev-
reduction of the amounts of solid *rrt"'it'fr eral States' the District of Columbia' the Com-
are generatea, reauc-tion of overall t""o"tiu monwealttr of Puerto Rico' the VirCin Islands'
consumption, anO uUtizatiorr of ,*or"t"-J.i' Guam, American Samoa' and the Common-
sources. rurr@vrvr' wealth of the Northern Mariana rslands'
(22) The terEr "resource recovery" means the (32) The term "state authority" means the
recovery of material or energy from solid ;d;;. a,Sencv established or desiSrrated under section-_tzel Tlre term ..resource recovery system,' 694? of thistitle.
mearxi a solid waste management system ;hi'h (33) The term "stor&ge"' when used in con-
provides for coftection, s-eparatlo", .""vi,iiiii, nectlon wlth.haaardous waste' means the con-
and recovery of solid wastes, including afsposii talnment o.f haaardous waste' either on a tem-
of nonrecoverable waste residues. poiatv basls or for a period of years' in such a
(24) The term ,.resource recovery factllty" msnner as not to constitute disposal of such
-eat" any facility at which solid waste ls proc- hazardlus wa'ste'
essed for the purpose of extracting, "otuuiltg (3{) The term "trea'tment"' when used in con-
to energy, or ottrerwise-t pti"ti"iand prepar- nectlon- wtth ,hazardoT-^Ifh*.means anv
ing solid waste for reuse. method, technlque, or process' including neu-
hce 803 TITI,E 42_TIIE PI'BIJC I{EALTH AND WELFARE
a
a
t
o
o
trali'ation, desiened to change the physical,chemical, or biological char&ct€r or compositionof any hazardous waste so as to neutralize suchwaste or so a.s to render such wa-ste nonhaaar-dous, safer for trausport, amenable for recov-ery, amenable for storage, or reduced involume. Such tcrm includes any activity orprocessing desiened to change the physicalform or chemical composition of hazardouswaste so as to render il ngnhqq-rdous.(35) The term "virg:in material,, mea,ns a rawmaterial, including previously unused copper,aluminum, lead, zinc, iron, or other metal ormetal ore, any undeveloped resource that is, orwith new technology will become, a source ofraw materials.
(36) The term "used oil" means any oil whichha-s been-(A) refined from crude oil,(B) used, and(C) as a result of such use, contaminated byphysical or chemical imFrurities.
(37) The term "recycled oil" meiuu any usedoil which is reused, following its original use,for any purpose (including the purpose forwhich the oil was originally used). Such tenrrincludes oil which is re-refined, reclaimed,burned, or reprodessed.(38) The term "lubricating oil" means thefraction of crude oil which is sold for purposesof reducing friction in any industrial or me-chanical device. Such term includes re-refinedoll.(39) The term "re-refined oil" mearui used oilfrom which the physical a.nd chemical contami-nants acquired through preyious use have beenremoved through a refining process.(40) Except as otherwise provided in thisparagraph, the term "medical waste', meansany solid waste which is generated ln the diag-nosis, treatment, or immunization of humanbeings or animals, in research pertaining there-to, or tn the productlon or testing of biologicals.Such term does not include any hazardouswaste identified or listed under subchapter IIIof this ch&pter or any household waste as de-fined tuc regulatioru under subchapter III ofthis chapter.(41) The term "mixed waste" means wastethat contains both haaardous wa.ste and source,special nuclear, or by-product material subjectto the Atomic Energy Act of lS54 A2 U.S.C.2011, et seq.).
(Pub. L. 89-272, Ufle II, E 1004, as added pub. L.94-580, ! 2, Oct. 21, 19?6, 90 Stat. 2?98; amend-ed Pub. L. 95-609, | ?(b), Nov. 8, 19?8, 92 Stat.3081; Pub. L. 96-1163, g B, Oct. 15, 1980, 94 Stat.2055; Pub. L. 96-482, ! 2, Oct. 21, 1980, 94 Stat.233{; hrb. L. 100-582, C 3, Nov. 1, 1988, 102 Stat.2958; Pub. L. 102-386, title I, g! 103, 105(b), Oct.6, 1992, 106 Stat. 150?, 1512.)
Rrrnrrrccs rr Tlrr
_The Atomic Energy Act of 19b4, referred to in pers.(2?) end ({1), ls act Aug. 30, lO5{, ch. 10?3, 88 Stst.921,-8s a,mended, which is classified Sienerally to chep-ter 23 (! 2o1t et Eeq.) ol this tiue. For complete classl-flcation of thls Act to the Code, see ghori A'tue note8et out under section 20Il of thls uue and Tables.
kron h.ovrstoxs
kovisions similar to those in this section were con-tained in section 3252 of. this tltle, prior to the generel
amendment of the Solid Waste Dispcsal Act by pub. L
94-580.
A-rraroxsryts
f992-Far. (15). Pub. L. 102-386, ! 103, insertedbefore period ai end "and shall include each depart-ment, agency, and irutrumentality of the UnitedStates".
Par. ({1). Pub. L. 102-386, $ 105(b), added par. ({t).
1988-Par. ({0). Pub. L 100-582 sdded par. ({0).
1980-Par. (l4). Pub. L. 96-482, ! 2(a), defined ..open
dump" to include e facility, substituted requirementthet disposal facility or site not be a sanitary landfiUmeeting section 6944 of this title criteria for prior re-qulrement that .lisposal site not be e sanitary landfillwithin meaning of section 6944 of this tiue, and re-quired that the disposal faciltty or site not be a facilityfor disposal of ha--rdous waste.Par. (19). Pub. L 96-{82, ! 2(b), defined .,recovered
material" t,o cover byproducts, substituted provisionfor recovery or diversion of waste material and by-products from solid waste for prior provlsion for col-lection or recovery of material from solid waste, a.ndexcluded materials and byproducts generated fromand commonly reused within an ori8lnsl manufactur-lrg process.
Pars. (36) to (39). Pub. L.96-{63, ! 3, added pars. (96)
to (39).
19?8-Par. (8). Pub. L. 95-609, [ ?(b)(1), struck outprovision stattna thet employees' salaries due pursu-ant to subchapter IV of this chapter would not be in-cluded after Dec. 31, 19?9.Par. (10). Pub. L 95-609, ! ?(bX2), substituted..man-agement" for "disposal".Par. (29XC). Pub. L. 95-609, ! 7(bX3), substituted"the collection, source separstion, storage, transporta-tion, transfer, processing, treatment or disposal" for"the treatment".
Tnensrrn or F\rNcrroNs
Enforcement functions of Admlntstrator or other of-ficial of Environmental Protection Agency related tocomplience with resource conservation end recoverypermits used under this chapter with respect to pre-
construction, constructlon, and initial operation oftransportation system for Canadian and Alaskan natu-ral gas transferred to Federal Inspector, Office of Fed-eral Inspector for the Alaska Natural Gss Transporte-tion System, until first anniversary of date of inittaloperation of Alaska Natural Gas TlansportationSystem, see Reorg. Plan No. I of l9?9, eff. July l,
19?9, l! 102(a), 203(s), {{ F.R. 33663, 33666, 93 Stst.
13?3, 13?6, set out in the Appendix to Title 5, Govern-ment Organ-ization 8nd Employees. Office of FederalInspector for the Alaska Natural Gas TransportotlonSystem abolished a^nd functions and suthority vestedin Inspector transferred to Secretary of Energy by sec-tion 3012(b) of Pub. L 102-486, set out as an Abolitlonof Office of Federal Inspector note under section ?19eof T'ltle 15, Commerce and Atade.
SDcrror RETERRTD To rx OTHm Secrrors
This section is referred to in sections 5919, 6921,
6939e. 699r, 9801, 9614 of thls tltle; tiUe 10 sectlon2?08: tltle 25 section 3902; tttle 26 section {062: title Bgsection 2601; title 46 App. section 883; title {9 sectlon5102.
0 6904. Governmental cooperation
(a) Interststc cooperation
The provisions of this chapter to be carrledout by States may be carried out by tnterstateagencies and provisions applicable to States
ft$l\ail
a
a
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
g 2013 Ott .42-rEE puBlrc EEALTE ^*9*^-,A&rDrTr8
*^""_.:rmf sub.ec..).
ffiffi*ffii#Hil,HlTt#'ffi:rffiffi*:*,Iffi#E
n to," e'' reLiiii# ffiE_e^p^p"rded thar -r^rl
zuIB to 2(n8. 2r3B ;r;+^ggctton -d*r^N-olhlnS
uiti"_,f, #its";:*, jjr;1#91,^3z.as_daTfilTpra
prorrtrlono 8et orrr .;;;112 ot tlt" uGl"i?t -": tt'L
al';-2oi;"ftHJtili:ffi ,R.itHTSl.W-Hltlg suthoruv oitilti.Errsrty L'oEulDl,Balon ,,-^-119 st8tfs, o - !run g1-
res+ ." _.o;.is"?.*T":l^ts: et"ir" freH1?d"uvpfra"dlTi1:Tf _".ltDt$t, to reffif,r act or
tlioii ana-ritiiElUTffi rluclear ureter.rqi iTf .
uourcc,
I*HgI*_ilaH:#H:l*r-f lt"*iG.rTi"iH.:lEDogfUoD of eove-i*--11,'rw url€ UEIted Sto+.aerenrii& ;1;"J*11tal guarantees-L}'I1F bv
--ffi -aJilffJ*ffi ' S,ifr?; LFH ETfflllr35rffig aaretv oi itri eiri[c :;qto]#:,rTl. rheei,nt"riii6u"-rr;iir*! " Eerev
"otrf,-i3i tgtcTlorRuIIuro
urhrs sseroD ;;r;Tffir:ff;"or
th,.
0 2013. Puporc of chapter"ffi*ffi,ffiN*
ffi#ffiffim
Pace 688
(e) e pro8ram of lntenrstlonal cooperatlonto promote tJre conmon delense and Besurtff
and to make avallable to cooperaHngl natlonstlre beneftts of peacetut appllcatlons otetomlc energy as wldely as exDendlna t€ch-nology and conslderatlons of tbe commou defense a.nd securlty wlll permlt and(f) E proga,m of adnlnlstratlon whtch wlllbe condstent wltJr the lorregolrg pollcles andprogrens, wtth lntenrettoaal anangpments,and wittr agreements for cooperailon, whtchwlll engble ttre Congress to be ctrrrentlv ln-lormed eo as to take lurther legdslatlve acdonas rn4y be spproprtate.
(Aw. t, 1940, ch. ?24, tltle I, ! 3, as added Aug.30, 1954, cb- 1073, ! 1, 08 StaL 922; amendedAw. 26, 1964, Pub. L 88-{89, ! B, 78 gtsL 002;renunbered tltle I, Oct 24, 1992, pub. Ir102-{86, uue rv, ! ooz(sx8), r00 st8t. zg{{.)
kroE hovr$ors
Provlslons slnller to those comprlslns txrle scstloDwere contalned ln secdoD I o, act Aus. l, 10{6. cb- ?Z+60 StsL ?66, ehlc.h v8s clessilfled to s€cdotr l80l olthls tlEe, prlor to tlhe general eneo.hnent eod r.cnun-tlerln8 ot 8ct Aug. l, 19{8, by act AuS. 30, l06tl
AErDEtts
196,f-Subscc. (c). Pub. Ir 88-,f80 lrrrerted ..rhether
owned by the Gloveranaent or ottrrers,'a,Dd.a,nd to provlde contlnued saaura,noe of the Govenlnent'! abtltyto enter tnto and enforce sge€EeDts wlth natloua orgloupg of natlous lor tJre control of rpcdel nuclcasmoterlals and atomlc weapons,,.
lllrgltn o! Ft rcrrora
Atontc &rergy Commlsston abollshed and firncflonrtransterred by aectlons 68111 aDd 58{1 of thtg ufle. Eeealso Tla.Bsfer of lqucHous not€8 8et out under thqesectlons-
S 2014. Delinitions
The lntent ol Congress ln the deflnlflons asgiven ln thle sectlon should be construed tromthe words or pbrases used ln the deflntflons. Asused ln thts chapter:(a) Ttre tem "agency of tJre Untted Statea,'mearu; the executlve branch of tJre UnltcdStates, or any Goverament agency, or the legls.l,ative branch of the Untt€d Stst€s, or anyagency, commlttee, oommlssloD, offlce, or otJrerestablishment ln the leglslatlve branch" or the
Judlclal branch, of the Unlt€d States, or anyofftce, agency, commlttee, GonrnlssloD, or otherestobllshment tn tJxe Judlctal branch.(b) The term "agreement for cooperaflon,,Eerns any agteement wlth another natlon orregioual defense orgnnlzotton authorlzed orpermitted by sestlons 2074, 2077, ZOg4, ZtLz,2121(c), 2133, 2l3rl, or 2164 of thtq flt.le, a,ndmade pursuant to sectlon 2153 of thlg ttile-(c) TIre tem "atomlc energy" Eelne all lomsol energy released tn the course ol nuclea,r fls-slon or nuclear trensfometlon-(d) The term "atomic wealrcn,' rneaDa aDydevlce ptlltzlng atomlc energy, excluslve ol ttrbraeans for traosportlng or propelllng the devlce(where such means ls a separable and dlvlslblepart of tJre devlce), the prlnclpal purpose ofwhlch lg for use as, or for development of, a
Pase 589 TTTIJE 42_TEE PT'BLIC ETALTII AIVD WELFARE 0 20ll
e
t
o
I
o
e
o
o
I
t
wealrcn" I wealx)n prototype, or a weepon testdevice.(e) Tbe tem "byprpduct meterial', means (1)any radloactlve materlal (except specia,l nuclea,rm8t€rlal) ylelded in or made radioastive by er-posure to the radietion tncideut to tJre pnrcessof producing or utllldng speclal nucleer metea-al" and (2) tJre te,ttin8s or wastes produced bythe extractlon or ooDoentreilon ofuraninm ort[6flrrn from any one prooessed prinarily forIts source meterlal content.(f) The tem "Commisslon" Dternl tbeAtomlc rberCy e6mrrtlsl6s.(g) Ttre teru "common defense and security"means the common defense end security of ttreUnlted Ststeg.(h) The teru "defense rnforuailon,' mea,nsany lnformsUon ln any cat€gory determlned byany Goveranent agency authorlzed to cln*ililnformatlon, ea being tnformation respecthd,rel,etlng to, or affecting the na,ilonal definse.(l) Ttre term "desl8m', Eea.lrs G) speclfica-tlons, plnn^, drswings, bluepriats, and otherItems of llke neture; (2) the lnfsrua,tlsn coa-tained thereln; or (3) the research and development dats lrcrtinent to the lnform.aflon con-tslned thereln.(J) The tem, "extr"aordlnary nuclear ooeur-
ipnce" rleens any event causlrxg a dtscha.rge ordlspersel of source, special nuclear, or Uyproa-uct materlal from lts tntended place of co-nfine-ment ln amounts offsite, or causing radlationl_evels offslte, which tJre Nuclear ItreguletoryComnlsslon or the Secretary of hersy, ea &p,prol}rl8te, deterulnes to Ue substan-Uil, eiAwhlch tbe Nuclear Regufetory Comrntnslsn s1the Secretary of Enerzy, as approprlate, deter--!^ee has result€d or wlll probaLf result lDsubstantle,l rh.ynages to persons offsite or prop-qrty offslte. Any determiDttion by the NuclesrReguletory Commlsslon or the Secretary ofhg.Sy, 8s approprlet€, that such alr event lr8s,or tres not, occurred shall be ftnqr and conclu-slve, a,nd no other officlal or any court shalllaye power or Jurlsdlction to review any suchdetermlnsdon. The Nuclear Regulatory Com-rnlsrlon or the Secretary of Energy, asappno.prlate, sha,U egtBbll,Bb crlterta in wrlttns Betilnsforth the basls upon whlch such determlnstioishell be made. As used ln this subseeilon, ..off-
slte" means away from "the locailon,, oi ,.the
contract locatlon" as deflned in the applicableNuclesr Reguletory eemmrlqlsn or thC Secre-tary ol Energy, es epproprlate, indemnltya,greement, entered lnto pursuant to eeciloa22LO oI thls ttile.(k) The term "financtal protectiou,' Eeansthe--ebtllty to respond ln dlhrges for publlc ll-ablllty and to meet the costs of tnvestfgBilngand defendlng clrtrns and settilng sutts foi Euch,hryrrgeg.(t) Ttre tem '.Government egency,, EleaDaanJ/ _execuilve deparhent, comnlsslon, lnde-pendent esteblishment, corlporailon,- wholly orpeftfy owned by tJre Unlt€d Sttte of Amdrtcawblch ls an instr:umentality of the UnttfdStBt€s" or-e.ny board, bureau, dlvlslon, aerylce,otflce, offlcer, autJrorlty, atuinlstrailo& orot'her estabUslrment tn tJre erecutlve bran& oftilre Goverament.(m) The teru "hdennltor,'means (l) any ln-surrer wlth respest to h|s obUga[on8 undlr e
Dolicy of insrrrance fuaished as proof of finrn-cial protectioq (2) any licensee. contregtor orotJrer person who is obllelat€d under a.qy otherform of finendal protectton, wttJr respect tozuch obtientioDs; and (3) the Nuclea,r Renrleto-ry @mmlsston or the Sccretsry of hergy, aseppmprbte, wlth D6p€ct to eny obllSa6onundertaken by lt tn tndemnlty aereenent en-tered hto purflr8rt to section 2210 of thrr [,1ils.(n) The term "lntenrrilonel errangemeut"mee,Ds any tntcmetionel egreemeDt hereafterapproved by tbe Congrees or anj/ treaty dtrlnSthe time suctr afreement or treety ls tD fullforce and effect, but does not lnclude anya,greement for cooperetlon.(o) The tem "Ererjy Commlttees,' meslrsthe Comnlttee on ri'.nergy and Natural Re,souroes of ttre Etenete and the Comnlttee onr'.nergy and Commerce of the Eouse of Repre,sentatlves.
(p) The tera "llcensed astlvlty,, Eeans r.rr ec-tivlty llcensed pursuant f6 thrr chepter and cov-ered by tJre provislons of secfion 2210(8) of thtstttle.(q) f1re teru "nucleer lncldent,' rneang anyoocrurenoe, tncluding an extraordlnery nuclea,roocurrenoe, Eithln tJre Unlted StBt€6 caustng,within or outslde the Unlted Atst€6, bodflylnJury, sickners, dlsease, or deetJr, or loss of oid"nage to property, or loss of use of property,Brlsins out of or resultlng from tJre radlossilve.toxlc, explosive, or other hazerdous profrerdesof source, speclel nuclear, or byprpduet mstert-el: hovid,ed" lwroaq, Tbat es tbe term ls usedln sectlon 22L0<D of thls ttfle. lt eherr tnstulsany such oocurrenoe outslde the Unlted Stgt,es:And pmoldd tltrthzt, Ttrat es the tem ls usedin sectlon 2210(d) of tbis fifle, lt shell tncludeany such oosrurenoe outside ttre Untted Ststeslf zuch ooculrenqe lnvolves souroe, spedal nu-clear, or byproduct materlal owned by, andused by s1 rrnflg; contract wlth, tbe UnltedStates: And prcdd.ed, lartJwr, Tlrat as tJre teiais used ln eectlon z2l0{.cr 6f thts fltJe, lt gbsll tn-clude aqy such ocsuretrce outslde botb tJreUntted Stat€s and any other nsflon lf such oc-cru?enoe erlses out of or results lrom ilre radto-acttve, toxic, exploelve, or 6!!s1 hnqnrdqlrspropertles of source, spectal nuclee,r, or byprod.ust meterlel licensed pursua,nt to subchtpten
V, \i|I, VII, and IX of tJrls dlvLslon" wblch ls ugedln connectlon wlth the operaflon of a llcensedstatlonary productlon or utillzailon faclUty orwhich moveg outslde the terrltorlal llmtts oft&e Urtted gtatec ln trandt from one person ll-censed by tbe Nuclear Rcnilctory Commlsslonto another person licensed by the Nuclear Reg-rrlat6ly CommlssloD-(r) The tera "operatot''mea.ns Bny hdlviduslsho rnanlpulatee tJre controls of a uflllzailon orproduetlon faclltty.(s) The tem "person" me8,Ds (1) sny tndvld-nrl, @r1rcretloD, psrtnershlp, flrn, sssoststlon,tJxrst, estst€, publlc or private tnsfltuiloD,83oup, Govemment agetrcy otlrer the,n theComnieslon" eny Stat€ or any pollHcel subdtvl-slon of, or any political enUty wlthln a gtate,
any forelgn govenrment or natlon or Bny poltil-cal suHlvlsion of a.ny zuch government ornatton" or otlrer entlty; and (2) any leenl 6uoseg-
020u O rrr,r 4,-TEE prrarJc EEAr,TE {wEx.EAnE
sor, nepresentetive, agent, or aSency of tJre for
gotngl.(t) The term "person tndernffled" meens (1)slth respect to a nuclear lnddent occurrlnswtthtn the Unlted States or outdde the Unlted
Stst€s as tJre tem ls used ln sestlon 221fic) of
thls tlt'le, and wtth respect to any nuclear lnct-dent ln connectlon wltJr the destcrtr, develop-ment, constnrctlon" operatlon, repalr, 'I dnte-
Y|rnce, or u8e of tbe nuclear shlp Eievannah, theperson slth wbom an lndemntty efreement is
executed or who ls required l9 mnlntrln flnan-
cf,al protectlon, and any other person who may
be llable for publlc liBbtltty or (2) witJr respectto any other nuclear lacldent ocsurrlns outslde
tJre Unlted States, t'Ire person wlth wbom an tn-demnlty agr€enent is executed and any otberperson who may be liable for pub[c llabtllty by
reeson of hts actlvltles under an5l contract wltJrthe Secretary of Erergy or anJr proJect to
wbich lndemnlficatlon under the providons of
sectlon 221fid) of thls title has been extendedor under any subcontract, purclrase order, orotber agreement, of any tler, under a,ny suchcontract or proJect.(u) Tlre tem "pmduce", when used in rele-tlon to spectal nuclear meterial, meaDs (1) to
manufacture, m8ke, produce, or ref[re speclal
uuclear E8t€rial; (2) to separete speclal nuclearmaterial from other substances ln whlch such
materlal msy be contelned; or (3) to make or toproduce new speclal nuclear material.(v) The tcm "productlon faclllty" means (1)
any equlpment or devlce determtned by rule ofthe Commlsslon to be capable of ttre production
of special nuclear materlel ln sucb quanilty asto be of slgnlflcance to the eomnon defense
and segurlff, or ln such rrrtnrrer as to effect thehes,ltb and safety of the publig or (2) any lm-portant comlronent pert especially deslgaed forsuch equlpment or devlce as determlned by the
Commlsslon- Ereept wlth respect to tJre exportof a urantum enrlchment productlon facillty orthe constnrctlon and operation of a uraniumenrlcbment productlon facility uslngl AtomlcVapor Laser Isotope Separstion technology,zuch tem as used in subchapters DX and XV of
tJrls dlvlslon shall not lnclude any equipment ordevlce (or lmporta,nt conponent Dart especlnlly
desl@ed lor such equlpment or devlce) capable
of separatt.g tJlre lsotopes of uranium or enrich-
lng uranlum ln the lsotope 235.(w) Tlre term "publlc llablllty" meens any
tega,l U,ubfltty arlslug out of or resultlng from cnuclear lncldent or precautlonary evacuatlon(lncludlng ell reasonable addltlonal costs ln-
eurred by s Stste, or a polltlcal subdlvlslon of a
State, ln tbe course of respondlng to a nuclear
lncildent or a precautlonar? evacuation), except:(l) clqhnq under State or Federal sorkmen's
compensatlon acts of employees of persons ln-demnlfed wbo ere employed at ttre slte of andln connectlonwltb the acttvlty where the nucle-er lncldent (rccurg; (lt) clalms erldng out of anact ol wa,r; and (lll) whenever used tn subsec-
Uotrs (a), (c), a,nd (k) of sectlou 2210 of ttrrlstltle, alllrnq fOr IOSS Of, Or denage tO, or lOss of
use of property whlch Ls located at the slte of
and used ln connectlon wltJr tJre ltcensed actlvt-ty where the nuclear tncldent oocurs" "Publlc ll-abtlltfi" also lncludes drrilage to property of
Pase 59O
pergons fn{emnlflsd hotldd" That sueh prrop.
erty is coyercd under tbe teros of ttre llnmchlprctectlon reSultEq except property whlch lglocatcd et tJre dtc of and used to coanectlouwlth the actlvtty where tbe nuclear lncldent(rccurs.
(x) Tlle term "researctr and developmerrt,'Eeans (1) theorettcal Bnalyd& exploratlon, or
exlrerimentatlon; or (2) the extendon of lnvegfl-gettve flndlngs a.nd theories ol e sclendllc ortechnlcaf nature tnto practlcal appllcatlon lorexperlmental and demonstratlon purDos€s, ln-dudtng the experlnental productlon end test-ing of models, devlces, equlpment, netcrlels,
and processe&
(y) Ihe tem "Restrlcted Dst8" neans alldsta conceralng (1) deslp, manufacture, or uu-llzatlon of atomlc weapoDs; (2) the productlon
of spesiel nuclear materlal; or (3) tJre use ofspeclal nucleer meterlal ln tJre productlon ofenergy, but etrell not lnclude dets declsssil'ledor removed from tJre Restrtct€d Data categorypursusnt to sectlon 2162 of tJrls tJt^le.
(z) T1re ten "souree m8terl8l" Eer.nr (1) url-nlurn, ttrorlurn, or eny otber materlel whlch tsdetemined by the Q6mrnl*lllsa pUrsusnt to theprovldons of section 2091 of tJrlg tltle to beBource materiaU or (2) ores contalnlng oDe ormore of the foreggtng materlelg ln such con-centratlon as tJre Commlsslon may by regule-tlou determlne from tlme to tlme.(as) Ttre term "speclal nuclea,r E8terl8l"
mee.ns (1) plutontum" uranlum enrlched tn ttrelsotope 233 or ln the tsotope 235, and any otiermateriel whlch the CommlsslorU pursuant tothe provlsloas ol sectlon 20?1 ol tbls tltle, de-temlnes to be speclal nuclear materlal, but
does not lnclude aourse Eaterls.t; or (2) any me-taial ertltlcielly enrlched by any ol the forego-
ing, but does not lnclude souroe materlal(bb) The tern "Unlted Ststes" when used lrr ageographlcgl sense lucludes all terrltorlee andpossessiorut of the UDlt€d Stat€s, tJre Ca,nel
Zone and Puerto R.lco.
(cc) The tem "utlllzatton faclllty" means (1)aqy equlpment or devlce, except an atomlc
wealrcn, determlned by rule ol the Commlsglonto be capabls 9f mrklng use of speclsl nuclearmaterlal in such quantltv as to be of sltBltl-cance to the comrnon defense s,nd securlty, orln such rn^nrrer as to alfect the beeltlr andsslety of the public, or pesullarly adapted lorrnnklng use ol atomlc energy in such quenflty
as to be of slgnlflcance to the courmon defenge
end securlty, or in such rnnnner as to affect tJrehealth and safety of the publlc; or (2) any lm-portant component part especlnrly dedged lorzuch equipment or device as detemlned by theCommisslon-
(dd) The tenns "hlsh-level radloactlve waste"and "spent nuclear fuel" have the meaolngs
Eilven zucb t€rms ln sectlon l010l oI thts tttle.
(ee) Ttre term "transuranlc waste" meaDa rna-terlel contamlnated wlth elements tbtt bave enatomlc uumber great€r thgn 02, lncludlng nep-tunlum, plutontum, s6gfl6lrrrn, and curl'm,and ttrst are ln concentratlons greater thsn 10nanocurles per gram" or ln such other concerr-tratlons as the Nuclear Regulatory Commisslolr
Page 591
may preecrtbe to prot€ct the public heelth and
safety.(ff) Tbe teru "nuclesr waste activiti€s", 8s
used lrx 8€ctloD 22L0 of. thls tltle, EeaDa ectlvi-
ties subject to an aSreemenf,6f lnlsmnlfication
under gubeectlon (d) of such s€stlon, thgt the
Secretsry of &rergy ls euthorlzed to undertale,.
under thle chapter or 8,ny other law' lnvolvingthe storage, h8udliDs, tmrsportatton treat
ment, or dlsposal of, or reseetrcb a,nd develoF
ment on, spent nuclear fuel, hlgh-level radloac-
tlve waste, or transuranlc waste, tncludlng (but
not llrnlted to) actlvltles authorlzed to be car-
rled out under the \traste Isoletlon Pilot ProJect
under sectlon 213 of Public Lew 96-164 (93 Stet.
1265).(gg) Tlre t,erm "preceutlona,ry evscuatlon"
EreBDs en evacua$on of the publlc wlthln a
speclfted iBrea near a nuclear facllity, or the
transportstlon route ln the case of an accideut
tnvolvlng trangportstlon of Bounoe materlal,
specle,l nuclear meterlal, byproduct materiel,hlgh-level redloactlve waste, gpent nuclear fuel,
or tr8nsurenlc waste to or from a producUon or
utlllzatlon faclllty, lf the evacustlon ls-(1) the result of any event that i,8 not classl-
fled as e nuclear lncldent but that poses lm-
mlnent deuger of bodlly lnJury or property
damase from the radioloslcal propertles of
aounse materlel, speclal nuclear meterlal, by-product materlal, hlgh-level redloactlve
wast€, spent nuclear fuel, or tra.nsuranlc
waste, a,ud causes an evacuatloru a,nd(2) ltrlttst€d by sn offlclel of a Stat€ or B po-
Utlcel aubdlvlslon of a State, who ls euthor-
lzed by Stcte law to lnltlst€ euch a,n evacu&-tlon and who reasonably deteralned that
such an evacuatlon was neoessalry to prot€ct
the publlc health and safety.
(hh) The term "publlc llabtllty actlon", as
used tn sectlon 22L0 ol thls tltle, rneaus any suit
asserUng publlc llabtllty. A publlc ltBbiUty
actlon rhnll !,s deemed to be a,n action srlslns
under sectlon 22lO ot this tltle, and the sub-
stantlve rules for declslon ln such action shall
be derlved from the law of the Stete tn whlchthe nucleer lncldent involved oocurs, unless
such law l,s lnonsl,stent wlth the provi,slons of
zuch eectlon.
(JJ) I Lrcer. Cosrs.-As used ln sectlon 2210 of
thls tltle, the term "legal costs" Dea,ns the costs
lncurred by a plalntlff or e defendlnt ln lnttlaL
tng, prosecuttng, tnvestlgsting, settllng, or de-
fendlng cla,tns or suits for dama^ge EristnS
under such sectlon
(Aue. 1, 19{6, ch. ?24, tltle I, ! 11, as added Aug.
30, 195{, ch. 1073, ! 1, 68 Stat. 922: n-rnended
Aw. 6, 1966, ch. 1016, ! 1,70 Stat. 1069: Sept. 2,
196?, hrb. L 86-256, ! 3. ?1 StBt. 6?6; Aug. 8,
1e6S, Pub. L 8H02, ! 1, 72 St8t. 526; Sept. 6,
1901, Pub. L 8?-206, !! 2, 3, ?5 Stat. 476; Aw.
29, 1962, hrb. L 87-616, l! {, 6, 76 Stat. 410;
Oct. 13, 1900, Pub. L 89{,[5, ! 1(a), 80 St8t. 891;
Dec. 31, 1976, Pub. L 9{-19?, ! f,89 Stot. 1111;
Nov. 8, 1978, hrb. I^ 9H0{, tltle II, ! 201, 92gtst. 3033; Aug. 20, 1988, hrb. L 1(XH08,!! {(bF5(b), 11(b), (dX2), 16(8Xl), (bxl), (2),
(dX1H3), 102 Stst. 1069, 10?0, 1076, 1078-1080;
0 20u
Nov. 1.5, 1990, Pub. L 10r-5?5, ! 5(8)' lO4 St8t.
2835; renumbered title I and a.uended OcL 24'
1992, Rrb. L 102{85. tltJe IX" ! 902(aX8)' tltleXt, ! 1102, 100 Stst. 29{{, 2955; Nov. 2, 109{,
Pub. L 103-43?, ! 15(lxl), 108 Stat. {592.)
RttBEtcs rr Trrt
For deflniuon of C.D!.I Zone, rcfetled to ln Eubsec-
(bb), 8ee s€cflon 3602(b) of Tltle 22. Foretn RelctloDs
a.nd Intercourg€.
Sectlon 213 o( PubUc L.F 00-lG{, referrsd to ln
subcec. (lf), ls hrb. L 06-16,1, ttoe II, ! 213, Dcc. 29,
19?9, 93 AtsL 1105, shlch ls not clradfted to the Code.
hroa PBoYrttor8
hovlsloDs 6lnllc to thc€ conDrlslna thlE sectlon
sere @ntai.Eed lu rcctlon l8 ol rct Aw. 1, 1}{8, ch.
721, 60 s'tsL ??4, rhlch wes cfasallled to aectlon 1818
of thts ttue. prtor to t'he genenl roendment r,Dd re'
nunberhg of lct Aw. 1, 1918, by ed Aua. 30. 196{.
AElDgEttS
199€ub6cc. (o). Rtb. L 103-13? rubctltuted
"'EnerSiy CoEnttt cs' Ee8D! the CottrEltt c onFnerty rn<l Nstunl Rerourcea of ttre Ecnrtc rnd the
Connlttce on herly and Commerce of tJre Eoure of
R.epre€Dtstlv€t" lor "'Jolnt Comnlttec' E€eJxs the
Jolnt Comnlttce on Atonlc herrY'.
19024ub6ec. (v). hrb. 14 102{86 aneoded brt !cn'
tence generally. Hor to amendment, lrst lenteDcc
read es follows: "hcept stth re0cct to the erport ot
a uranlun enrlchnent productlon faclUty, such tcm
as ured ln aubchrptera EE a,Dd )rV of ttrl! dlvldon
shsll not lnclude eny equlpment or devlce (or lnDor'
ta,Dt coEponent Dart espectelly deslEed for rucb
equlpmeat or devlce) capable of !€par8$na the lro'
topes ol uraDlum or enrlchlnS uraalum ln ttre l&toDe
236."199(Htubsec. (v). Pub. L 10l-6?6 lD8ert d at end
"Ercept wltJr respect to the export of r unnlum en'
rlchnent prpductlou ftcltty, such tcm as uacd ln gub'
cha,pters Ef e,nd XV ol tJrls chapt€r abrll not lnclude
eny equlpEent or devlce (or lmportrot conponentpart especlally deslsred for suclr equlpnent or devlce)
capgble of s€psratlng the lsotopes of uranlun or en-
rlchlng uranlum ln the lsotope 235."
19884ubsecs. 0), (m). Ptrb. L 1fi)-r08. ! 10(bxt).
substltuted "Nuclear ll'4ul8tory ComElsslon or tJre
S€cretary of hergy, as spproprtat€," for "Connls-
slon" whercver appeerlnS.
Subs€c. (q). Ptlb. L t(xH08, ! 18(dxl), subttttutad
"sectlon" lor "subEectlon" tn three placea, shlch for
purpces of codlflcatlon was translated
thus requlrlng no chrnge tn text.
hrb. L l(xH08, ! 10(.X1), substltut€d "Nuclear Reg'
ulatory Commlcslon" for "Commlaslon" wherever e,p'
p€artng.- Aubcec. (t). PLrb. L 1(xH08, C t0(d)(2). subttltuted
"s€ctlon" for "subeectlou" ln tso plrces, thlch forpulpc€s ol codlllcatlon sas tre[slatcd rs "8ccuou",
thus requlrlDa Do ch8,D8i€ tn t€xt.
hrb. L 1(XHO8, | 1SGX2), substltut€d "gecretary ofrrergy" for "Commladon" ln cl. (2).
Suboec. (s). Pub. L 1(xH08' ! 16(dx3)' rubstltuted
"subsectlon8 (r), (c), and (k) of sectlon 2210 of tnl8
tltle" for "scctlon 2210(8), (c), 8nd (k) ol ttrlr tltle".
Pub. L l(X)408, 16(8), lDs€rtad "or prccautlona,ry
evscuatlon (trclu,llng eU reasonl,ble addltlonrl costl
fncurred by r 8trte, or 8 polltlcal subdlvlsloD of a
stst , ltr tlte courr€ of reapondlql to e nuclear lncil'
dent or a preceutlone,r7 evacuatloD)" aft€r flr8t t?fer'
ence to "nuclear lncddeat".
Subcec& (dd) to (ll). Ptrb. L lfiH{t8, ! {(b)' edded
subs€cs. (dd) to 6f).
Subeec. (cc). Ptrb. L 1fiH08, ! 5(b), dded lubcec.
(ss).
Eubcec. (bh). Pub. L l(x)-f08, ! ll(b), added subsec-
(hh).
TTTLE 42_TETE PI'BIJC EE.AL'TE AND WELT'AR,E
I
t
t
I
t
t
o
t
t
t
I Eo tn clilarl No !ub€c- (U) b$ bcctt cDrctcd.
o
o
o
o
a
a
o
CLI-00-01 - Intemational Uranjgrn (USA) Corporationo - Docket No. 40-8681-MLA-4 Page I ofll
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
COMMISSIONERS:
Richard A. Meserve, Chairman
Greta Joy Dicus
Nils J. Diaz
Edward McGaffrgan, Jr.
Jeffrey S. Merrifield
In the Matter of
INTERNATIONAL URANIUM (USA)
CORPORATION
(Request f<rr Materials License Amendment)
DOCKETED 2IIOIOO
SERVED 2lt0t00
Docket No. 40-8681-
MLA-4
cLI-00-01
MEMORANDUMAND ORDER
I. Introduction
In this decision we review a Presiding Officer's Initial Decision, LBP-99-5, 49 NRC 107 (1999),
which upheld a license amendment issued to the International Uranium (USA) Corporation ("IUSA").
The license amendment authorized IUSA to receive, process, and dispose of particular alternate feed
material from Tonawanda, New York. The state of Utah challenges the license amendment and now
on appeal seeks reversal of the Presiding Officer's decision. Envirocare of Utah, Inc., has filed an
amicus curiae brief supporting Utah's challenge of the Presiding Officer's decision. The NRC staff
and IUSA support the Presiding Officer's decision. We affirm the decision for the reasons we give
below.
II. Background
IUSA owns and operates a uranium mill located at White Mesa, near Blanding, Utah. On May 8,
1998, IUSA submitted a request for a license amendment to allow it to receive and process
approximately 25,000 dry tons of uranium-bearing material from the Ashland 2 Formerly Utilized
Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP) site, currently managed by the Army Corps of Engineers
and located near Tonawanda, New York.o The NRC granted the IUSA license amendment on June
23,1998. Utah timely petitioned for leave to intervene in the license amendment proceeding. On
September 1, 1998, the Presiding Officer admiued Utah as a party to the proceeding. See
International Uranium (USA) Corporation (Receipt of Material from Tonawanda, New York), LBP-
98-2t,48 NRC 137 (1998)
hup ://www.nrc.gov/lrlRc/COMMIS SION/CLI|2000 12000-00 I cli.html 7lt2l200t
a
a
o
o
o
o
o
O
a
o
CLI-00-01 - International Uranium (USA) Corporation - Docket No. 40-Q681-MLA-4OO Page2of1l
At issue in this proceeding is the Atomic Energy Act's definition of l1e.(2) material, defined by the
statute as "the tailings or wastes produced by the extraction or concentration of uranium or thorium
from any ore processed primarily for its source material content." 42 U.S.C. $ 2014e (emphasis
added). Utah interprets this to mean that the primary purpose for acquiring the ore must be an interest
in processing the material to recover the uranium. Emphasizing that IUSA is being paid over four
million dollars to receive the Ashland2material from the FUSRAP site, Utah argues that IUSA's
interest in obtaining the material is "primarily for payment of a disposal fee" and not for recovering
any uranium the material might contain. Utah's Appeal Brief (May 24,1999) at I l.
Utah explains that the fee IUSA will receive for this transaction far exceeds the monetary value of the
uranium which might be extracted from the material. Utah accordingly suggests that the "primary"
reason IUSA is processing the material is so that it can be reclassified as 11e.(2) material and then
disposed of at the IUSA mill site. See id. at 10.
In short, Utah argues that the NRC staff improperly granted this license amendment because IUSA is
not processing the Ashland 2 material "primarily" to recover its relatively minimal uranium content
but rather to obtain the generous handling and disposal fee. Utah emphasizes that IUSA's license
amendment application failed to adequately substantiate that the material was to be "processed
primarily" for its uranium content. Utah insists upon "some objective documentation" to show that
recovery of the uranium, not payment for disposal, was IUSA's primary interest behind the license
amendment. See Utah's Reply to NRC Staffs and IUSA's Briefs (June 28,1999)("Utah's Reply
Brief') at 10. Given the "wide disparity" between the fee IUSA will receive for taking and processing
the material and the probable market value of the uranium that can be recovered, Utah claims that the
"only reasonable conclusion" to be drawn is that the "primary purpose of applying for the license
amendment was to receive a four million dollar disposal fee." Id. at 9-1 1.
In interpreting what is meant by $ l1e.(2)'s requirement that ore be "processed primarily for its
source material content," Utah relies heavily upon language in the NRC's "Final Revised Guidance
on the Use of Uranium Mill Feed Material Other Than Natural Ores," 60 Fed. Reg.49,296 (Sept. 22,
l995x"Alternate Feed Guidance"). The Altemate Feed Guidance asks licensees to "certify" that the
feed material will be "processed primarily for the recovery of uranium and for no other purpose." Id.
at 49,297. The Guidance goes on to enumerate three possible ways a licensee can "justify" this
certification that feed material is to be processed for source material. The three possible factors a
licensee can cite are "financial considerations, high uranium feed content of thqfeed material, or
other grounds." Id. Throughout this proceeding, the parties sharply have disputed the meaning of
these and other statements in the Alternate Feed Guidance.
Utah, for instance, argues that the Guidance included a "Certification and Justification" test expressly
to prohibit licensees from "using a uranium mill to process material for the primary purpose of ...
[reclassiffing] the material to allow it to be disposed of in the mill tailings impoundment." See Utah's
Appeal Brief at 10,12. Utah claims that processing material merely for the sake of reclassifying it as
l le.(2) material is "sham processing," and that the wastes or mill tailings generated from such "sham
processing" do not meet the definition of I le.(2) byproduct material. See id. at 10-l 1. Utah concludes
that IUSA "failed to justifu and document under the Altemate Feed Guidance any satisfactory or
plausible grounds to show that [IUSA] was not engaged in sham processing." Id. at I l.
In LBP-99-5, the Presiding Officer rejected Utah's arguments. "[O]re is processed primarily for its
source material content," stated the Presiding Officer, "when the extraction of source material is the
principal reason for processing the ore," regardless of any other reason behind the licensee's interest
in acquiring the material or seeking the overall transaction. See 49 NRC at 109.
On the other hand, the Presiding Offrcer went on to explain, "[i]f ... the material were processed
primarily to remove some other substances (vanadium, titanium, coal, etc.) and the extraction of
uranium was incidental, then the processing would not fall within the statutory test and it would not
a http :/iwww.nrc. govA.lRC/COMMI S SION/CLI|2}}} 12000-00 I cli.html 7/1212001
a
o
a
a
o
o
o
o
a
o
o
be byproduct material within the meaning of the Atomic Energy Act. That is, the adverb 'primarily,'
applies to what is removed from the material by the process and not to the motivation for undertaking
the process." Id. (emphasis added). In the Presiding Officer's view, "the only 'sham'that stops
material from being byproduct material is if it is not actually milled. If it is milled, then it is not a
sham." Id. at I l1 n.6.
The Presiding Officer found this interpretation of $ I le.(2) consistent with the language and
legislative history of the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978, as amended
(UMTRCA). He went on to conclude that the staff appropriately granted the license amendment
because IUSA "is milling ore" to extract uranium and therefore is "not involved in a sham." See id. at
113. The Presiding Officer also found that Utah had misunderstood the NRC Alternate Feed
Guidance. He rejected Utah's claim that the Guidance was intended to prevent material from being
categorized as l1e.(2) byproduct material if the licensee's primary economic motive was to receive a
fee for waste disposal instead of to recover the uranium. Id. at I12. "The Alternate Feed Guidance,"
the Presiding Officer stated, "is not supportive of the position, taken by the State of Utah, that
material is to be considered byproduct only if the primary economic motivation is to remove uranium
rather than to dispose of waste." Id. Under LBP-99-5, then, the licensee's underlying motive or
purpose for acquiring the material in the first place is irrelevant. What matters is that the material
actually is processed through the mill to recover source material.
Both the NRC staff and IUSA endorse the Presiding Officer's conclusions. The staff explains that
"the Presiding Officer properly applied the [alternate-feed] guidance by focusing on whether the
processing was primarily to extract uranium," regardless of any economic motivations involved. See
NRC Staff Opposition to Utah Appeal of LBP-99-5 ("Staff Brief')(June 14,1999) at l3 (emphasis
added). The staff also stresses that "[n]either a high uranium content nor economic profitability is
'required'under the guidance," which provides three separate and alternative reasons a licensee can
describe to support a proposed license amendment, including any number of reasons which might fall
within the category of "other grounds." See id. Indeed, the siaff argues, the definition of $ I l".Q)
byproduct material should be broad enough to encompass those fuel cycle activities involving the
processing of even low grade -- with relatively low concentration of uranium -- feedstock. Id. at 15.
"LJtah's attempt to require an economic motive test and to require detailed financial review should be
rejected," the staff urges. Id.
FocrLsing-upon_UMTRCA's legislative history, IUSA similarly concludes that at issue is simply
wh_ether the tailings and wastes were "produced as part of the nuclear fuel cycle." See IUSA'i Reply
to Utah's appga] Brief and Envirocare's Amicus Curiae Brief ("IUSA Brief)(June 14, 1999) at 9-10.
According to IUSA, those tailings and waste from feeds processed to recover uranium outside of the
nuclear fuel-cycle, as- in a secondary or side-stream process at a phosphate recovery operation, would
not be 1le.(2) material because the actual processing was not [intend-ed] primarily-fof the source
material content. Id. But where there is a licensed uranium mill involved, "the oily question to be
answered," argues I_USA, "is whether it is reasonable to expect that the ore will, infact,be processed
for the extraction of uranium." Id. at 15.
While not adopting the Presiding Officer's reasoning in its entirety, the Commission affirms LBP-99-
5, for the reasons given below.
III. Analysis
To clear away athreshold matter, we must briefly consider the NRC staffs claim that the Ashland 2
material already was $ 1le.(2) byproduct material, even before it was sent to IUSA and even before it
was processed. See Staff Brief at 8 n.11; 14 n.l8; l5 n.19. The staffs theory derives from the
Department of Energy's certification that the Ashland2 material was the residue of a Manhattan
Project uranium extraction project, and therefore constituted "tailings or waste produced by the
extraction ... of uranium ... from ... ore processed primarily for its source material content" within the
meaning of section lle.(2). We find it unnecessary to reach the staff argument. Historically, the NRC
cLI-00-01 - Internationat urary rusA) corporation - Docket N". +0$81-MLA-4 Page3ofll
http ://www.nrc. govAtrRC/COMMISSION/CLll2000 12000-00 1 cli.html 7/1212001
o
a
a
a
o
o
o
a
a
O
o
CLI-00-01 - International UraniIl ruSA) Corporation - Docket No. +Olffl-MLA-4 Page4ofll
has maintained that it lacks regulatory authority over uranium-bearing material, like the Ashland 2
material, generated at facilities not licensed on or after 1978 (when UMTRCA was passed). See
United States Army Corps of Engineers, DD-99-7,49 NRC 299,307-08 (1999). Nothing in this
opinion addresses the pre-1978 question or should be understood to do so. Instead, our opinion rests
solely on section I le.(2)'s "processed primarily for its source material content" clause.
On appeal, Utah finds the Presiding Officer's "first error" to have been that of having "resort[ed] to
interpretation of the AEA and the legislative history of UMTRCA in searching for the meaning of
'primarily processed for."' See Utah Appeal Brief at ll-l2.Instead, Utah argues, the Presiding Officer
should have focused only upon the NRC's Alternate Feed Guidance to discern how the $ 11e.(2)
definition is to be applied and met. Id. at 12. The Commission, however, agrees with the Presiding
Officer that the $ 11e.(2) definition, with its requirement that material be "primarily processed for its
source material content," can only be properly understood within the context of UMTRCA and its
legislative history.
Based on an in-depth review of UMTRCA and its legislative history, and of the Alternate Feed
Guidance and its background documents, the Commission reaches several conclusions. To begin
with, the Guidance does appear to contemplate an NRC staff inquiry into a licensee's motives for a
license amendment, just as Utah suggests. The Guidance, for instance, expresses a "concern that
wastes that would have to be disposed of as radioactive or mixed waste would be proposed for
processing at a uranium mill primarily to be able to dispose of it in the tailings pile as 11e.(2)
byproduct material." 60 Fed. Reg. 49,296,49,297 (Sept. 22,1995). The Guidance thus outlines
possible 'Justifications" that a licensee may describe in support of the license application, and these
are intended to assist the staff "[i]n determining whether the proposed processing is primarily for the
source material content or for the disposal of waste." Id. Indeed, the requirement of a licensee
"justification" apparently stemmed from a 1993 Presiding Officer decision which questioned, in
another proceeding, whether a simple licensee "certification, without more, would adequately protect
against ulterior motives to dispose of waste." See UMETCO Minerals Corp., LBP-93-7,37 NRC
267, 283 ( 1 993)(emphasis added).
Such statements do not support the NRC staffs current view that under the Guidance all that matters
is that processing for uranium was intended, regardless of underlying motive. On the contrary, the
statements in both the proposed and final Guidance take as a given that processing for uranium
content will take place, but also indicate that such processing should not be employed simply as a
device to reclassifu material to enable it to be disposed of -- as I le.(2) byproduct material -- at a
uranium mill site.Q As Utah has maintained, therefore, the Alternate Feed Guidance certainly can be
understood -- and is perhaps best understood -- as reflecting an intent to prevent material from being
categorized as l1e.(2) byproduct material when the licensee's overriding economic motive is to
receive a fee for waste disposal.
Yet, although the drafters of the Guidance apparently intended to distinguish between those license
amendment requests where the licensee's overriding interest is obtaining uranium and those where
payment for disposal is driving the transaction, the NRC staff apparently has not consistently utilized
the Guidance in this way. While the language of the Guidance may suggest that a licensee's
motivations are to be scrutinized, parsed, and weighed, the NRC staff typically has not relied upon
such probing reviews of licensee motives. It has not been the staffs practice, for example, to require
licensees essentially to "prove" quantitatively or otherwise that the value of the uranium to be
recovered from a particular licensing action will outweigh other economic reasons for the transaction.
See, e.g., UMETCO, 37 NRC at274,281-82; Staff Brief at l5-16. Since the Guidance was first
issued, it seems, there has been little connection between what the Guidance seemingly proposes and
what the staff in reality has required.
This fact has prompted the Commission on this appeal to take an in-depth look at the Guidance and
its policy ramifications. We find that the apparent intent in the Guidance to have the staff scrutinize
the motives behind the license amendment transaction is neither compelled by the statutory language
http ://www.nrc. govA.{RC/COMMISSION/CLI/2000 12000-00 I cli.html 7/12/2001
a
a
o
a
o
o
a
a
a
o
o
CLI-00-01 - International Uran$ (USA) Corporation - DocketNo. 40-51-MLA-4 Page5ofll
or history of UMTRCA nor reflects sound policy. Our review of UMTRCA and its legislative history
confirms the Presiding Officer's conclusion that the requirement that material be "processed primarily
for its source material content" most logically refers to the actual act of processing for uranium or
thorium within the course of the nuclear fuel cycle, and does not bear upon any other underlying or
"hidden" issues that might be driving the overall transaction.
As we describe in further detail below, the purposes behind the wording of $ 1 le.(2)'s definition
served: (1) to expand the types of materials that properly could be classified as byproduct material;
(2) to make clear that even feedstock containing less than 0.05% source material could qualify as
byproduct material; and (3) to assure that the NRC's jurisdiction did not cross over into activities
unrelated to the nuclear fuel cycle. The IUSA license amendment is consistent with these statutory
intentions, regardless of whether IUSA's bigger interest was payment for taking the material or
payment for the recovered uranium. Indeed, even accepting Utah's claim that the four million dollar
payment IUSA contracted to receive for processing and disposing of the Ashland 2 FUSRAP site
material was the primary motivator for this transaction, the tailings generated from the processing can
still properly be classified as $ l1e.(2) byproduct material.
UMTRCA's Purposes and History
It may be helpful to outline a little of UMTRCA's legislative history and, in particular, how the $ l le.
(2) definition came about. UMTRCA had two general goals: (1) providing a remedial- action
program to stabilize and control mill tailings at various identified inactive mill sites, and (2) assuring
the adequate regulation of mill tailings at active mill sites, both during processing and after
operations ceased. As then Chairman Hendrie of the NRC explained to Congress, the agency at the
time did not have direct regulatory control over uranium mill tailings. The tailings themselves were
not source material and did not fall into any other category of NRC licensable material. The NRC
exercised some control over tailings, but only indirectly as part of the Commission's licensing of
ongoing milling operations. Once operations ceased, however, the NRC had no fuither jurisdiction
over tailings. This resulted in dozens of abandoned or "orphaned" mill tailings piles.
To prevent future abandoned and unregulated tailings piles, Congress enacted the I le.(2) definition,
which expressly declared mill tailings to be a form of byproduct material. As Chairman Hendrie
explained, tailings are "fairly regarded as waste materials from the milling operation," but the
proposed definition would classify them as byproduct material and thus make them licensable under
the AEA. Under the new $ l1e.(2) definition, Chairman Hendrie emphasized, tailings generated
during uranium milling operations would "formally be byproducts rather than waste." Uranium Mill
Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978, Hearings on H.R. I1698, H.R. 12229, H.R. 12938, H.R.
12535, H.R. 13049, and H.R. 13650, (hereinafter "UMTRCA Hearings I") Subcomm. On Energy &
Power, House Comm. On Interstate & Foreign Commerce, 95th Cong. 2'd Sess. at 400 (1978)
(statement of Joseph M. Hendrie, Chairman, NRC).
At the time Congress drafted UMTRCA, the Environmental Protection Agency had some authority
over uranium mill tailings under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA), but
EPA had no authority over the milling process which generated the tailings. By defining mill tailings
as a byproduct material, the new 11e.(2) definition removed mill tailings from RCRA's coverage
since RCRA excludes all source, byproduct, and special nuclear material. This exclusion from RCRA
was intended to minimize any "dual regulation" of tailings by both EPA and the NRC. Chairman
Hendrie suggested that since the NRC already regulated the site-specific details of uranium milling, it
seemed logical for the NRC to regulate the treatment and disposal of tailings "which we permitted to
be generated in the first place." Id. at 342-43.
From the legislative history, we can glean a few conclusions about the actual wording of the I le.(2)
definition. As originally proposed, the definition of 11e.(2) byproduct material was directly linked to
the Commission's definition of source material. The original definition referred to "the naturally
occurring daughters of uranium and thorium found in the tailings or wastes produced by the
http://www.nrc. govA.{RC/COMMISSION/CLI|2000 12000-00 I cli.html 7/12/2001
a
o
o
o
o
a
a
o
o
CLI-00-01 - Intemational Uran$r OSA) Corporation - DocketNo.405I-MLA-4 Page6of1l
extraction or concentration of uranium or thorium from source material as defined in [then] Section
712.(2)." But Chairman Hendrie was concemed that a definition of byproduct material that was
linked to that of source material would exclude ores containing 0.05% or less of uranium or thorium.0 H" proposed that the language be revised to "from any ore processed primarily for its source
material content." His discussion with Congressman Dingell went as follows:
Mr. Hendrie: The Commission is informed that there are a few mills currently using
feedstock of less than 0.05 percent uranium. As high grade ores become scarcer, there may
be a greater incentive in the future to turn to such low grade materials.
Since such operations should be covered by any regulatory regime over mill tailings, the
Commission would suggest that the definition of byproduct material in H.R. 13382 be
revised to include tailings produced by extraction of uranium or thorium from any ore
processed primarily for its source material content.
Mr. Dingell: I am curious why you include in that the word "processed" primarily for
source material content. There are other ores that are being processed that do contain
thorium and uranium in amounts and I assume equal in value to those you are discussing
here. Is there any reason why we ought not to give you the same authority with regard to
those ores?
Mr. Hendrie: The intent of the language is to keep NRC's regulatory authority primarily in
the field of the nuclear fuel cycle. Not to extend this out into such things as phosphate
mining and perhaps even limestone mining which are operations that do disturb the radium-
bearing crust of the Earth and produce some exposures but those other activities are not
connected with the nuclear fuel cycle.
UMTRCA Hearings I at343-44.
There were, therefore, two principal intentions behind Chairman Hendrie's proposed language, which
Congress accepted. First, the I le.(2) definition was intended to reach even "low grade" feedstock
with less than a 0.05% concentration of uranium. Second, the definition was intended to make sure
that the NRC's jurisdiction did not expand into areas not traditionally part of the NRC's control over
the "nuclear fuel cycle." The definition therefore "focuses upon uranium milling wastes" and not, for
example, upon the wastes from phosphate ore processing which are also contaminated with small
quantities of radioactive elements. Id. at 354 ("Section by Section Analysis of H.R. 13382 As
Revised by NRC Recommended Language Changes"). Sim_ilarly, I le.(?) material was not to
encompass uranium mining wastes because, as Chairman Hendrie explained, "[w]e don't regulate
mines. The mining is regulated by the Department of Labor under other regulations so our definition
was drawn to maintain that and to keep us out of the mine-regulating business." Id. at 401.
We find, then, that the $ I le.(2)definition focused upon whether the process generating the wastes
was uranium milling within the course of the nuclear fuel cycle. As Chairman Hendrie made clear,
the concentration of the uranium or thorium in the feedstock was not a determinative factor in
whether the resulting tailings should be considered 11e.(2) material. The focus was not on the value
of the extracted uranium but on the activity involved.
In short, the $ I le.(2) definition focuses upon the process that generated the radioactive wastes -- the
removal of uranium or thorium as part of the nuclear fuel cycle. See Kerr-McGee Chemical Corp. v.
NRC, 903 F.2d 1, 7 (D.C. Cir. 1990). But UMTRCA does not require that the market value of the
uranium recovered be the licensee's predominant interest, and thus UMTRCA does not require the
NRC to assure that no other incentives lie behind the licensee's interest in processing material for
uranium. There simply is no reason under UMTRCA why licensees cannot have several motives for a
transaction.(! That IUSA's primary goal here may have been the four million dollar payment for
http ://www.nrc. gov/\iRC/COMMISSION/CLI|2000 12000-00 1 cli.html 711212001
CLI-00-01 - International Uranium (USA) Corporation - Docket No. 40-8681-MLA-4 PageTofll
o
o
o
o
o
a
o
o
o
o
o
disposal, instead of potential profit from any recoverable uranium, does not in and of itself prevent
the tailings generated from the milling process from falling within the $ I le.(2) definition. Moreover.
as we touch upon further below, making such purely economic considerations a determinative part of
the staffs review would unnecessarily divert agency resources to issues unrelated to public health and
safety.
The Need for Revising the Guidance
In this litigation, Utah and the other parties focused not upon UMTRCA and its legislative history,
but upon the NRC's Alternative Feed Guidance. The Commission, however, is not bound by the
Guidance. Like NRC NUREGS and Regulatory Guides, NRC Guidance documents are routine
agency policy pronouncements that do not carry the binding effect of regulations. See, e.g., Curators
of the University of Missouri, CLI-95-1,41 NRC 71,149 (1995); International Uranium (USA) Corp.
(White Mesa Uranium Mill), LBP-97-12, 46 NRC 1,2 (1997)(referring specifically to final Altemate
Feed Guidance as "non-binding Staff guidance"). Such guidance documents merely constitute NRC
staff advice on one or more possible methods licensees may use to meet particular regulatory
requirements. See, e.g., The Curators of the University of Missouri, CLI-95-1,41 NRC 11,150 &
n.l2l (1995); Petition for Emergency and Remedial Action, CLI-78-6, 7 NRC 400, 406-07 (1978);
Consumers Power Co. (Big Rock Point Nuclear Plant), ALAB-725, l7 NRC 562,568 n.l0 (1983);
Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. (Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station), CLI-74-40, 8 AEC
809, 8l I (1974). These guides, however, do not themselves have the force of regulations for they do
not impose any additional legal requirements upon licensees. Licensees remain free to use other
means to accompiish the same regulatory objectives. See id. "[A]gency interpretations and policies
are not'carved in stone' but rather must be subject to re-evaluations of their wisdom on a continuing
basis." Kansas Gas & Elec. Co. (Wolf Creek Generating Station, Unit l), 49 NRC 441, 460 (1999)
(referencing Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.,467 U.S. 837, 863-
64).
Accordingly, it has long been an established principle of administrative law that an agency is free to
choose among permissible interpretations of its governing statute, and that at times new
interpretations may represent a sharp shift from prior agency views or pronouncements. Chevron, 467
U.S. at 842-43,862 (1984). This is permissible so long as the agency gives "adequate reasons for
changing course." Envirocare of Utah v. NRC, F.3d , No. 98-1426 (D.C. Cir., Oct. 22,1999), slip op.
at 6. Given that: (1) the disputed portions of the Alternate Feed Guidance are not derived directly
from UMTRCA or its history; (2) the Guidance apparently has not been consistently applied in the
manner proposed by the State of Utah; (3) the precise terms of the Guidance are not entirely clear
(c.f., e.g., "other grounds"); and (a) the Commission believes that literal adherence to the apparent
intent of the Guidance would lead to unsound policy results, the Commission declines to follow it
here and will require the NRC staff to revise it as soon as practicabls.(')-)
Several policy reasons support departing from the Guidance. First, the NRC's statutory mission is
public health and safety. Our regulations establish comprehensive criteria for the possession and
disposal of I le.(2) byproduct material under NRC or Agreement State jurisdiction. See l0 C.F.R.
Part 40, Appendix A. The criteria were designed to assure the safe disposal of bulk material whose
primary radiological contamination is uranium, thorium, and radium in low concentrations. But
whether the concentration of uranium in the feedstock material is .058% or .008% -- the initial high
and low estimates, respectively, of the Ashland 2 material based upon samples taken -- has no impact
upon the general applicability and adequacy of the agency's health and safety standards for disposal
of $ I le.(2) material. Yet, in Utah's view, whether the actual uranium concentration proved to
be .058% or .008% could well dictate whether the resulting tailings appropriately could be classified
as $ 1le.(2) material and regulated by the NRC.
Utah's interpretation thus divides byproduct material into two different regulatory camps based solely
upon market-oriented factors, i.e., the expected profit from selling recovered uranium versus any
other economically advantageous aspects of the license amendment. Utah emphasizes, for example,
http ://www.nrc. govA{RCiCOMMISSION/CLL/2000 /2000-00 I cli.html 7/12t2001
CLI-00-01 - Internationat UraSn (USA) Corporation - Docket No. 40581-MLA-4 Page8of1l
that it "has not objected to several [IUSA] altemate feed license amendment requests where the waste
material contained [greater amounts] of uranium." See Utah's Petition for Review of LBP-99-5 (Feb.
26,1999) at 9 n.10. From a health and safety perspective, though, there is no reason to prohibit IUSA
from disposing of tailings material in its disposal cells solely on account of the feedstock having a
lower uranium concentration or lower market value. Cf. Kerr-McGee, 903 F.2 at7-8.
Second, the Guidance, if applied as originally intended, would cast the NRC staff into an
inappropriate role, conducting potentially multi-faceted inquiries into the financial attractiveness of
transactions. The staff essentially would need to look behind and veriff every assertion about the
economic factors motivating a proposed processing of material -- an unnecessary and wasteful use of
limited agency resources, at a time when the Commission increasingly has moved away from
performing economics-oriented reviews that have no direct bearing on safety and are not specifically
required by Congress.@
In addition, the NRC seeks to regulate efficiently, imposing the least amount of burdens necessary to
carry out our public health and safety mission. Yet, as this proceeding itself demonstrates, the
Alternate Feed Guidance's unwieldy "Certification and Justification" test lends itself easily to
protracted disputes among the NRC staff, intervenors, and the licensee over such issues as how much
the licensee will "really" profit from selling recovered uranium, what the licensee's "bigger" motives
may be, etc. All this effort and attention imposes burdens on the parties while detracting from our
central mission -- radiological safety, i.e., assuring that there are no constituents in the alternate feed
material that would prevent the mill from complying with all applicable NRC health and safety
regulations.
Nor is it inconceivable that eventual potential changes in the marketplace could impact whether
particular material might fall within the $ 11e.(2) definition one year but not the next, merely on
account of some new market factor. Purely economic factors, in short, should not determine how
radioactive material is defined. Whether IUSA was paid a "substantial sum," as Utah emphasizes, a
nominal sum, or had to pay a sum to acquire the Ashland 2 material has no bearing on health and
safety issues. Therefore, this is not appropriately the Commission's concern and also should have no
bearing on whether the resulting tailings meet the statutory definition of byproduct material under $1te.(2).
While it may be true, as Utah states, that when Congress enacted UMTRCA there was no "thought of
using offsite active uranium mills to process and dispose of industrial cleanup waste from FUSRAP
sites," Utah's Reply Brief at 5, several Congressmen did express an interest in having private
corporations take and reprocess materials as a means to offset the federal goverrrment's ultimate
disposal costs for cleaning up UMTRCA's designated Title I sites. See, e.g., UMTRCA Hearings on
H.R. 13382, H.R. 12938, H.R. 12535, and H.R. 13049 ("UMTRCA Hearings II") Subcomm. On
Energy & the Environment, House Comm. On Interior & Insular Affairs (1978) at 82 (statement of
Rep. Weaver)(some "companies might be interested in sharing the cost of stabilization of tailings in
return for access to minerals remaining in the piles";.0) Then Chairman Hendrie voiced no objection,
stating that "[i]f they want to reprocess the piling to make a complete recovery of the resource there, I
think that is fine from a conservation standpoint. It also puts them back in the active business of
milling." See UMTRCA Hearings II at 82.
Here, the Ashland 2 material has been approved for processing and disposal, and the resulting
byproduct material will be disposed of pursuant to the same health and safety standards that apply to
any other 1le.(2) material in an NRC-licensed mill: l0 C.F.R. Part40, Appendix A. Though Utah
may be dissatisfied with those standards, an adjudicatory proceeding is not the appropriate forum to
contest generic NRC requirements or regulations. See, e.g., Duke Energy Corporation (Oconee
Nuclear Station, Units 1, 3, and 3), QU-99:11, 49 NRC 328,334 (1999).
We note, additionally, that early in the proceeding Utah expressed concern that the Ashland 2
material, contrary to the NRC staffs findings, possibly contained listed hazardous waste. But while
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
O
o http://www.nrc. govA.lRC/COMMIS SION/CLIl2000 12000-00 1 cli.html 7lt2l200t
CLI-00-01 - Internationat Ura$t (USA) Corporation - Docket No.405I-MLA-4 Page9ofll
the accuracy of the license application can appropriately be the subject of an adjudication.
notwithstanding staff findings, here subsequent events have rendered Utah's hazardous waste concem
moot. Following negotiations with IUSA and, after analyzing investigations and data from the
Ashland 2 site, Utah formally withdrew its allegation that the Ashland 2 material may contain listed
hazardous waste. See Utah's Appeal Brief at 3 n.2.Instead, although Utah is upset that the staffs
allegedly "scan$/" review took only "about six weeks," its own review failed to uncover any errors in
the staffs conclusion that the material contains no listed hazardous waste. Utah's remaining
generalized complaint about how the staff reached its conclusion is not a litigable issue, given that
Utah now concurs with the staffs conclusion and no longer alleges the presence of any listed
hazardous waste.
Nevertheless, such disputes about the presence of hazardous waste are likely to recur, and the issue is
a significant one, implicating three concems: (1) possible health and safety issues, (2) the potential
for an undesirable, complex NRC-EPA "dual regulation" of the same tailings impoundment, and (3)
the potential for jeopardizing the ultimate transfer of the tailings pile to the U.S. govemment, for
perpetual custody and maintenance. See generally UMTRCA, Title II, $ 202 (Section 83 of the
AEA). In view of our decision that the Alternate Feed Guidance requires revision to reflect our
decision on the 1le.(2) definition, we will direct the staff to consider whether the Guidance also
should be revised to include more definitive and objective requirements or tests to assure that listed
hazardous or toxic waste is not present in the proposed feed material. We note, for example, that in a
recent license amendment proceeding, the Presiding Officer declared it simply "impossible" for him
to "ascertain the basis for the Staff determination that this material is not hazardous." Intemational
Uranium (USA) Corp. (White Mesa Uranium Mill), LBP-97-12, 46 NRC 1,5 (1997). Similarly, in
another earlier proceeding, the Presiding Officer found that the "Staffs new guidance for determining
whether feed material is a mixed [or hazardous] waste appears confusing," and accordingly suggested
there be more "specific protocols ... to determine if altemate feed materials contain hazardous
components." UMETCO,37 NRC at 280-81. The Commission concludes that this issue warrants
further staff refinement and standardization.
In conclusion, applying the Commission's statutory interpretation of $ I le.(2) byproduct material, the
Commission finds that the IUSA license amendment properly was issued and that the mill tailings at
issue do constitute $ I le.(2) byproduct material. From the information in the record, we believe that
it was reasonable for the NRC staff to have concluded that: (1) processing would take place, and (2)
uranium would be recovered from the ore. Utah itself has acknowledged that "[i]n three different
estimates, taken from DOE documents, the average uranium content of the material ranged from a
high of 0.058%oto a low of 0.008%." See Utah's Appeal Brief at 4; see also Utah's Brief in
Opposition to IUSA's License Amendment (Dec. 7, l998x"Utah's Brief in Opposition") at 8, and
Attachment at7-8. Utah's own expert estimated that up to $617,000 worth of uranium might be
recovered from the Ashland 2 material. See Utah's Brief in Opposition at 8, and Attachment at 9.
Utah's primary argument all along has been that the monetary value of the recovered uranium would
be much lower than the 4 million dollar payment IUSA would receive, not that no source material
would be recovered through processing. See, e.g., id., Attachment at 9 (where Utah's expert stressed
that the value of the uranium-239 that could be extracted from the Ashland 2 material "represents a
fraction (1.6 to l5 percent) of the $4,050,000 that [IUSA] will receive from Material Handling &
Disposal Services fees"); Utah's Reply Brief at 1l (the "disposal fee received by [IUSA] ... is almost
60 times the value of the uranium recovery").
Not only was it reasonable to conclude that uranium could be recovered from the Ashland 2 material,
but it was also reasonable to conclude that the processing would indeed take place. IUSA had a
contractual commitment to do so; its contract with the Army Corps of Engineers required IUSA to
process the material prior to disposal. See IUSA Brief at 18, 25. In addition, as the Presiding Officer
noted, "IUSA has a history of successfully extracting uranium from alternate feed material and has
developed credibility with the NRC ... for fulfilling its proposals to recover uranium from alternate
feeds." 49 NRC at ll2. This was not an instance, then, where there was no reasonable expectation
that the mill operator would in fact process material through the mill to extract recoverable uranium.
Moreover, it is also the Commission's understanding that the Ashland2 material has in fact been
o
a
o
o
a
o
a
o
o
a
O http ://www.nrc.govA.lRC/COMMISSION/CLll2000 12000-00 I cli.html 7lt2/2001
o
o
o
O
a
o
o
o
o
o
o
CLI-00-01 - Intemational Urar$n (USA) Corporation - Docket No. 4051-MLA-4 Page l0 of I I
processed in the IUSA mill and that approximately 8,000 pounds of uranium were extracted. While
that quantity of uranium was on the low end of IUSA's estimates, it nevertheless represents more than
a minute or negligible recovery of uranium.o
The Commission concludes, therefore, that the Presiding Officer's interpretation of the $ I le.(2)
definition reflects a sensible reading of the UMTRCA statute and legislative history -- one we hereby
embrace -- and that the record overall supports the issuance of the license amendment.
III. Conclusion
For the foregoing reasons, LBP-99-5 is affirmed.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
For the Commission
Ioriginal signed by]
Secretary of the Commission
Dated at Rockville, Maryland,
this lOth day of February, 2000.
l. IUSA made a similar request to receive, process, and dispose of uranium-bearing material from the
nearby Ashland I and Seaway Area D FUSRAP sites. That license amendment is the subject of a
separate NRC adjudicatory proceeding (Docket No. 40-8681-MLA-5) currently held in abeyance
pending the outcome of this appeal.
2.Infact, when the Guidance was first proposed, there was a description of how owners of low-level
or mixed waste, facing the high costs of disposal, might find it "very attractive" to "pay a mill
operator substantially less to process [the material] for its uranium content and dispose of the
resulting l1e.(2) material," rather than to pay for disposal at a low-level or mixed waste facility. $pq"Uranium Mill Facilities, Request for Public Comments on Guidance on the Use of Uranium Mill
Feed Materials Other Than Natural Ores," 57 Fed. Reg. 20,52 5,20,533 (May 13, 1992)("Proposed
Guidance"). The Proposed Guidance labeled such transactions "sham disposals," and implied they
"would not meet the definition of I le.(2) byproduct material." IQ. at20,533.
3. "Source material" has been defined by the Commission to exclude ores containing less than 0.05%
of uranium or thorium. l0 C.F.R. $ 40.4.
4. Sge 4!qq, qg, Ks{L-MgGgg, 903 F.2d at 7 (where the court suggested that the word "primarily" in
the $ I le.(2) definition could be read to mean "substantially," and thus the tailings from the
coproduction of source material and rare earths could still be deemed l1e.(2) byproduct material so
long as gnB of the reasons for processing the ore was for extracting source material). The court's
reasoning in Kerr-McGee is consistent with the UMTRCA history, which reflects that it has long
been the case, for instance, that both vanadium and uranium might be extracted during a processing
of material, and indeed that the amount of recoverable vanadium may very likely be much greater
than that of the recoverable uranium. Seq, e.g., UMTRCA Hearings I at 155 (where private company
http ://www.nrc. govA.IRCiCOMMISSION/CLL/2000 12000-00 I cli.html 7/r2t2001
o
o
o
a
a
o
a
O
o
o
CLI-00-01 - International Urani_um (USA) Corporation - Docket No. 40-8681-MLA-4 Page l1 ofll
reprocessing material was extracting 2 % pounds of vanadium for every % pound of uranium
extracted); qgg 3bA UMTRCA Hearings III at 136 ("We recover ... about 1,000 pounds a day of
uranium, about 4,000 pounds of vanadium"). There was never any suggestion in the legislative
history that if the amount or value of the vanadium proved higher than that of the uranium, the
tailings could not be categorized as I le.(2) byproduct material.
5. The Commission has promulgated no regulation implementing the Guidance. Thus. the
Commission's rejection of the Guidance does not present a situation where the Commission has
altered "suddenly and sub silentio settled interpretations of its own regulations." N4lqral Resoqqqes
Defense Council, Inc. v. NRC,695 F.2d 623,625 (D.C. Cir. 1982). Sgqgeqqally Syqcor Int'l Qorp.v. Shalala, 127 F.3d 90 (D.C. Cir.1997); Paralvzed Veterans of Amgrica v. P.C.4{qqq L.P.,117
F.3d 579 (1997), cert. denied, 523 U.S. 1003 (1998); United Technologies Qprp v. E!A, 821 F.2d
714 (D.C. Cir. 1987).
6. See, e.g., Final Rule, Environmental Review for Renewal of Nuclear Power Plant Operating
Licenses,6l Fed. Reg.28,467,28,484 (June 5, 1996); Kansas Gas & Elgc. Co. (Wolf Creek
Generating Station, Unit 1), CLI-99-19,49 NRC 441 (1999).
7. See also, e.9., UMTRCA Hearings I at 89-90 (written statement of Rep. Johnson); Hearings On
5.3008, 5.3078, and 3.3253 ("UMTRCA Hearings III") Subcomm. On Energy Prod. & Supply,
Senate Comm. On Energy & Natural Resources (1978) at 59 (statement of Sen. Haskell)(if private
companies reprocessed some of the tailings, that would be regulated under the NRC's regulations).
8. Moreover, even if we had adhered to and sought to apply the Guidance's tests for licensee
"motives," the record does not show that IUSA processed the Ashland 2 material as a means to
change rc!-l1e.(2) material into $ lle.(2) material. IUSA was aware that the NRC staff had accepted
a DOE certification declaring that the Ashland 2 FUSRAP material met the I le.(2) byproduct
material definition. Based upon the DOE certification, the staff had concluded that "the material
could be disposed of directly in the White Mesa tailings impoundments," without any need of
processing at the mill. Sep Technical Evaluation Report at 6, attached to Amendment 6 to Source
Material License Sua-1358 (June 23,1998). The staff thus claims that "sham disposal" was not a
concern "since it did not appear that the material was being processed to change its legal definition,
and as such was truly being processed for its uranium content." See Staff Aff. of Joseph Holonich at
7. Whether the Ashland 2 material actually already was $ I le.(2) byproduct material under
UMTRCA remains unclear. Ssg supra at 6-7. Nevertheless, IUSA was aware that DOE, the Army
Corps of Engineers, and the NRC staff all had categorized the material as such, and that the staff
indeed had stated that this was material that could have been disposed of without any further
processing. This suggests that IUSA had a genuine interest in processing the material for the uranium
and not qimply an interest in "reclassi&ing" the material by processing it. The subtle and complex
nature of this inquiry, however, reinforces our view that discerning a licensee's motives for a license
amendment transaction is a difficult, virtually impossible and, in any event, unnecessary exercise.
Accordingly, our approach in this decision rejects ultimate business motivations as irrelevant to the $l le.(2) definition.
a http ://www.nrc.gov/IIRC/COMMISSION/CLI|2000 12000-00 1 cli.html 7fi212001
o
o
a
o
o
a
o
o
o
o
o
a
a
a
a
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
540.2o
$40.2a Coverage of inactive tailings
sites.
(a) Prior to the completion of the re-
medial action, the Commission will notrequire a license pursuant to 10 CFR
chapter I for possession of residual ra-dioactive materials as defined in thispart that are located at a site wheremilling operations are no longer ac-tive, if the site is covered by the reme-dial action program of title I of theUranium Mill Tailings Radiatlon Con-trol Act of 1978, as amended. The Com-
mission will exert its regulatory role inremedial actions primarily throughccncurrence and consultation in theexecution ofthe remedial action pursu-ant to title I of the Uranium MillTailings Radiation Control Act of 1978,
as amended. After remedial actions are
completed, the Commission will lice[sethe long-term care of sites, vyhere re-sidual radioactive materials are dis-posed, under the requirements set outin $40.27.(b) The Commission will regulate by-product material as defined in this partthat is Iocated at a site where milling
operations are no longer active, if suchsite is not covered by the remedial ac-tion program of title I of the UraniumMill Tailings Radiation Control Act of
1978. The criteria in appendix A of thispart will be applied to such sites.
t45 FR 65531, Oct. 3, 1980, a.s amended at 55 FR
{5598, Oct. 30, 19901
$40.3 License requirements.
A person subject to the regulationsin this part may not receive title to,own, receive, possesB, use, transfer,provide for long-term care, deliver or
dispose of byproduct material or resid-ual radioactive materlal as defined inthis part or any source material after
removal from its place of deposit in na-ture, unless authorized in a specific orgeneral license lssued by the Commis-sion under the regulations in this part.
[55 FR 45598, Oct. 30, 1990]
$ 40.4 Definitions.
.Act means the Atomic Energy Act of1954 (68 Stat. 919), including any
amendments thereto;
Agreement Store means any State with
which the Atomic Energ:y Commission
or the Nuclear Reg:ulatory Commission
l0 CFR Ch. I (l-l{l Edilion)
has entered into an effective agree-
1n61f, rrnfls1 subsection 2?4b. of theAtomic Energy Act of 1954, as amend-
ed.
Alert means events may occur, are inprogress, or have occuffed that could
lead to a release of radioactive mate-
rial but that the release is not expectedto require a response by offsite re-
sponse organizations to protect persons
offsite.
Bgproduct Material means the tailingsor wastes produced by the extractionor concentration of uranium or tho-rium from any ore processed primarily
for its source material content, includ-ing discrete surface wastes resulting
from uranium solution extraction proc-
esses. Underground ore bodies depleted
by such solution extraction operationsdo not constitute "byproduct mate-rial" vyithin this definition.With the exception of "byproductmaterial" as defined in section 11e. ofthe Act, other terms defined in section
11 of the Act shall have the same mean-ing when used in the regulations in
this part.
Commencement of constructioa meansany clearing of land, excavation, or
other substantial action that would ad-versely affect the natural environment
of a site but does not include changes
desirable for the temporary use of theIand for public recreational uses, nec-
essary borings to determine site char-acteristics or other preconstruction
monitoring to establish background in-formation related to the suitability ofa site or to the protection of environ-mental values.
Commission means the Nuclear Regu-
latory Commission or its duly author-
ized representatives.
Corporation means the United States
Endchment Corporation (USEC), or its
successor, a Corporation that ls au-thorized by statute to lease the gas-
eous diffusion enrichment plants in Pa-
ducah, Kentucky, and Piketon, Ohio,
from the Department of Energy, or anyperson authorized to operate one or
both of the gaseous diffusion plants, or
other facilities, pursuant to a plan forthe privatization of USEC that is ap-
proved by the President.
Decommission means to remove a fa-cility or site safely from service and
614
a
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Nucleor Regulolory Commission
reduce residual radioactivity to a levelthat permits-
(1) Release of the property for unre-stricted use and termination of the li-
cense; or(2) Release of the property uader re-stricted conditions and termination ofthe license.
Department and Depdrtment of Energy
means the Department of Energ:y es-tablished by the Department of EnergyOrganization Act (Pub. L. 95-91, 91Stat. 565, 42 U.S.C. 7L07 et seg.) to theextert that the Department, or its dulyauthorized representatives, exercisesfunctions formerly vested in the U.S.Atomic Energy Commission, its Chair-man, members, officors and compo-nents and transferred to the U.S. En-ergy Research and Development Ad-ministration and to the Administratorthereof pursuant to sections 104 (b), (c)and (d) of the Energy ReorganizationAct of 19?4 (Pub. L. 93-438, 88 Stat. 1233at 1237, 42 U.S.C. 5814) and retransferredto the Secretary of Energy pursuant to
sectioD 301(a) of the Department of En-ergy Organization Act (Pub. L. 95-91, 91Stat. 565 at 577-578,42 U.S.C. 7151).
Depleted uranium means the source
material uranium in which the isotope
uranium-23s is less than 0.711 weightpercent of the total uranium present.
Depleted uranium does not include spe-
cial nuclear materlal.
Elfectiue kilogram means (1) for thesource material uranium in which theuranium isotope uranium-235 is greater
than 0.005 (0,5 weight percent) of thetotal uranium present: 10,000 kilo-grams, and (2) for any other source ma-terial: 20,000 kilograms.
Gooernment agenc! means any execu-tive department, commission, inde-pendent establishment, corporation,wholly or partly owned by the UnitedStates of America whlch is an instru-mentality of the United States, or any
board, bureau, division, service, office,officer, authority, administration, orother establishment in the executive
branch of the Government.
License, except where otherwise spec-ified, means a license issued pu-rsuant
to the regulations in this part.
Persons means: (1) Any individual,
corporation, partnership, firm, associa-tion, trust, estate, public or private in-stitution, group, Government agency
s40.4
other than the Commission or the De-
partment of Energy except that the De-partment of Energy shall be considered
a person within the meaning of the reg-
ulations in thls part to the exteut thatits facilities and activities are subjectto the licensing and related regulatoryauthority of the Commission pursuantto section 202 of the Energy Reorga-nization Act of 19?4 (88 Stat. 1244) andthe Uranium Mill Tailings RadiationControl Act of 1978 (92 Stat. 3021), any
State or any political subdivision of, or
any political entity within a State, anyforeign government or nation or any
subdivision of any such government ornation, or other eDtity; and (2) anylegal successor, representative, agent
or agency of the foregoing.
PhatmaEist means an individual reg-istered by a state or territory of theUnited States, the District of Columbiaor the Commonwealth of Puerto Ricoto compound and dispense drugs, pre-
scriptions and poisons.
Physician means a medical doctor ordoctor of osteopathy licensed by aState or Teritory of the United
States, the District of Columbia, or the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico to pre-
scribe drugs in the practice of medi-
cine.
Principal actioities, as used in thispart, means activities authorized bythe license which are essential toachieving the purpose(s) for which the
license was issued or amended. Storagedu-ring which no licensed material is
accessed for use or disposal and activi-ties incidental to decontamination or
decommissioning are not principal ac-tivities.
Residual radioactiae material means:(1) Waste (which the Secretary of En-
ergy determines to be radioactive) inthe form of tailings resulting from theprocessing of ores for the extraction of
uranium and other valuable constitu-ents of the ores; and (2) other waste(which the Secretary of Energy deter-mines to be radioactive) at a proc-
essing slte which relates to such proc-
essing, including any residual stock of
unprocessed ores or low-grade mate-rials. This term is used only with re-
spect to materials at sites subject to
remediation under title I of the Ura-nium Mill Tailings Radiation ControlAct of 1978, as amended.
615
o
o
o
O
O
o
o
o
o
o
s40.s
Site area emergencA means events may
occur, are in progress, or have occwredthat could lead to a significant release
of radioactive material and that couldrequire a response by offsite response
organizations to protect persons off-site.
Source Materiol means: (1) Uranium orthorium, or any combination thereof,in any physical or chemical form or (2)ores which contain by weight one-twentieth of one percent (0.05%) ormore of: (i) Uranium, (ii) thorium or(iii) any combination thereof. Sourcematerial does not include special nu-
clear r]raterial.
Special nuclear material means: (1)
Plutonium, uranium 23{}, uranium en-
riched in the isotope 233 or in the iso-tope 235, and any other material whichthe Commission, pursuant to the provi-
sions of section 51 of the Act, deter-mlnes to be special nuclear material;
or (2) any material artificially enrichedby any of the foregoing.
Transient shipment means a shipmentof nuelear material, originating andterminating in foreign countries, on a
vessel or aircraft that stops at a United
States port.
United States, when used in a geo-graphical sense, includes Puerto Ricoand all territories and possessions ofthe United States.
Unrefined and, unprocessed ore meansore in its natu-ral form prior to anyprocessing, such as grinding, roastingor beneficiating, or refinlng.
Uranium enrichment facility mearls:.(1) Any facility used for soparatingthe isotopes of uranium or enrichlng:
uranium iD the isotope 235, except lab-oratory scale facilities designed orused for experimental or analSrtical
purposes only; or(2) Any equipment or device, or im-portant component part especially de-
signed for such equipment or device,
capable of separating the isotopes ofuranium or enriching uranium in the
isotope 235.Uranium Milling means any activitythat results in the production of by-product material as defined in thispart.
[26 FR 2&1, Jan. 14, 1961]
EDTTORIAL NoTE: For addltional FEDERAL
REGTSTER citatlonB affectlna $40.11, Bee theLlst of CFR, SectloDs Affected, which appea,rs
l0 CFR Ch. I (l-l{l Edilion)
in the Fluding: Aids section of the printed
volume ald on GPO Access.
$40.5 Communications.
(a) Unless otherwise specified or cov-slsd rrnfl61 the regional licensing pro-gram as provided in paragraph (b) ofthis section, any communication or re-port concerning the regulations in thispart and any application filed under
these regulations may be submitted to
the Commission as follows:
(1) By mail addressed to: Director,
Office of Nuclear Material Safety and
Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555.
(2) By delivery in person to the Com-mission's offices to the Director. Officeof Nuclear Material Safety and Safe-guards at:(i) 2120 L Street, NW., Washington,
DC; or(ii) 11545 Rockville Pike. Two WhiteFlint North, Rockville, Maryland.(b) The Commission has delegated tothe five Regional Administrators li-
censing authority for selected parts ofits deeentralized licensing program for
nuclear materials as described in para-
g:raph (b)(1) of this section. Any com-munication, report, or application cov-
ered under this licensing program must
be submitted as specified in paragraph
(b)(2) of this section.(1) The delegated licensing program
includes authority to issue, renew,
amend, cancel, modify, suspend, or re-voke licenses for nuclear materialsissued pursuant to 10 CFR, parts 30through 36, 39, 40, and 70 to all persons
for academic, medical, and industrial
uses, with the following exceptions:(i) Activities in the fuel cycle and
special nuclear material in quantities
sufficient to constitute a critical massin any room or area. This exception
does not apply to license modificationsrelating to termination of special nu-clear material licenses that authorizepossession of larger quantities whenthe case is referred for action fromNRC's Headquarters to the Regionai
Administrators.(ii) Health and safety design review
of sealed sources and devices and ap-
proval, for licensing purposes, of sealed
sources and devices.
o
616
o
o
a
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
O
EPA-NRC Guidance Page I of8o
utrdSaliEnimsrtdfglrEy
o
Radiation Protection Program
Mixed Waste Teams,EPA
You are here:radiation protection homg> mixed waste home > guidance > definition and identification of comnrerctal
mixed low-level radioactive and hazardous waste
Guidance on the Definition and ldentification of
Commercial Mixed Low-Level Radioactive and
Hazardous Waste
The following guidance was developed by NRC-EPA for Low-Level Mixed
Waste Identification. The following memo was published with this guidance.
Definition
Mixed Low-Level Radioactive and Hazardous Waste (Mixed LL\y) is defined as
waste that satisfies the definition of low-level radioactive waste (LLW) in the
Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985 (LLRWPAA)
and contains hazardous waste that either (l) is listed as a hazardous waste in
Subpart D of 40 CFR Part 261 or (2) cause the LLW to exhibit any of the
hazardous waste characteristics identified in Subpart C of 40 CFR Part 261.
Identification
The policy provided in this guidance was developed jointly by the U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (NRC) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA). LLW that contains hazardous wastes defined under the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) is Mixed LLW. Under current Federal
law, such waste is subject to regulation by NRC under the Atomic Energy Act
(AEA), as amended, and by EPA under RCRA, as amended. In the absence of
legislation to the contrary, management and disposal of this waste must be
conducted in compliance with NRC and EPA or equivalent state regulations.
This guidance presents a methodology (Figure l) that may be used by generators
of commercial LLW to ldentifo Mixed LtW. trnplementation of the methodology
should identiff Mixed LLW and aid generators in assessing whether they are
currently generating Mixed LLW. Generators are cautioned, however, that
application of the methodology does not affect the need to comply with
applicable NRC and EPA regulations. Because EPA's regulations for hazardous
waste are currently changing, generators should use applicable regulations that
are ln effect at the time of implernentation of the methodology. This guidance has
been prepared based on NRC and EPA regulations in effect on Decernber 31,
1988.
Application of this methodology to identiff Mixed LLW will reveal the
complexities of the definition of Mixed LLW. If generators have specific
http://www.epa.gov/radiation/mixed-waste/mwjg25.htm 8/8/01
a
promptly
t
EPA-NRC Guidance Page 2 of 8
questions about whether LLW is Mixed LLW, they should
agencies by writing to the persons listed below.
contact the
Methodology
Step 1. Identiff LLW
Step I in the methodology requires that the generator determine whether the
waste is LLW as defined in the LLRWPAA. This Act defines LLW as
radioactive material that (A) is not high-level radioactive waste, spent nuclear
fuel, or byproduct material as defined in section lle(2) of the AEA (i.e., uranium
or thorium mill tailings) and (B) the NRC classifies as LLW consistent with
existing law and in accordance with (A). If the generator determines that the
waste is LLW, the generator should proceed to step 2. If the determination is
negative, then the waste cannot be Mixed LLW because it is not LLW. However,
the waste may be another radioactive or hazardous waste regulated under AEA,
RCRA, or both statutes.
Step 2. Identify Listed Hazardous Waste
In step 2,the generator determines whether the LLW contains any hazardous
wastes listed in Subpart D of 40 CFR Part 26l.LLW is Mixed LLW if it contains
anyhazardous wastes specifically listed in Subpart D of 40 CFR Part 261. Listed
hazardous wastes include hazardous waste streams from specific and non-specific
sources listed in 40 CFR Parts 261 .3 I and 261 .32 and discarded commercial
chernical products listed in 40 CFR Part26l.33. The generator is responsible for
determining whether LLW contains listed hazardous wastes. The determination
should be based on knowledge of the process that generates the waste. For
example, if a process produces LLW that contains spent solvents that are
specifically listed in the tables of Subpart D of Part 261, the generator should
suspect that the waste is Mixed LLW.
Step 3. Identiff Hazardous Characteristics
If the LLW does not contain a listed hazardous waste, Step 3 of the methodology
requires the generator to determine whether the LLW contains hazardous wastes
that cause the LLW to exhibit any of the hazardous waste characteristics
identified in Subpart C of 40 CFR Part 261. This determination can be based on
either (1) an assessment of whether the LLW exhibits one or more of the
hazardous waste characteristics because it contains non-AEA materials (i.e.,
materials other than source, special nuclear, and byproduct materials) based on
the generator's knowledge of the materials or processes used in generating the
LLW or (2) testing of the LLW in accordance with the methods identified in
Subpart C of Part 261. Except for certain ores containing source material, which
are defined as source material in l0 CFR 40.4(h), and uranium and thorium mill
tailings or wastes, NRC and EPA interpret the definitions of source, special
nuclear, and byproduct materials to include only the radioactive elements
themselves. Generators should identifu non-AEA materials contained in the LLW
by examining the process that generates the waste. For example, if the process
mixes byproduct material (an AEA material) with a volatile organic solvent (a
http://www.epa.gov/radiation/mixed-waste/mwpg25.htrn 8i8l01
o
t
t
a
t
t
t
t
I
t
EPA-NRC Guidance Page 3 of8
non-AEA material), the generator would determine either through his knowledge
or testing of representative samples of the LLW that contain the solvent waste
whether the waste exhibits any of the hazardous waste characteristics because it
contains the solvent.
If the wastes are tested, the generator should collect and test representative
samples of the LLW to determine if the waste exhibits any of the characteristics
identified in Subpart C because it contains the non-AEA materials. These
characteristics include ignitability (Section 261.21), corrosivity (Section 261.22\,
reactivity (Section 261.23), and Exfaction Procedure (EP) toxicity (Section
261.24). Waste testing should be conducted in a manner that is consistent with
the worker protection requirements in l0 CFR Part 20. The purpose of the
characteristlcs tests is to identifu hazardous wastes that are not specifically listed
in Subpart D of 40 CFR Part 261. Test methods to collect representative samples
of wastes are described in Appendix I of 40 CFR Part 261. The samples should
then be tested using the referenced testing protocols (e.g., ASTM Standard D-93-
79 orD-93-80 for the Pensky-Martens Closed Cup Ignitability Test). EPA's
testing requirements are reproduced in Appendix II of this guidance. It should be
noted that on June 13, 1986, EPA proposed a modification to the EP Toxicity
testing requirements to include organic constituents.
If LLW contains a listed hazardous waste or non-AEA materials that cause the
LLW to exhibit any of the hazardous waste characteristics, the waste is Mixed
LLW and must, therefore, be managed and disposed of in compliance with EPA's
Subtitle C hazardous waste regulations in 40 CFR Parts 124, and260 through
270, andNRC's regulations in l0 CFR Parts 20, 30, 40, 61, and 70.
Managernent and disposal of Mixed LLW must be conducted in compliance with
state requirernents in states with EPA-authorized regulatory programs for the
hazardous components of such waste and NRC agreement state radiation control
programs for LLW.
Questions and Answers
As a supplernent to the "Guidance on the Definition and Identification of
Commercial Mixed Low-Level Radioactive and Hazardous Waste (Mixed
LLW),* answers to anticipated questions are included to clarifu obscure points
and to respond to public comments.
1. Are my low-level radioactive wastes exempt from RCRA because
they are source, special nuclear, or byproduct materials as defined under
the AEA?
Except for certain ores containing source material, which are defined as source
material in 10 CFR 40.4(h), and uranium and thorium mill tailings or wastes,
NRC and EPA consider that only the radionuclides themselves are exempt from
RCRA. Section 1004(27) of RCRA excludes source, special nuclear, and
byproduct material from the definition of "solid waste." RCRA defines solid
http:/iwww.epa.gov/radiation/mixed-waste/mwjg25.htm 8/8/01
EPA-NRC Guidance Page 4 of8
t
a
I
t
t
t
t
t
a
e
waste as:
"any garbage, refuse, sludge from a waste treatment plant, water supply treament
plant, or air pollution control facility and other discarded material, including
solid, liquid, semisolid, or contained gaseous material resulting from industrial,
commercial, mining, and agricultural operations, or from community activities,
but does not include solid or dissolved materials in irrigation return flows or
industrial discharges which are point sources subject to permits under section 402
of the Federal Waster Pollution Control Act, as amended (86 Stat. 880), or
source, special nuclear, or bvproduct material as defined by the Atomic Energy
Act of 1954, as amended (68 Stat. 923)."
Since "hazardous waste" is a subset of "solid waste," RCRA also excludes source,
special nuclear, and byproduct materials from the definition of hazardous waste
and, therefore, from regulation under EPA's RCRA Subtitle C program. Section
l1 of the Atomic Energy Act, as amended, defines these radioactive materials as
follows:
Source material means (l) uranium, thorium, or any other material which is
cietermined by the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) pursuant to the provisions
of section 6l of the AEA to be source material, or (2) ores containing one or
more of the foregoing materials, in such concentration as the AEC may by
requlation determine from time to time.
Special nuclear material means (l) plutonium, uranium enriched in the isotope
233 or in the isotope 235, and any other material which the AEC, pursuant to the
provisions of Section 5 I of the AEA, determines to be special nuclear material;
or (2) any material artificially enriched by any of the foregoing, but does not
include source material. Byproduct material means (l) any radioactive material
(except special nuclear material) yielded in or made radioactive by exposure to
radiation incident to the process of producing or utilizing special nuclear
material, and (2) the tailings or wastes produced by the extraction or
concentratlon of uranium or thorium from any ore processed primarily for its
source material content.
Source, special nuclear, and byproduct materials, however, ffioy be mixed with
other radioactive or non-radioactive materials that are not source, special nuclear,
or byproduct materials. For example, tritium may be contained in toluene, a
nonhalogenated aromatic solvent. Consistent with the definition of byproduct
material, the tritium may be considered a byproduct material, while the toluene
that contalns the tritium would not be byproduct material. Mixtures of toluene
and tritium could satisfu the definition of Mixed LLW because they contain listed
hazardous waste (spent toluene) and tritium that may qualifr as LLW if it has
been produced by activities regulated by NRC under the AEA.
2. What are some examples of Mixed LLW?
A preliminary survey performed for the NRC identified two potential types of
Mixed LLW:
I http://www.epa.gov/radiation/mixed-waste/mwjg25.htm 8/8/01
a
I
I
I
t
I
I
o
t
I
t
EPA-NRC Guidance Page 5 of8
LLW containing organic liquids, such as scintillation liquids and vlals;
organic lab liquids; sludges; and cleaning, degreasing, and miscellaneous
solvents.
. LLW containing heavy metals, such as discarded lead shielding, discarded
lined containers, and lead oxide dross containing uranium oxide; light
water reactor (L!VR) process wastes containing chromate and LWR
decontamination resins containing chromium; and mercury amalgam in
frash.
The preliminary survey concluded that potential Mixed LLW comprises a small
percentage of all LLW. For example, LLW containing organic liquids accounted
for approximately 2.3%by volume of LLW reported in the preliminary survey
(Bowerman, et a1.,1985). An earlier survey identified a more diverse universe of
potential Mixed LLW includlng wastes that contained aldehydes, aliphatic
halogenated hydrocarbons, alkanas, alkenes, amino acids, aromatic hydrocarbons,
chelating agents, esters, ethers, ketones, nltrosamines, nucleotides, pesticides,
phenolic compounds, purines, resins, steroids, and vitamlns (General Research
Corporation, 1980). NRC also anticipates that additional LLW may be identified
as Mixed LLW in the future, as generators implement the definition of Mixed
LLW and as EPA revises the definition of hazardous waste.
(Editorial Note: The following discussion on BRC is moot as NRC's BRC
policy has been rescinded)
3. Could some "below regulatory concern'r wastes be considered Mixed
LLW?
A determination that radioactive wastes are below regulatory concern (BRC) for
radioactivity may affect how the wastes are managed or discarded, but it does not
affect the legal status of the wastes. Specifically, their status with respect to the
definition of Mixed LLW does not change. BRC waste is still LLW because it
satisfies the definition of LLW in the LLRWPAA and is within the NRC's
jurisdictional authority under the AEA.
When radioactive waste contains sufficiently low concentrations or quantities of
radionuclides, NRC may find that they do not need to be managed or disposed of
as radioactive wastes. For NRC to make such a finding, management and
disposal of the waste must not pose an undue radiological risk to the publ-c and
the environment. However, NRC's determination that the radioactive content of
the wastes is below NRC regulatory concern does not relieve licensees from
compliance with applicable rules of other agencies governing non-radiological
hazards (e.g., regulations of EPA or the Department of Transportation).
Therefore, some BRC wastes may still be considered Mixed LLW if they contain
hazardous wastes that have been listed in Subpart D of 40 CFR Part 261 or that
cause the LLW to exhibit any of the hazardous characteristics described in
Subpart C of 40 CFR Part 261. BRC Mixed LLW may be managed without
regard to its radioactivity (but it must still be managed as a hazardous waste in
compliance wlth EPA's regulations for hazardous waste generation, storage,
http://www.epa.gov/radiation/mixed-waste/mwpg25.htm 8/8/01
EPA-NRC Guidance Page 6 of 8
transportation, treatment, and disposal (cf. 40 CFR Parts 2 266)\.
4. If I use chemicals in my process that are identified by EPA as
hazardous constituents, should I assume that my LLW is Mixed LLW?
No. Lowlevel radioactive waste that contains hazardous constituents may not
necessarily be Mixed LLW. As defined above, Mixed LLW is LLW that contains
a known hazardous waste (i.e., a listed hazardous waste) or that exhibits one or
more of the hazardous characteristics because it contains non-AEA materials. For
wastes that are not listed in Subpart D of 40 CFR Part 261, testing is not
necessarily required to "determine" whether the LLW exhibits any of the
hazardous characteristics. A generator may be able to determlne whether the
LLW is Mixed LLW based on knowledge of the waste characteristics or the
process that generates the LLW.
Furthermore, if the generator normally segregates LLW from hazardous and other
types of wastes, there is no need to assume that hazardous wastes may have been
inadvertently mixed with LLW or to inspect each container or receptacle to
ensure that inadvertent mixing has not occurred. Although the generator is
subject to RCRA inspections and must follow the manifest, pre-tansport, and
other requirements of 40 CFR Part262, the generator is not required to
demonstate that every LLW container does not contain hazardous waste.
5. How can I obtain representative samples of heterogeneous trash
included in LLW to perform the hazardous characteristics tests?
Before discussing the collection of representative samples of waste, generators
are reminded that they are not required to test LLW to determine if the waste
contains hazardous wastes. Generators and handlers of mixed waste and
hazardous waste can declare their wastes hazardous or nonhazardous based on
knowledge of the process/production of the waste, in lieu of testing for a
characteristic.
Representative samples of waste should be collected for testing in accordance
with EPA's regulations in 40 CFR 261.20(c), which state that waste samples
collected using applicable methods specified in Appendix I of Part 261 will be
considered as representative samples for hazardous characteristics testing. This
appendix has been included in its entirety in Appendix II of this guidance. The
sampling techniques described in Appendix I of Part 261 apply to extremely
viscous liquids, fly ash-like material, containerized liquid wastes, and liquid
wastes in pits, ponds lagoons, and similar reservoirs. In the absence of guidance
about sampling heterogeneous wastes, generators should use appropriate portions
of the sampling methods described in Appendix, I of Part 261 and EPA's manual
entitled "Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, Third Edition (i.e., SW-846)
in combination with other methods to collect, to the maximum extent practicable,
representative samples of the waste to be tested.
6. Are lead containers whose primary use is for shielding in disposal
operations, hazardous waste under RCRA?
http://www.epa.gov/radiation/mixed-waste/mw1g25.htm 8/8/01
o
62 through
I
t
a
a
t
t
I
o
a
o
EPA-NRC Guidance Page 7 of8
No. While lead containers and lead container liners may exhibit the hazardous
characteristic for lead, those containers whose primary use is for shielding in low-
level waste disposal operatlons are not considered wastes and thus, are not
subject to the hazardous waste rules. These same containers and liners if disposed
of or discarded would be considered wastes and if they exhibit the hazardous
characteristic, would be subject to the hazardous waste rules.
It should be noted that EPA recognizes that all lead containers and liners may be
equally hazardous to human health and the environment when placed ln the
ground independent of its legal classification as a waste or container. Therefore,
EPA recommends that all lead containers and lead liners be managed in an
environmentally safe manner (e.g., managed in a permitted hazardous waste
facility or treated such that it no longer exhibits its characteristic).Encapsulation
may be a viable mechanism to mitigate lead migration from these containers and
liners. The EPA has not evaluated specific containers or encapsulation
methodologies usinq the EP Toxicity test.
7 .lf a waste contains any of the constituents listed on Appendix VIII of
Part26l, is it ahazardous under RCRA?
No. Under RCRA, a waste is hazardous if it is a "listed" waste or it exhibits a
hazardous characteristic. Wastes are listed by EPA if they contain significant
amounts of toxic constituents identified in Appendix VIII, and the Agency has
determined that these toxic constltuents are persistent and mobile to some degree
such that they pose a potential and substantial threat to human health and the
environment. (Factors outlined in 40 CFR 261.1 l(a)(3)(i)-(xi), which include
nature of the toxicity present and potential degradation products, may be
considered when determining whether or not a waste should be listed). However,
until the Agency lists the wastes in Subpart D of Part 261, they would not be
considered hazardous by EPA (even if the waste contains one or more of the
hazardous constituents listed on Appendix VIII) unless the waste would exhibit
one or more of the hazardous waste characteristics.
References
Bowerman, B. S., Kempf, C. R., MacKenzie, D. R., Siskind, B. and P. L. Piciulo,
1985, "An Analysis of Low-Level Wastes: Review of Hazardous Waste
Regulations and Identification of Radioactive Mixed Wastes," NUREG/CR-4406,
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
General Research Corpora'ion, 1980, "Study of Chernical Toxicity of Low-Level
Wastes," NUREG/CR- I 793, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Back to the Guidance Page
URL: http://www.epa. gov/radiation/mixed-waste/mwjg25.htm
http : //www. epa. gov/radiation/mixed-waste/mw1g2 5.htm 8/8/0r
EPA-NRC Guidance
t
Last Reviewed: November 30, 2000.
I Mixed Waste Home I Overview of l{iTed Waste I Regulatory History of Mixed
Waste
Mixed Waste Rule I State or FederafRegulations I Land Disposal Restrictions-----------GuidancelTransporrationlTreatneffi
What's New! | G-loasa-l OfrEiNfixed W-aste-WSiiiesTFA-AQs I Mixed Waste
t Library
Maintained by: ORIA Webmaster
Page 8 of8
o
a
t
t
t
t
e
I http://www.epa.gov/radiation/mixed-waste/mwjg25.htm 8/8/01
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
oi
q
a
Federal
o
Regiater /ovol. sz, No. 93 / Wednesdafl, May 19, 1gs2 / Notices
)
contention mtrst be one which, if proven"
would entitle the petitioner to relief. A
petitioner who fails to file such a
supplement which satisfies these
requirements with respect to at least one
contention will not be permitted to
participate as I party.
Those permitted to intenene become
parties to the proceeding, eubiect to any
limitations in the order granting leave to
inten'ene, and have the opportunity to
participate fully in the conduct of the
hearing including tlh opportunity to
pr€sent evidence and cross-examine
witnesses.
Since the Commission has made a
final determination that .the amendment
involves no eignificant hazarde
consideration. if a hearing ic requested.
it will not stay the effectiveness of the
amendment. Any hearing held would
take place while the amendment js in
effect.
A request for a hearing or a petition
for leave to interyene must be filed with
the Secretary of the Commission. U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Comnission.
Waahiagtou DC 20555. Attentioru
Docketiry aud Serviceg Branch. or may
be delivered to the Commission'e Public
Document Room. the Gelman Building.
2120L Street. NW.. Washington. DC
20555, by the above date. Where
petitions are filed dufing the last ten (10)
days of the notice period. it is requested
that the petitioner promptly so inform
the Commiscion by a toll-free telephone
call to Western Union at 1-(800) 325-6(m
(in Missourl 1-(8001 342670). The
Western Union operator should be given
Datagram Identification Number 3f,17
and the following message addressed to
(Projecl Direcior): petitioner'a name and
telephone number, date petition was
mailed. plant name. and publication
date and page number ofthis Federal
Register notice. A copy of the petition
should also be gent to the Office of the
General Counsel. U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission. l{ashington.
DC 20555. and to the attorney for the
licensee.
Nontlmely filings of peUlions for leave
to inten'ene. amended petitiors.
supplemental petitionr and/or rcquests
for hearing will not be entertained
absent a determination by the
Cornmission. the preeiding officer or the
Atomic Safety and Ucensing'Board that
the petition and/or rcquect should be
granted baaed upon a balancing of thc
factors specified tn 10CFR 2.2r4(aX1Xi)-
(v) and 2.7741d1.
Duquesao I lSht Gompany, eL.aL. Docket
No. 5tI41lL Beavcr Vdley Power Station,
UDit & Shipingort Pconaylvanie
Dolc of omendment rcquest: lanuary
13. 19S2
D e s c ripti o n of am en dme nt req u es t:
The amendrneat revises Table.!.2-1 of
Technical Specification 3.2.5, "DNB
Parameter:." Specifically, it lowere the
value for the minioum required reactor
coolant system [RCS) totd f,owtate
fmm 274.8fl) 8?m to UO,&fi gpm and
lowere the flow meas!rcrDetrl
uncertainty value. specified ln the
footnote. fmm 35% to2.M.
Date of issuaace April 23,7992
Effective dorer Aprfl 23. 1992
Amendrnant No: tli
Foc i lity'GtPemting License /Va *,F-
73. Amendment revised the Technical
Specificationr hrblic commentr
requested as to proposed no significant
hazards consideration: No. fhe
Corumissioo's related evaluation of the
amendment. finding of emergency
circumstances. acd final determination
of no aignificant hazards coneideratlon
are contained in a Safety Evaluation
dated April 23,7W2-
Local Public Document Room
locotion: 8. F. fonee Memorial Ubrary.
663 Franklia Avenue, rdliquippa.
Pennsylvania 15@1.
Atnrney for licensee: Gerald
Charnoff. Esquire Iay E tiilberg.
Eaquire. Shaw, Pittmsu, Potts &
Trowbridge. 23m N StreeL NW.,
Washingtoo DC2CXX}7.
NRC Prcject Diectoc lohnF- Stolz
Dated at Boclville. Maryland. thir Sth &y
of May 1992
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commisgion
Stevea.{. Varga.
Ditxton Divisiotr of fuoctor Pmjects - UIL
Oflice of Nwleor Reoctor Segulo tion
[Doc.92-11099 Filed 5-1242: 8:45 amJ
grufio e@c 7$o{r+
Uranium mill Facllltlcr, Bcquactlor
Publlc Commentc on Bevl$d
Guldancc on Dlrposal ol Non-Atomlc
Encrgy Act ol 195f, SGctlon tlc{A
Byproduc{ lilatcrlal ln Tallhgr
lmpoundmcnb and Posltlon and
Gddancc on ltc Urc olUranlumlllll
Feed matCrlale Othcr Than ilstur.l
Orcr
AGE aCil Nuclear Regulatory
Commisaion.
ACIIOI: Request for public comment.
3ulrlffi The Nuclear Regulatory
Commisgion (NRC) is soliciting public
comment on two gridance doctmtents:
-Revieed Guidance on Disposal of Non-
Atomic Energy Act of 195d.gection
11e.(2) Byproduct Material in Tailinga
Impoundmentc" snd "Position ad
Guidance on the Uae of Uraaium Mill
Feed Materials Other Than Naturd
Orcs:- along with the asaosiated stall
analyses.
DAIE$ The comment Period exPires
fune 12.1992
ADDf,ESSES Send written commmts to
Chiel Rules and Directives Review
Branch. U.S. Nucler Regulatory
Commission Weshington DC 20555. or
hand deliver to 7920 Norfoik Avenue.
Betheeda, MD. between 7:45 a.m. and
4:15 p.m. on Federal work<iays.
FOR FUF"HEB II{FORX TIOI' COilTAgT:
Mlron Fliegel, Oflice of Nuc'lear
Material Safety and Safeguards. U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Waahingtou DC 20555: telePhone (301J
50{-2555.
SUP?t.ETETTARY II'FORTATIOI*
Dlrcussioa
NRC staff has prepared a revision to
its licenaing gridance. issued July 27.
1988, on the disposal of material other
than that defined in section ue;{2) of the
Atomic Energy Act of 19tl (AEA). as
amended. ln uranium mill tailings
impoundments [Part A of the
Supplementary Information). The staff
hae dso prepared new licensing
guidance on the processing of feed
materialr other than natural ores in
uranium rritls [Part B of the
Supplementary lnformation| Ia
developing the guidance. rtaff analyzed
the policy and legal issues involved for
each guidance documenl Ln order to
eolicii input all interested parties on the
issues associated with these Suidauce
docuraentg. the NRC ie roliciting
comments from the public, the
Envirpnmental hotection Agenry. NRC
Agreement Statea, and regional low'
level waste compacts. Comnents
reoeived willbe coneidered in deciding
whether the guidance documents should
be revised.
ln the guidance documents and
associated staff analyses. the term "non'
11e.(2) byproduct material- ig used to
refer to radioactive waste that is similar
in phyeical and radiological
characteristics ffor example. low
specific activiti) to byproduct material.
as defined h Section 11e.(2) of the AEA
but does not meet the delinitioo in that
section because.it ie not derived froro
ore prooesaed primarily for its source
naterial contenL
lbedalf analyces in Parts A and B
contain additional definitiong 8nd
ex,tengive .baclground inforzradon
neeesEaqf to understand the summary
guidance documents. T'he reader should
consult the analyree for'the terms and
iscues preeented in context.
I
I
t
t
t
------..-
20526 Federal *rgol Vol. s7. No. e3 / Wednesd"y, r"rrf lgsz lNorices
I
t
t
o
o
a
t
a
t
Part A-Revised Guidaaca on Disposal
of Non-Atomic Energy Act of 1981,
Section 11e.(2) Byproduct Malerial in
Tailingo Impoundmente
1. In reviewing licensee requests for
the disposal of source material wasteg
that have radiological characteristics
comparable to thoae of Atomic Lnergy
Act (AEA) of tgSq, section 11e.(Z)
byproduct material (hereafter designed
as "11e(2) byproduct material") in
tailings impoundments. staff will follow
theguidance set folth below. Licensing
of the receipt and disposal of such non-
AEA. section 11e.(2) byproduct rnaterial
Ihereafter designated as "non-11e.(Z)
byproduct material"l should be done
under 10 CFR Part 40.
2. Naturally occurring and accelerator
produced material waste shall not be
authorized for disposal in an 11e.(2)
byproduct material impoundment.
3. Special nuclear material and
Section 11e.(1) product material waste
should not be considered as candidates
for disposal in a tailings impoundment.without compelling reasons to the
contrary. If staff believes that such
material should be disposed of in a
taitings impoundment in a specific
instance, a request for approval by the
Commission should be prepared.
{. The 11e.(2) licensee must
demonstrate that the material is not
subject to applicable Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act
regulatione or other U.S. Environmental
hotection Agency standards for
hazardoug or toxic wastes prior to
disposal.
5. The 11e(2) licensee must
demonslrate that there are no
Comprehensive Environmenta I
Response. Compensation and LiabilityAcl issues related to the disposal of the
non-l1e(2) byproduct material.
0. The 11e.(2) licensee must
demonstrate that there will be no
significant environmental irnpact from
disposing of this material.
7. The 11e.(2) license must
demonstrate that the proposed disposalwill not compromise the reclamation of
the tailings impoundment by
demonslrating compliance with the
reclamation and clogure criteria of
appendix A of to CFR part 4o.
8. The 11e.(2) Iicensee must provide
documentation showing approval by the
Regional Low-Level Waste Compact in
whose iurisdiction the waste originates
as well as approval by the Compaci in
whose iurisdiction the disposal site is
located.
9. The Deparlment of Energy should
be informed of the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission findings and proposed
action. with an opportunity to provide
comments within 30 days, before
granting the license amendment to the
11e.(2) liceneee.
10. The mechanigm to authorize the
disposal of non-11e.(2) byproduct
material in a tailings impoundment ie an
amendment to the mill license under 10
CFR Part,$. authorizing the receipt of
the material and its disposal.
Additionally. an exemption to the
requirements of 10 CFR Part 61. under
the authority of ! fl.O, must be granted.
The license amendment and the 3 Of.O
exemption should be supported with a
staff analysia paper addressing the
issues discussed in thia guidance.
NRC Staff Analysir of Disposal of Non-Atomic Energy Act of 19E1, Sectioo
11e.(2) Byproduct Material in Tailingr
Impoundmenta
1. Introduction
Recently, the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) received several
requests to allow activities other than
the normal processing of native uranium
ore at licensed uranium milling facilities.
IVe have, in the past. received. and, in
some cases, approved. similar requests.
These requestg have fallen into two
categories. The lirsl category of requestr
is to allow the processing offeedstock
material that ig not usually thought of as
ore. for the extraction of uranium. and
then dispose of the resulting wastes and
tailings in the facility's tailings pile. The
second category of requests is to allow
the direct disposal of non-Atomic
Energy Act (AEA) of 19S{. section
11e.(2) byproduct material I [hereafterdesignated as "non-11e.(2) byproduct
material"l, that was not generated
onsite. into tailings piles.
- In assessing these requests, the staff
has raised two policy concerns related
to tailings piles. The first concern is that
the requested activity might result in
complicated. dual. or even multiple
regulation of the tailings pile, and the
second concern is that the requesled
activity might ieopardize the ultimate
transfer to the United States
Government. for perpetual custody and
maintenance. of the reclaimed tailingspile.
This analysis addresses the second
category ofrequesta, thal ia. requests to
dispose of non-11e.(Z) byproduCt
material in tailings piles. Issuea relating
to such proposals requesting regulatory
consideration of commingling of tailingswith other radioactive wastes are
I !'or the purposes of lhis analvsie. the term '.no&t'le.[l] bvproduct msterial" will Le uaed ro refer torudioactite wcste that ia similar to byproductmotoriill. as defined in the AEA in settion tte.(3f.bul is nol logully considered to be ttc.lay byproductmilleiidl.
discussed. This analysis is limited to
options involving commingling with
existing tailings impoundments.
2. Bockgmund
The Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation
Control Act (UMTRCA) of 1928
amended the AEA to specifically
include uranium and thorium mill
tailings and other wastes from the
prooess as radioactive material to be
licenged by NRC. Specifically, the
definition of byproduct material was
revised in Section 11e.(2) of the AEA, to
include ". . . the tailings or wastes
produced by the extraction or
concentration of uranium or thorium
from any ore processed primarily for its
source material content."
The definition of byproduct material 2
in Section 11e.(2) of the AEA includes
all the waster resulting from the milling
process. not just the radioactive
components.ln addition. Title Il of
[TMTRCA amended the AEA to
explicitly exclude the requiremenl for
the Environmental hotection Agency
(EPA) to permit 77e.(2) blproduct
material under the Regource
Conservation and Recovery Act
(RCRA). The designation of 11e.(Z)
byproduct material contrasts
significantly with the aituation for
source material t and other radioactive
materials controlled under the authority
of the AEA. This possibiliry for dual
regulation by both NRC and EPA can
become an issue when dealing with
mixed hazardous wastes. As a result oft MTRCA. NRC amended 10 CFR Parr 4O
to regulate the uranium and thorium
tailings and wastes from ihe milling
process. Thus. under normal operation.
all the tailings and wasteg in an NRC or
Agreement State licensed mill producing
uranium or thorium are classified ag
"11e.(2) byproduct material." and are
disposed of in tailings piles regulated
under Part 40. They are not eubiect to
EPA regulation. under RCRA. Ilowever.
the EPA Clean Air Act regulations still
result in direct EPA permit authority
over the mill tailings, whether or not
they are commingled with non-11e.(2)
byproduct material waste.
The UMTRCA also required andprovided for long-term custody and
suraeillance of the byproduct material
and the land use for its dieposal. The
Department of Energy (DOE) is the
Federal agency currently deeignated as
r Henceforth. byproduct met€rial ar defined inScciion ile.l2l of thc AEA will be rcferred ro as"f le.l2l byproducl maierial."i Excepl in thc cace of rourcc rnalariul o?e. sorrrcr!material conlist! only ol thc rsdioactive
componenla of the w86lr. lhel is: umnium. thoriunr.or uny combination of the two lro CFI {0.{lhll.
c
Federal negistf Vol. sz. No. 93 / wednesday, May l*, / trlotices
a
a
o
I
t
t
o
;
o
t
)
the "custodial agency" by the AEA.
However. the UMTRCA specifically
referred only to 11ed2) byproducl
material. UM]3CA contains no
provision allowing for the transfer of
custody or title. and hence for eventual
long-term custody and surveillance of
other material. even if the material were
no more radioactive or toxic than the
uranium ot thorium tailings themselves.
3. The Cotegory, of Requests for
Commingled Disposol To Be Addressed
I
Some licensees have proposed to
directly dispose ofradioactive vvastes in
existing uranium mill tailings sites. The
materials vary from tailings from
extraction processes for metals and
rare-earth metals (such as.copper.
tantalura columbium, zirconium) to
spent resins from water-treatment
processes. However. because these
materials did not result from the
extraction or coocentration of uranium
or thoriurn from ore. they are not 11e.(2)
byproduct material Many of these
"orphaned" wastes have elevated
concentrations of source material. and
unless otheru"ise exempted, require
licensed control. if the materials exceed
the O.O5-percent licensable (content of
source material by weight) criterion in
10 CFR Part il(). Some of the wastes
proposed for commingling ccntain
radioactive material. not regulated by
NRC that classify aa naturally-occurring
and accelerator-produced radioactive
material (NARll) and as such cannot be
easily disposed o[. ln most of the
proposals the staffhas seen. disposal of
these materials in tailings
impoundments would not significantly
increase the eflect on the public health.
safety. and envirpnment. Because of the
relatively larye volumes of these wastes.
lowlevel waste disposal options arr
limited. These wastea are similar lo
tailings in volume. radioactivity, and
toxicity. Therefore, some waste
producerr see the mill tailings disposal
sites as providing an economical option
for such disposal.
1.Types ol lfiostes Being Proposed for
Disposol Into Toiliags Piles
The NRC and the Agreement States
continue to receive requests for the
direct disposal of non-11e{2) byproduct
material into uranium mill tailings piles.
The followiag general calegories of non-
11e{2) byproduct material illustrate the
requests submitied to NRC and tbe
Agreement Slates for disposal into
uranium urill tailingr piles licensed
under authority eatablished by title II of
UMl.T,CA
{.1 Mine lVastes
To miae'uranium or other source
r:raterial ore from underground or open-
pit rrines, operators hequently need to
dewater the rnine cavitier. This resultc
in quantitieo of mine water with
suspended or dissoh'ed constituents.
some of which are source material. After
processing the mine water to satisfy
National Poll ution Discharge
Elimination System or other release
requiremeots. the resultant clean mine
water is then discharged offsite. [n some
cases, the resultirg wster-treatment
filter-cake or sludge rcsidues exceed the
O.05-percent licensable limit for source
material These residues do not satisfy
the Ceiinition of ue.1z; byproduct
material. because they do not result
from the extractioa or ooncentration of
uranium or thoriura frcm ore.
tiRC and the Agreement States have
been contacted by lirensees and *v8ste
Senerator€ that desire to dispose of cuch
filter-cake or sludge residue directly into
the tailings piles at licensed uranium
mill tailirgs sit$. NRC has indicated
that such sreterial does not constihrte
11e.(2) byproduct rraterial.
4.2 Secondary hocess Wastes
Frequently, natural ores that are
processed for rare-earth or other rnetds
have signifrcant concentrations of
radjoactive elements. Examphs include
copper. zirconiusr. aad vanadium ores.
Sometimer the uanium ie captrued ina
side-sbeam rec,overy operation in
which u.ranium is precipitated out of &e
pregnant solution. beforc or after the
rare earth or other metal. Nthough this
side-stream recovery operation is
licensed by NRC the tailirys {whic}t
consist of the crughed depleted ore and
the depleted solution after recovery of
metals and rare eartha) ane rrot 11e.(2)
byproduct material. Thls ie because the
ore wa8 not processed primarily for its
source material content. but for the rare
earth or other rnetal. If the tailr contain
grester than 0.05 percent uranluo and
thoriunr" they would be gource material
and would thue be licensable and have
to be diepoeed of in compliance with
NRC regulatione. NRC hae recelved
rcquestr from ITJRC and Agreement State
licenseee to diapoee of such tailingr
(resulting from proceaee. to erdract
other raetals) lnto licensed uranium mill
tailings pilea.
{.3 Formerly Utilked Sites Remedial
Action Progtarn (FUSRAP,
These sites primarily processed
material such ac monazite eands. to
extract thorium for coomercial
applications. Governrnent contracts
were issued for thorium rource material
used in the lrlanhattan Engineering
District and early Atomic EnergY
Commission progranur. Wastes resulting
from that proce*iq and disposed of at
these sitee would gualifY as 11e{Z)
byproduct material. However. it is not
c'lear that all the contaminated rnaterial
at these sites result from processing of
ore for thorium. At some sites there was
also processing for rare earths and other
metals. The DOE which accePts
responsibility for the ruSRAP materials.
is investigatiag options for disposal and
control of these materials. DOE
estimates that a total of 1.7 million cubic
yards of material is located at sites in 13
States. Recent pmposals have
considered the transpotlatlon of
FUSRAP materials from New Jersey to
tailinS piles at uraniLun mills in other
Statei.iuch as Ulah, Washington and
Wyoming.
4,4 NARM
Thete wastes result from a wide range
of operations. but are not generally ,regulated by the AEA. Paet requertr.for
diiposal in uranium mill tailiry ponds
have included contaminated resins from
ion-exchange well-water purifying
operations. NRC hae also received
inquides mgarding the diePoeal of
construction acraP and radium-
contaminated soil from old commercial
operations. The individual States
usually administer the regulatory
reaponsibility over NARM. but many
other Federal agencies have
iurisdictional responsibilities related to
NARM.l5ese include EPA, the
Consumer Ptoduct Safety Commission.
the Departmer:t oI Health and Human
Servicis, and the Department of Labor.
There is a State-licensed NARlvt
disposal facility in Clive. Utah. licensed
to Envirocare of Utah. Inc.
Two common elements nrn through
most of the requests we have received
for direct diepoaal of non-t1e.(2)
byproduct material in tailings piles: the
material is of low apecific-activity. and
the material is physically similar to
11e.(2) byproduct material. lr{ost of the
requests are for bu[< material like soil.
crtrshed rock. or sludges. contaminated
with eource material in relatively lorv
concentrations.
5. Prcvbus StoffGuidonce
In reaponse to I request from Region
IV. the Director of the Office of Nuclear
Material Safety aod Safeguards (NMSS)
pmviiled guidance for addressing
r€qu$ts to allow the dispoeal of non-
11e.(2) blAmduct material ln licensed
mill tailinge impoundments. Tlre atalf
considered that the types of material
proposed for such disposal could be
i0
t Federal *rt". / vol. s7. No. eo / wednesday, ,lirr, Tssz lNotices20528
I
t
o
I
o
o
t
I
e
a
separated into two categoriesl (1)
NARM wastesi and (z) wastes generated
by operations regulated under the AEA.
In the guidance. the staff concluded
that it would not approve a policy of
allowing disposal of NARM wastes in
tailings impoundments. A maior concern
was that NRC did not have authority to
regulate NARN{. If States or EPA
became involved in regulation of
NARM, a situation with duplicative
lurisdiction with respect to the
commingled radioactive materials could
be created. Furthermore. the
Commission's authority, under section
8ec of the AEA. to approve alternatives
to requirements. if the NARM wastes
were to violate standards. would be
impaired.
The staff vierved the other cateSory,
wastes generated by operations
regulated under the AEA. as potentially
acceptable in a mill tailings
impoundment. Each such proposal
should be considered on a case-specific. basis. The guidance identified four
findings that would have to be made
before NRC would authorize such
disposal.
As a result of this guidance, present
policy is that NRC will approve of
proposed disposals of source material
on their individual merits. and only if
the licensee can demonstrate the
following:
a. The disposal will have no
significant additional effects on public
safety and health. and the environment.
b. The disposal will not compromise
the reclamation of the tailings
impoundment. In effect. disposal must
comply with the reclamation and closure
criteria in part 40. appendix A.
c. The disposal will not result in the
tailing becoming subiect to RCRA or the
Comprehensive Environmental
Response. Compensalion. and Liability
Act (CERCLA).
d. DOE or the State agrees. in
advance. to take title to the site, upon
completion of the reclamation.
The first trvo conditions are self-
evident and will not be discussed
further. The other two conditions can be
sufficient obstacles to any routine
decisions to allow such commingling of
byproduct and non-11e.(2) byproduct
materials under UMTRCA, and are
discussed. along with other issues.
below.
6. Itlojor Issues
Although the technical. economic and
societal advantages in some proposals
have appeared to encourage such
disposal of low specific-activity
radioactive malerial into tailing piles.
significanl statulory and regulatory
issues may complicate such disposal:
6.1 RCRA Authority and Mixed Waste
The NRC and Agreement State
licensed uranium and thorium milling
facilities do not fall under the
iurisdiction of RCRA. The AEA
explicitly excludes 11e.{2) byproduct
material from RCRA perrnitting.
However. radioactive wastes thal are
not 11e.(2) byproduct material and
contain hazardous wastes are mixed
wastes and are not exempted from
RCRA. Commingling RCRA-regulated
wastes with tailings could result in the
application of the EPA RCRA
regulations and separate EPA-permitting
authority. The licensee would have lo
comply with both EPA- and AEA-relaled
regulations.
NRC has revised the regulations in. 10
CFR part 40 (including appendix A) to
conform to the appropriate portions of
EPA's RCRA regulations. The U!viTRCA.
as amended. stipulates that regulations
for byproduct material be consistent
with the Solid Waste Disposal Act
(SWDA). On November 13. 1987. NRC
conformed the regulations of part .10 to
the EPA standards containing the RCRA
provisions of the SWDA. However, if a
licensee disposes of source material
compounds or mixtures other than
uranium or thorium ores. in the tailings
piles, only the source material
component of that compound or mixture
would be excluded from the provisions
of RCRA. if the compound or mixture
qualifies as "hazardous." The bulk of
such material would come under the
purview of EPA RCRA regulalions.
resulting in dual regulation of the
lailings impoundment. To preclude this
dual regulatory authority and the
complications resulting from it. including
polential conflicts in requirements. the
staff will not approve co-disposal of
non-11e.(2) byproduct material
containing hazardous constituents.
regulated under RCRA.
6.2 Custody and Title Transfer
UMTRCA. title II. section 202 [Section
83 of the AEA) stipulates that such title
to the 11e.(2) byproduct raaterial and to
the land used for the disposal ol 11e.(2)
byproduct material shall be transferred
to either the United States Governmenl
or to the State in which the land is
located. UIvITRCA identifies DOE. or
sny other aSency so designated by the
hesident. to be the custodial agency for
the U.S. Government. However. al its
option. the State may elect to become
the custodial licensee of the site after
closure,
The NRC staff has two concerns
relating to this transfer:
a. The licensee for any site where the
materials would be cornmingled would
need strong assurances or permission
from either the State or DOE that the
commingling would not compromise the {
eventual transfer of title and custody.
b. The license cannot be legally
terminated. uniess the custody and title
have been transferred as stipulated in
section 83 b(lxA) of the AEA.
Commingling of wastes could
complicate this transfer and. hence. the
termination of the license.
Because of these concerns. NRC slaff
wrote to DOE regarding ita position on
such transfers. DOE's response of lune
10, 1988. indicated its uncertainty
regarding authority to accepl cuslodial
transfer of tailings sites. where
radioactive material not constituting
11e.(2) byproduct material has been
commingled. In further correspondence.
of October 5, 1988. and March 10. 1990.
the NRC staff requested more specificity
from DOE.
DOE's initial responses addressed the
general issue of DOE acceptance of a
Title II site containinS non-ue.(2)
byproduct material. DOE would have no
obiection to such a transfer provided it
would not incur any additional costs
related to the non-11e.(2) byproduct
material. To ensure that there would be
no additional costs due lo the non-
11e.(2) byproduct material. DOE
suggested that NRC make the following
fi ndings before transfer:
-That there is no adverse
environmentaI impact resulting from
the dispoal of these wastes (e.9.. that
the reclamation of the impoundment
will not be impacted or that there are
no groundwater reetoration issues).
-There are no outstanding
environmental compliance issues
under any applicable environmenlal
law (e.9., under RCRA or CERCLA).
These conditions will be met if the
Iirst three conditions (a-c) discussed in
section 5. above. are demonetrated.
By letter daled lanuary 23. 19S1. DOE
responded to five specific questions
NRC staff had raised. The questions
focused on the guantities and
concentrations of several categories of
non-11e.(2) byproduct malerial that DOE
would find acceptable to dispose of in
lailings impoundments without
ieopardizing title transfer. DOE s
response stated that criteria for
determining acceptability should
consider three issues:
a. Concentrations of hazardous
constituents in the non-11e.(2) byproduct
materials.
Tables showing concentrationg
typically found in tailings were
presented and the statement made lhat
acceptable concentrations could be
I Federal Register / ; s7. No. e3 / wednesday, Ma1 ra, C, *o,,"r,20529
selected from those tables. DOE also, recommended that if concentrations inI the non-11e.(2) byproduct material
exceed those "' ' 'adopted from the
O tables (or other sources) ' ' '," a risk
assessment be performed.
Thus, DOE discribed a Process. with
an ultimate resort to risk assessment.
that could be used to determine
acceptable concentrations of
constituents in non-11e.(2) byproductl materials. The first demonstration.- discussed in Section 5. above (that the
disposal have no significant additional
effects on public safety and health and
the environrnent), encompasses this
DOE consideration. Thus, this
consideration will be met if the 1988l "11t,'.11T:? li3t"l?'itl?i materiar
quantity (volume) of non-11e.(2)
byproduct materials that the Title II site
would have to accommodate.
DOE stated that this determination
would have to be made on a site'specific
basis. considering cort. schedule. design
a capacity of the impoundment' and the
irnpact of errors and uncertainties in
these proiections and estimates. This
consideration will be satisfied by the
first two demonstrations discussed in
section 5 above.
c. Possibility that Radon-222 releases
- from the disoosal site would exceed theu limits specified in,lo CFR 192.32. as a
result of including non-11e.(2) byproduct
materials in the title II site.
The Radon-222 release limits in'!0
CFR 192.32 are incotporated in Criterion
6 of 10 CFR part ,$, appendix A. Ttrus.
this consideration will be satisfied byt the second demonstration ciiscussed in
section 5 above.
Therefore. demonstration of the first
three findings discussed in section 5
above (health and safety. compliance
with appendix A. and no RCRA
problems), should result in the fourth
t iinding (DOE acceptance of title) being
met. However, there ie one rernaining
concern related to DOE s acceplance of
title to tailinga impoundments
containing non-lle.(2) byproduct
material. None of DOE's response to
NRC on this question contains an.r uneouivocal statement that. if NRCI, dete'rmines that the above discussed
concerns and criteria are satisfied. DOE
will accept title to euch a site. For
example. in the letter of November 6.
1990, DOE stateg "At this time. we
would interpose no obiection if NRC
transferted ' t '.r' At a meeting ont December 11. 1990. NRC staff discussed
this issue with DOE and a possible DOEI concurrence on individual NRC
f decisions to allow non-11e.(2) byproduct
material disposals. DOE responded by
letter daled-December 24. 1990. that its
I
concurnence would not be appropriate
or necessary. However. in order to
reduce the potential for future problems
with transfer to DOE. NRC staff will
notify tlOE (with an opportunity to
provide comments) of each impending
decision to allow non-11e.(2) byproduct
material disposal in a tailings
impoundment.
6.3 Acceptable Wastes
As discussed in section 4 above, most
of the requeste for commingling non'
11e.(2) byproduct material in tailings
impoundments pertain to material
similar to uranium mill tailings and
wastes. These are usually bulk materials
like soil. crushed rock. or sludges
contaminated with low concentrations
of source material or NARM.
For the reasons discussed in section 5
above. the staff will rfot approve
commingling of NARM in tailings
impoundments. However, current staff
policy is to consider on a case-specific
basis, r,r'astes generated by operations
regulated under the AEA. This would
allow consideration of byproduct. as
defined in section 11e.(1) of the AEA.
and special nuclear materials (SNM)
wastes. in addition lo source material
waste, for disposal in tailings
impoundments. Recently, there have
been inquiries to the staff about disposal
of SNM-contaminated soilg in tailings
impoundments. For the reasons
discussed below, NRC staff will not
normally approve disposal of 11e'(1)
byproduct material (hereafter referred to
as "byproduct material") or of SNM in
tailings impoundments.
Appendix A of 10 CFR part '10presents criteria for the disposal of
11e.(2) byproduct material. These
criteria. to properly dispose of this
material. were developed based on the
physical chemical. and radiological
characteristics of the material. The basis
for most of the regueste to commingle
non-11e.(2) byproduct material in
tailings impoundments is that the
proposed material is similar in
characteristics to 11e.(2) byproduct
material. but does not meet the
definition. which is based on process
and history, rather than characteristics.
Because of this similarity to 11e.(2)
bypmduct material. the criteria in
appendix A arc appropriate to use. to
ensure safe disposal of this material.
This premise ia only valid for the
types of materials discussed in section 4.
that is. bulk material whose primary
radiological contamination is uranium,
thorium. and rsdium in low
concentrations. Wastes contaminated
with bproduct material are sufficiently
different that this premise may not be
valid.
Soils contaminated with SNM maY be
similar to 11e.(2) byproduct material in
physical. chemical. and radiological
characteristics. There are' however.
issues related to the disPosal of
byproduct material or SNM-
contaminated soils in tailings
impoundments that preclude routine
approval. using the criteria in app-endix
A ;f 10 CFR part 40. Possession of
byproduct material or SNM would have
to be licensed under 10 CFR part 30 or
70. respectively, and not part 40. For
SNM. the issues of criticality, malerial
control and accountability. and site
security might also have to be
addressed.
For these reasons, the staff will not
approve the disposal of bYProduct
material or SNM through the process
discussed in this guidance and analysis.
If there is a compellinS reason, such as
an immediate health and safety concer
to consider a specific proposed disposal
of byproduct material or SNM in a
tailings impoundment. approval of the
Commission will be required.
6.4 Regulatory Issues
There are two regulatory issues that
require consideration in developing this
guidance:
a. Inasmuch as the kind of material
under consideration ig within the
purview of the States under the Low
Level Radioactive Waste PolicY
Amendments Act of 1985 (LLRWPAA).
the explicit approval of both the
originating and the receiving Compact
should be obtained if the waste is going
anywhere but a designated Regional --faiility. Although this is not specifically
a health and safety issue, it is an issue
that could cause problems for the
Iicensee and perhaps inierfere with
ultimate reclamation of the tailings. As a
result. the policy ahould include a
requirement that the licensee's submittal
provide evidence of the ComPacts'
approval of the proposed disposal.
b. The material being ProPosed for
disposal in tailings impoundments is
material subiect to tbe Commission's
authority under the Atomic Eneryy Act.
It is mostly, if not all. soil contaminated
with uranium. thorium. and agsociated
radium (which is a decay product of
uranium and thorium) with radiological
characteristics aimilar to those of
tailings (11e.(2) blproduct material). The
dispoial of such material is regulated by
10 cFR 20.301 (10 CF? 2o.2oo1 in the
new part 20). That section states that no
licensee ahall dispose of licensed
material except by (a) transfer to an
authorized recipient as provided in 10
CFR part 30. 40. 00. 01. 70, or 72: or (b)
disposal authorized pursuant to $ 20.302
tU nlbbs / Vot tt NG A , W.dnday. May 1& trS / t{odd GT
I
I
a
a
conirrt{a ad br a wtdr. ll g]Uru.
would cctith thc prddm to nlicl A
p€tilioner rto Hb to 0lc lch e
rupplement which catirlier there
requirementr wi$ retpect lo at hart onecmtcotio rill aot b. pnilI,d !o
participalr r r prty.
Thorc pamitld b intenw bmc
parties to flc pmecdiag; ni{ct torny
limitatlonr ln thr ordcrSrantiq hrtr to
lnlerreoa. end Lrrr ltaAporturaty lc
partrcigrlc frlly h thc con6rt of thc
heanrj. lndudiq tb oppcfunlry topr€-nl svidcno erd cruccxamiacwilra.
Since thr Oo,mlrlon hm na& r
tinal drtourhalloo lhrl thr rtrrnda nl
involrcr no {n0cent hrrde
conrlderetlon. lle lcodry tr requertod.
it will ad del the efbcUuocs of tb
aroeadncal Arly buiq hrld uouldtrL ptuc. whib tb: aaenduent ir &r
effect.
A reqret for e Lorring or r padlloa
for leave tointrrrana raurt bs Eled ylth
the Secratery of ihc Couiulon. U.S.
Nuclssr nqarrlstory Coauldoo
Waehla3lon DC 2C555. AfEDUon:
Docketing and Servicer 8rec}" or Ery
bc dellvsrrd to th. CosulubdrArb[c
Docuncot Booo. lha CrlnenBulldlq,
2120 L BtrrrL Ntil. WuhlqdonDC
20555. by thc abcvc &lr. Wbarc
petitiora rrc Elod durl4 lhc lart ton 110)&yr oI thc aotlcc pcrbd" lt lr rrqtrcrlld
trat thr p.litiooa prpmp0y ro lelora
the Connlrrlon by c btl+Gt lelc$onc
call to Wot:rn Unlon at Um) B25m
(in Marourl r{m) il2876).Thc
Werlem Ualon qperutorrborld bc alvan
Da tqgram ldontlllcation Nuabcr ?it7
and the tolowlry tlcllag! addrcncd to
(hof,ct Dbeclct: pctltione/r Danc end
telqphonc number, datepettlon war
maile4 plent aame. and pub[cation
date and page number of tblr fcdrelRtfulrt notlcc. A copy of thr petttlon
rhould .lro b. rnl to thr O{icr ol thr
Genaral Counrel, U.3. Nudrar
Regulalory Comnisgi,on. Werhington"
DC 20558 and to trc lnorrry for thc
llcenrcc.
tJorflmcly illqr of petltlou for lsave
to intcrrBnG. anrerdcd pctitloil,
aupplernranlrl pctltlonr end/or rtqumtr
for hearing win mi be attcrteincd
absenl a detcrnnination by thc
Commision. thc pcridiq ofiicer ot thc
Atomic Safety and ticcndrg Board that
the petitlorn and/or Equert fiould be
granted bared upoa a balancirq of the
facton rpecified tn l0 CFR Z.7lA(a[l[]-
(v) and 2.7t4ldl.
tluquaac t rght Coqpeay, cL al. Docbt
No, EF.l12. Beavc Ydby hwcl SLdoo,
Uoil t, $nep&EFr, Prorylvede
Do te of am eadtre n l reg uesl.' lanuary
13, rot
Dcs c tipClan d u admcr,t rugucrt
Ths rmfunt rrrvis TtbL !r-f of
Technlcal Specification 3et *ID.IB
ParrnrcEl- Sp*ticrtty. I lower the
value fr b uisinru rcghcd rclclor
cooald lyfa GCSf ttrl !m raffrm !7r,GO 3pu to a0lln lpE lDdloreit Ga rbr aGrrottro1f
uncertainty rrlua +c-ilicd ln the
footnodr, frlorlsE b t0f.Daof irrrneJ\D{iltt. lE!Wtceu AD.flt!.tEi,ttrgr*rtarrb'agrui li ty *rair6 Zjcenra IIlr IrIPF-
73. Anarfuit rrrritcd tbc Ta&lcal
SpccltlE tE hbllccoalab
rcgumtod er b pmpard no {nl8oaothazardr coarld*rlloa: No. ltrCoaaillbs'r dalad cvCue0on of tbe
amendnenl fi nding oI emeqery
circtmrtancer. and linal determinatlon
of no rlgrificant hazar& miderrtlon
are oaldnod ir e Safcg Evaloeticn
datodAprll23, [e-mail],ia, : 8. F. f oar lloor{d Ubnry.
€0f h.*L. AYeu.. All$ippr"
Prnylvenir lUr.tWmyfud&rn'Grnld
Cherutl Brqulr. ley 8. anbrryEquinEhrr. Hatlro. krrtlTtouttidlr. t0 N Et!..L NW..Wr.rfhd n.DcanT-tfl,6W, O/lrmr,&r&A.LD.Ld d n *utlb. llerybn4 thlr Ih &yolllry t$l?c 0rltltclcar l4ulatory Conmlrlon8rvtllVqr
Dirccl;or,, Oiyit iu of baot @o . I /l L
Ofria d Nrc lctt tuoctor @ u I o ti o t
llLc. t2-u0 8S.d &12+ &.5.Ellurtrc rDatt
tffinIFffi-,no$I.ttorE0ccomnotronntrl.oolddfloo qr Dllpool dIqhlloilbln rl, Aot ol llft $cto lte{llByprodrtletrtld hfdlgtrlmfoudnrntr rnd PcrlUon ndOuldm otlh.Urr orUiltunilF..d lrtrdrb Oerr Thrn llhml
Or.r
SICii Ndeerlqulrtory
Commlrcion.
ecn* Requert fc public commelrt.
lnurt th Nucleu Squletry
Ga*nnbdor (NRCI tr roHtlq p*lic
cmErsrl E tro gddrradocomld
'torvire<l Gsklene m llrporel of Non-
Atomic Encqy Ast of 1S51. rcctim
11e.(2) Byproduct Material in Tailings
lmporrldareotr" end "Pori$oa edGuldrnrr tha Ur of Urulua Mill
Feed Malcriala Othcr Tlen Naturel
Ores- dorg wlth lhe arrodated staff
anrlyser.
ofttS rbc cmrd pciod crylror
lune 1l llE
ADiltltt Sstd rrltten commertr to
Chlef. Ruler and Dtnc{twr Rsvia*
BnEL LIS. NcdcunquhtsrlCmirbr WuUr;!a. [ElEtL1 ol
hand deltrr b rD20 lrlotio& Aucaa.
Bottcd.. MD. betrcca7tSr.m. end
l:15 p.n. on Fcderal worldeyr.
FOI irttDaE Foil l10r eor?rct
M;aon meg.L OElco of Nuclcer
Mstsrid Safs[r end Salegusd& U.S.
Nuclear 84ub tor;r Cmmimioa
Werhiryton DC6E5; telephoae (3{nf
tt,lrr,rrYttilJNn
DLau&o
NRCrtafiharpnparcd r revirion to
itr licemlry grddaroc. lrlrd W 7,
19E& oo trc drpo.lt otmetcrial othct
lhan that d.fuGd ln rcrffon ttc.lZf of rhc
Atonlc Erergl Act ol lst (AEA! dr
anGndd. ln unatun nlll trlllnp
impoundmeulr (hlt A of thc
Supplemcntary lnfcan8oo). The ilaff
har dro prqrred rr lbcnrla3
guldaucc on lhr puocrdns ottred
rDltldrb olher thu nettnrl olcr la
uranlun El8. trlrl E oI tL.
Supplemcrlrry lelcroetbo} ls
devrloplry tb fuldru. rtrfr eorlyzed
thc pollcy nd LFl lrrr lavolwd lo,r
each guldnor deGrrml lD ord.r to
.olHth?ril d bEgtdprrlicroa thc
irguer mdrld rLb thcrcfrldrne
docunaf. tb NnC b dlcitt
comrnontr hon thc publlc thc
Envlronmcml mm Af eocy. t'lRC
Agreemeil Slrbr rnd rqlod lolv-
level warlc oryectr C.;oad
rcclrrd rril bo cmddelrd ln dlddhg
whetrcr rfir 3rl&oo! do$m6nt. thould
br nvtrrd.
In lha guldnroo doctrmnh rnd
aseoclated rtafi analyret the term 'non-
llc.lz) byproduct matgrl8l" lr urcd to
rafer lo radlorctlvc wrrtc tlrel lr rlallar
ta ptryrlcal and radlolqlcrl
characterlCls [fc cxamplc. low
epeclfic activlty) to blproduct naterial.
ag de0nsd b Secthn ue{z) of the AEA
but doer ool aesl tha &Itnltioe in that
section beerrc ll h rot derived from
ore procered priErdly for itr rourrc
cralerielontanl.'Itc drff arntyrr in Prrtr A lDd B
contain lddi6.nal ddnltioru rod
erlcariva brdrgroond hfrtardon
n?eatrry to Ed!illd thcannrurery
guidance documenb. Ttrc rcadcr rhould
concult tlc rarlyrcr tr thc terau and
iacucr pr:rented ln contsxt
fd.srl nofUr / O' sz' No m / wcdnerday'}lay 11 NoticecI
I
I
20628
H#,:sEr'ry !;;;'ir.€i Bvd&,.i Metriel b :
t.ll$ tarPottutaau-irJr"riu*ing
licenree rcqurtb lor I
,rtj iitrit"i of iurce material wa'te!
l'fi iil'"iii arlogi ca I chr re cterirtio
;;;Ji;6th6sc of Atomlc EneEY
[;l,ffi i;:1fi';'ii""1[i'.Tl3l*"
ffi}.[i'#,.,,ffiH*p
Gher ro CFR Part 4o'*
ii. N
"
L*uv ry"y'T,""lf"iffil"ilt'
il:ffifi.rl{ii,*:lll-Hitr3
i;[':*,,,mfilmlm't*;;ffi;i ff"td be dirPoeed of in a
*ff x[+;*'"T,"[f 3,"#js",n.
A;#;;;i"" rirould uc PrePeS-1. iri" rr"'t2) licenree murt
a.'i"it-tt"t"iti"t the material ll not
i:*g:,ml::ol"*"':""#x",---r-,
ri[i*l'rul*'.1'";1fr',Tl'*"''h;;;ildtoxic wmlm Prlot to
commcnt! within fll deYr before
li#iil;iliicenrc arnlndmenr to the
u**r*sm#*,
thc raateriol snd ltr ditPottL ..
*i'-rfl'Jf:lf{#i;,lls'uff}
:Unf,rxro$#,H"*t:
i:#rJff i5Htii. g,,,a.*.
discur3cd. llris analylir ir limited ro
I"Tiil i""orving coirmingling with
;il-ti-i! tailingr imPoundrnenlr'
roo r1r€) ry MIGU||E "i6:fr;;*heniqo-g9cuthorire the Z. Boc*ground
flsffii:,r:l"\"i:1t' Hf#:{iilllHili#ffi:l',i" .mYH'"qH#ITTTTTTTTTTTTTIdI:':"*
'.ffif'i,tr;;":.gli.I
ffi$t'iiiffifiI[.'ffi$i-
- ffi ff*"
-
illinFRPartrri' -'deccereraro' r*'g;''-"rrnrdrin, ;Hlti{fttr*HH$l*fu3ilhi,ir*ffii'UlF#-''ffi .. 'ii,trfi#i**:ir:*.1""*,ffi '
r,
i. ipecialnuclear:l::
;:llfli;,i;#'"l'#ilffi;
rr dirpoul ln t trtttrrlr tr
llH"'I:",iltlliHfi :il:'
raterial rhould be dirgor
*si[u,f,}:H*il*' il#,}$ffi ffiffiffi,rr*,
lmidffim,o''ulliii'r,",2) ricen*e musr *X',H:it if"Hx''#l;HJl"ffi*' :*"*:s;.t1tr#H*iffiila"*
ffit;;i1ffir"im",--" l'*iirf,x,ffifrilffi
-rr,'
' "s' il; 1r;i'"'"t-fiH:?,""'
[N,u"H,ruH,ii*: ffiffi-#,dilr'demonstrale that thert'
mffi#tl""ffi?iz ,''e-':e 121 """"'- HlJIHl"l *fl'g;tU**:li'**l*llil' ffi#"qlliffiii1[tifbdemonrtratc that thc Pt
will not comPrcmioe tht
fi*$Iitffi,,#*u, *r,,m*Uuti#^,'';;,#iffi"m
ilii:lll#i;irlltTiiif6f;- I"**Ll13**"#l# . ---ffi,...a,m,m.e,,r,rrdc,n.r, n
dxi.',i',il,f.[],]lill"Jlriliflr ffi;;;,ffi;** ffir#flii'*r,,:*,::::;",;i:ifu"i*t+iuilt:.P u*fr***;,5lffill;;;;::::t'"r.-irlr"" fin,Jings and proposed. , bu'.:'-
;;i;;.;'i;h .n opp-ortunitv to provide m;trttrar'
o
3. rs92 lrJotks NN
FGdEI / voL sz. No. tllt /lYsl6da1'.May
a
t
a
t
o
uced in tbe Manbettrn Eng-irccnng
O-iitia endorrlY Atornlc Emr3Y
Conunierioo Prolrtor' Walter rerulting
il;fi;i';;dt'E !4 direocd.of ar
iil"L;'J;oua qi"tirY ar 11c{2)
Lg{'s;t",'m"mili}'*,::'?,
at rtrerc litca l€lult hoo procc^aetnq ol -
oie for trorium' At rone riter urcte war
;il";;;ing for rare carthr snd othcr
[:ri:,m f* ;]'sim :a .. rieb
it ilrtttirtii,l optionr fir dirpoul aad
l" iiiri.i ttt"i riattritta ooe
;iilffi iii"t " t*'t of t'z millioo cub-ic
;ilffii";;;Jl tcrra rmiur ln 13
'slr"r"l' i.ot PoPoldr brw -
ruu**$:'m-f,""'rrr-''ri*te::w"t"gglx
H#St,ffi'"j*ffi ttr"T[:;:.::""{.g.: -- D''rrictendo,rvAtomicEncrtv
H;;ilngqrr.(zl-bil'rodua' J#ffi;&"';+"-tkfi ffiffi:,'*"$}ffi'"' il{#;#fflffi ffiffi 3'-
lil.x'm*;ffiH#ffi $,kilffi'U*l",r::: illirffi'#J*rutf*::[trhe&""o.y'rw,i;r"*o*",**..gffi*'4mt*_6n:,ln"[##Ii'#"H#F,ffi J;Conmingled Digt '
so'rc ricrmc''""',{ffi[t{*:' ffii'ffi" LH'"ffi#HT "''" "
:xi,il[*?ffi*r,i
l'ff*'*:m*lH,u;,,1 H*!'##Si'ffir.' f'*Ur*'*';ffi*$r**;
tantalugr olusrblum' drcoolum' Io urryrium s thoriutl * *EL,,. a.ra W)'omry'
mxffi**"'I"ffiffi=, m;r';i*' '{ NAru\'
;ffi;Et*rf.,#tb*,
or thoriura lrorq oIa ll
[rffifi'#HH',J*tr , #,*ffi'Hffi
;iffiffiu";. ot -,r*, rnrterieL e^od ill;) btp.oduct urtcriel' i*tiidt "q9na3'rtrt'-r Pldryrrt,"G.,*.,iot#ffi.T-* ., r"-r'.*Proccarwertcc ;*',tn*ffi*tF##
Iiceared cootlol Ith
radioactlve llstrn&
NRC. tb.icbdly rr
and accelcretor'Pi;;d illo-Uw. rldr'drer rcoY'ly oP'r
mrrcrlal INARMI -I"*i'-J'I"*" U" which nreatun lttrldPit
tr;iffi;,tffi r$isJl"--' ;
"H:ilt*ffi'H?l,,,r, ffi[;:i#-uit"ditpotaloptionrarc :"'**"-----'---
Itmtted.ltere t"'t'Ji*imitarto' :* wat not PTcry'f
turrinsrrnvorumc';dild,iU'; ffif"ffJ:Hf:i"t?h
ioiici,v rr'".*o-';fiT,,'tf,'ii*pora, siffif;f,iffiffi.E$h filiilry#j+,*rji,:',ilIiiiitr.oroducett rce ttc g
for such diePoral',;Iffi f {.[,#f ,ff i,s,!.eaeea.llt#ffiffi fi*#,.,":;l-H$l#'*""t'':"#rrni:r
;'fi ffi#i#r:.r,,'!:*oil li##ffituh*ffi "'ii#;r$iri "i* ffi:r*
mareriel into u,"ru,il ,i-ri'Girli,b pu"'. ::l'T:ffi; utirizEd s.., Remedial llX;U;;; il'i"ri8l,14'6ussr
rhe rorowinsr.*ilili"e"i'i.;;;f oon- l}["f#*ffir p-.ffiil:ffiioi-"a-a,eryi1i
rle.{z) br,odua r","rJiuus.trate the "1:X:. H;i;;;cegsed 'rrciueru 6 alow the diaqgSl o[ non'
requesrs cubmi*eiTo N'it'"na tr't These ritec primarily oroceaged *"'='ffi;;;;atttttiit itii"lii*a
Asrecrnent Srater for disposal into. '"tfri-''"r''"' todttiu rn&' to "9"r?,i,[ffilstfii["il]rit" ii"n
ffi ;ffi;u ;'*ir,1i[HL:1", .' Uffif,r'mffi*'*Hiln", ###"rH.sffiil*'[fr'under euthoritY er
(IMTRC..|.:
2052S Fcdord Rfii't'r I vot' D^Vot. SZ. No. 9Il I *"arr"""r''"' "Q'
c.r RCRA Aurhorrtv rnd Mrxed warre L":i:llfl:i;#ffi;ffi ffiBiiii.T-ffi,t[i$1;1r1*;i;iffi: ;iil,]]TJf',trghf-;; ffi]'*tii*miryn'xrrt r"
u*iffi.mti*uiru;L fiffffim*,'r;, *ffim,irm :
ffiil':ilit'ii{+lti** .,,,, ilit:*,Tt;,li.l;*ffi#*;" ;r-,tt*;ggdn-x'*itommingled radioactivil'""ir r"'"ffip,.
11g,,1flpiitril:rtr^tfir"'ff ltffif$$ffi;;"'Commirrlon'r ruthoril;
hJ,ttffi l[i{iflxllf i]"'#ilil,:]$il"id;i:ii::::::htd:r*inhfulri]'i!l!"""
:trfffi;*##;,. #*$nl*xelm ti{rld*hH;t!fl'*tri',"#t,
i:ii.",:$:tf:,llr,ttrrT Potentiauv ::H"ffi 1ff'"1""'#ilffi;,[i'!r i"#oH?;,,,ar
reaponrer addresaed rhe
'#*h*'$,rr"'I,i},:,f{:fl".I" ti#ry l{#ilffffi :r,:Iilffi:H:ifj
dlrpoml.
Aa a rcsult of thia guidanc€' Pre'renl fitJ"n."" diopoaer o[ louru
[;i}[yilli[ir*r*']''*',iffi';g;g"ffiH1;ffi ,g{,1p,iffi[1*:F*-'^'
ffiih,il:lliflf:';il#:H, filffilliii#s*Xt,:rriv
-Hi'iffi:r#r*]i['t!:i:r#'
li*tffffilr*ffi"1 ,{$flff,ffi,1;;ii;;l in par.o. .r,fi?tiill,i,,n ,r,. :
c. The diePoaal w
:tfm::n**"fiT:ffi:::.|:" l'"o*"' not sPprove cJiipoi"t or il;
Reepbnrc. compcnratron' rnd Lrabirnv ::l;:k[*#;:"'rl:L""t"tf'""'"""' .J..'::i"*1t"'t,:'"il]fiffi'"ii,,'";ilSef:n;.,.," asre,..in ffi;iJi;"ff;;-ncne. ,."rionil"io,". "* dembrrctreted'
aduance. ro rale rrir" toir,iin€, upon e.z curtodv and rrrlc rranrrer *itit *llt"ll&11n*"?;L1?3;,?"t:+ii;,',',',1.,-,Iin'"li:',',s:'lH',",r- uMrRcA' tittr u'r:llif,.'lffi'T [:i.iqTii{;i;i:1fi.:i'f-t'-' ,
ilfl"*:[il:i.|l1"lil:131'T'ffi1."" o" [.l{='i:ffi{{'.#Tlpo,"i"r,e.(zr i"-1"",,t*1en';rr:.":l.T.l:g5','d[,:""ri,;"i;L;'*r.:ni:=lrjl;,,u,*"' &"t#!i*1[:Hi*';}"*Uri [*j{3,[tf",ff""'",rJti",:;iJ:",iT"""decirions to allow
H[iltitx{{tiffiii{iJxJ"i,:" [.';[is;;ht*'*r".]iil; 1iifiililf iilr?i;i'iili iior'
i.l';,i,.l.:,5
i,' .,,,er gsues '*,#:ilffi1;;t.$fl
,:,1{"F, l:iffj1t;;1;51:,:1:r:],,*
rnr, c,
."gl5:,j"'ili:',:ii:i:l;:?g::.T' Ui':li*,iii"""r*:'iili:H""lff ***'|'t,::::::tbvproduc'l;;;;i"e,."d r;"'"Iiiiiii ii,;h ''Tfi11".,fr_l-"-,#" concernr *:ll;ilf#iltri,Ut:::Yi:i:liii[::'X,:ffi!'ll:fil',ilH.rr.'. ,'r"iins'io1t'ir t1ayif i,""',iixiiii-,i;" '1"t"h"ii'ade rhat
,-igiir-i""n, ,r"**il,ll.l,ff"r,ru, "li,*11'"t"f;""::#,1H,XJtrJ'T
3f;ilii"';;";;ii"tionr "o'ia u"
istue! m8Y comPl
t f.d.nl oRdilot/ Vol. 57. No. 93 / WednegdaY' MaY Noticeg N8
"
ruu[:j,i',*lrr*i,i'ffi#'*
rJ$*.J4leqljlm!J*,8 riiTi":'3:["i3H"ii.i,T"rffir""'" ffiil;'i;'i.'Jh'I.r&'':i".''
rabler lor other rourcell'.
-. .,.. " '"1 notifj'Odg i.ith an opportunirv ro issues r€la
",iffif S8i3i*'ffi1',,"err. with U";i#ffi *"*ifr1,',W,*Uy"' llffin f:'glll'T'?liil;
an ultrmaro t?rcrr ro rirl d,',,nent, ,,.",uaii. air-#-ri ii l iirrrhit " ' impoundmcn. rhrt prccrudc routine
that could be urod ro d"i"r,,,tn, impoundmeir,. " ;;;PY"!.;;itg'itt" itit"aa ln appendix
accepteblc conccntrartonr ol -r .-. 8.3 Acceprsbte warrer lritxr*li*lt;?'Jffi'ill"',i n.,"
,';ii"n'- i" !*'1'"
i13:ixi[,i-,-*,, *Ermin[:g*"*i+*il'ild"" ['un+rl+i ;iilim,;.,*materialr. 11ro hrt dem
li:sffiil1:ri'ilf*xi:,u,imr r*iil***Ltrff'#.l?li" :Llil;',T.'jTfl3l[ilir,i:lrTl,*
errec. on pubri*arery and hearthand :m,1i**,ffi1il1i,1fi:11, ai:lf,'rT'-"rlf;illXoJl'l; i:' ''
the envimnment). encoffiffi;;il;;;r'il*;jft" j[ ff:*,"mtry#:li,i:"tfl::::'''.ff ,#,; rGs,. ....rh€!rarly:1, "",conriderrlion will bo s
""oT ffifrft h::l#i#l:", #il"#Ei"Hfitffi:::il' f,lft:H"ffi#ffi[#,*:il.
ffi'S'jiJHlliHlijltT,-h':ftI," u,,," d;:ii;;dorax-ryt aqnPve rr ther€qiff,f**fffi1,'r'S*1"
rr#;;,;,i#[fir{iq1:1,,r"i* tpfl*,'J r#is ffi-ri1
[,**g$**l*,g"i,ffi,,-"fi
:would hrvr to br mrd
;"-ff ;",i1ii,u"o,tla;&i;.'{;;is'.$##iifii"i-.r'*
pi$$ffiffi,$m.r f,fri"#rrlii#'f[ffi ,.##,ffiilr:ffi,'ri,1,;;iitl':'if;;ihar Rsdon',,rete11p [fit*ilfiIffiIyig,T;;,,", ]-l,;fuu:.:**'*'$;llateriar*',li;hi'.#r+;rm*,#I.#Ilil#,ffi lfif#,ii'l'*t"',*t$*'*i*'m,p,*t-
l'fll:ffi:Tir'[f"ifi.1ffiii""' h]l[*ili;;lf,S".tt",ll,",, H:iiklXi1l,Tl*ffi{",*,
materiab ln hc iitle. u tltc' . .^ :=:ii--.:;;:. ii."ord of 11s.(1) fl:'::i=:^;;rirtdU the
,ryrfie":.ffi 6[:llm'*ry.""u;r.ffi*mn$ff;19"H:1,,*;lLg*ro**,,,i'iri':-crn'p"'uo ##;iil {ril; Wffi,#lt*ti*; l}fr,ffiif,,}$EI$,....t{$fi*thir conrlderation wii'i;;;;e a;monrtration dircuued ln
.""tioii iuor.' Pr
ffi,"*nffiffiffffl,luffi " ,
t*ltp"ff.liffi 'J; ;";-i ma ini ne - - J"'iil; [i 6;;a;a ; "ffi;:;;fiai"ooiil'l#iiiiir"r t".lr"',:'lnrffil:'iH#,",'"'* ,"[fl{n::,:ll:*:rgr"rnr"1,TiirFr" biliryr impoundmentr PPj::,"::ii:Iiiir'..riiUtroau"r dioporal ln.t?1lllfl:IH:'::i
ffifiT:ilfi]i,$ffii'n" fl{+*r{Ii,ltffi, fi*lilumH:Hfr*,"ii,ir,*.r;,,,",inililliJ*"f15 il*iTl.di,iilj[T.iHili;|* :,jL:dereiminer tr,"r ,r,.'jiloiiii;i;'s1^- r3j::^'J*L:Jil'ii?,li.,llilf' ;'iffiil[i;t iie decav product or
concem! ana crit".il?i'rliilli,il. poe fr;-d;;, ';t"t!9::teria in **tfllfiii'rfiJ"rr -iri' r"aioL!i""t
ffi,qi$i,|fi]iffi
"'*xt'E;r*'*$'im,''"r""".rgftnl'ffiil5g$t*
;;;;ti#d" ' '"'Ar a meetins on
iiu""mte, rr,,sry,fiht;l"riJiee,14- #lltlii*.:*m:ii:[ffi1 L!i*3f'ffi'Tffi[?L-*h*o;il;i;;';iitJooe and a P.o-rriblc DoE
concurcnqa on indtvldual irlRC ;;;;;ii;nr wertcr'ilntomlnatcd' ms'tcrisl sxcoPt by (a! ronrfcr to an
ff*r"i*$:uu5itl;m,$-,r,*[,:*;,"#"H*i'*,i'H:i't,iff ''idxmnu#ilTdll'r
lelter daled o""ttf,iz' r-fu' that iis valid'
t wednesday, norr, tss2 lNotices
a
t
I
t
t
t
t
t
I
t
(n.z@Z) or part 01. pait 01 provides
regulations for the disposal of
radioactive waste received from others.while ! 20.302 (202fr2) allow for
disposal by a licensee of licensed
material in a manner not otherwiseauthorized in the regulations.
Since the material proposed for
disposal in tailings impoundments wiil
be received frcm licensees other thanthe-impoundment owner. 10 CFR part 61is the appropriate regulation tor slchdispoasl. Disoosa-l under g 20.302 has
been used by licetsees to dispose oftheir own wastes onsite. It does notpreclude disposal of radioactive wastereceived from others. Section 20.2N2 {inthe new part 20), however. specificailvlimits disposals under that plrt tolicensed material generated in thelicensee's activities. so it could not beused for the disposals discussed in thispaper. The new Part 20 becarne effective
on |une 20. 1991. with discretion by
licensees to defer implementation until
fanuary 1, 1993 (however. theCommission has under consideration aproposal to change the discretionary
implementation date to fanuary 1. 1iX)4).
Thus, in order to aliow disposal ofnon-lle.(2) byproduct material at atailings impoundment, either a part 61review would have to be performed anda license under 10 CFR part 61 would
have to be issued to themill operator, oran exemption to such a review and
license would have to be granted. Thepart 01 license to allow diiposal of thenon-11e.(2) byproduct maierial in thetailings impoundment would be inaddition to the amendment to the part {)license authorizing receipt of the
material.
The basic obiectives of parts 40 and61 are thesame: protection of public
health and safety and the environment
by disposal that controls and isolates
the wastes for long periods of time. part
61.6 of title 10 allows for exemptionsfrom the requirementr of part 6f if suchan exemption will not endanger life orproperty. In order to avoid seDarale Dart€ and 61 reviews and licenses for thedisposal of non-11e.(2) byproductmaterial in tailings impoundments. anexemption under Part 61.6 will begranted for each such proposed
commingling that meets all of the orherrequirements discussed in this analysis.
The basis for such an exemption is ihat
lhe proposed disposal will not endangerIife and property by virtue of its meetinethe criteria discussed in this analysis(which includes demonstrating thit thereclamation and closurp criteria inappendix A to part,O will be met).
7. R.esults of Stoff Anolysis
NRC staff idenrified the following
course of action with respect to req-uestsfor direct dieposal of non-11e.(2)
byproduct material in tailings
impoundments:
1. Each proposal will be treated on itsindividual merite.
.2.: fhq guidance discussed in section 5.will be followed. Specifically, for eaih -'
such co-disposal request, the staff will:
. a. Reiect the requist if the non-11e.(2)oyproduct material is NARM waste.
- b. Determine whether ttre requ-ei-iefor bulk material contaminatedwith iowconcentrations of source material. If the
ryquest is for byproduct material orSNM, determinL-if there is a compellincreason. such as an immediate treitttr aiasafety concern. to grant the requeii.-ti---eo, a specific request for approval by theCommission will be prepared.
. c. Determine whetheithe propoeeddisposal will cause significa-nt-' --
additional effects to p-ublic safety,health and the environment.
- d. Determine whether the proposed
disposal will compromise thereclamation of the tailings impoundmentby determining whether-cornjti*"" ----'-
with the reclamation and cloiure criteriasta.ted in 10 CF? part 40, appendix A.wut De ensurcd.
e.,No-i approve the request if the non-11e.(2) byproduct material contains
ha_zardous constituents regulated underRCRA.
f. Notify DOE (with an opporrunity toprovtde comments) if the staff intends loapprove the proposed disposal.
. g. I ne lrcensee must providedocumentation showin! approval by theRegional LLW Compaci in i"hosejurisdiction the waste originates as wellas approved by the Compict in whose
iurisdiction the disposal iite is located.3. Apprcval of the request wilt beaccomplished through an amendment tothe part 40 license of the impoundmentowner.
Part 9-P$ltion and Guldancc on thc UroJ Uranium lfill FGGd llltcriets Othcr ThrnNlturul Or.!
Staff reviewing licensee requests toprocess alternate feed materiil (materialother than natural ore) in uranium mills -
should follow the guidance presented
below. Besides reviewing lo determinecomplia.nce with appropiate aspects ofappendix A of ro CFR parr {O. the staffghould also address thi following ir*Lr,
1.. Delerminotion of Whether the FeedMoteriol Is Ore
For the tailings and wastes from thepropos.ed processing to qualify as 11e.(2)Dyproduct material. the feed materialmust qualify ag ',ore.', In determining
whether the feed material is ore. thefollowing delinition of ore must be used: I
ore is-a naturat;;;";:l; ffil Smay be mined and treated for the \
extraction of any of its constituents orany other mstter from which Bourcematerial is extracted in a liceneed
uranium or thorium mill.
2. Determinotion of Whether the FeedMoteriol Is lvlixed Woste
Nots to Federal Regieier notice
ruaders: For further eiplanation of this
cornplex issue. see the discueaion
section of the Staff Analysis thatfollows.
If the proposed feed materiat werehazardous or mixed waste, it would besubiect to EPA regulation under RCRA.To avoid the complexities of NRC/EPAdual regulation. such feed materiai willnot be a_pproved for prccessing at alicensed mill. If the licensee cin showthal the proposed feed material wouldnot be a hazardous or mixed waste. ifnot proposed for processing at the mitt,this issue is resolved.
- Feed material exhibiting only acharacteristic of hazardouis waite(ignitable. conosive, reactive, toxic)would not be regulated as hazardouswasle and could therefore be approvedfor recycling and extraction of soucematerial. However. this does not applyto residues from water treatmenl io -
acceptance ofsuch residues as feedmaterial will depend on their not beinghazardous or mixed waste. Additionailv.if proposed feed material contained awaste listed under Subpart D (261.30_331
of 40 CFR. it would be i hazardouswaste and should not be approved.
3. Determinotion of Whether the Ote Is
B_eing Processed primarity for lts
Sou rce-Mo te rio I Con ten t
For the tailings and waste from theproposed procesaing to qualify as 11e.(2)byproduct material. the ore must beprocessed primarily for ils source-material content. There is concern thatwasteg that would have to be disposedof as radioactive or mixed *"rt" ,outabe.proposed for processing at a u!"niummill primarily to be able td dispose of itin the. tailings pile ae 11e.(2) byproductmaterial. In determining wheth;ri the --
proposed processing wis primarily forthe source-material content or forihedisposal o[ waste, either of the follo*,ingtestg can be used:
- a.-Co-disposol tesL Determine if theleed material would be approved fordisposal in the tailings iuiioundmenluncler the guidance contained in the Julv lt r,27, 1988. memorandum from Huch L' - UThompson to Robert D. Martin."or v
subsequent revisions (e.g.. as described
Federal Register rot. s7. No. gtt / We&resday. May 13. ) tNotices 20531
a
o
t
I
t
a
I
in Part A of thir notice). If it would. it
can be concluded that if a mill operator
proposes to procesa iL the prucessing is
primarily for the eource-material
content. The material would have to be
physically and chemically aimilar to
11e.(2) blproduct material and not be
eubject to RCRA or other EPA
hazardous-waste regulations, ag
diacuaaed in Part A.
b. Licensee certificotion lest If the
licensee certifies under oath or
affirmation that the fee{material: (1) ie
being reclaimed or recyc)ed in accord
with RCRA. or does not contain RCRA
hazardous waste; and (z) is to be
processed primarily for the recovery of
uranium and for no other primary
purpose, it can be accepted.
If it can be determined. using the
aforementioned guidance, that the
proposed feed material meets the
definition of ore. that it will not
introduce a hazardoug waste not
otherwise exempted. and that the
primary purpose of its processing is for
its source-material content. the request
can be approved.
NRC StafrAndyair of the Uae of
Uraniusr MilI FGed Materials Other
Than Natural Orer
1. Introduction
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(NRC) and Agrcement States have
received" and in some casea approved.
request8 to allow a uranium mill to
proce8s feed material that was not
natural (native. raw) uranium ore and
dispose of the resulting waate in the
facility'e tailinga impoundment. In those
cases. the feed material was generally
either proceasing wastes from other
extraction procedures or the residues
from mine-water tr€atment. These
requests werc handled on a case-by-
case basis, and approvals were based
on the interpretation that the proposed
feed material wee rtfined or processed
ore. This deaigrration of the feed
material ae ore ig critical to the
determination of disposal methods. This
stems from the definition under section
11e.(2) of the AEA. which limits
byproduct material origin to "ore
processed primarily for its source
material content."
lf the alternate feed material does not
meet the definition of ore. or is not
proceseed primarily for its source
material. there are two concerns. The
first is that complicated. dual regulation
of the tailinge pile by both NRC and the
Envimnmental hotection Agency (EPA)
under RCRA could result. The second
concem is that the requested activity
might leopardize the ultimate transfer of
the reclaimed tailings impoundment to
the State or Federal Government for
Perpetual custody and maintenance.
During the paet three years. geveral
edditional requesta foi approval of
alteraate feed materialg have been
received. Decisione on thoge r€quests
arc pending until development of e
generic agency poaition. Ttre analysie
addresaeg the need for e definition of
the term "ore" as used in the definition
of byproduct material ln the Uraniurn
Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of
1978 (LJMTRCA). and for criteria to
determine if mill-proceesing wastes from
alternate feed material will meet the
requirements for byproduct material
under a 10 CFR part tl() license.
2. Bockgmund
The UMTRCA amended the AEA to
include uranium and thorium mill
tailings and other wa.tes from the
milling pnocesa ag material to be
hcensed by NRC. Specifically, the
definition of byproduct material was
revised in section Ue of the AEA by
adding:
And (21 the tailings or waste! produced by
ihe extraction or concentrstion of uranium or
lhorium from any ore proceased primarily for
its aource material contenL
Such byproduct material includes all
the waetes resulting from the milling
proce88, not iust the radioactive
components. ln addition. title II of
UMTRCA amended the AEA to
explicitly exclude the requirement for
EPA to permit 11e.(2) byproduct material
under the RCRA. The definition and
RCRA exemption of 11e.(z) byproduct
material contrasB sigrrificantly with the
situation for source material and low-
level radioactive waste (IIW). where
only the radioactive component is
regulated under the authority of the
AEA. EPA has to address hazardous
constituents in those materials
separately.
As a result of UMTRCA. the NRC
amended 10 CFR Part rl(,, to regulate the
uranium and thorium tailings and
wastes from the milling processes. Ttrus.
under normal operation. all tailings and
wastes in an NRC or Agreement State
licensed mill producing uranium or
thorium are claseified aa "11e.(2)
byproduct material." end are disposed
of in tailings pilee regulated under part
4O. They are not aubiect to EPA
regulation. under RCRA. However. if
material that did not qualify ag 11e.(2)
byproduct material was placed in a
mill'e tailinge impoundnenl any
hazardous constituentg it contained
could lead to regulation by EPA.
The UMTRCA also required either the
United States. or the State in which the
byproduct material has been disposed
of, to maintain long-term custody of. and
eun eillance over, the blAroduct
material and the land ueed for its
disposal. Ttre AEA currently designates
the Department of Energy (DOE) as the
Federal "custodial egency." However.
the IIMTRCA specifically refemed only
to 11e.(2) bl2mduct material. and
containa no provioion allowing for the
transfer of anstody or title of any other
material. While the application of
section 151(b) of the Nuclear Waste
Policy Act could mbot this issue in a
apecific caae, it doea not provide a legal
baeis for avoiding the labeling of a
tailings diapoeal impoundment as either
a mixed waste facility or a low-level
waate dieposal facility with the complex
regulatory burdena these labels carry.
One of lhe purpoees of the guidance is to
avoid these consequences.
The term "alternate feed materials" is
used to indicate sources of urenium or
thorium (thmqhout thie analysis
referenceg to uranium millg or ore
should be talen to apply to lhorium
mille or ore. aleo), for a mill. that are not
natural ore (ore ia not defined in the
AEA nor in LIMTRCA).NRC staflhas
approved requeete. in the form of license
amendments, to allow processing of
alternate feed materiala in uranium
mills. The rcqueated license
amendments generally were to allow the
mill to uee feed materials that were
either processing waates such ag those
derived thmugh the extraction of other
elementa. or the residues hom mine-
water tEatment.
The following are examples of license
amendments approved in the past:
1. Proceseing Wastes From Other
Operations
The Rio Algom (Lisbon uranium mill
in Utah has had its source-material
license amended several times in the
period from 1982 to 1987, so the mill
could receive alternate feed materials.
The mill waa authorized to use
processing wastes from: a uranium
hexafluoride conversion facility, a
niobium-tantalum recovery facility, and
from an yttrium-lanthanidee lecovery
facility. The materials were
radiologically coneistent with the
exieting tailirys. buL in the first
example, the fluoride was in higher
concentration (greater than one percent)
than in the existing tailings. In 1987.
NRC aleo euthorized the Quivira Mining
Company to ptocess raffinate sludge
hom a ruanium hexafluoride conversion
plant. The uranium content of these
wsgtea (the yttrium-lanthanides wastes
averaged l.17 percent and the uranium
hexafluoride waste streams 0.0 to 6.7
percent) waa higher than the average
a 20532 rederal neeiO / VoL 57, No. 93 / wednesd"v. r"r"t, 1992 / Notices
a
o
a
a
t
I
t
e
t
natural ore processed in the United
States.
2. Wastes From Treatment of Mine
Water
Some mines have to be dewatered as
the shafts or pita fill with ground-water.
This water often contains dissolved
constituents as a result of flow through
and contact with ore bodies. It must
therefore be treated before it can be
discharged offsite. Treatment is oftenvia ion-exchange columns which
concentrate high le\els of uranium on
resins or the eluate. Several mills
(Western Nuclear Inc., Split Rock,
Wyoming. and Atlas Minerals Corp..
Ivtoab, Utah) have obtained license
amendments and processed these
residues/rvastes through the mitl.
The NRC staff approved the
processing of these alternate feed
materials, considering them to be
refined and processed ore.This
designation ag ore is essential so that
the residue from uranium processing canqualify as 11e.(2) byproduct material for
the reasons stated earlier. With this
interpretation, the resultant milling
wastes were legitimalely classified as
11e.(2) byproduct material.
However. because there is not a
definition of ore in 10 CFR Part ,10 and
because of the potential policy issues
involved in approving the processing of
feed material other than natural ore. the
staff has put recenl requests on hold.pending establishment of an agencyposition.
3. Discussion
Uranium mills were designed and
operated to process natural uranium-
bearing rock (i.e.. ore). usually mined
nearby, in order to produce uranium (in
the form of yellowcake). There usually
was no question of other feed material
or what constituted ore. However. there
have been occasions when other
material has been proposed for
processing at uranium mills.
Mill tailinSs that meet the definition of
11e.(2) byproduct material must be
stabilized in accordance with the
criteria in appendix A of 10 CFR part ao.
but are not subiect to separate
regulation as LLW or as hazardous
waste under RCRA. The wastes and
lailings produced in a uraniunn mill
processing uranium-bearing rock from
nearby mines would meet the definition
of f re.(z) byproduct material. However,
it is not obvious. from the definition
alone, whether wastes produced from
processing feed material that is
something other than rock mine from the
earth meets the definition of 11e.(Z)
byproduct malerial.
Neither the AEA nor 10 CFR part,O
contains a definition of "ore" as it
gppears in the definition of tte.(e)
byproduct material. The term "uniefined
and unprocessed ore" is, however.
defined separately in part,l0, in relationto the exemption in 10 CFR 40.13(b) for
source material in ore, ag:
Ore in its natural form prior.to any
proce-ssing. such ar grinding. roasting orbeneficiating. or refining.
The fact that the term,.any ore..,
rather than "unrefined and unprocessed
ore." is used in the definition of rre.1z;
byproduct material implies that abroader range of feed materials could beprocessed in a mill. with the wastes still
being considered ae 11e.(Z) byprcduct
material.
Legislative history confirms thevalidity of a broad interpretation of theterm "any ore." The definition of ue.1z;
byprodud material as originallypresented in UMIRCA was:
The tailings or waste! produced by theextraction or concenttation of uranium orlhorium from any source materiat.
However. there was a concern that
tailings reoulting from the processing ofore containing lesr than 0.0S percenl
uranium (the minimum concentralion
that would still meet the definition ofsource material) would fall outside thedefinition. To oreclude that possibility. itwas suggested that the words ..any oreprocessed primarily for i[g sourcematerial content" be substituted for"any source material."
In its decision in a case involving
whether certain material in and ne-ar the
West Chicago, Illinois. facility of Kerr-Mccee Chemical Corporation (Kerr-
tvlcGee Corporation v. runC,gOb FZd 1(D.C. Cir. 1990) was 11e.(Z) byproductmaterial or source materiaL ttre United
States Court of Appeals arrived at a
broad interpretation of the definition ofbyproduct material in which the concept
of ore is not restricted to native rock- Iialso cited Chairman Hendrie'stestimony before Congress that led tothe wording that now exists. in the AEA.defiaing 11e.(2) byproduct material ase.stablishing that a broad readiry of thedefinition wag in line with
Congressional expectations.
The previous discussion leads to theconclusion that the term ..ore'. in thedefinition of 11e.(2) byproduct material
can-be applied to a broad spectrum offeed materials from which uranium orthorium is extracted. In view of theforegoing. NRC staff has recommended
a definition of ore as follows:
Ore ig a natural or native matter that maybe mined and treated for the extraction of -
any of its constituent! or any other matter
from which sour:ce malerial is extracted in a
licensed uranium or thorium mill.
Two maior considerations that rvent
into this pmposed definition of ore were:
1. It is broad enough to include a wide
variety of feed materials.
2 The definition continues to be tied
into the nuclear fuel cycle. Because the
extraction of uranium in a licensed mill
remains the primary purpose of
processing the feed material. it excludes
secondary uranium side-stream
necovery operations at mills processing
ore for other metals. Thus. tailings from
such side-etleam operations at facilities
that are not licensed as uranium or
thorium mills. would not meet the
definition of fre.1z; byproduct material.
Although the intent of Congress in
defining 11e.(2! byproduct materialappear to have been to encompass the
wasteg from all feed material pruceseedprinarily for ita source-material content.
two significant issues result from thepropoeed definition of ore.
Since some of the feed material could
contain hazardous components. in
addition to source material. the first
significant issue is whether material thatwould othenrise have to be disposed of
ag hazardous waste can be processed in
a uranium mill and disposed of in the
tailings impoundment as Ue.(2)
byproduct material. If such feed material
were not processed at a uranium mill. itwould be clagsified as mixed waste
(radioactivity regulated under AEA. plus
hazardous waste regulated by EPA) ind
would thus have to be disposed of in a
mixed waste facility.
To determine i[ the feed material
would be regulated as hazardous waste,
one musl first determine if it meets the
delinition of solid waste. since
hazardous waste is a subset of solid
waste. ruder RCRA. The EPA
regulatione that irnplemented RCRA
state (40 CfR 261.1-261.4) that solid
waste is any discarded material not
excluded in the regulationi and includes
recycled material. A material is recycledif it is reclaimed. Reclaimed is defined
a8. "' ' ' processed to recover a usableproduct ' t "' Since alternate feedmaterial would be reclaimed at the rnill.it would be considered solid waste. Il
also would be classified as byproduct.
which EPA defines as, "' ' . not one of
the primary products of a productive
process t t ,' However. 40 CFR
2612c(3) provides that byproducts rharexhibit only a characteristic of
hazardous waste (ignitable, corrosive.
reactive. toxic) and thal are beingreclaimed are not regulated as
hazardous waste. To support the
"reclaimed" provision, it must be
demonstrated that there is a known
t
o
20533
.oo
Federal Register / Vol. 57, No. 93 / Wednesday, May 13. 7992 I Notices
r)
market for the material and
documentation provided, such as
contracts showing that a second person
uses the material as an ingredient in a
production process. An exception to this
exemption is sludge from a water
trealment plant, so residues from mine-
r.J3ter treatmeni would not qualify.
Since feed material is being used as
e:r ore from which a useabie product
(uranium) is to be extracted. it is being
reclaimed and thus wguld meet the EPA
exemption to regulation as
characteristic hazardous waste. except
ii it were mine-irater treatment residues.
The proposed feed material would
still be hazarCous waste if it contcined a
wasie listed unCer suopart D (part
261.3G.33) of the EPA regulations. It is
uniikely that feed material for uranium
mills would contain such substances.
Assurances need to be provided that
thr-'se proposed feed materials do not
contain RCRA or'[SCA listed hazardous
wastes.
Consiituents with hazardous
characteristics that were in feed
materials processed at a uranium mill
would eventually end up in the tailings
impoundment as 11e.(2) byproduct
material. Ae such, they would be
regulaied under appendix A of 10 CFR
part rl{) which provides for monitoring
and control of hazardous constituents.
Thus. the ultimate fate of hazardous
constituents that might be in uranium
mill feed material would not escape
regulatory oversight.
The second significant issue that must
be addressed is the potential of' converting material that would have to
be disposcd of as LLW or mixed waste
into ore. for processing and disposal as
11e.(2) byproduct material. The
possibility of converting such wastes to
11e.(2) byproduct material can be very
attractive to owners of such material.
Thig is because of the high cosl of
disposing of LLW and especially of
mixed waste. An owner of cuch material
could pay a mill operator substantially
less to process it for its uranium content
and dispose of the resuliing 11e.(2)
byproduct material thanto dispose of
the material as waste at an appropriate
facility. Utah officials have already
expressed concern over "sham disposal"
(i.e.. converting a mill into a LLW
disposal site).
The proposed definition of ore would
include any material from which souDce
material ia extracted in a licensed mill
and would thus aeem to allow such
shan disposals. However the definition
of 11e.(2) byproduct material nequiresi that the ore be proceased
I primarily for iti source material
content" and thus would not permit such
sham disposals. Matnrial that was
processed primarily to convert what
would have been LLW or mixed waste
into 11e.(2) byproCuct material would
not meet the definition of ff e.1Z;
byproduct material.
Therefore, as part of its review of a
licensee proposal to process material
other than natural ore. the staff would
have to determine whether the
processing was primarily for the source-
materirl content or for the disposal of
rvastc. This determination would have
to be made on a case-speciiic basis. but
either of the ioilowing tests can be used:
7. Co-disposol test: lf the feed material
rvould be approved for disposal in the
tailings impoundment, under the
guidance contained in the fuly 27,798{i,,
memorandum from Hugh L. Thompson
to Robert D. lvlartln, or subsequent
revisions. it can bdconcluded that if a
mill cperator proposes to process it. the
processing is primarily for the source-
material content. The material would
have to be physically and chemically
sirnilar to 11e.(2) byproduct material and
not be subiect to RCRA or other EPA
hazarc!oug-waste regulations. as
discussed in this notice.
2. Licensee certificote les& If the
Iicensee cerrifies under oath or
affirmation that the feed material: (1) is
being reclaimed or recycled in accord
wirh RCRA. or does not contain RCRA
hazardous waste; and (2) is to be
processed primarily for the recovery of
uranium and for no other primary
purpose. it can be accepted.
4. Results of Stoff Anolysis
The staff has determined to issue
guidance on the definition of ore and on
the issues related to feed material that
could be considered waste. Although
Agency guidance does not carry the
weight of a regulation, the staff
concludes that the time and resources
required for rulemaking on the definition
of ore would not be iustified in this
inslance. There are only a few mills that
are in active or standby status and that
would be able to process alternate feed
material. and it is estimated that the
Agency would receive only one or two
such requests a year. However, the staff
will include the definition of ore the next
time amendments to 10 CFR Part r10 are
proposed.
Issuance of the guidance would also
assist Agreement States. As a policy. the
Agreement States are not required to
adopt this guidance as a matter of
cornpatibility. However. if an Agrcement
State implements a similar policy. the
State will have some assurance that
NRC will not question its policy in
proSram reviews and in making the
determination as required in 10 CFR
150.15a(a) prior to the State terninating
the license.
Dated at Rockvrile. Ilarylar:d. lhis :lh Cay
of IUay U)gz.
For the Nuclear Regulalory Commission.
fchn Surraeier.
Chief. Urcniurn Recovery' R:onch. Dlt ist,.ttt o.f
Lo*'- Level V;as ! e luto noge m a tt I o n d
Deco m nt iss i o n i ng. Ofrice of N s. I eo r !\ fu t F ri o I
So fe t -v o n d So ieg u o rc) s.
[FR Doc.92-1727'a Filed 5-1?-93:8:{5 aml
BtLLt'aG COO€ 74oO-O l-r
[Docket No.5(Fa16l
Entergy Operationq lnc.; Notlce ot
Congiderallon ol lssusnce ol
Amendment to Facillty Operating
Llcense, Proposed No Signitlcant
Hazards Consideration Determlnatlon,
and Opportunlty for Hearlng
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (the Commission) is
considering issuance of an amendment
to Facility Operating License No. NPF-
29. issued to Enteryy Operations, Inc.
(the licensee). for operation of the Grand
Gulf Nuclear Station, Unit 1. located in
Clairborne County. Ivlississippi.
The proposed amendment would
increase the trip setpoints of four circuit
breakers for the suppression pool
makeup (SMPU) valves.
In response lo NRC Generic Letter 89-
10, the licensee has identified the need
to replace four valve actuator for the
SPMU valves rvith larger actuators.
During the design change process. it was
determined that the required larger
valve actualor motors would require
circuit breakers with higher trip
eetpoints. These trip setpoints are
apecified in the Technical Specifications
(TS), and the licensee must request a TS
change to permit the use of the higher
trip setpoints. Allowing fcr the standard
3G.day Federal Register notice would
delay approval of the requested change
beyond the scheduled end of the curient
refueling outage. The staff concludes
that the liceneee has provided an
acceptable basis lor its request and thai
exigent circumstances exist.
Before issuance of the proposed
license amendment. the Commission
will have made findings required by the
Atomic Ene.gy Act of 1954. as amended
(the Act) and the Commission's
regulationr.
The Commission has made a proposed
determination that the amendment
reguest involves no significant hazards
consideration. Under the Commission's
regulations in 10 CFR 50.9& this meang
that operation of the facility in
accordance with the proposed
t
t
t
o
t
t
C
a
t
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
a
I
a
I
I
I
t
I
t
a
I
42USC 2022.
42USC2022.
Rule.
42 USC 791 L
42 USC 2014.
42 USC 690 I note.
Promulgation
authority.
purpose and any final standards promulgated by the Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency in accordance with section 275. Such
altemative State requirements may take into account local or regional
conditions, includirig geology, toliography, hydrology and mete"orology.2"
Sec.275. Health And Environmental Standards for Uranium Mill
Tailings.
a. As soon as practicable, but not later than October l, 1982,278 the
Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (hereinafter
refened to in this section as the "Administrator") shall, by rule,
promulgate standards of general application (including standards
applicable to licenses under section 104(h) of the Uranium Mill Tailings
Radiation Control Act of 1978) for the protection of the public health,
safety, and the environment from radiological and nonradiological
hazards associated with residual radioactive materials (as defined in
section l0l of the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978)
located at inactive uranium mill tailings sites and depository sites for such
materials selected by the Secretary of Energy, pursuant to title I of the
Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978. Standards
promulgated pursuant to this subsection shall, to the maximum extent
practicable, be consistent with the requirements of the Solid Waste
Disposal Act, as amended. In establishing such standards, the
Administrator shall consider the risk to the public health, safety, and the
environment, the environmental and economic costs of applying such
standards, and such other factors as the Administrator determines to be
appropriate.2?e The Administrator may periodically revise any standard
promulgated pursuant to this subsection.
After October 1,1982, if the Administrator has not promulgated
standards in final form underthis subsection, any action ofthe Secretary
of Energy under title I of the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control
Act of 1978 which is required to comply with, or be taken in accordance
with, standards of the Administrator shall comply with, or be taken in
accordance with, the standards proposed by the Administrator under this
subsection until such time as the Administrator promulgates such
standards in final form.28'
b.( I ) As soon as practicable, but not later than October 3 I , 1982, the
Administrator shall, by ru-le, propose and within I I months thereafter
promulgate in final form,'o' standards, general application for the
protection of the public health, safety, and the environment from
radiological and non-radiological hazards associated with processing and
with the possession, transfer, and disposal ofbyproduct material, as
defined in section I le.(2) of this Act, at sites at which ores are processed
primarily for their source material content or which are used for the
disposal of such byproduct material.
If the Administrator fails to promulgate standards in final form under
this subsection by October I , 1983, the authority of the Administrator to
promulgate such standards shall terminate, and the Commission may take
27?Public l-aw 97415 (96 Star. 2067) (1983), sec. l9 added this paragraph.2?tPublic Lasl 97415 (96 Srat. 2067) (1983), sec. l8 substituted "Ociober l, 1982" for "one year after the
date of enactment ofthis section."2nPublic Law 97415 (96 Stat. 2067) ( I 983), sec. 22 added this language to sec.275a.2t9Public Law 97 415 (96 Stat. 2067) ( I 983), sec. I 8 substiruted this language for "one year after
enactment of this section."2trPublic law 97-4!5 (96 Stat.2067) (1983), sec.22 added this language to sec. 275b(l).
1- l5l
t
D
o
o
a
t
t
I
I
42 USC 2014.
42 USC 2021.
Consultation.
Notice, hearing
oppornrnity.
Publication in
Federal Register.
Judicial review.
actions under this Act without regard to any provision of this Act
requiring such actions to comply with, or be taken in accordance with,
sta;dards promulgated by the Administrator. In any such.case, the
Commission shall promulgate, and from time to time revise, any such
standards of general application which the Commission deems necessary
to carry out iis responiiUitlties in the conduct ofits licensing activities.
under ihis Act. Requirements established by the Commission under this
Act with respect tobyproduct material as defined in section I I e.(2) shall
confirm to sirch standards. Any requirements adopted by the Commission
respecting such byproduct material before promulgation^by the
Co-mmission of suCh standards shall be amended as the Commission
deems necessary to conform to such standards in the same manner as
provided in subsection f.(3). Nothing in this subsection shall be construed
io prohibit or suspend the implementation or enforcement by the
Co-rnrnission of any requirement of the Commission respecting b;product
material as defined in stction I le.(2) pending promulgation by the
Commission of any such standard of general application.'o' ln
establishing such standards, the Administrator shall consider the risk to
the oublic health. safew. and the environment, the environmental and
ecoiomic costs of appiying such standards, -arld such other factors as the
Admini strator deteririines io be appropriate. 283
(2) Such generally applicable standards promqlgaled pursuant to this ^subiection fo-r nonradioiogical hazards shall provide for the protection of
human health and the environment consistent with the standards required
under subtitle C of the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended, which are
applicable to such hazards: Provided, however, Thgt -q9 p_ermit issued by
th6 Administrator is required under this Act or the Solid Waste Disposal
Act, as amended, for thL processing, possession, transfer, or disposal of
byproduct material, as defined in section I le.(2) of this Act. The
Administration may periodically revise any standard promulgated
pursuant to this subslction. Within three, years after such revision of any
such standard, the Commission and any State permitted to exercise
authority under section 274b.(2) shall apply suc! revised standard in the
case of any license for byproduct material as defined in section I I e.(2) or
any revision thereof.- c. ( I ) Before the promulgation of any rule pursuant to this section, the
Administrator shall publish the proposed rule in the Federal Register,
together with a statement of the research, analysis, and other available
inlormation in support of such proposed rule, and provide a period of
public comment df at least thirty days for written comments thereon and
ln opportunity, after such comment period and after public notice, l9I uny
interested perion to present oral data, views, and arguments at a public
hearing. There shallbe a transcript ofany such hearing- The
Admin]strator shall consult with the Commission and the Secretary of
Energy before promulgation of any such rule."' (2) Juditial revlew of any rule promulgated under this section may
be obiained by any interested person only upon such person filing a
petition for rwie* within sixty-days after such promulgation in the. .United States court of appeals for the Federal judicial circuit in which
such person resides or has his principal place of business. A copy of
2s2Public lraw 97415 (96 Stat. 2067) (1983), sec. l8 changed subsec. b from "eighteen months after
enactment ofthis section" to current language.28rpublic lraw 97415 (96 Stat. 2067) (l 983). sec. 22 added this language at end of subsec. b.
b
I
r-152
a
a
e
I
t
a
t
I
I
t
5 USC et seq.
42 USC 202 I .
42 USC 2014.
42 USC 7401 note.
Uranium mill
licensing
requirement
regulations.
Implementation
and Enforcement.
Review, public
comment, and
suspension.
the petition shall be forthwith transmitted by the clerk of the court to
the Administrator. The Administrator thereupon shall file in the court
the wriften submission to, and transcript of, the written or oral
proceedings on which such rule was based as provided in section 2l l2
of title 28, United States Code. The court shall have jurisdiction to
review the rule in accordance with chapter 7 of title 5, United States
Code, and to grant appropriate reliefas provided in such chapter. The
judgment of the court affirming, modifying, or setting aside, in whole
or in part, any such rule shall be final, subject tojudicial review by the
Supreme Court of the United States upon certiorari or certification as
provided in section 1254 of title 28, United States Code.
(3) Any rule promulgated under this section shall not take effect
earlier than sixty calendar days after such promulgation.
d. Implementation and enforcement of the standards promulgated
pursuant to subsection b. ofthis section shall be the responsibility ofthe
Commission in the conduct of its licensing activities under this Act.
States exercising authority pursuant to section 274b.(2) of this Act shall
implement and enforce such standards in accordance with subsection o. of
such section.
e. Nothing in this Act applicable to byproduct material, as defined in
section I le.(2) of this Act, shall affect the authority of the Administrator
under the Clean Air Act of 1970, as amended, or the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act, as amended.2e
f.(l) Prior to January l, 1983, the Commission shall not implement or
enforce the provisions of the Uranium Mill Licensing Requirements
published as final rules at 45 Federal Register 65521 to 65538 on
October 3, 1980 (hereinafter in this subsection refened to as the
"October 3 regulations"). After December 3 l, 1982, the Commission is
authorized to implement and enforce the provisions of such October 3
regulations (and any subsequent modifications or additions to such
regulations which may be adopted by the Commission), except as
otherwise provided in paragraphs (2) and (3) ofthis subsection.
(2) Following the proposal by the Administrator of standards under
subsection b., the Commission shall review the October 3 regulations,
and, not laterthan 90 days afterthe date ofsuch proposal, suspend
implementation and enforcement of any provision of such regulations
which the Commission determines after notice and opportunity for public
comment to require a major action or major commitment by licensees
which would be unnecessary if-
(A) the standards proposed by the Administrator are promulgated
in frnal form without modification, and
(B) the Commission's requirements are modified to conform to
such standards.
Such suspension shall terminate on the earlier of April I , I 984 or the
date on which the Commission amends the October 3 regulations to
conform to final standards promulgated by the Administrator under
subsection b. During the period of such suspension, the Commission shall
continue to regulate byproduct material (as defined in section I le.(2))
under this Act on a licensee-by-licensee basis as the Commission deems
necessary to protect public health, safety, and the environment.
@. 3039) (1978), sec.206(a), added sec. 275.
I
l-153
a
t
t
I
o
t
t
I
,o
42USC2ll4.
42USC2023.
Separability.
Short title.
(3) Not later than 6 months after the date on which the Administrator
promulgates final standards pursuant to subsection b. ofthis section, the
Commission shall, after notice and opportunity for public comment,
amend the October 3 regulations, and adopt such modifications, as the
Commission deems necessary to conform to such final standards of the
Adminisffator.
(4) Nothing in this subsection may be construed as affecting the
authority or responsibility of the Commission under section 84 to
promulgate regulations to protect the public health and safety and the
Lnviroriment.2v'
Sec. 276. State Authority to Regulate Radiation Below Level of
Regulatory Concern of Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
(a)2E6 IN GENERAL.-No provision of this Act, or of the Low-Level
Radioactive Waste Policy Act, may be construed to prohibit or otherwise
restrict the authority ofany State to regulate, on the basis ofradiological
hazard, the disposal or off-site incineration of lowJevel radioactive waste,
if the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, after the date of the enactment of
the Energy Policy Act of 1992 exempts such waste from regulation.
(b) RELATION TO OTHER STATE AUTHORITY.-This section
may not be construed to imply preemption of existing State authority.
Except as expressly provided in subsection (a), this section may not be
construed to confer on any State any additional authority to regulate
activities licensed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
(c) DEFINITIONS.-For purposes of this section:
(l) The term "low-level radioactive waste" means radioactive
material classified by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission as
lowJevel radioactive waste on the date of the enactment of the Energy
Policy Act of 1992.
(2) The term "off-site incineration" means any incineration of
radioactive materials at a facility that is located off the site where such
materials were generated.
(3) The term "State" means each of the several States, the District
of Columbia, and any commonwealth, territory, or possession of the
United States.
(b) REVOCATION OF RELATED NRC POLICY
STATEMENTS.-The policy statements of the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission published in the Federal Register on July 3, 1990 (55 Fed.
Reg.27522) and August 29,1986 (51 Fed. Reg. 30839), relating to
radioactive waste below regulatory^ concern, shall have no effect afterthe
date of the enactment of this Act.'o'
Sec. 281. Separability.
If any provision of this Act or the application of such provision to any
person or circumstances, is held invalid, the remainder of this Act or the
application ofsuch provision to persons or circumstances other than those
as to which it is held invalid, shall not be affected thereby.
Sec. 291. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the "Atomic Energy Act of 1954 ."
Public Law 97-4 I 5 (96 Stat. 2067) (l 983), sec. I 8 added new subsec. f2eP.L. I02486 (106 Srat.3l22)28?Public Law I02-486 (106 Stat. 3122); Oct. 24,1992 added new Sec. 276.
.O
)
l-154
o
o
o
o
o
t
I
o
a
t
t
t
t
a
t
t
42 USC 2l14.
Infra.
42 USC 6901 note.
42USC2112.
Rule, regulation of
order.
Ante, p.3033.
Civil penalty.
subsection, the United States or a State shall not transfer title to
material or property acquired under this subsection to any person,
unless such transfer is in the same manner as provided under
section I 04(h) of the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act
of 1978.
(8) The provisions of this subsection respecting transfer of title
and custody to land shall not apply in the case of lands held in trust
by the United States for any Indian tribe or lands owned by such
Indian tribe subject to a restriction against alienation imposed by
the United States. In the case of such lands which are used for the
disposal of byproduct material, as defined in section I I e.(2), the
licensee shall be required to enter into such arrangements with the
Commission as may be appropriate to assure the long-term
maintenance and monitoring of such lands by the United States.
c. Upon termination on any license to which this section applies, the
Commission shall determine whether or not the licensee has comolied
with all applicable standards and requirements under such license.E5
Sec. 84. Authorities of Commission Respecting Certain Byproduct
Material.
a. The Commission shall insure that the management of any
byproduct material, as defined in section I le.(2), is carried out in such
manner as-(l) the Commission deems appropriate to protect the public health
and safety and the environment from radiological and nonradiological
hazards associated with the processing and with the possession and
transfer of such material taking into account the risk to the public
health, safety, and the environment, with due consideration of the
economic costs and such other factors as the Commission determines
to be appropriate,s6
(2) conforms with applicable general standards promulgated by the
Administration of the EnvironmeriLtal Protection Agency under section
275, and
(3) conforms to general requirements established by the
Commission, with the concurrence of the Administrator, which are, to
the maximum extent practicable, at lease comparable to requirements
applicable to the possession, transfer, and disposal ofsimilar
hazardous material regulated by the Administrator under the Solid
Waste Disposal Act, as amended.
b. In carrying out its authority under this section, the Commission is
authorized to-
(l) by rule, regulation, or order require persons, officers, or
instrumentalities, exempted from licensing under section 81 of this
Act to conduct monitoring, perform remedial work, and to comply
with such other measures as it may deem necessary or desirable to
protect health or to minimize danger to life or property, and in
connection with the disposal or storage ofsuch byproduct material;
and
(2) make such studies and inspections and to conduct such
monitoring as may be necessary.
Any violation by any person other than the United States or any officer
or employee of the United States or a State of any rule, regulation, or
ErPublic [:w 95-604 (92 Stat. 3033) (1978, sec. 202(a), added sec. 83.86Public kw 97-415 (96 Stat.2067) (1983) sec.22 added the language after "material."
I -41
I
a
e
a
t
I
o
t
.o
42USC2282.
42 USC 2014.
42USC2n4.
42U9C2022.
42USC2l2t.
Authority.
order or licensing provision, of the Commission established under this
section or section 83 shall be subject to a civil penalty in the same manner
and in the same amount as violations subject to a civil penalty under
section 234. Nothing in this section affects any authority ofthe
Commission under aiy other provisions of thiiAct.sT
c. In the case of sites at which ores are processed primarily for their
source material content or which are used for the disposal of byproduct
material as defined in section I le.(2), a licensee may propose altematives
to specific requirements adopted and enforced by the Commission under
this Act. Such alternative proposals may take into account local or
regional conditions, including geology, topography, hydrology and
meteorology. The Commission may treat such altematives as satisfoing
Commission requirements if the Commission determines that such
alternatives will achieve a level of stabilization and containment of the
sites concemed, and a level of protection for public health, safety, and the
environment from radiological and nonradiological hazards associated
with such sites, which is equivalent to, to the extent practicable, or more
stringent than the level which would be achieved by standards and
requirements adopted and enforced by the Commission for the same
purpose and any final standards promulgated by the Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency in accordance with section 275.EE
CHAPTER g-MILITARY APPLICATION OF ATOMIC
ENERGY
Sec.9l. Authority.
a. The Commission is authorized to-
( I ) conduct experiments and do research and development work in
the military application of atomic energy; and
(2) engage in the production of atomic weapons. or atomic weapon
parts, except that such activities shall be carried on only to the extent
that the express consent and direction of the President of the United
States has been obtained, which consent and direction shall be
obtained at least once each year.
b. The President from time to time may direct the Commission (1) to
deliver such quantities of special nuclear material or atomic weapons to
the Department of Defense for such use as he deems necessary in the
interest of national defense, or (2) to authorize the Department of Defense
to manufacture, produce, or acquire any atomic weapon or utilization
facility for military purposes: Provided, however, That such authorization
shall not extend to the production ofspecial nuclear material other than
that incidental to the operation ofsuch utilization facilities.
c. The President may authorize the Commission or the Department of
Defense, with the assistance of the other, to cooperate with another nation
and, notwithstanding the provisions of section 57 , 62, or 8 l, to transfer by
sale, Iease, or loan to that nation, in accordance with terms and conditions
of a program approved by the President-
(l) nonnuclear parts ofatomic weapons provided that such nation
has made substantial progress in the development of atomic weapons,
and other nonnuclear parts of atomic weapons systems involving
Restricted Data provided that such transfer will not contribute
ETPublic Law 95-604 (92 Stat.uPublic L:w 97-4 1 5 (96 Srar.
3039) (1978), sec. 205(a), added sec. 84.
2067) (1983) sec. 20 added subsec. "c."
to
t
| -42
t
o
a
I
t
t
t
o
I
sr%.22o
where oaly mlnor quantltles of resldual
radloactlve materlale art lnvolved. Ex-
a,mples are resldual radloactive rnrto-
rlele urder hard surf&ce publlc roads
a.trd aldewalkg, arouad publlc sewer
lin6s, or ln fence post fou.Ddatlons. SUP
plemeutal standerds should aot be a1>
plled at such slt€s, however, U lndlvtd-
uals are likely to be exposed for long
periods of tirne to ra'dlatlon from such
materials at levelg above those t'hat
would prevall uader $192.U(8).
(d) The cost of a rcmedial actlon for
cleanup of a buitding under 0192.f2O) ls
clearly unreasonably hlgh relatlve to
the beaeflts. Factors that should be ln-
cluded lu this Judgment are the antlci-
pated period of occupancy, the lncre-
mental rad.iatlon level tJlst would be
affected by the remedial actlon, the re-
sldual useful llfe$r'e of the buildlng,
tJre Dotential for future constnrctlou at
tbe glte, and the apDllcabillty of less
costly remedlal methods than removal
of resldual radioactive materlale.(e) Tlrere ls no knowu remedlal ac-
tlon.(O I'he restoratlon of Eroundwaterquality at any desi8rrsted proceesing
slte uDder S192.l2(c) ls technically lm-practicable from an engf,neerlng per-
spective.(g) TIre eroundwater meets the crl-
teria of !19.ff(e).(b) Bsdionuclldes other thaa radlum-
226 and lts decay products are presentin sufficlent quautlty aud concentra-tlon to constltute a slginlficant radl-
atlon hazard from resldual radioactlve
materialg.
t{8 F'R,602, Jaa. 5, 19&1, as amended at $ FR
2868, Jan. 11, 19951
ll'g2.9l2 Supplenental etan&rds.
Federal agencies implemeutlng sub-partg A and B may in lieu thereof pro-
ceed pursuant to this section witb re-spect to generlc or individual sltua-tlons meetiog the eliedbility require-
meDts of $192.2f.(a) When one or more of the criteriaof !192.2f(a) through (s) applies, the
Secretar:f shall select and perform that
alteraative remedlal actlon that comes
as close to meetlng the otherwise ap-plicable gtandard u.nder $19.02(c)(3) as
is reaaonably achlevable.(b) When !f92.21(h) applies, remedial
actlons ehall reduce other residual ra-
O 40 cFR ch. I o-l-0 Eoq
I
dioactlvlty to levels that are as lor.ls r€aaouebly schievable and coryol
to the BtsDd8rds of subparts e and nlt'he rna-rlmum exteDt practicable. I
(c) The tmplementlng agencles q1make general deteralnatlons cdceralng remedial actlons under qi
BectloD tbat wlll apply to all locattqlwlth epeclfied cbaracterlstlcs, or th;may make a determlnation. fgr a qriclflc locatlon. When. remedlal acltoq
are propooed under this sectlon for Ispectflc locstlon, the DepErtment qEnerjy shall infom auy prlvate o\
ers aDd occuparrts of the affected locltioa a,nd eollclt thelr commenta. \Department of Enerely shsU provlot
any such comments to the other lmplu
mentlnS: agencles. The DepertmeDt q
EnerEF shsU slao perlodlcally lnforu
the Eavlronmental Protectlon Agrenclof both general and lndlvlduEl deter.
mlnatlous under the provlslons of thh
sectlon.
(d) When Sl92.2l(b), (O, or (g) apply,
implementlng Egencles rhall apply aoy
rcmedlal actlons for the restoratlou olcontamlnatiou of Erouldwater by ro
sidual radloactlve materlals that ls De-
quired to asgure, Et 3 rnln{rnum, DD11.tectlon of human heelth End tJre envl-
ronment. In addttlon, wh€n !192.2fG)applles, supplemental gtendsrds sh8l1
engnre thst current and reasonablyprojected uses of tbe affected Eround-water are preserved.
[{8 FR 602, Jan. 5, 19&1, as amended at $ EF
2868, Jan. U, f9951
! f0298 Efiective drtc.
Subparts A, B, and C shall be effec-
tive March ?, 198t|.
Subpod D-Stondords for Mon-
oglement of Uronlum Byplod-ucl Msledols hrrcuqnl to Sec-tion E4 of the Alomlc E4ergyAci of 1954, os Amended
SouRcE: {8 FR {59{6, Oct. ?, 1983, unlees
otherwlse noted.
! 19240 Applicability.
Tlris subpart applies to the mauage-
ment of uranium byproduct materlalr
under gection 84 of the Atomlc Enert3Act of 1954 (henceforth deslSi'Dated "thr
26
t)
j
:
Envtronmenbt protecnon l}.v
Act"), as ameaded, during and fol-
lowing processiag of uranium ores, andto restoratioD of disposal sites fol-lowiag any use of such sites under sec-tion 8t|(bXlXB) of the Act.
!f923f Defrnitious and croee-Def.enenc'e&
References in this subpart to otherparts of the Code of Federal Regula-tions are to those parts as codified ouJanuary 1, lg8il.
(a) Unless otherwise indicated in thissubpart, all terms shall have the samemeaning a,B in fiile II of the Uranium!,Iill Tailings Rediation Control Aci ot1978, aubparts A and B of thts part, or
parts_190, m,2$t, and 2gl of thls chapter. For tbe purposes of thta subpart,the- terzrs ,.\paste,,' ,.hazardoug waite,',lld related t€rms, as used ln parts 260,pl, and fr4 of tJris chaprer sh;ii apptvto byproduct material.
.-(b) Uronium byproduct trwtqiot me&DsEhe tallirxgg or wastes produced by theertra,ctio[ or coDceDtratiou of uraniumfrom any ore proceBseO pdmarili rorIta Bource material content. Ore bod.iestlepleted by uranlum solution "rir""-tton operations and wblch remain un-oerjround do not constltut€ ..b5prod.-
uct mBterlal" for the purpose df thissubpart.
..(c) Con*ol meang any acilon to sta-ollize, rnhiblt future mlause of, or re-ouce emlgsioDg or effluents from ura-ulum byproduct materialg.
. (d) tricezrsed site meatrB the area cou-erned wf.hrn the bonndar:r of a loce_lroD under the control of lleraona gen_
Sliog _or storlagr urantui umroiuctInaterlals under a llcense tssuCd- pursu-eDt to secuon grl of the eci. foi pur-Doses of thls subpart, ..llcenged slt€1; tsEqulvelent to ..reguleted unlt" ln gub,11 tof Dorr?ftr of thts chapter.
_-je) Drqfosol site me&pg a slt€ eelectedPurluant to eecilon gll of the Act.
_r!?, DT?rsol areo meaDa the reg[ou
:.^lTn the perimeter of sn impouna_
311! g" plle conralDrDs uranii- Uv:i^o!l.t matertals ro whtch the post-
IiYluq requirements of ir9.e(bXl) or"ru8 Eubpart apply.
"l!J
n"o.lotory ogenq meaas the U.S.{ }:lear Regxrlatory CommtsElon.
*,{!) Closnre ptiod meana the period of;tr Deglnnrng w.lth the ceasatlou,".ua r€Bp€ct to a waste lmlnuadment,
s r92.3t
o
o
I
I
t
I
t
t
a
I
of uraaium ore processing operationsand eading with completion oi requife_meuts specified uuder a closure plan.(7) Closure plon means the plan re_quired under $264.1U of this chapter.(j) Eristing portion meaDs tUat tauAsurtace area of an existing surface im-poundment on which significant quan_tities of urauium byproduct materialshav-e been placed prior to promulgation
of this standard.(k) ,4s expeditiously as practicable con-sidqing technologticol |easibititU meansaf quiclly as possible considertng: thephysical characteristics of the tailingsand the site; the limits of availabletechnologyl the need for consistencywlth mandatory requirements of otheiregulatory prograrns; and factors be-yond the control of the llcensee. Thephrase permits consideration of thecost of compliance only to the exteutspeclfically provlded for by use of theterm "available technology.,,(l) Pertnanent Rodon Barrisr meangthe final radon barrier constructed toaclieve compliance with, lncluding at-taiDment of, the limit on releases ofrudon.-2P2 ta S 192.82(bx1)(ii ).(m) Aaoilable technologRl meaus tech-aologies aud methods for emplacint apermaueut radon barrler on urauiummill tailings pllea or impouadmeats.This term shall not be conitrued to in-clude extraordlnary measnres or tech-niques that would lmpose costB thetare erossly excesslve as meaaured bypractlce wtthin tJre lndustry or one
-that ls reasonably anelogous, (such as,by wey of lllustration only, unreasoD-ablg overtlme, ataffing or transpor-tatlon requlrements, etc., conslderingnormel practice in the ladustry; laserfuElon, of solls, etc.), provlded there tsreasonable progEeEs toward emplace-ment of a permaneat radon barrler. Todetermlne grossly excesalve costs, therelevant basellae agatnst whtch costlncreasea ehall be compared lg the costestlmat€ for tallinep lmpoundmeat clo-gure coatalned ln the llceusee,a talllngsclosute plan, but costs beyond such es-tlmates shall not automaHcally b€consldered grossly ercesalve.(n) Toilings Clontre plon (Ra.don)
means the Nuclear R.egulatory Com-mlsElon or Agreemeat State approvedplan detalllng actlvttles to accompllshtlmely emplacement of a p€tmaDeDt
n
t
I
o
o
a
t
t
I
I
o
a
s te2.32 0
radou barrter. A tsUfDSE cloaure plau
ehnll lsqtsde a gchedule for key radon
clogure mllegtoae actlvltie8 aqch as
rtnd blowa ttfff"s" r'etrleval and
prii-r"t oo tu" Pu"' hte-rlm-sta-
6iuz"Eo" rr -cruqlg-3grtg15;' $inemoval of frec
ntooDtourlDa), ;d emPiacement of a
;ffi;;-;;don uarrrer constnrcted
f,J-rclroo" compllaace wlt'b t'he 20 pGV
il-"-a.o staDdard as exlpdltlously aa
pr"cticeute considerlnsi technologdcal
ieasiblllty (lncluding factorg beyond
the cont'rol of t'he licensee).
(o) Prctors beyond tlu control of tlu li-
censee meSDB factors pronrnately ceus-lng delay in meetiag the echedule lathe applicable license for tlmely em-placemeut of the peraaaent radon bar-
rier notwithstaudinei the good faith ef-
forts of the licengee to achieve compll-
ance. llrese factors may i.uclude, but
are not limlted to, physicel conditlonsat the site; iuclemeut weather or cll-
matic conditions; an act of God; an actof war; a judicial or adninistrative
order or decigioa, or cbeaS'e to the
statutory, re8ruletory, or other legal
requiremeuts applicable to the licens-ee's facility that would preclude ordelay the performance of activitles re-quired for compliance; labor disturb-
anceB; any modlficatlons, cessaflon ordelay ordered by state, Federal or localagencies; delays beyoad the time rea_sonably required in obtaining Dec-essary governmeDtal permits, liceuses,approvals or consent for activities de-scribed in the tailings closure plan(radon) proposed by the licensee ihatresult from agency failure to take fiualaction after the liceusee has made agood faith, tirnely effort to submit le-gally sufficient applicatioDs, responsesto requests (iDcludlng relevaut dita re-quested by the agencies), or other in_formatloa, including approval of thetailings closure plan by NR.C or the af-fected Agireement State; and an act oromission of any third party over whomthe licensee has no control.(p) Operationol means that a uraniummlll tatlings pile or impound.ment isbeing used for the coutinued placement
of uranium byproduct material or is instandby status for such placemeut. Atallings pile or impoundment is oper-atio.-nal from the day that uranium by-product material is flrst placed in the
}e cFR ch. I O-t{D Edlfion
'olio:i,"f$frffi."*
unt, the d8!
-lqj) MilesrorE means aa enforceabl3
aatl uv which actlou, or the occtrrr€Dcg
of an eyent, ts required for purpoaes 61achtevlngl compllance wtth the fr) pCtr
rD8-E flur standsrd.
[{8 EB {59{5, Oct. ?, fg&l, as amended at E8 FRf,tsS5, Nov. 15, r9$l
!f0242 Stonderdr.
(s,) Sj/a;nna,rds for opplication duingprocessing operotiotts and, grior to.tlw eutof tlw clontre period. (l) Surface lm-poundneats (except for anr extsttngportlon) subject to thls subpert must
be designed, congtnrcted, aud lnrtalled
ln auch ma,nner as to conform to the
rcquirements of g264..ru of thls chrfter, except thet et sltes where the an-nual preclpltatlon fel[Dg ou the lm-poundneut aud auy dralnage area coD-trtbutlng surf&ce nrnoff to the tm-pouadment ls less then the annualevaporetlon from the imlrcundrnent,th9 _requirements of $2ti4.M1ey121(iif)@) referenced lu !20{JZf do notapply.(2) Uranlum byaroduct materlalsshall be managed 80 as to conform tothe ground water protectlon standardiu $20{.92 of this chapter, except thetfor the purposes of thls subpart:(i) To the list of hazardous cousiltu-ents referenced in S2el.g3 of this chap.ter are added the chemical elemeatsmolybdenum aud uranlum,(ii1 1'o the coaceutration llmlts pro-vided tn Table I of g28t.94 of thts chapter are added the radioacttvity Umitsin Table A of this subpart,(iii) Detection monltorlng programErequired under 9264.98 to establlsh thestandards required under $2A1.92 shaltbe completed within one G) year of pro-mulgation,(iv; '15" regulatory ageDcy may es-tablish alternate concentraHon limlts(to be satisfied at the point of compli-auce specified under S2et.g5) under thecriteria of SZi4.94(b), provided that,after cousidering practicable correcilveactions, these limits are as low as rea-sonably achievable, arld that, ln anycase, the standards of S2O{.9{(a) are sat-isfied at all points at a greater dietancethan 500 meters from the edge of thedisposal area and./or outslde the stteboundary, aud
28
oAglency
I
t
e
o
t
o
I
Envlronmenlol Hotecllon
(v) Ihe functions aud responsibllities
designated in Part 2lt4 of. this chapter
as those of the "Regional Adminis-trator" with respect to "facllity per-
mits" shall be carrled out by the regu-
Iatory a4:ency, except that exemptions
of hazardous coustituents under S264.93
(b) and (c) of this chapter and alternate
concentration limlts eetablished under
$26{.9{ (b) and (c) of this chapter(except as othervise provided in
$192.32(a)(2)(iv)) shall not be effective
until EPA has concured therein.(3)(i) Uranium mill tailtnep piles or
impoundments that e,rre Donoperational
aud subject to a license by the Nuclear
Regulatory Cornrnission or an A8ree-meDt State shaU limtt releases of
radon-202 by emplacing a Irermanentradon barrier. T1ris permauent radonbarrier shall be constructed as expedi-
tlously as practlcable consideri:rg tech-
nologlcal feasibiltty (iacludiug factors
beyond the control of the liceugee)after the pile or impoundmeut ceases
to be operatioual. Such control shall becarried out in accordance wltJr a written tallings closure plan (radon) to betncorporated by the Nuclear Regu-latory Commission or Agireement Stateinto hdlvidual site licenses.(li) fhe Nuclear Regulatory Commls-sion or Agreement State moy approvea licensee's request to extend the tlmetor pertormance of milestones if, afterproviding an opportunity for public
Darticipatlon, the Nuclear R.eelulatoryuommisgion or ASireement State finds
lhat compllance wtth the 20 p0Umz-suu( staudard has been demonstrated
Fins a method approved by the NRC,
P !n. manner required in 192.32(aX4Xi).
Yuy under these circumstalxces audouring the period of the extenglon musteornpliance wtth the 20 gclltmz-s fluxstandard be demonstrated each year.
_ (iii) Tbe Nuclear Regulatory Com-rnissiou or Agreemeut State may ex-leDd the final compliance date for em-Dlacement of the pirmanent radon bar-
f-.., o" relevaut ririlestone, based uponcost if the new date is established aitera flnding by the Nuclear R.egulatoryuornmission or Agreement State, after
:lovidinc arr opportunity for publlcparticipation. that the licengee iJmak-ulS Sood faith efforts to emplace a per-uaaent radon barrter; the dllay ie 6on-Ershnt with the defiuition of ..avail-
s 192.32
able technoloSf" ln S19.31(m); and the
delay will not result in radon releasesthat are determined to result in sig-nifi-cant lucremeutal risk to the public
health.(iv) the Nuclear Regulatory Commis-
sion or Agireement State may, in re-
sponse to a request from a licensee, au-thorize by license or license amend-
ment a portion of the site to remain
accessible during the closure process to
accept ura,nium byproduct material as
defiued in section 1l(eX2) of the Atomic
Ener3y Act, 4!2 U.S.C. $14(eX2), or to
accept materlals slmllar to the phys-
ical, chemical and radlologdcal charac-teristics of the ln situ uranium milltai[ngs and associated wastes, fromother aources. No such authorization
may be used es a means for delaylng orotherriae impeding emplacement of
the permauent radon barrier over the
remainder of the pile or impoundmentin a manner that wlll achieve compli-
ance with the 20 pCVmz-s flux stand-ard, averaged over the eutire pile or
impoundment.(v) The Nuclear R.egrrlatory Commis-sion or Agireement State may, ln re-
sponse to a request from a licengee, au-thorize by llcense or liceuse amend-ment a portlon of a pile or lmpound-ment to remaln accesglble after em-placement of a permanent radon bar-rier to accept uranium byTroduct ma-terial as deflned ln section 11(eX2) ofthe Atomic EnerEy Act, U U.S.C.
%)14(e\(2),lf compllance with the 20 pCV
m2-8 flur standard of S192.32(bx1)(ti) is
demonstrated by the llcensee's moni-torluSl conducted ln z manDer con-slstent with S192.32(aX4Xi). Such au-
thorizatlon may be provided only if theNuclear Regulatory Commisslon or
Agreement State makes a flndlng, con-stltutlng flnal agency action and after
providlnS: aD opportuntty for publlc
particlpatlou, that the slte wlll con-
tlnue to achieve the il pOVm2-s flux
standard when averaged over the entlre
lmpoundment.(4Xi) Upon emplacement of the per-
manent radon barrler purauant to tlO
CFR 19.32(aX3), the licensee shall con-
duct appropriate monitoring and anal-ysis of the radon-W releases to dem-
onstrate that the desietD of the perma-
nent radoa ba.rrier is effectlve in lim-Itlng releases of tad.or,-?92 to a level
29
I
I
I
o
a
i
a
t
I
e
s r9,1.33
not exceedlrei 20 pCvmz-s aa requircd
by 40 CER 19.3i1(bxlxil). Tlris monl-
torinC shall be conducted uslng the
procedures descrlbed iD 40 CF'R part 61,
Appenrrt- B, Method 115, or any other
Eeasurement metJrod proPoeed by a li-
cenaee thgt the Nuclear Regulatory
Commisslon or A8reement State aP
proves as being at least as effectlve as
EPA MetJrod 115 ln demonstratingr the
effectiveness of the permanent radon
ba,rrier ln achieving compliance wlth
the 201OUmz-s flux staudard'.
(ii) When phased emplacement of the
peruanent radon barrier is included lD
tUe applicable taitiass closure pla,u
(radon), theu radon flur moaitoring re-
quired u.nder ! 192.9(aX4)(l) shall be
conducted, however the licensee shall
be allowed to conduct such monitoringl
for each portion of the plle or impou.nd-
ment on which the radon ba,rrier has
beea emplaced by conductlug flur mon-
ltoring on tJre closed Portiou.(5) Uranium bYProduct materialg
shall be managed ao as to conform to
the provlsions of:(i) Part 190 of this cbapter, "EDvlroD-
meutal Radiation Protectiou St&ud-
ards for Nuclear Power Operatlons"
and(il) Part flO of this cbapter, "Ore
Mintns and DressinSi Polnt Source Cat-
egory: Effluent Llmitations Guldellnes
and New Source Performaoce Stand-
ards, Subpart C, Uraulum, R.adium, aad
Vauadium Ores Subcateg:ory."(6) lte regulatory afrency, ln con-
forrrity with Federal Radiation Protec-tioa Guidance (FR, May 18, 1960, pgs.
440144ff/), shaU make every effort to
malutain radlatlon doses from radon
emisglons from surface lmpouadments
of uranium byproduct materials as far
below the Federal Radtation Protec-
tlon Guidee aa le practicable at eech li-
censed site.(b) Sta;tudords for opplicotion ofter the
closure pqiod. At the ead of the closure
period:(l) Dtsposal areas shall each comply
with the closure per{ormance gtandard
In !281.111 of this chapter with respect
to nonradlological hazards aud shall be
deslgiDed t to provlde reasouable assur-
J crn ch. I (7-l-oo Edffioq
ance of control of radiological bazarq
to(t) Be effective for one thousanq
years, to tbe exteut reasonably achiev.
eble, aud, iu auy case, for at least 2q
YeAfS, rnd,
(11) Llmlt releases of radon-222 frorq
ura,uium byproduct materlals to the a,t-
mosphere Eo as to uot exceed 8n aver-
a8lez release rete of 20 picocurlee per
square meter per second (PCUm2s).
(2) The requlrements of S192.32(b)(1)shall not apply to any portion of a Il-
censed and/or dlsposal slte which con-
talns a concentratiou of radtum-226 ln
laud, averaged over a,reas of 1(X) Equare
meterg, whlch, as a result of uranlum
by?roduct material, does uot exceed
the backeround level bY more than:
(t) 5 picocurtes per Errem (pCVg)' aver-
aged over tbe first 15 ceutimeters (cm)
below the surface, aDd(it) 15 pCUc, averaged over l5 cm
thtck layers more than 15 cm below the
gur{ace.
ta8 FR, {59{6, Oct. ?, 198i1. as amended at 58 FR
6085ffi56, Nov.15,l9$ll
lfg2Ag Conective action progran&
If the Sround water sts,Ddardg estab
Iished under provislons of $ 192.32(a)(2)
are exceeded at any llcensed glte, a cor-
rective action proEiram as spoclfled lD
S26{.f00 of tJris chapter shall be put
lnto operatlon as sooD aa 1g Drac-ticable, and ln uo event later than
eighteeu (18) months after a flnding of
exceedance.
110n34 Efiective drte.
Subpart D shall be effectlve Decem-
ber 6, 1981!.
zTtis averaS:e shall apply to the entlre sur-
face of each dlsposal area over perlods of at
lsast otre year, but short compared to lfl)
years. Radon wlll come from both uraalum
byproduct meterlals and from coverlng ma-
terlals. Radon emlsslons from coverlng ma-
terlalg sbould be estlm&ted as part of devel-
opinB a closure plau for eacb slte. Tbe staDd-
ard, however, applles only to emiesioDs from
uranlum byproduct materials to the atmos-
pbere.
tThe staEdard appliesmduttoring requlrcment
!r92.32(eX{).
to deelSi! wlth aaa apeclfled ln
TIeLe A To SUBPAFT D
I
30
O ,;F:
:
9Oil1
o
q
6905
oI
US Code : Title 42, Section Page I of2
US Code as oil 0l i05/99
Sec. 6905. Application of chapter and integration with other Acts
o (a) Application of chapter
Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to apply to (or to authorize any State, interstate, or
local authority to regulate) any activity or substance which is subject to the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. l25l et seq.), the Safe Drinking Water Act (42 U.S.C. 300f et
seq.), the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972 (16 U.S.C. l43l et seq.,
1447 et seq., 33 U.S.C. 1401 et seq., 2801 et seq.), or the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42
U.S.C. 201I et seq.) except to the extent that such application (or regulation) is not inconsistent
with the requirements of such Acts.
o (b) Integration with other Acts
o (1) The Administrator shall integrate all provisions of this chapter for purposes of
administration and enforcement and shall avoid duplication, to the maximum extent
practicable, with the appropriate provisions of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401 et
seq.), the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), the Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (7 U.S.C. 136 et seq.), the Safe Drinking
Water Act (42 U.S.C. 300f et seq.), the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act
of 1972 (16 U.S.C. 1431 et seq.,1447 et seq., 33 U.S.C. 1401 et seq., 2801 et seq.), and
such other Acts of Congress as grant regulatory authority to the Administrator. Such
integration shall be effected only to the extent that it can be done in a manner consistent
with the goals and policies expressed in this chapter and in the other acts referred to in
this subsection.
o (2). (A) As promptly as practicable after November 8, 1984, the Administrator shall
submit a report describing -r (i) the current data and information available on emissions of
polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins from resource recovery
facilities burning municipal solid waste;r (ii) any significant risks to human health posed by these
emissions; and
(iii) operating practices appropriate for controlling these
emrsslons.. (B) Based on the report under subparagraph (A) and on any future information on
such emissions, the Administrator may publish advisories or guidelines regarding
the control of dioxin emissions from such facilities. Nothing in this paragraph shall
be construed to preempt or otherwise affect the authority of the Administrator to
promulgate any regulations under the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.)
regarding emissions of polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins.o (3) Notwithstanding any other provisions of law, in developing solid waste plans, it is
the intention of this chapter that in determining the size of a waste-to-energy facility,
adequate provisions shall be given to the present and reasonably anticipated future needs,
including those needs created by thorough implementation of section 6_962(h) of this
title, of the recycling and resource recovery interests within the area encompassed by the
solid waste plan.
o (c) Integration with the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act
of 1977
o (1) No later than 90 days after October 21,1980, the Administrator shall review any
regulations applicable to the treatment, storage, or disposal of any coal mining wastes or
overburden promulgated by the Secretary of the Interior under the Surface Mining and
Reclamation Act of 1977 (30 U.S.C. l20l et seq.). If the Administrator determines that
any requirement of final regulations promulgated under any section of subchapter III of
a
o
o
o
o
I
I
I
o
e
http ://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscod el 421 6905 .text.html 711212001
o
t
t
t
I
t
a
o
t
o
US Code : Title 42, Section 6905 Page2 of2
Secretary.
(2) The Secretary of the Interior shall have exclusive responsibility for carrying out any
requirement of subchapter III of this chapter with respect to coal mining wastes or
overburden for which a surface coal mining and reclamation permit is issued or approved
under the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (30 U.S.C. l20l et seq.).
The Secretary shall, with the concrurence of the Administrator, promulgate such
regulations as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of this subsection and shall
integrate such regulations with regulations promulgated under the Surface Mining
Control and Reclamation Act of 1977.
a
this chapter relating to mining wastes or overburden is not adequately addressed in such
regulations promulgated by the Secretary, the Administrator shall promptly transmit such
determination, together with suggested revisions and supporting documentation, to the
http ://www4. law.cornell.edu/uscod el 42 I 6905 .text.html 7/121200r
tw
:
?
a
o
o
'ir'r":-'r'*,
,,331,i1,31T,,, l* stat 322,
Page 2
(Cite as: 99 Stat 3221)
LINITED STATES PI.]BLIC LAWS
98th Congress - Second Session
Convening January 23, 1984
Copr. @ West Group 1998. No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works
DATA SUPPLIf,D BY THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE. (SEE SCOPE)
Additions and Deletions are not identified in this document.
PL 98-616 (HR 2867)
NOVEMBER 8, 1984
An Act to amend the Solid Waste Disposal Act to authorize appropriations for the fiscal years 1985 through 1988,
and for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States
of America in Congress assembled,
SHORT TITLE AND TABLE OF CONTENTSI
SECTION l. This Act"42 USC 6901'may be cited as "The Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984'.
ALIHORIZATIONS FOR FISCAL YEARS 1985 THROUGH 1988
SEC.2. (a) Section 2007(a) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act "42 USC 6916' (relating to general authorization) is
amended by striking out "and $80,000,000 for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1982' and substituting
'$80,000,000 for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1982, $70,000,000 for the fiscal year ending September 30,
1985, $80,000,000 for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1986, $80,000,000 for the fiscal year ending September
30, 1987, and $80,000,000 for the fiscal year 1988'.
(b) Section 30 I I (a) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act "42 USC 693 l' (relating to State hazardous waste programs) is
amended by striking out "and $40,000,000 for fiscal year 1982'and substituting "$40,000,000 for the fiscal year
1982, $55,000,000 for the fiscal year 1985, $60,000,000 for the fiscal year 1986, $60,000,000 for the fiscal year
1987, and $60,000,000 for the fiscal year 1988'.
(c) Section 3012 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act "42 USC 6933' (relating to the hazardous waste inventory) is
amended by striking out "$20,000,000' in subsection (cX2) and inserting in lieu thereof "$25,000,000 for each of the
fiscal years 1985 through 1988'.
(d) Section a008(a)(l) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act "42 USC 6948' (relating to development and
implementation assistance) is amended by striking out "and $20,000,000 for fiscal year 1982' and substiruting
'$20,000,000 for the fiscal year 1982, and $10,000,000 for each ofthe fiscal years 1985 through 1988'.
(e) Section a008(a)(2)(C) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act "42 USC 6948' (relating to implementation assistance)
is amended by sriking out "and $10,000,000 for fiscal year 1982' and substituting "$10,000,000 for fiscal year 1982,
and $10,000,000 for each ofthe fiscal years 1985 through 1988'.
"(0 UNDERGROI-IND STORAGE TANKS. - (l) There are authorized to be appropriated to the Administrator for
the purpose of carrying out the provisions of subtitle I (relating to regulation of underground storage tanks),
a
o
a
a
t
I
I
Copr. @ West 2001 No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works
1"'r"-'r'*,
,,381,tffitT
r,, O* stat 322 t
(Cite as: 99 Stat 3221)
Page 6l
"(5) innovative uses ofclosed landfill sites, including use for energy production such as solar or wind energy and
use for metals recovery;
a
"(6) potential for use of sewage treatment sludge in reclaiming landfilled areas; and
"(7) methods to coordinate use of a landfill owned by one municipality by nearby municipalities, and to establish
equitable rates for such use, taking into account the need to provide future landfill capacity to replace that so used.
I The Administrator is authorized to conduct demonstrations in the areas of study provided in this subsection. The
Administrator shall periodically report on the results of such studies, with the first such report not later than Octoberl, 1986. In carrying out this subsection, the Administrator need not duplicate other studies which have been
completed and may rely upon information which has previously been compiled.'.
URANILIM MILL TAILINGS
I
SEC. 703. Nothing in the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984 '42 USC 6905' shall be construed to
affect, modifu, or amend the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978 "42 USC 7901'.
NATIONAL GROUND WATER COMMISSION
SEC. 704. (a) There is established a commission to be known as the National Ground Water Commission
(hereinafter in this section referred to as the "Commission').
(b) The duties of the Commission are to:
(l) Assess generally the amount, location, and quality of the Nation's ground water resources.
(2) Identifu generally the sources, extent, and types of ground water contirmination.
(3) Assess the scope and nature of the relationship between ground water contamination and ground water
withdrawal and develop projections of available, usable ground water in future years on a nationwide basis.
(4) Assess the relationship benveen surface water pollution and ground water pollution.
(5) Assess the need for a policy to protect ground water from degradation caused by contamination.
(6) Assess generally the extent of overdrafting of ground water resources, and the adequacy of existing
mechanisms for preventing such overdrafting.
(7) Assess generally the engineering and technological capability to recharge aquifers.
(8) Assess the adequacy ofthe present understanding ofground water recharge zones and sole source aquifers and
assess the adequacy of knowledge regarding the interrelationship of designated aquifers and recharge zones.
(9) Assess the role of land-use patterns as these relate to protecting ground water from contamination.
(10) Assess methods for remedial abatement of ground water contamination as well as the costs and benefits of
cleaning up polluted ground water and compare cleanup costs to the costs of substitute water supply methods.
(l l) Investigate policies and actions taken by foreigh goverrunents to protect ground water from contamination.
t
I
t
t
t
t
o
Copr. @ West 2001 No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works
fle*
t
?
t
t
o
?
a
t
)
'lt
a
I
t
a
o
a
t
o
I
hb 4 ,etl CoNGIEISOI{ALW 20ti7
ElGlrrtao ertlbur ntlf-l C f A Ir a tc3. GEal tsi d6q tb tr d ocErdd tb. Et{rIgfrlr'aA.-rl4lCf lEli.,5fdbE. :. tEDlnllc@.dlLrrditIfddrlt.-. : -rtt -ttU.hfbrrbblErrr
a il! I, ts ll, Ei ErrbIU lEElu,lo : tata. - h e dE rIL lllr.--rt--=rrrFEC _ =rt-G:t-a-:=Er=- EE!-il!.trG-rrEil'IE-. IGEtt-fE - Er-=I - ilEiFflI-lI=D rC r.f} r- I -- arrEF --A:rG':t-.f
--E=:E
11;.l.-3---r-al-reE a'!r; rrrr
-*E,
ilt-r-GrEG3-rEr'-j--Lt= t{t--er-j iry.ErlI-=EEETtEEEr3---rl r.ll t.E dlr r,i.= =. -r{tifi *; *.trit ;#S'--s,*rf;GrldGrrtg'lrabdd rf nE{-*==I*SFHEllDd lrrltl d rdr #€fr#Huia+rlCdllr.'. E :, (!E tia rrft rU. fm, lC:ffi-:=ffiffiffi(lurlr:'ID.Htrth.lgrnuDrri ts It- GIllE:tG tr:3 ?rEr E E, -.t1.:,3!L L_-d EE-c-:r==]-ed.G.rcidIr.;rEtr}.-a ;.;-r. rl rr_11 ^.h.dr., =3;F
E "tn, Arrurr, rI €,X--ElE[rltcroqutEt'tscl5r-d-6 lG.-E;FIHf;r,t . jf,5g-g;r.**'(trbG'! ^.o ru'.r
"Efi*tffi'ir'.-,rr-,.r-' : a,o-,-tr*lf -.' i. ,%I!,ffiggsaj*
'e'F'n'"o*;;Hffi 'ffi"ffi *=il!"?
-ffi
I,asodbrtbllr(hrrrab LAiE h E-tE! -.r: r*, e:r_ -rrrt|cstl EIBE r lts- clll|E or_=El|' tEEEltiD , :[lltr G r.:|.gfd;fE Ethr''ulh"rtl-"i; ilff l.rn'
-
-t o!.(rErr,rn.,.r.rr,-tsr'.;ffi*H:# r'!r&r'(l',rd tDrr'
=tff S k-Itr"ffi E{iE ffi-6 Fre U ui G.ufi. .(tr .rd hri E-. :T .rotd t+! Uq-tb. !9tr|!r!A lttEiuirifdrriol$t'a- - E-911.a th ta ;p1.Lrcb r, B =_!!lF+-
r x! lalEl-t r . tF
EIG.JT€Ia:-- -(tED5]-,-L.Er|-ir-:r.=ar..rr!.- {'J- G-EEaril. EE|EEE!a: b-O lrG tt.:t -- att= €, f- --U, rr,-E; rG, r.rtEE-=r"r a =:=1
fr-r---llgs d tr'Hqt &s crtisffialrcii 6rt--aref,rsruqr;rc-;nrrd E ry_.:-F{ I oruun rctrn rrsH-orrr-ilu.rrlrur"rlrrdEt rriagrr d Dilmrra hrrrD-.!! a;;#. !tllT_9_dr rilr hrandod lo d!.? E d'**#*[ ; .;;;, ; ; rctr ffi fi;*58 .-#. ffiGprrrtrl rrr.-,!,rtrt ..ttr,dHl a.!r]|l ahhlhtrotad.ltrothatr* try=-E I ll'!I.! lo .IELE8LU,rEiEi*-"fI -' EffiI::!..tldruEr.FrErorrit
llEE'ro.tal| LE D. tt.l Errr*r til lqtrrrttnrr<r'on tt-crtrtr-ruar-t Eff+ffifr.: : T'3.g1s =:=rffi_1qs -Ef:EtHlB:8Hffifird €orra a'. E remrr, ra E-riEu-rE-rif,E6cuEE;Irruo. - ZfrraDrrtorrrcb.E air#&tffir,dtanu&."*'-#E5;ufg ffi-ffiGf Erdaft rhar durl-. u5nrr& rTIEE-r#ffi E!:?!_c!Hl:: -- ^-enG*.,*-*ffo,ffi*.SXffirrfc tdll.r lL ir-- eh rGrE +!|.:-*Eor 14. ir, -frrilt"Err olql tslurlllt.r loub rE bE E rrgrn rc airde S-Effiffi.ffiHffiF ar 1a iD_l Etr of EEGF ffi trr5 i1-nnr- C zrei rcr, rq7rnr-O+al-rdH,lDlLlth.G ip'rro. lO : : rLrd.t rlriltrtEdEfliaffif 5cd"ts'.e--"*1c EnlffiryTffffiffiffi--r- - r*'G'c -#rir-Efi {Er.-Effi *i g.rctrrll!' ftr lb rlcrtaftrddi, aGll- i Edrl 4tid-rc d.6 rrlr, EIH t' rt. GrllIlE (tr hhrll q nJ- ttc 11 6E llE ${5*r!-i Ei dr!.rlh- rdrd tur E}d loan tsua. arq.r. rg DrrrE-hi e;aa.rc L-;-L-rt ffi Er -D&s.ct. Etrrrdt-orla -- :;iffiEsDlt6 lrD aq br a Ed 1 .tt 1d f -u rxtrc *r'o d b cunul ra ffi' b- trh Glnrre, lraryt, Drl!,ctr*, -'-- i EEn E= aEi E :n gfi-ct--oqurrcl-i-E-E; .nl;t
-
E rrE E tqrrtlrrtd-ootr-LP. a';alt DE;a- u rcaua-E na-;;a- rcfiDa-[ ral! rtto
(hrpr 71o Orfor rlrr-tl d ffulDtrltd lo EC, TftltrllE olcteh r+ollltGtstt tc Er EhrDf rarlrtEDd ts &, Itt^E (Irr hlrdtrd !rr.^r E.Ir od Drrr.il.
a
l*o*A.rtoo.D*q* O July S, 19tl
5 d Lrds lrltL .!a Lllr I'rrc 4tDfFhtS--Et;. ItlE!3nal f rt urra b 5 -- ?' n&'Eb b*ffi'ffiffirSEf;EEEEr aEffifr ret rrl iE hd E rutr @ t+ rrsr;cdrra rp1EEE; rrfrec f d r:.bu. .dallt i'd c r rrdr olil- rla nltrt3 htiuen rad(l, d t[ rrlri ifr rnfnr tlurgor. br ll4
rottt
crrtc.l r rl !o tlurt tlrt ttr! tttl E !o rll rsrrbfy sndrtsc odeu. -!f.rrt&.I e, r!, lEtrxrr olrltrEostlto rtGhor r&i rr'trr ElEre&uoE:L B,-
a
I
I
e
a
I
o
o
AEEIE.TS.ErE? lErlE ErEEi mlEl -gr anoo nrDrD ffi. Erb.Dr tE E*r d rdt .f,t(tllr:SodlulrdlllllrEMflL &tfoiro.,el|b.ttriEdlD lE |!l * IE laro ta Bilb.lwtrlnESodllllrtlrtllr-Eu.l} -rbtut o-ldGb.HEdlE
-
llal * IE laro ta Bilb.lWd Edsntr t- iSE.rntu l* lEEa Et' dn Grrlt d 6 la ]ca (rll d Efranl rr.t Jtlr DlbG,-.!r., -lflEl -dO ll(lll, d aE! rld EdTIEtEn, Eahd lb ^-r.rnr+ttrad ts xr. cEAtE rto blctl rirssst f !]tdrDdlo:E& rrtr (c. lt ltrcrrrtr, 15. aLtlralls -rgr -rEL
lrrrrlL trllrr. IhE .rrh . FU,-B raI Er (Er.d -tL Er mrr c oEltB o tb rd-ol &crr ttr ClI! IIE &3 lfil f 6EE tltl. altsll, d rrlfitrDrr (lr E [dr EtEqB FG aa .ncr U!. tl. bct fb. El rrh.ttllt.lhEoo IEr DoetlrnE U lryr.AlEftLEtr: brr*sr lcldturnbqratlaa tsllC5 'tBl D aer u b riEI r trlilrr tGaall ffi t0trot ol tl. -l! lll E Erd rt GrrD .d tDlcl ErrlG nnthot t Eilrlr tl&n6- te E cr-DIEU.Jlcl lr rffi E trt!|f -(lr ltd rDat torE D&rrE tf Erddf dG iB tb rqltur ol Oi.rlr rbla{r &rnr '. b rddarthr .E(ln|D|' l8 rll EEEraala ,lEE rlr!!, lr.ct (A) ht f- b r dno b odl6orilIrDD|] (lL ttr. Eal itl r llrEnr b & .Dslrt Eattler gduatf. rEsaGts7 looa dld, b arDIlr.-rrbl(At.6L.!ttOLuaEr6a3D! DlflEiat,lntert[art']lr]rlEt,E grDlrt't.b9-dlaEEdlrEBrl]ffif Err Farf[laE !o. uEtr oo l!. !rE. rtltr ct rlf F rt|lr9h 6, drll b FD trr atbt tl.'llx^l lrEi r rlt{atd h frn ldrl.Ca, uLrH rt lrilan !i} fa * illrrra G( rED olraa ol odrCrDttCl. lcleulroeEaildugEaa. StEtr E151EE! hE tfpd tt5 rui drl b tE7 E b thl6 r rtf-r bEE! G a (h,E !l EEs d E! Ilr|lrl 3tuct !D tun D-lln Ea - Er.!tb@ E- .|D.IE !e IDI.Dt l3 lFri. DEDCI ar+ lryl--tr cI crtroaar oi -.4't arrfidi trpqrl trgb lAt rlb lb Ofc C cnrrfel cfti{ rdt-r'tilif lE lb'^tltlloilrb 6 I.!. dBdd br tL rrl3.l!a*i tir t-eoU frrro borl llt lirabdllErfc Ef.3 FilgIts (l) o3 tlt rlc. b rllulrEL C .lrnil!trga tAL UrI d tr. Orr ts tbllluulrrb d rddtsplEt tElip rrtrt tN *r gir !..{. trrlllli* rf Udna B -!da.E b tt Elllt}-tl,hrrtb.rcrabtlr,.rE.e r!.rthraG-l.CTlDEE T-+cn- Ct!6 d t!c*E ir.t- & d6rtlcD tbt tr rE c]fitc !D* EA [Br I f m:lrc rarfnOO6j3 to tfrc r=erg;. DL 3b. DEld g, mrr1rn b anDFlr-blt!3. c us d ttrhil3rlh (A!, b it3 E,o! ttlh (.^) arli b br rrr lllB tD. obnil E lE ta tn rn rru d whrrttL h> rol ddll3 anlr.a hruatung :c dg ot !!a orocrr||rflr. tbo rrld ls a@oolFlog r' d.tlEd ]! rEFnlllDn (_ol ot-arlrc lEFrlldElt 'hl rbbh tb anlou rutrr lrlEnrrch (1, roi &rc r ttEEttd F ElElf q! ltillrc IE rGtalrilta t6, t& ttrt . lD tDt cr olr ''la6n ol a14'- uaa* afto.,rauit ar4C.DlcIartcr lC-ndmb lrd h fil, gtral rn' u$turtd furrnr lrt11 (D, .i'-tr h 5{, bir tbra !l rtlt rlt trgisertbGcoatpa(ll ar ar.*,- antltnrorr rr ttrtr u t!. tbL .t rr!6 Ebulllloft .Dd tb
rbrll Do3 rdrA ict. or trr. brr&ru E|lrt Eo gouad trac. Stu l6lnl*rr Efd & tb AduhlrBrerc (r, ll rn+rr. rt5 E art leur lra .ftc aG t8-(a;. ll rgrytrb ftF t a.) b urtSar- Ftat , 6. at lrrt !o d'rtla !$ dtDi3 o'
arrc of Gflom! sel- Eob rrtr.! b it ro lDrnc rE! !tulr!E3rl. .. Etry E oFlrrast grtlE rbtf,.trPtt (1, Ea (Dt
gltlIdErtlS b la ootlre rnD ?&t c E-r:r fo lsld Durra lplllr srd thr rhrll b ttot Ltx tDra !a EDElh3 rlra tbqs!E!!oL ot clta t0ol(o rn&t tsufa tott@lD8 EdutElt lla lEuttasrl.:ot tLtc of funfrrffnrpgty to r!4r tElouaaras tr ll tct Err. ctE n{(r| rtrlltr rouE .Ddr.to rulu --(t't E tD. rt or rr ery!49 E'ElDt&fti -t!c Errrlnr. C ClrG (lt .? ttt lub tsnonbrntr U ttrC, ttrc ttt : orrrr lr lticb tb. tsEr r$ l-t dthUil
FErrgL fU l3a 'U!!r EDr r lrr --lD, a!. om.f or ottrar C utnrr1a.! Orror lttrE bco b*rlld prtrlrat to rbcLlttef-tlrtqultEEtrof rqrrfefAlE tDFrrtutsGrtl prElt[, ohtar.ro rD trluurr.rlL{tdrlI.rE.!Ua!!baEalur rts.lh reorrtlcEao l!-.ltG r d Earltrilr tAr ct t!t] Drrtr|'lt,r rto u. t.ttf upaua dftr @ nll(3i rlard.l!r d Ee!f, ril Dr3 fr ,rE- lln lo blLtr rD.! @ rtrl Drau'ot an thG fdElnllttrtor'r rrarlrdrrr ra aila.ia lrllEull|lDt I E mgurE r|tt Frrgrgh tAH! r Ot) q rttrr-rph (Et u 6mqrlr ;illib3 losl ra, hltE3rltt rgClrur EooDa uu.r Etd. cr l|'trl!E tsqFuErEnt h !E tEurrd &ttcjtbsttttrEt,Dlhcrcl.lldrt Etlol* lqulrfr*l !r ndftlr rfit p,altr to opry tttb lb. tTdrclntr d rtb rurrra rilca h dlLr-tt rIlE thrt tt6d.tiurrosr(slatthlrre. - rrarDh (Ar rDrtr rriy to ghe ldqHr ru ot Eirfhd FIllurr! b ttdr nr>-alt 1tt .arlilrtrrtE (ea !! hfC h brtr (e lha Efd.. b fhe crr d-. AaJb lrgD.hdr f rilrrllt lotalGD rrall !t E
t.br cr d . &.L tllt ro Ett*t!.1 D!+ rltb 6 rrtDorl€C EqrrrD) lDt Ll.r fill rtdorldrt,.tor rhn btu *- EG 9aEiltErDl, rtt r ldb Ed e,tEqldtt E il srlh rth? Ur. Otr ct aul, irnl d uxrir tllb Gllrt 6 ltlcb trdlllr. IdtrlntEEst Dt EdI, tb. rlultE at cl th Eolld ffe DbnI &l Areudrnotr ln thb;obrnlngh dlrll Fldud. ur. ld-rrts[ifnph (..,t tbr rnr r*tl lneolEtr !f tla lor r thtrtulnrtfr a ftr rrll&. Ei!tsfril.r tE lEulrlnt EdalLllon d rEd lt !d bhs b8 ta EGifu rtfr 6l HIlt| ol rrlntfneh (4, to a&lr.arE r. r:r ltrcr ,httl tt fdraldr:srfot hr
atNt d 6rr;Ei3 d llL Gutl r|rh UD t[!rrt|!-Et. t,E6 rran c ry.rrr odl !ci$B rD EGrD 3!rt .o, Iur brtrllci9d Aca .AEGEr ef tta. tlc mcruorLr td,,/w rrtlnq* tooch Crdr|fL trl,rral, la tir qlnrrcolr of I D1f,-fr.fr.t.r dc.d|lt r ttd IA .lr*'fb tdrdba wttcacr I b qpllllr,o rllr ErDh I laatlU,beoo,rbsnlr b lufrd. SOa.r{ O l'tollta atf.t Etltqtil nEurnElat rird
filinEcEr rryiuuanrrnic E .Eb [r t hth3 L. vt c EbE-to-=Err brrIrl trti rlE etlfr.l !E J tEtE rtthS- e[
ff Uref --gZ*E=?c GI*rGrEl :G IE Iltc. clFrb
E---t.-- e-rr,:tGt-D il E r {E- lEe rEG!-
l-f rE$-trtE-dn:rlll rllr.-hE tt$! rd gE h
ha qr tlll.r f., t!! lil6 blfi it !!lld -Lt lladabr-lt l Eb d+{sH- rE rE trruf d tltroU rlrlr l! dlar rrU to *t|trf t!, t tD oDtlrE ltt ut! !B aII Ur. (lL 5d-arl, f nrE.frii1tr rcurrr.gwA rE r&r tr3lr (O\ El .E .rlrt5 d ric ld!
- :nrtllEg E - {rE- tE tEEf FfudllE rd }Erry cutsrirlt! lbrlEiEia&atoldllbdh.irdOtD arr tl.U !n I l-l E rb: tEItrLd
b Et ct. i.AIt b EIU.D lIA GF lrIE ll.rll. rd tb.t btt&lr. dh-ri fUIXO a O es ffr l4 r-.h !E .r ra lHr l! Ellrt trlc 'tt blbrcrtr.o[5,lC,tlllEElh.!3 rt|lilEl3 lDt! glld r$.r. tltblB
(O, Fr lbo purTm ol rDftrgrDll(Al(lll r errfror l@lruttEot b b&d forE rrB ol nrlmrrlfc hrdrCldoc If tE
conod tllE c an LE rrE .t llt fF Er. - flC d It& t'&r aa oi:!!r rf InooonCnrnr b ccr or bXlmlodcdlyco.Arrha tlG Flo., bErrEr lll llErrrrt cgErEr tGftbt .,o rBFtrgrl)b tAXD lF srtrdFh IEh rrtb lryuneaal. Eftth lt Ol, fr.lr ltlJlr. r ar.t1ln .&bn E, 'r t! ]|. -(lr. Dlc .'uroi ll|ultcf. Esrthrrn-lbrE.rtD3otcr&tGEtErtt, lrd potHcrd -afrE dt;h ri.rlcrils '{U)rlotsrttoordotrgrrlrrnrnff'tad llDalcr lblr lDurrrrrlll ad d, LLt hhtD3 fta of!.iltc b gtound rrt r tit- trousd pur-r d dnaft. t*c U rro lG
rD^a I mashr r{Er Eh tlo ol ilf. aclg rhrl U) lrrc! rur... llrEr5dErrt Brllqr or thc tsrlurro{ plL hftt'led-
Lt.- To n6 Ef, 3| }if fL-
fililtIIEDd rLoE,-Ea d. G td tb BraqEr t:8, n.|-il GEr B d.lE rrdtEd E E CIIIE (Jsr lidrdblrturtldt ltT.Edf t! GE
qE- .t UrbtllDl8?-.D.rlr.irrdE c uL tel h o'lnrrortltr dlt agdorEr>ElD.lEtl allriD frfrtrt ffiEi fat.?
e tosfl lo*o*.r**-o"lL Jybr,,l,-,rstr
$l cgrlrarnrt tf dlalnlhra: rqn ilr tsrr ttrl hr 6!.q+ 6. ^-hr+F!^-.f El ro & ddr tDtlr ol'nar c rrnr!n.o -lr-? ffi ffiffif$- -l-' r.E r-. -,oE IEbu* oErs#"l#ffir|! dl.f ..-Lrtt I,th orrbrlghEtrcar{- -sE#ffiIFFE;t-f,tlE--;il H ffi. BjE.=g =.EE.EEi!':{=ffi;F ffiffi-+*fi =Ffrit_EGiitrt"-{ig*-j*F-Fg EE FiEH=e. s4a -rt f-5.ffi =rffi"=.fin hOrCo+rr.ffirrr0r alr lalo s
t
a
I
o
o
I
I
a
a
o,.atrlrr-*_mrE.rll.lJ rtt tu€dhrft tluafl rUe rh.tD." rdtcthdr!ansrcrohffi,-?.ffi]B.ffiffi3lrtr 6.rcrtErrro. EA r[t ttrtluti rtEr E rrr uc i ulr tba ba3 btOrutto orrtlrDlc tcE ailr. Eh 'rG .fr.l.tr' E ..rlth.tf.. Dtc rErEllt r!- h I.rrr*r rE ;^--t, .rra,tro. c D #fiEH,LErFrEarorloclrrtlra E] ill ian'iG-Effi.truD -t-rtbt gl-uffi;i
_ lltbs*-r rGiXrtEErlllnr r.uGtuL5*8,ffi ",-ffiH:m $i,ffiffe *, H""tr .FEiffir ffiHIE.DETElbDdI-*u=*offiffi#ffirrltd druEfrriE ftE lh Elcrrlltrtlc tEllrrbr$6tbAtzunc.uwr-gppgffiffitclar u.oruUol UFDedrr qt 6crc abanl lldlll r rb rrild. tDl oerrary*ffiffirffiq{rr borrsutlti&'€ruritrnto-ooru-'b.B-tDa-td&;
=Fq
crEEt DEr r atxictaoao -E1r616aif,-Gr:r:-r3111q.4Gt!u4hu.brG..rc u. turr.r., -iH-5# ffi*-drh.*--.,.;i; H1*Stlr,ffi."rc u' tur&.r ff-rlrffi #iffi#.ffi"!ff"ffi Fffi.tffisEiHffirlr.' cooftBlf rlthlrtrurige. gr.1 lpil6.E!rE****-ffiA l$Etr tbtb lELErEm Edg. tllb ille3.U b.! 6rahca rdrlt Elt rr t 'ro t -t. iam-tffiiif, Ei1tolltr Ed ts ruara n rle nurr.: r rnillffi rniEfriili ili.ro .*-I Errdld Dlt gr 1aa*cererffi Ho? lruE qtDrlit{ tqdrltdild Ac ftrnh!Elily*rffi
$
alDhaDabbffir,r
rad crrr tstlll of qBlUr c*..rL bdrr' * -.'H',EI ffififfi{iEEffiE: *ffifr*rddlllad rl- o, rr
!!fn"odr rt'.'E 4Hkffi $-ffi:E&-ffiftH ffiH"?ffigorEg cuc rG IruI D
ff f,LroH'Siffi.Enx ffi fr,Hffil,,ffia:fiffi,s r-r-trE-:ri ffifft';-rr.rrc'I.,&4ffi#ffiSffi,cbctlc q9 El. Et br|.dlltr rurta tbo Lri iarr l..I' (hanc, tdEraf.. rE mhSt brc tjrr@lt elffi*T'ffi fiE ffi,,,Tffi"Iltr# Th? s. ?6, r, r=po.d rr cr.o,r torL rElrti, lrEr rlrr lr r..cEG'iie lEa.t- E rltcnlh tD* tEoe lllth-rDlrru'.hE tD..lf..:so rrn qrrc-jiil tuc.urr..EErurlorrDrt- iar.rorldt, EDrtr3-;E ultinX*.fiffi-Hle Er* ryLy#*;s'*-# ry+lr33"nffiffiAr urnDb ot sh r rtrrarr orru b. !..rE l.-- ,ndnD.ll!..--hlt ;[LE arDGEtrE urtr ou. c'"E _t*r - rrrur rlr. ran-.r-.as- rqr6 Earto r!i, Da ,rr Eto lErftflllt l&B rrhrlrlln rltbtt rura rouJaw ;.,;#ffi H ffitrffill*.ffi:,fl xi":}E.ffi-;J:fffi "FE
a Jtt$ zq 11gl .i.*ot
'NAL
r,@RD-sril^Tl 2ott5
,ld,,'l, hunLa bllti ra tlr 4 drE -i.t s tu. r cqlal $rffitil rU, i-r6. ry fi* =!+ r-. ttu! a.il rbn rcffiffilrrE]ot, n.,lda!a 19l._il !r T?it =;aE-n ru n:rlis- E toErrlr C EfcsE CrIh. AfiED r:Igar+-uarb-4rnLrfirUdB db ora b d s: urda o tlr rlnf f C. rlrr rEr tDt Edorl,E C rr6t GilcEIE Dlia c latsU d lE Gffi{r o b ra'uuGEe3 rtrirr sd lalld r!.rftnhhEcrril =U
-ru=Dcc11p.j-l11 a1D :fr al8l d tsrrrt fll lr-
Gtrlgrgr.AdD6riilc}j+;.\,-Iil: et tE rrraE ir-ir tc FEEffititrffiffiffiF;1!q! Cla +4. + flt r+ ;-idtllp-n-urryroisrr.,cfD' &. AcEEErtEi Urafrrb oftsn rn-JE, Irr. tr ni r ulrrttsi C EAL GdriE .[tb.fnt fD u rnc pl b .rrttr..lct}.f.r bu,dt alob dltulEltoDr ruc t ;rrt to tlo! a ltn r* E r! rD@ tD.
Dtrc tl tEBltldoa b tbc-nErl rl tfir .arEtrlcFttl&EllElupabctl.]l,Fffi. , tts it- lbliLtlouCIf i: ttrrlrrD. IDCr.r.
Euurqr|arlor-rErdrE'r. ,. :&. Pttraltaol d gr, r! l!rD!'tlrg.d,]rtttrai'[/i Etsr th.t und.l lbo ogolaS DEID-T- tI{rEtE'n. tnrtirn Ol tbfE lrar .trt r&tUah.ar lLrranrn .E- , t| frl|tl ato.aaE 6mtd rillJ fO.
teqrc--nxrrEaroeL:ea6 Edr tG rtdf. tlo tht b[l th.lllSlltr(Al' D.rdE FltilF d::t Flntrr' fl.[a rfrtc Fo'l!ta! d rcEdr rilt d Belo Et (lt.od Ol tl[| aoDa(,Xll r|.ro .lrtr acodd-d lU /f!L Ql' cur,a,llE I lorAttlt tL. d.r.tlDtEl I arror Xclrlcfr
rE tE uc -nl-,-u;-ltrrru-E rrc DG"to on ttrl ttDdl o 8- ?t? trH rrrlrlrd. tf nunq, pq boludrd la tlr Rrp rl tbl! Dolst.tA b Ethtd. ltl pan' ea{r tbc rrtslrl tollorr'h>-ttEtttlto mth.FAI l.|tOrf E- tl|lrtiL G bito 1 lrtt drrr* rrrArrbr to? ffir rEc-ffr Ab ldlu ts tln rapduraG b r rrcrIr3huilo'bcd|'r.rdtDtGrrllDrrll. il.a ltll dffi tD, aaEEE.ErE oE E tlEaEcc 3.t I]EET tr- to DrqDqEI.E EE lto to tD.6l-rlllll.Ero .EErt tt GrElt chrrrcs} rr-nor ffiEE rrtta! tEa,qg'if tbc rrrlc rDrr t,ttE r3t tlait tr slllA ,rr.1 trrtilit F fD. eatl!l., ! I r}r.a tlllrf'll| lI}llriurb. D6llEt.tliGfrmrafrolitortcauotr*iG c-rE. sr rh EEEI-I! q'3. E-Er ,1 t&rd.ur r,n -E Erorooqr r r lorccll. lol(lxtxrxtlF:' aHril rrir omlttlltarcLrDcrdloElAItuEarltlr tlr EtEt|'tlrc, da rs trr lb. cO.{.It Orla r\- Fttr&rdr, Elt .trE{Er tsttaurfc rat. pntt ft.rl!Dor-{- bral E-{Sir rrEr..a- rr Ea =r=rila4:rihtetEbrl*..* I tlG dl rru.l[ &Ef t r lll .d srruto .to. E,o -rrrr-|t|iq.u.rhFErirrdidry. .i .DdtuGt-.drbau.-rndr Tbhd; DO Eurfbtrrlld.tsh n-r- r.ib..E tt, d aDl- tlr D,r.E br te ndtl fbr rdrul .bnrdi.. .Llrd-tar6bqf-f. tbtLIrgrfilr, Gr^Et.
lbc AGlalllrtryi dAq rrill5]|lu. dtba.lln t r'h Ad
o
a
o
I
o
o
o
o
I
ailbal, dlrral BIEB dctsi lo.tDrmtacd@rhiashldlr ld.cluDbl lEEl.Tilt altl.,r.lEc[t tlr H.Fa t3outt rrri tIrC lrt rl[ aol FglrltGUrrr ptrhr r|ri.r ritEDU b ltrfraic=thcr dtb brrl(lou CDaElClrrar.!h: lco&al Ftortufrthd, t ilrt.lb rtrlE.' trrfr bcsnt rbtri 5lcrorlim r hsrdur ruilrtlr. laqrrrhlllto' d IPl' j[ brve l,hc .l}tDrttt te udty tlc nqulnmtr drb r€t rcariltE lllra 6[.Dal lEib
tlcor. rnlnbrla taobndrfd rquilpErntr E w lrrxllllb era sEtrothpordn:rrtr,-olhr thrD tLroud urtr EGLEEr .lrrtsicElrt--d cdle .6b tor r.lcra ol xrrqior lrL, aa tbatrFl, to ndr rlrlnr rG., to trlr
lnlo rrrout lt11 tDldll cbrIl:[lrtL,d tlrrcE f,.lcr tlp'rrctasrt cf-tarltsr raclIf rltts tbc Era..G-mt s( lrh nrnr. Ed tuloa dt+rDdnG lrotcr tE Eodl0d rs&FEtair toutd contlnrc !o E rlUlcaa lolbc uodcrtrtrr ttglnlt Dtltt th* thc,drrtf .rnst! BoraGtlc d hrEEbcrltl rn6 tlr rrrtoEEEL rrlrlc! l,al courrr. tbc srl o[ dl d lE rrlcamrroE:orrl lrrt.t l&bl lirl lt I tEpctrllt lo Fa.sut tbrr Dllttsllgr of pblh hqID.Dt tDr outsrrgat ll r ba4 otr.urhbl ;rL ilrlct r EU $rn r+olrl DclDb3 ;|th8 0r oortr*t d r!D.-llr. rtrdrrfi, ddra. Ccquotly. tb3 A&hlillfc rould [otbc botDa t' r drddoa nrdr lE r dl.lrrut lr.lurl catart !r detcrahe3th. TD"orlila tDranr tl vbioh tarUulrrr EEEI}t.lil.I ulrb to crtEd Bt l,stlErdG ro rhcOu urarra ol 3 70?. Aolrrccrr:. tG trcla|tht rIrE F!tslE.Dd rEEDf Clillt tttb -- to Etol"alttti! thlr rurceatf
lrCfEclt lO O{ttl attlt|cftf C iEEtatll!.l. llD 5t!gt rrllriqittr c (Il,t rr EEElEltr! lD E Era.Ea
r Xr. RAITDCIIS!. t ro Bl:errn b,6 l] r llx,aE o, thf rEa'bligru! I r.tr rilltc Acrlrtflll ClLltt El Iill Dd ,rE tDb ulrrblilDlB ltY tltc tonbnLhed llot nra.
lr re brr ardc Ela !r tll. EtEtrDO i3D Cbq rEEulrpcnt|' Eb. all.ElDlltilrc L rlb to oDc flu Inafc o[ tr8$rt]qt oCrE l'l.3 rurtlS ?D. El'rdrr. rbeigUdttrolhrau lrxnn rid tlrc radmoaiitE.lrtA'ftLra ,r..4 v&L r =rtttrrattaq l,b ,ffielrdrtlrfc cq- dtcnlftnst.rdnl sDtlsr G (irbt
'(nlld poE3 htEU:n.DF'irr ird UtDGVttETEaEL Tbr Arlulofrtintc tr dr,rcotffi b rlbct rbG adn lDrlrouid -r<t tbrrOrolal rraiLtr!tDC lEa3 aiEDL c Df,itindtdrtlIumD!t. Ec b. . r!![IIUItsr tc
nErf,5' rlrrEr. t !. nrlr, DE! ail !f, DltlEf. lDt t3trdblt.E-r--. tila tlPf f fEiIT[L rFtfrrFt lr r drrtfcdh d atnr r,-ii aqrrrtirfrl iro+raF t-tttuxr iid-E.rE xr *rlrrc ltrhHrtart ffin fiilhdlll. anni.rrar ;Ilrr'ic ,nanm|il d tl r rinr E prLEu. c.
rl' l} Gtdl:It.tr--r 1;a 6rf f ;qEiIrifu lo -ttrEr rffi{.er dr&rfa.tft tsrrt-&dil.C.tt -*!ir. rlio.D|lrtlE,b tllc t4 .I!tr !el[. Ear .rrl t&r d. dtF F Fprabq Fr&e ryn -!0t Ur-rrtt5l rd fnrtr .r! t|Irrlrth. rilUa r rhrtb Ih .n lret.. r.rr. rd, lr tdl crorrtU.lrr ridacuo .r-ri, nf, a ccfarll :if .{+ cnrH td. EDl, rtr ilinrrta EDEamtrrt{.ttaBs6r5.dd rU ro_-osirtfli -OE- -rEl..4 =- tlE ilE-rilt E-r E=ia=3re-.E:ilt rjr&.al DrDlrE x'.Itrirt EqEe,d gc. r*q-.Casc. rlttrrtlDqE trl.t .d rE:lE .rlt.!. TtrI {r} mrnU E.lrlU._ailIl- t-EDEtE oorG E lyDIE fr suaa na- irrdtrnfrU.ne fnEtuol+E.DT TE}T .IE.T LshTE -gL. EBIr.GrTLEIIftr.rllrbIEE'lr!c! . sJG.& G*:E--t C !- rAGl :.-rhl = ->E. ,E}!E dI cqA t..tnr.r!hE rnl g rrb st ttrnt H ilr]q-E:- fE EDC;'6? rt-rao- 13 !EU! -8. -rr-cH rrnrCLELt
-r.E
r..Eaanrt EErEEd. d EnElr ts.Ir rr =oirtsAl c Ojh.-rtr rEr.r .hlatlt Eilt 'Ed ltE, tfclnf add, r..d; ir frra-a- tsDErrEElrutrt cEEliAErr E)f,:bl ttt dEd. IrFt rdu d rat !* -!-tdgd tb. .rld. f tThla rrtpdrra rnueltsr dEtstsr.rdE!-.
lGfa Gr*n,orro**.r-.+ru.l rab ti, ,rsl'tl;,-r t{ilrnr-v Illtr Er?t-iicrqolt: rErra.d il. rtg rrrrc brt l*ltrr4ry1lql_gEir.Iotb -irg a e-rr;aF-. E=-]ffiffi =Gbrdcrbfllirtrrr rrxLrED , ;., 'Erlia-iilr-aiifr-i.ai;ib.r
-
Eb fr1 lb eb*-=?::ll._9+!.^1.rii FEl-:ffi-dtr".
o
t
I
I
t
t
t
f
a
E-ffi*ffiXFEtrEEHEL--'T--*- EErH FT- =.*==Fiffii-EE= rE, rD rr r-E D .:- =--RpEiH,lffi:E-uiuu-dbt-p';sr---r'--=ffi i*--;ffi $_dELE=Eksl- E F llr.lhE -rE r lolbur!7-m--ffiSE il+!='t-1.ffis';F'Q,tlrabbtslt=,,=!!!r?.*3ffi ffiEEr1CtIsi-{blf-.flrilr
=ffiffi nhrrr r dr D oc c. z.ti rs r-d.r,iaa;G?iffi I?EE {=-trffiffin"rrl,ElE:il&tEd-q rffi,EElEEr..* r *f uffi# ffi.|.m'ro:.;*rat-i=a-?*-tEilrEr;rE -_nn:.-_E-H rG1-.EE _==l ri-lEEE--- uEr -rE i- =ilElEr
--=
L re -.=: -.r -EE.-;;== _txE q..=; r Ei-tl E r -il. iEB rEr + =r -r. -ernE-E- A!3= ;--=.=-p-l_+iE ..r-Li'IIE E --=Err. E'lrff|f rl
-Er
iErr.Erf GrrrGUrEir:EEcnEi, d - G-rErE :l -- - rare, - rErlG a lr.fl G =t> ar -t-tiE-frffi D + C.tI rtli afoal Slid rd; -ffi, -ft!ry{EE ffiH,o*-,ffiElH,S E irEt*1-jEE"15-:!EF;iErstaEdrTGLE =Ih-.tE
5t r ,lrllrd - c rrrErr-r:5reE-r;;cfrffi&_ffgr.ryr- 55:fiIfflf fr lffi-'*,# .l;EDr.Eu"ffi-.I!.ffi"Effi. ffi-ffi,-&E.Hfb,E.ffi.-rrXr11!dr*.@f UreldUrlE rra+lrrlE.-lllaf3ilrXrruE EDt t1rtafEl tk lb G[onA Ol 3[tSbreDrut E !!a ]l
irrd mart iilfa! Etll3.uEoo l0{l!)lcr tuEotttl I fnoibrr rtuirudil. rEtrutlll q' rl|*qrna-lrEG rE igID bDIB TE lrhlDts5l8Ur.r&, r|rlh.f to E&l,I. lha{troll. EaultG EE rEh EfdtItarDD- l!* uutrsri, b ErDt d, Ir*ea
=11l
q! 9c :arU 1115E-n e-ffiffirmea* ". Elr EuEr,,ob *E lrb F mlr]dEai-orffiOnLlrrrcnh a.br Uoful, t!..dtrrGi Otpr:qtlttx rrrorrun-narrcc-d ffiSS lLtflffiffiffitr.-ffiBE[H* lffi.rEq eru. uElu r ruur-imrir s*rg==.sgq^lrtr*mr- ,- -t-L,
sdq','rDr',itu - ffiIir,ffi* gpi-ffi; ffiHFy*i.ffilurlarur tE rlrht
-Irt- b Ec qffi?#,=::ffiEffiffiiE,ffiffiHEr*'ffi ffiffiat.! cEr!,llti ta th. Irr3 hr rlrlll3 rr!. Ib to qlc rb*tlr tt4 r'uF --'"r IH Fo*ffif;d*-H ffi H#ffiUIIECryIllIElEL FIffiJffi.ffi 3g &ui_ .".-m;;;,;n.r e';aae ,'"#Efiu ;E #EffiflH-ffiE ffiffilrtrurar--d lur lrr. -.ft=rba l+!td!q #c' lr,r EGgr3 'E DG or rli rffi sffi @-u!a", otstrlu c &-rar eol|dEolllrru tH r trri *-i-.,".,*,#*H# *-"t d- @dr'iffFry S,$.fm-*-*"ffi.'qr.tuE- ilffi .ffifffi"--r .*t rar jrab-i! ttr. .,.E! rr*c can.rl* rp-
,h*t $, retl g*eagssroNlL *."""-.*r^t ,#
Elu,trtttdultoutr'ailDElolru ttllt Gfy sEti- g rtrt. tar u drbfr uDa.rF.d rl.- G
EtE;-,1"1 E i rF,.,.nD .rrDErsTE'aErEED ffifl'tr "I. rHH'HBlaEG5. E urt i- Etu! !tF. .trrrrCro'Gtttl jrarrotl.|lt.Il} u!! ltrt E.&.R ld rrtr ict r-rtrlrrlt Er pwU lE ttit'L rr l5d ElDh3cctEttdtlalolIllilltb,rrrfrd drtf|h. r.DlllDlE S-,.dts I fEh}Dbl |E I ltsih tf-. taDLtE C'lI- br.auachl 6{r,,rrcf tG E a.h*f3 ElaG'Ot aqtlr]Eq EnEf :r& o rd.fi rrDtD-t ? I,tuIry, ,r .€Lb dlnl !r't.q EEallr Saa ls.d rlurr tUlrfrrr aearF lbl EEstc trFGrb I| E |l[t rtl |lnr ;IG Ctr.E ed lteul idl| lraLE fuIr&t|.lfiril rr GIr.,rr!6ffit d.rrL- lblrlrr arf4 .t - lDa IFEtui Al( Ea,(lrit hd-rLlSgs,tbrflltlqbtrccallrirrrdrurrts - eal-uceldLlobfb'Oqla * - rdff-6 r rirql,arltr- tlpnrrOrt .ln'H*L"-rrr td ll Ure tsoxhiL lao o d,tlrl Fr-l fifid d lLt rrotbrh LI aro* a tn- riOn tnb rb EB tDr dllo f GtttE'ttt tDrrltril rr,G,;-ifrril t'E -f.lbr sdsc rcdimlfil oqor.re rut lrl tF lt lt E Ir l'E ll.rblE,'lt9 [tr lulth - Ft 3r? r* d rEt Cb I!EEIE.D|I| ril ltn E{ri lex$f, -rrblf tr Ita,errillc d* all -trUE qr-fi lilr rUi f cUr>EEt r l{lt rttG 4!trrG, a tE !t> fE-tEa-r-sriEElEEr.ED E,EE rEElEl GtsErc.drE Dllt&r rrltr. ltrt rdr I ed:n.l tl: tsrolalr rd aFF -nu. G !|uEa il, tclfr bnqord,. llrlcrrlE!+.il,4l'tirtc;{ttllIt+ t.rI..fdr EHr ,rrrz llirnE toepGm rltl or r -rl a$-,Fpl+tf qpkdtFltdlrts .rtq .r! r|rlg.pEIG artrb rrj!i.A !l!; tfrrr g E rut l?f nOEr tir& lC + rir-Ets r! l (t, Ddlts a!LU|r,r s,--r lloHb bdfb r.r e r*!i.A !l!; tfrrr g E rut t?f nOEr tir& lC + iir'Ets r! l (t} Ddlts alLlhrlc !!--3 fxr tOU r.r e r*,56.rr3tstLD.0Gtnll8llrl-It lt HilD IEEIEIEEIE. rcr15n il- p rlll rrrslg r iD f|Ef :frfrr or. or lLt -ltC G rtr lcEr- GnGtr tErr t ,r.,ke
-td =Er ril.et r.!-lsi irar-d[ cd b{.o- clffi'Gf hfat- fr qt|E d ,!I -3 .E tEb .I,r5 6rtDr.C rl lEBratES rO, c r .t5 Dr. d .@ trB ltr ,EE IG. D CrEt ESEI
=ffi tlt €lrcil c 'nuoru fEc !, E E G &ta lrii ru.cr. .-h rrLtI!.
-t-:r
rEr E.rD EIoEr6;crdltlldoilcrcElaLccr As b'&ita]Lrl 5 a-tlrD6uatr(S, n,Oi'.iC,.idt'i$, ritlnL. d
DE E rru'.tDa llrao t' ib._Tqp+ rrl$rodllor-6r;3(t[r-i!]t{,|!l ag pfrry-oc}t-- 'f '19 !!6- *!o d i,br gqo+ llrda,odllor 6t-t.Ut Xllrln3 A&. ED.!E 0c), ' 'a '.b -E hmlf olrtm i rdu-L I rf dtrna ol'r rrlor bL I ctnE.rkb+rd (d}. ddfrr ;a-EilEl mrd ddat-rd rrryFrhcrr n!.l * ffi 6ir.*nL doCrlolallr : ,, ^aAA,,b ifrd bt di .tU drrr rtr oqiqt^tlqta EgF-*,Stut]|-rol4ii'fi'p tIIr,.rir*r-lr*, trp-F-o.rar t rlur trr D r tEE tFG! ct rtlrrarr iEl{ dD ibglralr,.=Ett r-*rprs=-J.ngG=rclt - rrr. EI -DEEhr lFE ilG!-l ctliElEltl-|.'tgd bt}ErlEErrl lntDE l5trltt'rllts.l t a ImcllEE ail'tlilr'l'lauEt.EEt rD rilBdEEn 6if crar !E--Edt-rrdE.Er-ilE 5ti(fm Ca .pl-Ertd tE.trrE Edrc dc iracE-cE. f -tEljblhl.trE 'ac nr ur.aGl- t as rrulrD rfo.hr,alrtiGllrr,t5t d. r;cap Ar :fr,.hdG.:-&t .GIr:ilElE-E [- Lm -!tr!f 6 Er |ruEtrl! Et!!-E-CEnPlrErlr!EE!a rc r.rf.E* lErU lC'cEEEsrzt TuIEED qri.E al . .b- u Era.rlE,.EEE usii DEE'c5..@EE,t'd. EaClRhtEll.. lDEErE,qElltr3EtB IIiI c ts Elrrul ilfEfit BI .r.drrtr.E.-!ll,.E ,dtD'ilEfrr.rrrdr.t-6lruqmtFrraifa aj-- agEDIf IE;p TEt!il ffDqDD tEIr6tgalaarrd-lEEfBdt! ltr lF'd,a!Gl.rri!l.r
'rtlfir
16a'-nrE FIIr tG. Ed ll.iE, B *-E srt! gmrE*,.u ahnr.w- libErB El[tE tra- rn&amlct aqr{E-oihcoord rlreEE ro dt!.Deie|' rlCrr.d fdtbtsrr.Eoil r'r rh .&r,.th itr tab.. EEE htld Cl-*f-oOi. lL IiIOrrr- grrr= ra. .ec Uil trrlf- .ta Ed..ol..clrdrl' r* r*'d.D E rdd: a-6rt
a.Ec.6!b,i 6rlr. ra{ lhr.drbrE''!. olllE.l.II
=-- gsr= r+ ec .r-r lrGl!:i .s *l-{-.L..aLl.r*e-*a r+ nd.]rltlll Dlita tu[.E -tla dtcsd rrrD,tts!,ElDa]|am,lF*uuac -5 lQ'D cE ,g- E -EEI[ =rf,tE4ril E_rilf,5 rlaLaDrt-r!!-rBlrhr us 'd-'E.
I
a:
rfgrqr, qfl
tlr'rgrouzlts.df rfurocrgr iIEtc tccEGrd tE''anrr *,.dfru. drrr.rr td lgrrj lrtrrEt-lll cq,,cu 36- rg.grq4pt rr,aft
Et,i,
ufror-aon.5 EGffitG.
l*ft,U{r.
.irdt,(i[r[,nilr&IIEANll,,
&.DSl:tg
B C.-F
--rrG-rEr-E:-l G'tlfE : ffiaE--ItrElE.rlllrjErsa'ar.E|Dlr-- D Ea tEE-lrlrrtrE Et{Ei-
Eir-le;GGr,d-,|-f Cr'EEFEF qt.atr; I c-!6L =:tdlctl r
1 '.tutt 't-: tt,\) crlrQ,sssroxer rl@rD-snrArE o g0t55HffiE.ffi#H*#tffit L-iE**fffiHfftr,c Er Ht :f*ft.-f i{r1i EE-ff trffito dCrrclorDd lElEror,'E- *#h:dr*eEo ffitt"ffi llffi. r.Er rqr a ril* or rhc rt.h -*-;.1r. d..G; 'our rld
freE !H:"'A"='E*,EE ffiffi EtEft ffiEffidl'L&qgqffi Ury*_*,ffic t5n FErorn- rte dr.rt&rtr oI Err6r1r6 .cllsr .r dirrt;rfi-fi |IfF+ tu rrvrucar-u.t u ..ffinffiffitr#;-BffiEi-ffiffiffia,rrt rr-ariE-- rou-rii-uasil ffiJ%, F;ffi Ftffi* ffi,ffiE li;ffi.;.ffi# fj._ ncn r EEE rerlrDrc phcI ro gl--d dro to hrvc cryoa- --rii p;tliffitfl r-ra"- t brrr dttl$to
;ffi,"[i "ffi "lffi iffi ."'"# nffiXltJffi.f H' .S Is,H HXts ffi.IrboDorarrD trrc BcRrbr. Trre T+i ;"rG,"i,r!tr+;Hi.-t ffiffiffifir ffirrrfiH. "trffi ;3 r* "l*:',m*ffi rrrrdcJ{,-tnr rli E.rtT arur--rrc ar orr-rlrE u.e1Hlftffif,'rH..,ffi1ffi ffi.ft'ffi-nEIffirrrrdl' - 6 lrouDd ntrr nrqeotlo ttc a a I 1gu3 raA b5pffiffi tl4.. rr arrc ,ho htd GDGrt.rc.strrdrrfi lcr hrlrdour rrrte lrnd $rE b-rrr liIrr.t-yEfrGft-ffi llrlrr6 W-crneurar--fib-r.a1il..dl4orl- lldlltiar G.iltsE rmnnot -.nd
"EEE
iff tto olr tlrc-Et-7c urtu-euu-Iil lt* unrrxlacgt treirlre ttr, Courrtc. t lil-prirr*-d" ud'riit ryportrt BFA to bctudB llarnort recrutrtsi 'tr uort tl todrt-ir n4,-D.ri;|ofrT , .i qE brlc dirrcrd 3hc ra Arrrarrir-- lrullm lot orEsllG .Gth il thc G Dot trjutm3 dl 94 rU m6rcrr tilrr t! ttdllata r lrr[ qnatstr rgr-Prr{eurnc rlrDd.sdr tts r ttrrc b thr turi{ons rrrtc D|ottor iiri :d{ar ilEd, io anatahc $r|t !!|lrrcncrr tu lo? sbc olrDEt eod opc*r. plrrue Er c!!.r u tricountrt I,ae rtc nn:rni rb dU mirir"" prout,orr of bE{onr uetl Orpd trc[I. 5g-.r- nuglrat r rilainiil,-alg lr ,r t alr:msr rr.L ot tho cors.rl:e Currcn3 FA recut tl6 rt{sllr tc.*rd |l [f,o rcaun6f,ot bsrd;; Til.oP]gc,r md o-pcrtarr to Drcvtdr ,l!.E- rrltt! ltltpa.t Dr-Ulodr .rd-rt&'-rr.". ; tb ncEA ntll cotreu aEFrbc-dd rcooarlllUty ururrau ts tr.- otsr, prirlar ttc ccurag ot'dcrJrc on lua' lroo dLgrl B.rvlsion ttrll
^coatrotdauErndpct*Jcursnrtn Ref,f lbc bl[ trrr E.olra lt-hantil Jlold rrudurtoarr natc d dbrt ?cDrlloe oI hrnilour ststc dlrpol tDal h.l b r.,|uc ptrcr le lrrc -ff. ,ffis d ht|rxbur r.lt.! !r liDdlmllltrcr. Eortlvlr. ttnrac{rr nrthd- trtr rlELgorrr uio trr raa r ua cit, itta Wc havt nuvbd tor rttrr-ranteblllty atunacr lre not uor tXtrlnd caano rlort trrt rlroC. Bo,rsrcr.urc fna aiernl tiUCrlas oalt rhlrtfor cs.ztd,lue urirro lf,{ EltEE br$ EFf wratltec hr itro ;rji i ob u ttcnciurtrd tart nrefr rt.to ba talaa to de.lr uD sDtt- GsnirdDr- cbroFs h tbc mt ttr& rU nefr:n : tatrlc taEbnotodt. ]rtr b ll lcr:t rrtion crncd by nrclt ftdlrthl. ID la. Est-pFltlcr, tB.tt ral roeE. fd .lt GtGlrD u aoullr lln rr Ed ,€t c@.ltrDae. thchc OitlcuvE rstloD lr p. nurt 'do rll t.brt ie podlblo lo 'mfil- g!u! tc IEot*t hnnrlr D..ltl|-rn l tbc.lrqr.Cc nqrcr.t cauldDerrbrtrrr- nb lrEardorr nnr Coarusr ria Fytao|E rt. lu rddlrJO. ttr blltlld' qrotrllr ,r_ttourd t.t f, br ritDu4or,uturr ta-cirfnUv;foa.ct rorrlOctrcctureObtliruoratP^- E n qlt&ltlatla Eloe oooprh. tfrc rbltc htaul ud ttc-cfuhro- to f@ubtc l.Gnrlrtloal eantnflr"'d rlllr -lcrrc ffilrG Eusr anarrno -tr.r ir-rnEray to FtiEi: trc'. oiidi of- dril-ra ontrtntngqi4 mlt obue._c bc trEd llrtq tbc rsailfril of protrOft t|ta pttft" trcti't.bo,,rtuDlcu. I! ll,cD_ --. l-3 L lltGlt haltl raa rsrtrormcnt-rE !l'A tlrt , r l*t thc &vbmocar .Dat publlctlrl,l .r--rE rold tsrve !o bc rCgF. pbnr Euuqir orrt Ere UOt iaa qrrt tr ,putr Cton!ilatc- hrt-.ulda Chct
,Inrn_drr 6lpnalbllltv rniarucoi rattr8iiiotteruraclodrirtre itrc connrttr .Itemrr tts-porrrrmr !I!l-r-!Lf. G9!?oqfmg L dEuDd ro pra ud ipe puDilc ht rEt -tolg for th. aurEd- ot-;rGrrlrt- ra:r ur BvEr '.elr GresEuilrit Ey Erllnt rllt hrrarnrc .Doug thc lxr of concera of oDd3r thd oty -rcntthr c oHrn-tttrl tlra. rlho ornr raa oacntr dL tDr cnvlc-ourort u7-nafuUurar--fti Ulittit r-nffistrittf-lu.l-6ttdtr.l .lts hrv..d!$rrl. rurmru io typc. erd lsran o{ faorrbtbar olfG ,trE ftn E r qG,quiil cbrrd;clcrn uD lrtv colrtralartlon thrt nntn &c cairorrrrdt'ana rort iutr-, it-i *r-tlc bc Erdg ln rury arlEonEUhl, rut lcaut to nlutGlt ir. rcr Et-tud n . ;!dr.I drtrtl.Thcaaoodrla.DdD&ntfsvldctlc grUcrr-hrrr tJrctr pOtst-ot ntcn. , ZtC-gaOttf"erlDrgL6doutcrrEr.EPA.slth ruthcttv lo llua tD .tu1D, corihcr nccut{i-; SitE-E & id; iri6iil--rrati*ir-fr -tii-cttlcn aunIstntt"t cdcr. c t4 canm.ta r fill ol rotocttni-tbl cnrlr6o;t !!td ffidEL &tblrr lr! Ern', rtltre ia(l 14!9 I _th.^IrJ. dt trtci oourt ta r+ irrtrr irdottrclDl-i,iou-proi.crlm 6ir:[ur rhrr hrrc boca roadrd !e r+oulrc oorrtrtlyr EHe ri tottrb dth.rrutsuuarrrrrrrrri-nrirr-oE nE'rlrro rlta fair;-urO-tf.t b;st r.,. hrlrrt.o,r _u"rc.^.iilrutrt Jdlr.lp:urrnotourrrijiiitn E;l'.tE iq-rffirl tir rloglErionce" or dueporel trdltUo vhcrr t5b rct Etts E to bG rnm;ttaGd- E-ihEts!-;rlATctld h thc Errthcrc ll or hr. baca-e nlc.lr o! !rr. rut foc-utnr u zrort ertiG-ra-rre lorrd--drgrra tn thr -tiacrrll rha=er{our ;rL. !D! fA qrrtsrlv hl r8inrtttrt 6 t.trr-D.e,iior'lb ilrfri EEi-nruuo-oruIir.ffi".tGd urlrutlrorlt, to nqulrc noh srrcanrc rd- aDo-llriutrt nrigrd rcrqrra hrrfron.-;;E.rEil hdl Th.rction ]| D-rmlttod trgrrdolrr rrto r\rr.lD.dn .qfor. lo-r{u-!!D-D-* ilE o.r-t gp slrt l6q' urc Bourar,atarcnt' .tar.st. r'.,r dtml lrdtt- iDs uril rG rrG- coattr ahf,- HII ffia bt["
t
QErnntEnr, C'drril
o
tlr urltrll ttr ae oqqflrlq b !L rlt d EaratG qt r*' tru stD quilEr trs. TtvrDrD,tb, rU_lhap-t llr S ibJt 'dlfdlbr& , , qUo-.r1ao-5rJEtfd uE 13 albrb ur to rrl E CEllEa. fO. Drrllcat I i* fr. illErftOf. t emouacr ttrrt{tP.goEE{ Ealtq Ec dG sn&rr gg3 tlrt tb! ai? h8 tb frorllr-Cn tncrfo fltr. E r"ibd ro lD.- drl EE E! tllq4llE-llllgrtrGiuH. _^- -rilrrbgrrlirlr d r!il ts b rrptts rts a* rruotltg oFErcrB t7ilir., -Itl ra-ilDnt, ofirrcB,, llr!FLr- r.D+{ d sorrcflry .hE!'? q*-otlgHegl! r? qhqt ^ ; 'trEr rt -orbG.cr ra tLc cD.a.D-tth l1d r!. @!t E -CEaDE e. ffill I ta b;ihatoEcr-ffiSffi.Effir: ffi*ffi,H5,Sffi , JuErr-.iii'-,'pc-v-. n
bctor d ltlr UL PA rd h. b rblr11lal tu &rr3trr uiirF ---;".r-r',so,,e.f.. ,.f.tEtr ft'Ea lrbb tb ;rAlh Err3 alo.l E-n f!3?.6 aatlha rb b nub f tht DB!!D!XO OI,I|ICIn. ill r.lra-{
I .&rrtclt lottdd-ru rc.Lm rt te: dhcdot tlttrorl oDlclar rl ffi. ts], H..d 5 r*r gtrln :hrt fotcUc ! lrac{f{. , , .-_ryrd+_ _ _--:-_'-E:-frftG.&.ndrbtrr,-i S3-. =-- HE;ortarlhltq&trlttoOol u!llb!{. -rrat tl! rr-:aabaraI rr. cr- l-trtwolrrradlbmahn?t!* rud b tb. hEeb Eaidil. S5r B-hrrc rrn ril ollttt rurEt -tbotE.B Ifr-ilD i. o orqrer. TDrr acoa -trr--rllsorio orrrsr. :rtri ff =f *nn3bffidtod5rlr.cEll+ ffirlllrtnrl- Farr DrL rrt-rrhltrrtor b tlul hht rhoc. tar Ilrr ltirlt lcdrlrtbc 6 o?d H ![ plIrtsr.ltsr EEt3 t{a b 1 rlllme rrtotrcu : I =f Etr rE..EeoE ornn ltr rglql!, blll tsG A s_ (E.t. rrrt rD rDd tlc !td; qllr Ea Ergttt tsilEtli lll3tr. rlrb lrD&cr0 lrn fant Ast to r,EtllEtt r'rbo!t. 9l- tErtt, !.- -
trDEtEE rDo:her rloEIlti IlE!: ED bt r fiEl r.r IL EE{D -.
=- = =._bb.t! pd u to tlb l|I O& ldbaltssrPrrptrrrfir !E rEEd adt raldo d a!. pBEsrDnfo olr!ct8- irl ffi f,3.- Ftte rwlrcoraL l rould tbsL E nr. lbrm olFofha io'h- tElrcrt:ot th, E!F!_ rrnc r-nffi.ffiHffi*SH*.**.H ffi ffittdr lrE. n h.. bcro CUiIG an HaJ.. DruddbsrnrlhtbcUl" ', r!. E hoGrtE Eoc lb? m !o Etnrl tll b0l I!. CfJfPf" &. hsl&nt I rlln E! t-b- irs
out lld I thtDt rr brsr-dl lrtildi to-ei&-rtr rtbr tDc-mfry,-dr;i;: ffi,l* il, ffi.t[,Ft-l}rl bDrvlat rfidFrdfD !B raf |!rl,ln lhuttErtelth.urrrotS. EDEi-- rrdr GtrTAllduhllclrlcdbLdratttoual} lll.uucoded. : Fi brrrl 4Dtui roorudr b tDL rrur-ud lnhtt -lL. !nEBIDIXG| OFFrcIR- rt * EtEr llmobriorltaa"d-tffi rtiouan.rwftrmriffi-iE E-. Dtr t&
0016ts lorrlrd tD rtlne tblr Hll ur lrrocdcrn rloatEtD6-?EEld rlubor 3lut taarDLrd rr- Lr. GEIIIEE Ir. FlrurcnB I rl, hrrrE r.xl, rer[
e
I
t
f
I
I
e
neblo Bllr ttrrr]drbru rDd br. thc lorlDtrdrerdqd3baulL . *!-_ E!!dlrErSlrB@latDlrreadcasr. lto rngro-rro oifrcri- ma btb rErh.6trr D.th tt$ rll gtrrcat tba c. |luEUE b sr tb cE.rEt3! ol tbe I lc lh. llll (lLB, !dD, rr rDtfit(bc
ouIIGmt ol fulttlt Eumrnnd dte eacodmcrrf rod lha th&d rcedtnebl trlEr.4rlouorDTnrr ol(l '3ltta clDrdG-'lr flr! 'rrr blll" : h,r4 tlrt tE lol te t&. EFr erof prrrrntb ts tGlb r pud of tl: tumdrsrnl ils ordcrcd to b. nu5EiUrr aE.B -r, orftr- '.rr
ffi"*H;t B.-H H."-.ffi :Ifi6.--tlrc utt to tc rcra,-, f.fiffiffiGmt''..r"rdru" E!$4F., i. H-:?:ffii?ffif;ffiH:Is. CEAII!. E. PItll(hL t rlt- tt giflla fr. i.rqasnt i !!t ffi;' t{., *, ll rrcr -h. Er3Ersqt fbr qilgql_g! r quonrr. te tlc tsr .nd llyt c larl granje c.ilda hrrEah. FBBIDIXO GIICER- Thr dEtr-tatt.lrr.uadad. a
iis*;t **ffi* ;; ; ,ffiEm*tTt$ITffi' "it .,ffii1i:,#E il**.:..rimlt rultllrstaod. , lrr.--xr. GEAIEI. Ir. ]trl*o3, t gI TbcfrrlDdDeyrrorcor$rtd- ; - -; 'ffiHrr. cEellD. Ir. Piltdaal I rmrr gLtt illl crll thc rou, -d :a.ro.1 *od,ecE Er uar r-tl&d rcrdlis o( A t3? o rroa&d- thc rrrlrtrst rcgldrthc olcrt lttid, caatr: glpdE it'irf. .d tlo,Ei..ooT5" p11,l6tDltfc O111ll1gg1. .1L orr.roll : rrr lrr-rrr rr lirl ia- adry a-;bltr lr ofo to lurtlur rasthrot. B fL EtEttIlNE I rnnouno Chrt tD- brblr lo. rrI. Seia tO, ff[ 6tJltAt ts no turtber rorUfrr:af tO bc Emrts frsa Ilnllr:ror. t&,- Eota-. rEtrEf^So. ll.f. rdt sarb"r I. l!f.ffi, Tooffi,g se* F.H.t?&trtrffi ffi H:ir:t, -,er ordcnd to_bG cosreqd S;.ffitl"ll&* rlH ffil#nffite r t8lnd l'o dhs ted rla rud tthc EErrtc ffu rrrH (ffr. Tonmr[ rid. lF.Ti.n o,E.O 'Gt'
iEl ,t.. lolllrlsddEs. 3nG !1r111t t Eroo Oonarattolf -Stir. r.I-iErrri-ld-:rliffi.fL Cg tlE Xr. Rcd&tt3, I n3 E.EI rrcnmr,rtlrabEnl ; r1*eerr'".,il3arr ,,rr-lsrr:,,orlrDrrttltc&rac_g!_rqlq'nrrL I tGlrrr lDn urED lh.t. It plmrt' .EDtTb! PB^E IDIXO -glqlCER tls. .od_rqlt!a. the Etrtor 665 fq'r-io- E .. !Gr..aa ror .r thr &lld ;rncAllrcu. TbG clcrt glll crll tb! mll tr tE Dqr-gral rEd tlrl Sotr.?irr Dtla.l ec tr uraaa ry-rarrtral -rri
a
INrBnNRrro*oo
UneNIuu (use)
ConponeuoN
Independence Plaza, Suite 950 . 1050 Seventeenth street . Denver, CO 80265 . 303 628 7798 (main) o 303 389 aI% (fax)
November 16,2001
VIA FACSIMILE AND EXPRESS COURIER
Mr. Melvyn Leach, Director
Fuel Cycle Licensing Branch
Mail Stop T-8A33
Office of Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
2 White FlintNorth
11545 Rockville Pike
Rockville, MD 20852-2738
Re: Drummed Uranium Material
Amendment Request to Process an Altemate Feed Material from Molycorp at
White Mesa Uranium Mill
Source Material License No. SUA-1358
Dear Mr. Leach:
On December 13, 2000, Intemational Uranium (USA) Corporation ("IUSA") submitted a request
to amend Source Material License No. SUA-1358 to authorize receipt and processing of a
uranium-bearing material from the Molycorp, Inc. ("Molycorp") facility located in Mountain
Pass, California (the "Mountain Pass Facility"). This material resulted from the mineral
recovery of natural ore for the production of lanthanides. IUSA also submitted supplemental
information to NRC on January 2,2001 relating to this amendment request. The material
addressed in IUSA's amendment request and supplemental information letter will be removed by
Molycorp's Lanthanide Division from three former impoundments at their mine and mill site at
the Mountain Pass facility. The amendment request and January 2,2001 letter referred to the
material to be removed from the three Molycorp impoundments as the "Uranium Material."
Subsequently, in a letter dated October 17 , 200I,IUSA addressed a small quantity of additional
material from the Mountain Pass facility, which at the time was stored in 36 drums at that facility
at an area referred to as the "Reintroduction Area", which IUSA requested be included in the
foregoing requested license amendment. This specific additional material is referred to as the
"Drummed Uranium Material."
The purpose of this letter is to transmit specific additional detail regarding the Drummed
Uranium Material.
l. Status of Molycorp License
On November 7, 1994, Molycorp applied for Amendment l0 to Molycorp's Radioactive
Material License, requesting that Molycorp be licensed to possess uranium source material. In
the October 17,2001supplement to IUSA's application, in Attachment2,IusA included a copy
S:\MRR\l\4olycorpdrums\Molydrumsltr I 0 I 70 I .doc
66$n"\
$ NI tt$) EH t!-- -,. , N:l 1+ *'",. r I I.-- l-+-' .' r,. (h,
fo. ',r, rior ,9^i
QQrrr"4
-2-(lor"-u. r t:,2ootMr. Melvyn Leach
of Molycorp's License Amendment 10, together with relevant pages from the license application.
However, the copy of those pages was not a signed copy, and IUSA is transmitting herewith a
signed copy of the application pages. In addition, IUSA transmits herewith Molycorp's letters
related to its License Amendment 10, dated November 7,1994; December 4,1994; and January
13, 1995. These three letters are all referenced in Molycorp's Radioactive Material License
under license condition ("LC") l3(e), the LC applicable to Amendment 10. Amendment 10
licensed the Drummed Uranium Material as uranium and thorium source material. Molycorp's
license is currently considered to be in timely renewal.
2. Quantity of Material
The Reinhoduction Area, containing only the equipment where the stabilized material was
repulped and slurried, was decommissioned under the oversight of the State of California
environmental authority after March 1998. The residuals from these decommissioning activities,
containing the original stabilized drum contents treated with leach acid, were returned to drums.
As stated in IUSA's October 17,2001submittal, the approximately 36 drums (approximately I I
tons) from this area constitute the "Drummed Uranium Material." As further clarification
regarding the number of potential drums involved and weight of the Drummed Uranium
Material,IUSA adds the following:
a. The Drummed Uranium Material is currently stored in only 35 drums, as
Molycorp has transferred the contents on one drum which contained a small
volume into another partially-filled drum. The drums are presently stored in
Molycorp's 90-day storage yard (Hazardous Waste Yard), because the area has
appropriate security that includes chain link fencing and a locked gate (entrance
and exit), and is designed for storage of drums. The Yard and its contents are
inspected once per week.
b. If Molycorp determines, based upon regularly-scheduled drum inspections, that
any drum exhibits a need for repackaging (due to corrosion, rust, or other
concerns), then the number of drums in which the Drummed Uranium Material
would be managed prior to shipment to IUSA may again change slightly;
however, the contents of the drums or alternate DOT-compliant packaging would
only be Drummed Uranium Material as described above.
c. The weight of the Drummed Uranium material is expected to be approximately l1
tons; however, depending on moisture content, it could potentially be as great as
approximately 16 tons.
3. Occupational Safety (Process)
In its October 13, 2001 request, IUSA indicated it believed that the higher levels of copper and
zinc in the Drummed Uranium Material are not expected to pose any additional worker safety,
environmental, or process issues at the Mill. The basis for this statement is as follows:
a. These naturally-occurring materials are also found in natural ores processed at the
Mill and in the contents of the tailings impoundments at the Mill.
b. In addition, Molycorp's occupational health consultant, McDaniel Lambert, Inc.,
was asked by Molycotp to evaluate the potential human health risks from
inhalation to industrial workers associated with exposure to copper and zinc found
in the Drummed Uranium Material. Based on it's evaluation, and as stated in the
attached report from McDaniel Lambert,Inc., "the risks from copper and zinc in
S:\MRR\MolycorpDrums\Molydrumsltrl I l60l.doc
-3-Qr.-t.. l7,2oolMr. Melvyn Leach
Mountain Pass drummed uranium material are well below levels that would pose
a health risk to potential industrial workers".
4. Transportation (DOT Classification and Securing Drums in Position)
The Drummed Uranium Material will be shipped by exclusive-use truck from the Mountain Pass
facility to the Mill in sealed drums. Molycorp anticipates that all of the Drummed Uranium
Material can be transported in one or two trucks. The shipment(s) will leave the Mountain Pass
facility before December 31,2001. The DOT description selected by the transportation
contractor for this Drummed Uranium Material is "Environmentally Hazardous Substance, Solid,
n.o.s., (lead, uranium) 9, UN3077, PGIII." Molycorp will anange with a materials-handling
contracior for the proper labeling, placarding, manifesting, ild transport of the Drummed
Uranium Material. The truck will be "dedicated exclusive use" (i.e., the only material on the
truck will be the Drummed Uranium Material). The Drummed Uranium Material will be
transported along the same route selected for the Uranium Material in the amendment request:
via I-15 and I-70 to U.S, Highway l9l at Crescent Junction, Utah, and via Highway l9l south
through Moab and Blanding to the Mill.
MP Environmental Services, Inc. (MP), Molycorp's transportation contractor, has reported that it
will properly brace the drums for transit. MP loads all 55-gallon metal drurys into 48-foot long,
102-inch wide van trailers. Drums are loaded from the front (bulkheaQ of the van to the rear.
The 102-inch width allows four 55-gallon drums to be placed side by side creating a row. The
48-foot length of the trailer allows 25 rows or 100 drums. In many instances, MP reports, it is
restricted frtm transporting 100 drums on a single trailer because of legal DOT highway weight
restrictions. MP will ensure that the weight of the trailers will meet all DOT highway weight
restrictions. MP secures the drums in place inside the van trailer by use of a DOT approved
o'Load Lock." This devise is placed behind the drums and secured by a spring and locking
mechanism that attaches to the sides of the van trailer. Once the load lock is properly placed, the
drums are prevented from moving backwards toward the rear door. MP reports that this device
is common in the trucking industry and is used by all major carriers for most types of freight.
Any further information regarding typical load lock specifications could be secured from a load
lock vendor.
As mentioned previously, Molycorp plans to ship all of the Drummed Uranium Material before
December 3l,2OOL Should you have any questions regarding the above, I can be reached at
(303) 38e.4131.
Sincerely,
Michelle R. Rehmann
Environmental Manager
S:\MRR\Ir4olycorpDrumsWolydrumsltrl I I 60 l.doc
Mr. Melvyn Leach
MRR/mef
Attachments
cc: John Espinoza, Molycorp
Ronald E. Berg, ruSA
Richard Bartlett,IUSA
David C. Frydenlund IUSA
Ron F. Hochsteiq IUSA
R. William von Till, NRC
fUittiam J. Sinclair, UDEQ
Don Verbica,UDEQ
Dennis Downs,UDEQ
Terv Brown" EPA Region 8
Richard Graham, EPA Region 8
Loren Setlow, EPA
Paul Giardina, EPA Region 2
S:\MRR\MolyorpDrums\Molydrumsltl I I 60l.doc
bvember 17,2001
Molycorp Application for License Amendment
Dated November 4,1994
Srdr d Crlt(rrrie-{crtlh |trlt wttfr' At.[c'
Dcarrnet oiErrIL Ecr
Rrithlogic Eeslth Branc[
744 Psd
gacrameoo, Cetrlorda 9$14
APPLICATION FOR RADIOACTIVE I\TATERIAL LICENSE
Insructioos; I. Refer to Guide fq ApPticests' Forsr ItH 2051' 2'Vhec.q *'"t providcd t-t 9f -f9* is insufEc'esl' anach srpplene*al
s'cers refcrt<rciry rb, pa$ bcirg opqual- t. sro*ffi'"ti*rr'gogr"rr"-l-tnJ-n oirlrgb Ir.alfb BrEscb ar 6e Ad&css giveo above'
;:Ttffi;iltr*. n;iJd* "'n* tu' I hd" :* b h:It
l. e- Name of applicant Molvcom' llrc- (a UnocAl'Companv) "
b. Irailiug address:Number ad
Le-
b.
3. & Nuclide
U source material
Th source material
4. Describe the proposed use of the radioactive material'
See Attached
City
Ciry
flves Exo
b. chemical aud/or PhYsical form c'
ln a soil tyPe material-
Material contains 50o/o water-
Stored in 55 gal drums-
U is as a sutfide and Th as an oxide'
After stabilization material will be in a
weak concrete matrix in lined fabric bags'
zip
zip
-Wi[' radioaCIive marerial be used at temporary job sites?
c. This is aa aPPlicxion foc
fl a ** radioactive mflte.rial limse
I Renewal of radioadive mar€xial license No'
E[ Amenoment ro radioactive macrial license No- 3221-
Possession lirnit
40,000 lbs
19OO lbs
city and sute Mguntain Pass. GA
-
ap 92366-
List all addlases at which radioactive maleriat will be usecl or stffiil:
sHserAddress 67750 Bailev Road. P.O. Bo5 124 gitv MOuntain Pas-s'--eA- np 9?3ffi
Street Address
Street Artdress
c Teteptrone number. AIea Code--CLg.- NuIBber 8-5-6-2201 Extension 279
Tlpe of business:E inoiviarat f] pumasniP or assocruion ElcorPorarion
nfl 2050 (tzEa
5. Radiuion safety officer "d i'dl'at users'
List radiation safety officer first AtrachForm RH 2o5GA" starement of Ttaining and Experieoce, for each indvidual
who will use radioactirre material-
Wlliarn J. Almas, Hadiation Safety Officer
5. Radiation detectioninsuunents'
Make & M@l Nuf,ber
Number DescriFion Available . Purpose for whi,,ff uSed .,.
--.-,,
See Attached
7. Me&od, &eguency, and standarh used ia calibratiry i8strureils listcd aDova
See Attached
8. krsonrel Eonitoriag and bioassay procedres
See Attached
9. Facilities arul eqdPmem.
See Attaehed
10. Rarliation safety f,rcgms-
See Attached
11. Efftuenr and eovironmental monitoring'
See Attached
12. Wasa disPosal-
See Attached
13. Decommissio'rinB and decootaohation plans.
See Attached
14. Certif,cats
The applicant and any ofEcial exeorting fris cerrificate on betralf of ttre applicanr named in Iteu I certify rhar all
information contaioea nerein" inclutling any supptemena aftarhed hereto, is trrre'and correcl The individnl executing
fris certificare has arthority tg commit the applica-m relative to Eaters involviqg in this application-
Dare: ///qn{_r i-By:
Molycorp Radioactive Material License Amendment 10
a
RADIOACTTVE MATEBIAL LICENSE
pu$tr,nt to tha caifonia codc ol negulatlons, oavivtio/i. Titte ll, chepter 5, subchapter 4. Group z Licendag ot fradioactive Material, aod h
relience on statamerfis and ftprcscntaioasi herctofore made hy the ltcensee. a liccase is lpreby isgted authorizing the licensee to ,€/ceivc. usc.
possesr, ,,enster, ot diwose ol radioactivc material tisted halow; ,,nd to use sucl, adioact;ve ,nEterial lor th€ poryJoselsl ond ot lhe Placelst
dcsignrted betow- lhis licease is subiect to all ,ppticcble rules. regulatiool and ordets ol thc Deqortment of Heat'h Seruicx no* or hereefter
in cilccf and to any $andtrd or specific conditiott sDcclfied in tis ticcrlsc'
l- Licensee
2- Addtas
Aficntiot:
t
SrEtc of Cslifomia-Healfr and Wclfs'€ Agcncv
Liceuse Number 3?29'36 is hereby ametrdd as follows:,,#
MolyCorp, Inc-
Mountain Pass Plant
P.O. Bor l24
Mountain Pass, CA 92366
Grover Eatos
Man4gcr of Permining
3. Licanse No-
3n9A6
4- Expiadoa &te
August 5' 1998
5. tnsputia agazcy RadiolOgiC Health Branch
Los Angeles
Daprntmcnt ct Healrh Sewices
Pagelot 4 Pages
AawtdmcatNo: lO
measurement of
(3)
9.
A.
B.
C.
Autho.ized. -[Ise
To be used h a Texas Nuclear Corporation souros holder Model 5190 for storage only.
To be used N e
densrty.
To be used
of density,
of an Ohmart Company source holder Model SR-A for the
D. & E. To be.'wed
6. Nuclide 7.Fotm 8. Possession Limit
A. Cesium 137 A. Sealed sourcc (Texas
Nuclear Model 57G
57r57C)
A. One source not to exceed
200 millicuries.
B. Cesium 137 B. Sealed source (Ohman
Corp. Model A-2[OZ)
B. One source not to exceed
130 rnillicuries.
C. Cesium 137 C- Sealed sources (Texas
Nuclear Model 696894)
C. Three sources not to exceed
1O0 millicuries.
D. Umnirm, natu:al or
depleted
D. Soil mixture D. Not to exced 40,000
pounds of Uranium (6(Ml
rnilliclries).
E- Thorium, natural E. SoiI mixture E. Not to a(ceed l9fil Pounds
of Thorirm (f00 mCi)-
ss!r. ol Califcmiu-Heslth rad Wdr're Agency Dcpa?tmenl of He8lth S€Trricss
Page 2 of
-4-
Pages
Licensc Number: .-3"{q-3.6
Artsndmerrt Number: 10
RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL LICENSE
SupPlementarY Sheet
LLCENSE CONDMONS
Radioactive rnaterial shall be used oDly at the followiqg locatiom:
(a) 67750 Bailey Road, Mountairr Pass, CA
ffis license is zubject ro a-u ailrual fee for sourses of radioactive rnaterial authorized to be Possessed at any
one time as specified in Item g of rhis license, The annual fee for this license is required by and comPuted
in accorda.uce wirh sectious 30290-30232 of the californiaRadiation control Regulanons and is also subject
to an immral cost-of-livir,,g adjusrnenr pursuail to section 113 of the california Health and safety code'
Radioactive material shall be used by, or uuder the supervision of, the following individuals:
(a) Tony D. Garcia \(b) Jack roleY '(c) Kevin Cosgrove(d) Kevin Curnutt(e) Craig E. Dial .(0 JeffreY Bennett
G) Dave Dorn(h) Tim Eyres(i) Brian A. Finnell
0) Laura Hennen(k) Jim l(aminski
(l) Jim Madden(m) Marvin SzoYchen
Excepr as specifically provided othenvise by this license, rlre licensee shall possess and use radioactive
*"t.iaf aescriU"a in-Items 6,7, B ana g of ti,is license in accordance with staremenB, represensr,ions, and
pio.J*.. contained in the documents listed below. The Deparrnent's regulalions shall goveltr,nless thc
statements, representatiot$, and procedures fur the liceusee's application and correspondence ale more
restricdve than ttre regulations.
(a) The application with anachments dated May 12, 1984, signed by George H- Ducker as modified by
the letter with auachmenS dated July 5, 1984, signed by Keith L- Elliot'
O) The lerer with anactrmenrs dated March 23,1987, sigued by Keith L. El[on.
(c) The amendment application with attachments dated January 12, 1989, srgned by Jim Strong,
Environmeatal Engineer.
(d) The letters with attachments dated March 1, 1989 and May 9, 1989, both signed by Jack L' Jolley-
___{eL_ The tefter with attschments deted Novemben 7, 1rgg4, Decenrber 14, 1994, aud January 13, 1995,
s;1 signed by \{illiaur J. Almas rcgarrling stabilizationr storage aud processing of PblFe filter
cake-
r0.
11.
12.
t3.
SlBle of Califomia-Healtlh and WCllsrc AsCncY
14.
15.
15.
t7.
18.
r9_
20.
2t.
RADIOACTIVE MATEBIAL LICENSE
Supplementary Sheet
Depdrtmsnt ol Healttr Senrices
Page3 af 4 pages
License Numberr,-..732(''36
Amendment Number; -l(l
(a) The Radiation safery officer in rhis program shall be Jack Jolley.
O) The Alternate Rafiation Safety Officer is \is program shdl be WiUiam J. Almas.
Sealed sources described in Sub-items A, B, aud C of this license shall be tesaed for leakage and/or
coutamination at intervals not to exceod three years-
The following individuals are authorizcd to collect wipe test samples of sealed sources possessed under this
license using leak test kits accqrtable to the California Departrnent of Health Services:
(a) thc Radiation SafetY Officer
(b) qualified individuals designated in writing by the Radiation Safety Officer
euanritarive analyrical issays for the purpose of tests for leakage and/or contamination of seded sources shall
bL performed only by percons specificalty authorized to Perform that service.
Records of leak test results shall be kept iu uuis of microcuries and maintained for inspection. Records uray
be disposed of following Department inspection. Any leak test revealirig the piesence of 0.005 microcurics
o, *oie of removable radioactive material shall be reponed to the DePartment of Healh Scrvices, Radiologic
Healrlr Branch, 501 N. 7th Street P.O. Box 942732, Sacra.mento, CA 94234-7320, withiu five days of the
test. This reporr shall include a description of dre clefeetive source or device, the resulcs of the test, and thc
corrective actiou taken.
lstallation, relocation, and inirial radiation survey of devices containing radioactive material described'in
this license may be performed by the following individuals:
(a) JackJolley
The licensee shall coutiuct a physical inveruory every six mouths to account for all sealed sources andlor
devices received aad possessed under the licerse- Recor& of the inventories shall be mainrained for
inspection, and may be disposed of following Departrneut inspection.
Rafioarfive materials shall be used by occrrpational workers in suci a manner that the ilose limits
specifred in Title fO Code of Federal Regulations, Part 20, Subpart C (Sections ?n.YnL through
20.1208) sre not *ceeded.
Ihe licensee shall nonitor oeculntional exposures to radiation and shall supPly atrd require the use of
individual monitoring devices by persounel as required by Title 10, Coile of Federal Regulatious, Part
20, Sectiou 20.1502 (a).
22.
Srate of Cal-fornia-Heahh and Wellare Agcnct
HADIOACTIVE MATERIAL LICENSE
Supplementary Sheet
D6portmcnt of llealtfi Soruicai
Page4 of 4 Pages
LicorlseNumber: 3??9-'1q
Amandrn6nt Number: -lQ
The licensee shall monitor occupational htalrcs of radiosdive mstcrisl bn and assess the committed
eftechve dce equivalent to, indr'viduals who may have exceeded or are likely to excred, the limits
;p".fu in Tiu;10, code of f,'ederal Regulatiors (cIR), Part 20, Section 2o-r5o2 (b)- Suitable atrd
tir""fy measlrerrmts used for determination of zuch intemal e:rposures shall be pertrormed as specitied
by 10CFR 20.Yl0a.
For the State Department of Health Servlces
D-Et By: - "'
Radiologic Health Brsnch
P.O- Box 94.2732,
Letters dated November 7,1994; December 14,1994; and January 13, 1995 regarding
Molycorp Radioactive Material License Amendment 10
Molycarp lnc.
P.O. Box 124
Mountain Pass. Calilornia 92366
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: (61 9) 856-2253
I: '.'..',i .!,t\.
'/rtr
UHOCALTi
MOLYCORP
lvlr. Edgar Bailey
Chie(, Califomie Departnent of Health Services
Radiological Hcal6 Bramh
7l+744 PSusEr
Smranrento, eA 95814
DearMr. Baihy:
Rs Amcnfincnt lo &Iifornia Radimtive Marsial Liceose # 3229 for
Stabilizrtion, Storage aill Pmccssing of Ffo/Fe Hlter Cake
Enclosed plcasc End two @) copies of an agplicariou br Amendment to Molycmp,Inc. Radiorctirc
Ivlstcrisl License # 3229- The amendnreat applicatior rs submined pur$ant io California Health and
Safety Cotb, Division Z). Tbe amendmert application is fil€d at the rcqucst of thc Radiological lftanh
Branch saff. Thc rcque$ was made in a meeting on October 13, 1994.
As you are awarc, Molycorp, Lrc. is plarrning lo srabilize, store and feed o process some 17,0(I) barels of
Pb/te filter cake gener:ated as pat of the Monrtain hss lanthanide separarion recovery pmccss. Tlr
stsbilized filter cake will eidter be feed n process for recovery of tanthanide's urd les( or diryased of otr
sitc. Thc approval of tlre sabilization, storage and proccssing operatiors will be rhe cod resulr of a long
reguhrcry proccss. Stabilizarion openations are lo bc pcrfumed according ro a Cmceph'al Agreefient
with thc Qlifornia.Morney General's Offrce, Departmcnr of Toric Subsrances ard l,Iol)rcorp. The
detaitcd poccss descriptiur ard Health and Safety Plan are presenred in rhc rhcumgrt'T.evised
Alplication fu hc Emergency Permit for Stabilizarion of FiIrcr Cake- dared October, 199a, prepared byprirelhauscr Co4poratbn for Molporp. This document is auached ro rlrc eocloscd Radioasdve Malerial
License Amendment and is incorporared by rcfcmcc"
The Lbense Amendmenl applicarion and T,mergelrcy Persrit" address the kg), issues of radiation
gotection of workers and ttre public, prorcction of the envimnmeot and deconuilnination proccdurrs,
Please be aware thar Molycorp is under court order o cx@itiusly sabilizc and pocess or dispose of rhc
Pb/Fo filter cake. For this rearcn, Molycoqp requests rhe arnendment application be reviewod at )owearliest opportunity, so thar processing can Fmeed. Feel frce lo contact me with any qrrstirxrs you Eay
haveregarding this arileodrnenr application or il1ou ned addiriornl informatior.
GE Earon Vanachracnt
J.O. tandrettr {arrachmenr
R.A. Segn w/anachrnerrr
It{.A. Smith Vanachmenr
Mi ttelhauser Corp., Vattachment
Rogers Associaes, w/att*hmeot
C Molycorp lnc.
P.O- Box 124
Mountain Pass, California g2866
Telephone: (619) Bs6-Z2Ot
Facsimile: (61 s) E5e22sg
UlIOCAL@^
MOLYCOHP
Docem er l4,l99t4
It&-Pelepabl
Ilealdr ftyrnd.s
Glifornia Dqparmcot of llesl& S€rr iccs
Rsdioaffive Health Brarch
P.O- Box 94;2732
Sacrarrnnto, CA 94ru?t2l
Dcarltfr. Pael:
RE: Responses to Rcview Commenb for Amendment to Radimcrive Maieriats Liceus #3}JlgrMolycorp
The Radiologic Hcatth Branch of fire Cslifornia l{ealrh Departrnenr (Radiologic Heakfr) rcviqred arrd co6men6on thc Amendmeut to Radioactive Itfaterials Liense # szi. me plrrpo* of rhc amerdmcut is to documetrt andhelp cns,re propcr use of learlrtron filrcr caIG rhat is D bc stauiuzJa i* mr* ,*.r-r*ry?rr"rhanide,s. REviErv
trJffi:;ffffratuted in a lerrcr dated Novenrber 16, rgg4and were received ul rrr"iyr.rp, Irrc. (uotporp) or
R€sponscs b Radblogic Ir8alttt arc corlain€d beton'. Rcqponses to rhe conrmens arc in the uder prcsenrcd ia ttreffi""ffiHH*Y#: 15, lee4- Radiologb Heatrhcommenrs arBprEsenM in iraric wirh Molycorp
l ' seaion 4'l of yow submissbn imPlhs rhat the fihcr cake contains abow s0% moistwe and. ilnre is wtu freewater? what *eps are u*tn n nuk swe ilur dn! vrater thu lewes ,i iiiara fitor cak is rutconumitnted or crceeds pemtissible concenradons.
As noted in section 4-0 of thc amendmeut applicarion, pffie filEr cake cmmirrs atr ar€N*4gemoiso'e contenl of 5M by weighr TIle 50% nnisnue mes- not normally rcsun fu the presenceof free water' watcr is held in the interstial spaccs of rhc frlter cake, but it is possige ,;,ar frEBurater will be prescnt in a mrall percenage of rhe barrels due ro variability fu tbe fiIredngo'.cess' For rt'ig reason,l![otrycorp's warer bararpc salcrrlations pescnred in Appendir E of $re'R'eviscd Application tu Emergensy Permir fo sauirizarion of Filrer cake- assunes 12% of thedrurn-s conlqit 12% free u,ar€f,. rn ordcr o_""""*pii.t-=-otiriori-, tlrough hydradm , anadditional I,165 gallons of warcr per day u/r[ be rec;i; ,o ,t" p*"o* Unanriiipar,d smatlquantitics of ftEe warcr fmrn rtre filter catce will repon n i sump for usc in ure sabitizadonp[ocess as notod ia rhc amendmcntappticatioo
Mr.PetePatel
CalifomiaDeHmenl of ltrealft Senices
Radimctivc Hcalh Branch
Paglc2
At each stage of thc ptocess. tlu ptcntial ,rw&ds ttw, h evdhtatcd and fuessed, at proessing waailea
(t) nwl produ* dust ia tlu processing arca, (2) spilk ilring vaatfu operatbns cottld rzsult ia relearse oJ
du*s andlor radon for4hrcr Foducts to tlu cnviromant tlvough vcnfilsrion.rr.rr€ar erl,tutlr,. andlor (3)
looe aatominationlrom anl othcr proc.N ruy lcad to teluses ercecding qpllrcfrh lirrirs. Subrrlrit a W
de5rriptbn as n wlut type of hfrznrds aN duing each $tep of tlu process. ahd wLd ileps aft takcn n
sdegrurd against them la the eveil lau fu.tc.rmirc yow submittal alreafi include,s ttn rcesuy
infuroztrba, plcax refuencc tlu applicable ectbn(s).
TIrc Noveurber 14, 1994,license amendment application provided a descriptiar d the pomsses
and the relaM hazads illd dsl(s" Gamma doce gssessment and an estimares of tho rulease d
radon are giver in Sectbru 11.4 and llj- Ibrveve& tlris rcsponse pmvid€s a morc detailed and
cohesive desoiprion, wirh some rofcreoce to ths uiginal applil:afion"
Table I of this submittal piovidcs a listing of ilrc prmes steps, the notablc chmteristics of thc
rnatedal that will conuol emissions, and brief indicafons d the rc$lts o[ the assessurents. The
pmcessing of thc material is dessibed in dclail in Secdon 9 of the aracndment applicuioo
The filter cBIo is gesettly saurated with moisuse, and pobably contains sonre frce watEr.
Therefore, the stabiliation of fire frler cakc wilf uke place on a specially cor$nrcrc4 cuted"
concrete slab, oonsructpd fcr corrfrrement and containmeil of all liquids. Frurtermorc, as
idcntifrcd in Section 9 ttre pad is dcsigned b contain precipilation and ro albrr colledftn of all
liquiOs in sumps. All liquids wiUbe used in thesabilizingoperatbn-
As noted in rhe stabilizetion tasks in Table I CI6hs 2 n O, tho materid will hE moist- Ihe
stabilization prccess iS a urctproc*s, and em though the frlter cakc iS presently wct, tddiEonal
waer will be sdded hause of additioru of dry stabitiziqg materials. Shce thc materid is
presently saruratcd and the smbilizationprocess requires that thc material be prcoessed w€t, therc
should bc essentially no airbmnc dust. 'Ihe sabilization processing will tab plrc during he
carly part 0[1995, duing coltl o cml conditions wlrere IIErE will be minimd wapor'ation o &y
orn rcsidusls ou lhc cquipment or wort pad- The only potentid fm aiiborne dust during the
stabilization of the liltsr cake will be from the dry matcdals (not radioactive marerials) added m
dre filter calte lo stabilize ir Even though tlrese marcrials are not radioastive. they wix be
designed to minimizcrulease of any dust
ndnp.doc
tvIr. PetePael
Cnlifornia DeparUne$t of ltrealth Seryices
Radingmive itlealth Brarh
EagE 3
Tsble I. Assessment of Hazards Associated witlt Processiru of Filer Cake
l. TtansportofFihrCake to
Stabilization Pad
DumpfuU dnrms to Stab Pad
forprocessing.
3. roading ro rtg Mill
4. Pub MllOperation
5. Packagc in Sling Birts
6. TlangporttolVarehorrseB
7. Storage in \\rarehouse B
Thansport o Chcmical Plant
forprocessing.
Process to recover Ph/Ln
Maerial near saurratiou" Csrfined in
barrels If spillod wiltbcconfineil
iruterisl Samupd. Dumped in
confirrc{ cutedarca. Open area no
Rn accumulation (b).
Ivhterial saturatp4 timited stoclpite.
Workin confinod. crrrbed aea- Area
curbed, witr Iined mmp. Opcn alea"
noRn acornulatiol (b)
Wet malerial in Pug IvfIL fuEa
cufte4 wilh lined smp. Open arca,
no Rrr accumulation (b). Any qpi[ed
warr rwf'cled into prooess.
Itlloist granuler matcrial ArEa
cuted" with lined srmp. Opca rcs,ao Rn apcrrmularisr
Granulatcd/pelletized marerial. Not
readily dispcrsDta Confirre and
rctrieve spilagc.
Packaged in sling bins. Tranryuted
on ruc\ on sila If bag ruphtrEtr,
isolatc 8!ea, protmdve clodring,
pickup.
Confincd in sling bins. Relativcly dry
granular material. If bags torn parh
tlrem.
See usk6.
Process wirh exisring frcilirics.
Process in la{ge building, similar O
Warehousc B. llence, since only have
small fracrion of matffial prrcseil at a
time minimd radou buildup/releasc-
Pxmess air frOm dust control re;
opening sling bins and process
opcrations with bag horse.
t{orihtlo
No
Itfufuual
(a) Secr
115
Mnimal
(s)
No Itlfioimal
(a)
lib I{o Mnimal
(a)
No No Itfinirnal
(a)
l.Io No ?
l.Io Cont No
(e)
9.
!frNo Minimd
(a)
Irfinor (a)
(o
}finimal
(a)
Minimal
(a)
No
Mr.Pc&PaEI
Califomia Deparunent of llealth ServicEs
Radioacrive llealth Branch
rue4
Table l. Assesmont of Ilazards AssosiatEd with Plocossing of FftEr Cako (Continuod)
r0. Dccontaminarion of thc pad Surfidal conlaminsliuL
andeguipmonr
Foopas
a-
Iib I'ib Minfuel
(a)
b.
.L
Tlre gamma exposure is less than about 50 rrem/hr EDE. Bas€d on up m lm0 hffis d
exposue (greater rtran projecr duration of stabilization wort) the maximum dose is 50 rem
EDE, s/elt below license requirements- The average alosc ratc will bc bwer than 50
urerrvhr in the wort area
Tbe Ra-226 concsrrradon in less tran l/100 of the uranium conoentr'tatioo. Thcre will be
minimal radon producriorr, :he radon produced will be confined in tho filErcab sirce thc
material is wer The work is in an oper arca and rhe minimal radoil thal is produced and
released will not acctmulate in wo* areas
Tlp assessrnent of radon rcumularion in Waretrorse B is given h Section lfJ4. The
maximum projected concentrntion of radon a a small fraction of the DAC
The asscssment of gamma &sos around Warchouse B is given in Section ll5. Tte
garnma dose at dre Guard Shrh fie cl@st Iocafion with extensive mcupamy is 0.5
ruernlyrEDE.
Ths srabilized frlter cako will be prooessed in exising facilitics uung existing trDessesr
Dusy'vcntilation conuol will be provided whae rhc bags of filer cafte are opened Thc
.icntilation air and airbome effhrent ftom thc operadng equipment will tle focessed
throug[ a bag house.
.OrrF;
tvIr.PqcPatcl
California oepartment of Hefllh Selvices
Radioactive Heat& Branch
Pags 5
hocess Tasls I rtrough 5 wiU all rake place at Ete stabilization pad. Since the assessment fr
radoo rcumuluion ii S""rioo ll.a indicares lhar rhere witl bB minimsl radou sumuhtim
*f,* af of the sabilizcrl filter cakc is storcd in Warchouso B. the relesso of radoo.will. not qcat"
ero6sure prtrlerns arourrd thc outsirlc sabilizetioo parf whcre only a srualt Eacrioo d the
.i*irl-ilff be present at a given ftna fury releascd radm will te dispersed in the opcn
amqhere'
The above faciliry design, materials characterisrics, and prccess prucedures srE thE''si-q fr thc
assEssmeots fa' water,-dusL and radon in Tabb 1, fA TaskS f Urougt 5. In assmiario-n with
rh€se ct;a.rcreri51ics and procedrues, ilre -stabilizariut woft area- shatl be a auuolled ud
arEs, wirh requiremens fr use of personal protcctive clotlring and equipmcat ff CnSUIG
minimizing e*posun* via boh oral or inhalstbn inrake- ftrthe'rrrore,lddycup shall perform
radiariou i*irori"g as identifired in Sectims I and fl of thc Norrembcr application frr
amendmenrandlteru 9 of this response.
Assossments f6r exposrrc ro crtcfiul gamma radiatiou are given in Secrim IfJ of thc
applt""dg4 of amenimcnl Th6 asscssme$ts indicaE tlrat UE average exrernal gamma dosc il
work areas related ro rhe processing of rhe material witl be hss fun 50 urem/tprs (EDE) ard
thal &e exposures aroun0WUetrOuse B (even if all of the marerisl is st0rcd thcre ar One timE)
wiu bo bss umfi about 5 fircm/yr EDE Th6 dos ar rlre warBhouse door arc cstimaEd lo b
about 80 mreru6r (EDE), basetl orr full-rime ccupanc? rluonghout a 2000 horr ltct Thc dos
arc based on Oe rvirmOSgrm-o and Microskyslrine comprter cod€s fr,olrl Grorre Enginecring'
with 'rerifyins exposrure ralp measutrEments where tlrc umse is prcecody SUCiL
As indicacd in Tablc f of mis rcslDtrse there is essentially no potential fcr release of wsrcr
borae marerial fg6 Tajlcs 6 tp 9. Thc transporr of tlre marerial in sling biris Cfasks 6 and t) will te
on Molycorll roa6s within the faciliry. fire gmnular m pclleizotl maEriat will bE confuaed in
slirrg bins. if "pitt"g" oocurs from accidenu,lvlolyco4p shall conml the area tD If,Eveil facking
or airp"r=i* of ir,- and ir shall be immcdiatcly cleaned qp. The gabilizod utaterial will bB
pdocessed in exising facilities, which arc basically ousi& d the scope of this liceuse
amerdment
Tasks 6 ro 8 witl not prodlrce airbome dusL as indicarEd in Tablc l. The materigl wilf be
confined iu sling bins. The stabilizcd frltrr calse will be in the form of granutes or pellen. If
bqgs Bre rcirtentally torn, thc material will nor be readily dispcrsible and can be rapidly cl€aned
,plrirt essentially no exposrre ul pcrsonnel (may be prudent to wcar rcspiratory protcctioa).
As previously nord. rhc poenrial forradon relcasc and accurnulation in Warchouse B $ask 7) is
addressed in Section 11.4. As ftlendfied in Table l, thc radon erpo$rEs fa all lasks are
pojected ro bo wcll bclow tbe DAC Howcver, radon monitoring prcccducs ue givot in
Iesponso to hquiry 7.
Tbc porendal for exposre to exteffial gamma radiarion is gren in tlrc column on the right il
Taible l. i{s previo0sly irxticatcd a corsarvativc ssscs$Dent of expostres indicaEs trcy will bc a
srnall fraction of the roquircments of l0 CER 2(). The principles of As l-ow As Ressonabb
Achievable (ALARA) will be u-s€d to minimizc the garnnra expo$rcs" The applicatiott of
ALARA will includo minimizing tre contact of personnel witr ttre filter cake and minimizing tho
ocqryancy time in arcas whcre large qrnntitics of ttre filrcr cakc arc stgod.
red4doc
.3.
Mr.PecPatol
Califomia Departmerrt of Healttt Serices
Radioacrive llealth Brarrch
Frge6
In srrmmary, sssessmcnt of rhc operarions irdicates that the preliminary pathway of radiation
expostrrg or risk is to extesral gamma radiation Thc porcntial fr vaterbune releascs a[d
"irbo*" releascs and inhalarion are minimized drr O thc dostB of ttre sabilization hcility aul
the ctra*teristics of he marerial. Furthermoni thc doscs duo to exernal gamms erymurc fu
reasonablo exposrc scenarios are gerrcrally lcss than ofle-tenth of bE occnpatiooal cfiP6tle
critsriao[lOCFRZl. -
Undil item 5 of tlre applicatian, yot luve lisred lYillian l. Abnas os tlu sh wer- Are dditbrul u.wx
traingd a &at with tln radiological hatards wfur coasidcratioa? Pla;ase ehborac. Thc trainilW to hc
provided must illlctttdc floniriariil wtth ilrc followdng Stote and Fcdcral regdations: a) Califomia Radiariod
Canwl Regulatiors, Tiilc 17, fubchapur 4. b) 10 CFR PNt 20. 'Staildards fw Prorcaion Aeains
Rdiation" and c) I0 CFR Psrt 71. *Paabgttg of Radioactivc Muerial for Tranpd and Transporutba d
Ra/lioaeliye Matsial U adcr Ccr uh Conditior{ -
Appro-ximarety ?0 pmplc will tre involved wi& tlrc sabilization of PhrFe fiIer cake inclutling
equffienr operabrs and bborers. Fd this rullon, the speciEc listing of individuals a$ u$$,
orher than those direcdy responsible fq the maintenance of safo work prctices and thc
mooitoring of radiation erposurc is impractical There.fore, f/olyco,rp included a descdption d
the trainingprogram proposed for individuals invotvedin ficproccssirtg mhandling of thcPh/Fe
filtcr cekg wirh rcspect D mdiologicsl trazards" task and wott procedrres. The outline of the
progmm is included in thc Ecerse amerdmenr application as Figue lGl.
Page S-3 ad54 ildicalc.s rlu Mittellnrcer Corporation of Lagum (MCL), Califorab will provddc tlc labor
and equipment to rccomplish stobilization of tle PblFc wasu. Is tluir project managcr planning to obtain
training to lutdle radioactive materiak ander Molycorp's licerulr? Plcarse commil n lwiag all otlur tscrs
from MCL receive appropriatc taining with respect a radiabn sdetl.
The Mitdebaus project manager will receivo radiologic raining as thscribed in Ue
rcqponse m Iri:m 3.
Appeadix E-of tlu application dcscribes creathg a wdter hl$u tlat will collel ilw liquidlrinntc ftom
coruaintunt pd xunps and bc reused iz tlv lreameil proces dwkg gabilizatbn. Holt do you cnsre tltat
100% ol tlu watq will be it*orporatcd back iruo ilu procelis willnw looshg a poflion of ir? Is any residtnl
slwry disurdcd tlat nq lta,vc water as a ba*? Pler.lz clabrate.
rds described in Attachment 9-A of the liceuse amendment application, thc Eearnent sysBn
design procludcs the rclease of liquids from rbe pad- Page 9-Af pccifically describcs rmrer
con&ainment facilities. Appcndix C to Anastunenr 4 contaircd within the Rsvised
Application forErnugency Permit for Stabilization of Filter Cah. Ocrob€r , 1994 submitred
rc thc Department of Toxic Subsances Control inclgdes design rlawings of water mllectiqr
- and connol facilities. This document has beil incorporated by referencc ino rtre licensc
amendment application and is in )our posscasion. Appendix D-l prwides an waluarion d
the adequacy of Ute pad and the basis fc warer balarce calcul;uions dernonsrating rn
accumulation of liqud or slurry as part of rhe stabilization orpenetion
Providc tB with yrow criteda or suidcline fur disposing tiusste wder to vw* or soil ro fu discodcd dsizg
tlu stohilizatior process. If otlw nntlnd(s) are enployed, tlnn addrcss tlumwilh refcrcw o quaafiics andtlp of matgials, lewls of radiodctivity, a &saiptinn ol thc ruarner and canditbns of disposat, and,
ewluation of eavironnualal impaas and applicable contol gocedures.
5.
ndagdc
Mr.P€rcParcl
California Deparrnent of Health Services
Radioactit o IIEalth Branch
PagcT
8.
As iudicated in thc abovc disussion and in the liconso amcndrnent applicatiur, all water will
bo lrcorpqarod inro snbilircd product as a ruult of srabilizatiorr rtivities' Assuming rlre uso
of 20 -gpm ft a ?A hour p€riod O *coruplistr desontamination of the concrere pad ood
equipmCnt, approximarely 2E,00 gallous of decontaminarion water codd be produced as e
result d decorrtanrination efforts, Water from ttre process witl tro dccanrcd arrd ftcd to &e
chemical prwessirrg leach tanks as6ocisl6al with the ongoing r€covery of lantharide prodrcB 8t
tho sia._fhc small volune of solids gerrcrated ftom decontaminilion effon wiII be stabilizd
using hand lools to form a mabilized rraterial . This sabilizod filter cake wilt bs handlctl in an
;rr"n[cal mranncr r &e material gencraEd in tbe mechanizcd opefatioo ad will bo utUrntety
ftrl o gocess. lilolyoorp also hss the optiou of dispming of solitlified wasfiE by sttipPiqg O a
Iicersed disposal fecility, as ncccsstry.
Dwkg stotatcolstfrilizcdfltcr cakcs,lww doyottaccounthr any eavironmenml corditbns tlut nt1@ect
*rrtai*nnt? How b >ou plaa to monitorfor Rfun gds ia thc soragc facility? Pbase provide a deniled
rcryo.dse-
Environmenal condiriors will not effect conqinment of slabilized filicr cake. The potential br
lquid generation and pruvention of dusr conaining radionuclides has boen describc.I in thep
respotuler as well as tlre Iicense amendment application
Secrion Il.4 of &e license application provides an evaluation of potential tadon accrrmulstios in
rtre wsrEhousD during stor-age. This cvaluation indicatcs ttrar the conccntrariot of radon wihin
thc warehousE will be urelt bclow rte derived air corpentration (DAC) and tt€ EPA
recornmendod concentratiotr Of rador fu rcsfubrres. To enmrc the adequate monitoring of
radon concenradons" Irilolycorp wilt add a passive radon monilorirrg comporcnr n ilre radiatioo
moritoring program. I:ndauer high sensitiyiry ?ad-Trac" radon derrcors wiII bE used ar the
foilowing locations and monitr frequency.
Three collocated detectors at ilre stabiliud filter cake warclpuse,
Three collmteddctcctors ar the guard house, as backgutnd
Tiryo dstcctors ou efuher side of thc srabilizatbs pad druing opcrndons
Radon monitors win be collected rnonthly tluring stabilization rctivfics. If radon rneasurements
are below 0.1of DAC, rn@sur€mcnls will be taken quarterly the&afrr.
Tabk I, Emcrgenq Responsa Orgoizarion plan of your applicat'na fues tnt lkt ar1 radiobgbd pcromel.
It is ttre deryr,Dailf s pltq that eithcr tlu radiation safety oficcr or aa allernatc wlo is lully trained wilh
rdiobs'tcal cttcrgenry be notifud inmediately and, ba included ia such a pldn- Dwing such cmcrgercics,
commit to ,u.Wing ow inspection agenq 'n Sonhenn Calilornia region. KimWong at [phone]. and
(ilO) E52-7s50 (24 lwur runber) -
Winiam J. Almas, RSO and alternae Jack Jotrey will bc sddod b Tablc I of ttrc CootinEercy
Plan to ensure radiological hazards are consillered in the eveil of safety or environmcntal
accidenrs. Also, Dr. Kim Wong wiu bc sddcd to ensrrt that California kdiologic llealth has
Doon nodfied.
Please corunil to naintaiaing remr& of personael nuniloring. bioassays and otler applicoblc records
waildblefor iwpectbn by tlu Departmcil. Pbale nole illp,t fusittut t $nternal aad elernal per l0 CFR 20)
9.
ndrsPdoc
Mr. PerBkEl
California Doparunont.of Healft Services
Radioactivc llealth Brrnch
PageS
records af pcranul msst b naiild,irad indefi,nitaty. Baniaget or otlur otrol$tical labffioics rccepnbk
a ilu Depuncnl caa fu t*d o provide bbasq seniccs. lf bnathing mnc noaiwing will b doru by
Malycorp for iucnul bse asesnunt, providc proce&pes lor use sf apprupriate rcfercnu gourus aad
ittstrmlr;nx usenffi tutdyris. Tln 15 uglT as an investigatbn level mcds w bc upresrd, h tmu of tlu NIoil DAC tor occttpotiorul erysluu-cs. Wc suggest an investigaiorul lcvel be vt at 0.A NI. All r{erencasb dosirnEtr! slould bc ,rndE to tu tttut I0 CFR Wt 20 as horporaud in ilE Califtrnia Ctodd ol
ResularionsqTale l7).
Fersoiliel muritoring rmsds including bimssay. ccrtsfication of raining antl dre( qpplilablr
remds will be kept on file at ilre Ittlolporp facility and avaihble fr inpectior by Radbl%fo
Heslth staff. These records t iU be kept indefinircty in compliancc with provisions of l0 CFR 20
Assessment d intcrnal radiarion ttoses will be based on a comprehensive prqgram ircIuding rhc
folhwingcorrponcnts
a) Prorcctive rrork practiccs describod in Sectbtr l0 of the license nmondmenl This program
includes the use of appropriate potective oquipnrent and clorhing ard tlrc gohibirioo o[
activities tlrar could result in ingestion of radimctive rnarcrial*
b) Continued evaluation of moisture within msterisl dunng srabilizatim 1p ensrrc moisr
material resulting in little dus and small probabiliry of air-borne du$.
c) Air srmpling using high volume arca samplers and personnal pumps as descdbe.t in Setion
10 d Sre license application. Rcspirators wiU be usod by worters if significant lead r uranium
is forurd inair samphs
Tlre investigatiorr Ievel fa arr sampling will bc ser ar l0% of rtre DAC where tte DAC is basEd
on the relativc conenmrdons o[ uranium, thorium, and decay producB (e.g., Th-230, Pb2l0,
and Pa-231) in ttre filtcr cate. Based upon availablc arralysis of Bre filtcr c.ke ilte DAC is
expected tobe about 5 E-f2 uci/cc.
Air samplc equipmffit rrill be catibratEd ar lcast uice per year- Samples wi1 be counled on sie
to facilitate quick turn around and resporse times. Radiarion dcNecmrs will be calibrarcd ar basttwice pcr year using NTIS trrceable sourrces. Function checks on equiprnenr wil be perf66med
and documen,r6
"1196g,
dzily when in use"
d) A bimssay prograrn will bc insdnrrcrl m provide an additional sssessrnenr of uranium inake.
AnaIyUcaI analysis of ttre fittcr cakc indicated that tre uranium in the filEr cake is preseot irt arcladvely insoluble form of IRS8. Therefoc, the uranium solubility ctas is considered to bE y
as def,rned in l0 CER 20. Howcver, unccrudnty remains 8s b dE solubility o[ rhe lrgnium
compounds, and they may be more soluble than Class y. Ctass y slubte rnasium rcsrls in
bioassay being a pou method of evaluation of exposrres because of very low transfer meffisienBto udnq Therefore, drine analysis is considered a secondaryr means of murituing inrale dradiorrslides, atl-d air monitoring and source conDrol are considered pnmary mems of oonrrolarrd assessrncol Personnel involved wirh the srabilization proccss will be uine rcsrod prior oinitiadon of the project ard at one wee& intervals during the pmjcct for ttrose with rhe gle.15stpotential fu exposne. Urine analysis will be performed quarreAy'rhorcaftfr, m inOiriUuatsinvolvcd widr rhe srorage ard processing of stabilized lilrer caxe
ndrp.Aoc
Mr. PercPatel
Cslifoffiia Deparunent of Ilcalth Services
Rsdioactive Ilealth Branch
Page 9
lvblycorp proposes an investigation leral of 5 og& Ilis concenrarion equarcs ro rypuorimarclyI ALI fcr rs"anium (5 day pedo4 I hom day), u 4 ALI fs a 30 day sampliog pedorl
NnEGiG.4Et4, Interprclation of Bimsay lvleasrements,IJssard el al., 1990). Ffue uglt irpppced bessuscof lhe signifiesnt variatioru in concenrations of uranium in rrincexpecrcd rtrrb diet human physrotogy and analyical rariaEons (l,tedley er aL, Hmlgr PhFics. flhtn)dWinq H6alrlr.Plrvsi,cs. Voil" Il, Pg. ?3I, 1965). Thc potgsrial fr nunerous .tabe pmirive,
results can be expected if a hus invcstigative limit is ser lrilolyoorp coorcnds &at 5 qgll is
sttrcbndy prot+dve becausc of the retatively short drnation of rhe statiUzarion p*o.*s r*ere
significant exlrcsure is most likely, and thg olrcr componenrs of the radiation ProtEction pmgram
woting 5 minimiz€ gxpo,qnrt;
IO. Tlu possessioa limits requcsrcd utdcr item 8 oltlc applicubn stmlt inchtde all swcc ,rurqialE (Le., rsntnatetials, ,natcrbls ia pmcess wd stomge, scrap natcdals, and vmlstsEl Plase con{um
The possession limirs tisred in ircm 3 of Form RH 20SO (12lEZ) wcrc calcularEd to include all
raw matcrisls. uasEs, matcrials in procm u associated equipmart and materislg assmhredwith ilte sebilizatioo, storqge and processing of stabilized fitter cake adrtressed within tds
amenfunent application. Sealed $urces used on the prWerty are irrclnrled in rhc odginal
lbense applicatiorr and slc notrcpeated om ftis lhcsse arnendmeurfum.
ll. Upon complctioa of ilu project, tlu deparmut wtst bc rudfud. s that any &umnissbni^g dndhconaninatbn (D &. D) plm cat be reviewcd bt ttg Deparuw-nt prior to intpktrcnmdott. yow
commiuuttt to asc dcpruncntal gaida Dccon-I is not fu suffcicu to proccedwilh a D &D opaaion. A
formal reque* must befiled owlining thc pmce&rcs and scopc of tfo yogrant
A description o[ the mealrmss m be tal<en b decontaminac equipmort associated with ttpstabilization and storage of filrer cakc has beco pruvided as Sectioo 13. Tte durorix dstsbili4dom activities is only 70 days and fc this reason an ryprovod konramination ailddecommissionin8 plan musi be in place a short time afrcr *riv-irics are comurenced. U 6cDcparrnent has noted specific &ficiencies in Section l3.O these comrn€trrs arc requesletl 59 rhnl
Ivfolycorp can sddress hese deficierrcics.
If you havc @mments or noed additional infg55ffi66s, please call me at lour earlies qpporomiy nt our MourrtainPass faciliry. Tho rclephone numberis (6t9) er6,,220l,FxL2T!.
}YJATI
cE GErtm
f/f.4" SEfr
mdnp"doc
Silrcerely,
Molycorp,lnc.
A Unocal 3ompany
6z750 Bailey RoadMoui'ltaln ftrs, Ellrornrl 92388rel@hone l51S 85G22Oi
Facslmlte (619 856.2255
UITIOcAL@.
MOLYCORP
January 13,1995
Mr. Pete Patel
Health Physicist
Califoruia Departrnerrt of Health Services
Radioactive Health Branch
P.O. Box 942732
Sacramerrto, CA 94?34-7320
Dear }v[r, Patcl:
RE: Respouses to Review Comrnents for Amendment to Radioactive
Materials Liceusc # 3ZZg, Molycorp, Inc.
Tho Radiologic Health Branch of the California Health Department (Radiologic Health)reviewed and commented on Molycorp, Inc. (Molycorp) rrsponses to the first round ofcomrnents by the Radiologic Health Departrnent regarding rhe Amendment Application
for Radioactive Materials Licensc #3229.
The Health Department comments are dated December 22,lgg4.
Responses to Radiologic Health are contained below. Responses to the comments are inthe orderpresented in the Radiologic Health lener of December ZZ,lgg4. RadiologicHealth cofrmenB are presented irr italic with Molyeorp responses bclow for ease ofrwiew.
I- Item 3- of our letter required that additional users be trained and list them on thelicense. llle undersrand that is nat pracrical lo list approximately 70+ assr-s on thelicense, however, we iwist that supervisory users sutbmit a Traiiing and Experience' Form RH 2050Afor evaluarion to the department. The trainingprogram submitted
IMr. Pete Patel
Hedth Physicist
Califomia Departrnent of Health Services
Radioactive Health Branch
Page2
by you shall serte as an excellent guidelinefor irdividuals workingunder the
supervision of authorized users. The department will not allow yor ta auiltorde and
evaluate training credentials as a resdt of an approved training progran At a
futwe date, you moy submit a requeslfor the department's approval to maintainan
in-house trainingprogrnn (copies of Form RH 2050A are enclosed).
Attached are eleven Form 2050A forms presenriug the ocperionoe of
Mttelhauser supervisory persorurel involved with the Pb/Fe flter cake
stabitization project. Also enclosed arc lssrrmes from the two
additional Molycorp employees who will be involved in the monitoring
and health protection for radiological e4posurcs on site. In addition to
the educational and experience qualifications listed on the Form
2050A's, at a minimum, all personnel will receive the radiological
training ouflined on Figure I,0.1. Molycorp supervisory personnel will
receive 40 hours of radiation training by Certified Health Physicists
designed for Radiation Safety Officers prior to the comrnencement of
stabilization activiries.
2- In your response under item g (c) ofyour letter, based ulnn analysis of the filter cake,
you irtdicated the DAC @erived Air Concentration) to be 5E-I2uCi/cc. Please
explain (ifneeded, show by calculation) as to how didyou arrive to this quantity?
Molycorp has proposed an investigatiou level of l0% of the "effective"
DAC for U-238 and othermdionuclides contained within the filtercake.
The *effectivd' DAC is a theoretical sum of concentrations that
represeuts ttre highest concentration of U-238 and other radionuclides
contained in fihercake that, if inhaled would result lrr.gsyo of 1 ALI
over 2,000 hours- The concenkation of U-238 was obtained tluough
rial and effor. Other radionuclides are assumed to be in proportion to
radionuclides found in filtercake through radiochemical analysis
referenced in the Amendment Application. The attached Table I
presents the concentrations of U-238 aud other radionuclides used as a
basis for calculating the "effective" DAC and investigation level.
radrlpz.@c
Mr. PetePatel
Health Physicist
California Depattment of Health Services
Radioactive Health Branch
Page 3
Tablc I 0)
Basis for Theoretical DAC
f:::'i'-Ac-l
2.5e-l. '.t2.5e-L'
3.5e-3
5.Oe-2.
l.'1e-2.
1.2*2
l-Ze-l
l.2e-l
l.4e-1
95
Nuclides
rrts'lr, !.,n
,zzt -, r't1 y
Tl,"4Y
Th'30 t -rt- Y
Pb2ro - D
PoBo D
u235 Y
Patsr ' Y
Acu' YTh2r2 Y
Total o/o ofDAC
Solubility
CIass
DAC
(uCi/cc)
2-0e-l I
2-0e-l I
6.0e-12
l.0e-10
3.0e-10
2.0e-l I
2.Oe-12
2,0e-12
l.0e-12
Calculeted Ratio of
Conc. (uCi/cc) Radionuclide*,'u')'..J to DAC
5-0e-12
5.0e-12
2.le.l4
5.0e-12
5.0e-12
23e-L3
2.3e-13
2.3e-13
1.4€-13
(l) Assumes airbome concenftatiorr of 5e-12 uCi/cc U238 and other radionuclides iu
proportion to U-23 8, based on radiochemical analyses.
rudrsp2-doc
IvIr. Pete Pafel
Health Physicist
California Department of Health Services
Radioactive Hffilth Branch
Page4
Under ilem 9 (d) ofyour letter, did you mean "U358'?. Please clarify.
The reference to U3S8 contained in the letter ofNovember 22,1994 is
correct. The uranium contained witlrin the PblFe filtercake
precipitated out of solution as a zulfide compound ralher than oxide.
This has been confirmed through chemical analysis of the uranium
compounds as referenced in the amendment application
4. Item I1 of ow letter required your commitment to notify the department dt the
completion of the project, so that any decommissioning and decontamination @AD)
plan can be reviewedprior to its implementation. Please commit. There ate fio
specific comments regarding Section I3-0 ofyour applicatiott however; at the
completion of the stabilization process, afttrther review may be necesstr)r.
Molycorp will notiS Radiological Health immediately "n"rLconclusiou of Pb/Ie stabilization activities. The Decontarnination and
Decomrnissioning PIan will be reviewed with Radiological Heatttl
during the stabilization process as well to ensure that D&D activities
can follow stabilization activities immediately a,fter the cessation of
stabilization activiries.
If you have comments orneed additional information, please call me at your earliest
opportunity at oru Mountain Pass faciliry. The telephorre number is (619) 856l220L,
Err-273-
wreJsph
cq: Grovcr Eaton, Molycorp
Mrrk i{. Smith. Molycorp
RobcnScE+ Molycorp
tadrsp2.doc
McDaniel Lambert, Inc. Occupational Risk Assessment
For Drummed Uranium Material
McDaniel Lambert, Inc.
Occupational Risk Assessment for Mountain Pass Lead
Filtercake Residue (Drummed Uranium Material)
Introduction
McDaniel Lambert, Inc. was asked by Molycorp to evaluate the potential human health
risks from inhalation to industrial workers associated with exposure to copper and zinc
found in drummed lead filtercake residue (drummed uranium material). This drummed
uranium material is being considered for recycling for its uranium content at International
Ur*ir* Corporation's uranium mill in Blanding, Utah following the Nuclear Regulatory
Commissionr 6NRC") license amendment approval. The following examination and
determination summaries are for this drummed uranium material
Methods
The data set, which was supplied by Molycorp, included six measured samples of copper
and six measured samples oizinc. Data evaluation involved the calculation of the
arithmetic mean for each metal. The means were then compared with the United States
Environmental Protection Agency's (USEPA) preliminary remediation goals @RGs) for
metals in industriat soils. An assumption was that the highest potential concentrations of
copper and zi11c in the soil would be attained if all of the soil was replaced with ground-
up drummed uranium material.
For the determination of possible inhalation risks, it was assumed that the entire volume
of drummed uranium material (35 drums) has the same concentration of constituents as
the analyzed drummed uranium material (6 drums). The maximum amount of dust from
the drummed uranium material was then calculated and the levels of copper and zinc in
dust were compared with existing Occupational Safety and Heath Administration
(OSHA) guidelines for permissible exposure limits (PELs).
The assumption that the entire volume of drummed uranium material has the same
concentration of constituents as the analyzeddrummed uranium material (6 drums) is
extremely conservative. Therefore, potential risks associated with contact with drummed
uranium material and inhalation of its dust are very likely overestimated and this
assessment can be considered extremely health protective'
Results
In Table l, the statistical analyses of the samples are displayed. Copper and zinc samples
have calculated means of 747.83 mg/kg, and 8083.33 mg/kg, respectively. In
comparison, the industrial soil PRGs for copper and zinc are 76,000 mglkg and 100,000
-g/kg, respectively. The results indicate that if the same levels of copper and zinc were
prlr.ii in ihe soil at an industrial site as in the drummed uranium material itself, the soil
would not be hazardous to human health.
The fraction of copper and zinc in the soil was calculated to be 0.0008%o and 0.008% of
the total soil (on avirage), respectively. According to OSHA, particulates not otherwise
classified (PNOC) have a maximum allowable concentration of 15 mg/m' in air.
Therefore, given i5 mg/m3 dust in the air with 0.000802 copper and 0.008% zinc, there
will be 0.0it mg/m' oI"opp.. and 0.121 mg/m3 of zinc in the air.
-l-
occupational Nsk Assessmen, "t"o, Pass Lead Filtercake Residue (Drummed Ur-,rrtrl Version 1.0
These results were compared with OSHA's PELs over an 8-hour workday, or time
weighted average (TWA). For copper dusts and mists, the TWA is 1 mg/m', a level that
is significantly higher than the 0.011 mg/m3 copper estimated here. The TWA for zinc
oxidi dust is 15 mg/m3. This level is also significantly higher than the estimated 0.121
mg/m3.
Conclusions
This determination of potential human health risks associated with industrial worker
exposure to copper and zinc in drummed uranium material is considered health
protective. Even at worst-case possible exposures, the levels of copper and zinc in
drummed uranium material soils are below USEPA industrial soil PRGs, and below
OSHA TWAs in dusts (Table 2). It is the finding of McDaniel Lambert that the risks
from copper and zinc in Mountain Pass drummed uranium material are well below levels
that would pose a health risk to potential industrial workers.
Table 1: Statistical Analysis of the Sampling Data
\nalyte Copper
(mg/ks)Zinc (mg/kg)
iamples 761 1200(
46t 532(
42i 426(
123(1450(
140(959(
201 283(
]ount e e
Nerage 747.8i 8083.3:
Standard Deviation 476.95 4661.2i
Vlaximum Value 140(1450(
Vlinimum Value 201 283(
Table 2: Summary of Calculated Values and Government Standards
Analyte Arithmetic
Mean (mg/kg)
USEPA SoiI
PRG (mg/kg)
Calculated Dusl
Concentrations
(mg/m3)
OSHA TWA
(mg/m3)
Copper 747.83 76,000 0.011 1
Zinc 8083.33 100,000 0.121 15
-2-
INrsnNATro,.ror,o
UneNruu (usn)
ConponertoN
Independenceplaza, Suite g50. 1050 Seventeenth Street. Denver, CO 80265.303 628 7798 (main)'303 389 4125 (fax)
January 5,2001
Via Facsimile and Overnight Mail
Mr. Phillip Ting, Branch Chief
Fuel Cycle and Safety and Safeguards Branch
Division of Fuel Cycle Licensing
Offrce of Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
2 White Flint North, Mail Stop T-7J9
11545 Rockville Pike
Rockville, MD 20852
Re: Amendment Request to Process an Alternate
Mesa Uranium Mill
Source Material License No. SUA-I358
Feed Material from Molycorp at White
Dear Mr. Ting:
International Uranium (USA) Corporation ("IUSA") hereby submits the following supplemental
information in response to questions received from discussions with Mr. von Till of the NRC
staff on January 2,2001 regarding the above-noted request for amendment to Source Material
License SUA-1358.
Comment
NRC requested clarification on the factor used to convert volume to weight.
Response
For the amendment request, IUSA used a density range of 90-100 lbs./ft3. This density range is
indicated on page 1 of the Radioactive Material Profile Record in Attachment 5 of the
amendment request. Applying this range of density values to the estimated tonnage of material
would result in volumes ranging from 5,740-13,148 and 6,379-14,609 cubic yards based on 90
and 100 lbs./ft3, respectively. As noted on page 2 of the amendment request, Molycorp estimates
that from 7,750 tons to a conservative estimate of 17,750 tons of the material will be shipped to
the Mill. IUSA has included the conservative estimate to ensure that the amendment will be
applicable should the volume exceed the minimum estimate provided by Molycorp. As always,
IUSA will weigh and track the incoming material for an accurate record of material received.
Comment
NRC requested a desuiption of the rationale usedfor the DOT approach.
(1oozee14
{ x*}I ah":l
\L qs-
wo#
S:\MRR\Molycorp\MolycorpresptoNRCquestions0 I 050 I letter.doc
Mr. Phillip Ting a O January 5,2001
Response
Please see the attached letter from Molycorp dated January 5,2001, regarding their rationale for
selecting the appropriate DOT classification to be used for shipping the material. IUSA concurs
with this rationale.
Comment
NRC asked IUSA to provide further evaluation of the question of potential for worker exposure
to lead in airborne dust. In particular, NRC asked that IUSA further evaluate the potential forworker exposure to lead during ffioading operations.
Response
IUSA has evaluated this question further. Based on discussions with Molycorp, and as
documented in the attached letter from Molycorp dated January 5,2001, air monitoring data for
an operation in which Molycorp handled comparable lead material indicated there were no
results exceeding either the OSHA PEL limit (0.05 mg/m3) or the OSHA Action Level (0.03
mg/m3) for area and breathing zone samples. Molycorp has indicated that it believes that there
will be no significant airborne lead exposures resulting from the handling of the lead sulfide
pond material at IUSA, because it has essentially identical composition and moisture content as
the material handled during this operation. As Molycorp indicates, the air monitoring results
showed that the use of respiratory protection was not necessary to meet worker protection
requirements for lead, because the results were below both action levels and the PEL for lead.
As an added precaution, during initial offloading of the material, IUSA will analyze breathing
zone and area airborne samples for total lead to ensure that the values obtained are below the
PEL limit and Action Level for lead listed above. If either of these values are met or exceeded,
IUSA will require use of respiratory protection until and unless monitoring data indicate that this
requirement may be safely reduced. In addition, depending upon initial lead results, IUSA will
determine the frequency to be used for any follow-up air lead analysis during offloading of the
material.
Finally, IUSA understands, based on a review of lead sulfide toxicity reports and discussions
with Molycorp's Industrial Hygienist, that meeting the OSHA PEL limit and OSHA Action
Level listed above is more protective for a lead compound such as lead sulfide, the form of lead
in the material, than for more bioavailable lead compounds, because the OSHA and NIOSH
standards are typically designed to be conservative, in that they typically protect against the more
bioavailable form of a chemical. The bioavailability of lead sulfide is low relative to certain
other more bioavailable forms of lead. As reported in Impact of Lead-Contaminated Soil on
Public Health (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Centers
for Disease Control, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, Charles Xintaras, ScD.,
May 1 ,1992):
"The impact of exposure to lead-contaminated soil on PbB levels is also
influenced by the chemical and physical form of the lead. Data from animal feeding
studies suggest that the oral bioavailability of lead sulfide and lead chromate is
significantly less than the bioavailability of other lead salts (oxide, acetate) (Barltrop and
S :\M RR\Molycorp\Molycorpltr.doc
Mr. Phillip Ting O January 5,2001
Meek 1974)." "The reduced bioavailability of lead from mine tailings may be related to
its chemical form (lead sulfide) and its larger particulate size." (r. l2-13)
Comment
NRC requested a clearer copy of Tables I, 2, 3, and 4, "Total Threshold Limit Concentrations
for Constituents Listed" from the Investisation o.f Process Ponds. Molycorp, Inc., November 6,
1955. These tables were copied in Attachment 2 of the subject amendment request, and the
headings of the columns were not legible in the copies sent to the NRC.
Response
IUSA has prepared clearer copies of the requested tables, and transmits the copies herewith.
Comment
NRC requested a signed copy of the memorandum from an independent consultant regarding no
RCM listed woste in uranium material contained in Attachment 6 of the subject amendment
applicotion, and entitled Review o-f Molycorp Information to Assess the Potential Presence of
RCRA Listed Hazardous Waste.
Response
A signed copy of the memorandum is transmitted herewith.
As indicated in our submittal letter of December 19, 2000, Molycorp plans to start shipping on
April 1 ,2001. IUSA appreciates NRC's timely review of this request, and we will be pleased to
respond promptly to any further questions NRC may have. As always, I can be reached at
303.389.4131.
Sincerely,
a--, -
Michelle R. Rehmann
Environmental Manager
MRR
Attachments
cc: Ronald E. Berg
William N. Deal
John Espinoza/Molycorp
David C. Frydenlund
Ron F. Hochstein
Bill von TiIIAIRC
William J. SinclairAJDEQ
Don VerbicaruDEQ
S :\M RR\Molycorp\Molycorpltr.doc
ZL/ZilZAAL 13:35 588555591o
MOLYCORP LNVII<U rHgL QLI UJ
Molycorp,lnc-
67750 Balley Road
Mountaih Pass, california 92566
Telepnone (75O 855.2201
FacsmaE 1760,8562253
MolugorE
January 5,2001
Ms. Michellc Rehmann
International Uranium Corporation
Environmcntal Manager
Independence Plaza, Suite 950
I 050 Seventeenth Street
Denver, CO 80265
Re: Rationele for *Ore for Recycling'Shipping Name and Air Monitoring Data for
Sirnilar Materirl
Dear Ms. Rclrrnarn,
This letter provides the rationale behind selecting thc above mentioned shipping uame to be used
on Molycorp's Bill of Lading and requestcd monitoring iuformation associated with the lead
sulfi de porrds material.
Shlppius Name Rationale
Molycorp has determined that the uranium cofltsot within its three lead ponds has siguificant
feedstock potential for uranium recovery at Intsmational Utaniurr Corpomtiou (IUC). The
material in thcse lead ponds results frorn Molycotp's mining operations. This material is
considered ore material suirable for recycling due to its uranium content as mentioned above-
This material does not exhibit radioactive characteristics warranting DOT C]ass 7 shipping
requiremants. To clarify. on an average basis the total activity level of each cofltainer shipment
will be about 900 pcilgm- DOT regulations require that containers cxhibiting 2,000 pCi/gm or
more total activity be placarded as Class 7-
Air Monitor{ng Dete
Air monitoring information for arr operation that handled comparable lead material indicated
there were noiesults exceeding either the PEL limit (0.05 mg/m3; or the Action Level (0.03
mg/m3; for arca and breathing zone samples. Molycorp believes that there will be no significant
airbome lead exposues resulting fiom the handling of the lead sulfide pond material at IUC,
because it has essefltially iderrtical composition and moisture content as the material haudled
during this operation-
.: 8LtZ5/2EA1 13:35 75485666
Duriug a lead filtercake fixation project conducted in 1995, Icad sulfide filtercake was physically
transferred from 55-gallon metal drums into a hopper and lump breaker. The filtercake was
stabilized and ultimately packaged into sling bins for on-site recycling of rare earth lanthanides.
This project was performed outdoors with pusonnel weariug Level C protection. Lcvel C
protcction incorporates a 7r facc respirator with HEPA filters and tyvek type coveralls along with
the standard safety glasses, gloves, hardhat, and safety shocs.
As uoted above, the air monitoring indicated that the use of respiratory protection for lead was
not rrecessa4l to meet worker protection requiremcnts because the air monitoring results were
below both the lead action lwel and lead PEL.
Please contact rne by telephone at 760-856-7697 or fax at 760-856-6691 if you havc any
qucstions rcgarding this corrcspondence.
Cc: Bill Sharrer
John Vialpando
John Pugh
91.o MBLYCORP LNVIHU rHuE_ uJ/r oJ
o
^dooui'ts a4 E.U
BEB
= 5-A"(J
G'c
^oj'5 a
sES:(T EdoEo
^cho
EES\ REE_oA (JI
^6oo
"'E 6\3.HS$qE_oAC)
^co6+€6n 5:r\9EA
=EE_o& (;l
o e'*a
= q5J.
E.?EB
-oac)
oo(Uo
glo
+
Elco.9 ot!D=EE9'6a&i?cYO
FEtroOJeil
E!(,XcoOE(r=
.=
E
=!to
oo
F
EoF
i^-O{'€ 6olJ}l. s16B'99E
o.d
6-Oc''€ 6o5.!(\ dsB'! g5Ero*(J
6'Oq-'€ ants<9b !s.f9E
A'O6'* a.nt<gE 9p
T H5a.d
O
q
o(.)
aEho
JEndx9{r=<oor c)
o6.-.: ord
o6
=!tdx-l 5
=c)
^660ct'AAE6dd8;EI-oo. cl
^cho
3E
6dYts
-oo. (Jt
ad60
3E\OdY8
-oo.C)
aEno:E<c!Yg
-oor C)
a.Ea=h .lt
ee6€oF6*(J
a.E9E65e6€o
E5 ulool
rO_
o.6EIo2
E
dg
oZ
!coo.
Bq
o
EoanIE
6..E\Eo5UOT9n8
a.E9Eo536<o!e5E(J
o
oaoo
Cc
a6
ooN
r.;
s6he6
oor!o
Iot
eo
(,!
I6@o.l)
ccE
C
3to
oo
dID
*
f?
6
oaq3
cs
oit
tqgt6
*U'o,
|rr
oaqg
oooti
oo@ai€
et*dD
cco
Goaloc,l
EoIcid:
*N6cl6
oace
oE
fl
6eal{aoq
o
clol{'l
16
I!l{
G
Iat
*ao
tqF
G
Ec
t!Eo
iR66de
ooa
r?
cccC
ccFcG
B
o.
r+
oE
EIo
oc
{
E
u
o-
AE
N c.N c{@ o
v
C o ts c
C N
aog
o'
ov h oD o o
f,l
D.qaI
+u,
3
oo
dl
@
!,
',)Ioov)
hl:ul
@
u
|l
Gq
h
tsD6i
E
o e
Gn Fa o o.t q(\l crl Fo vto
cM!I Nc
6 g qln
d!adv
@oaoF
6
lrJoo
Go
lrJ5Io
D
@@n
oo_(o6e
oq
F
a,aEo
Nodr'aN RN
(\l ]:
o
i4
@
F'qt sN
@N
o
h
ho i {!e
o!t t.|
qln
c o
Fl I
ralo
!Iuc
Eoaoq
.q(,
@
oo)
uJ
qtl c o(,foN
ao
c{c.N pgr@
@!3
oa esi too nl
oo
v,Yh6l@
*N0
or h
oh E q(\Y
|o1ooo
luoo!
hqoml.,
oFo!3
aI
€
E
@
ahn
qaE,oR
o t\NN
N
v
ol
F
@g|n @F'
o o.i oa:
I
R
qo
dc(\F
c|d
6
ov o.9
o
6
c cN NoUt
o
riroo
GIUJoGd
qc,D
oo.nr
N
GI
fl
qs qo6
o o6lo
(\.qN I\a
@dt
e
v
q €o ra
h
(\F
Tl\o
oI N
o
@
€t o.N
ulooctI
Icti
G?UJr.l
d
hq.ahi
cl5EaF
tI
D
ocnFae
oo.
Gool
C'oha
oN 6oF
@
c
oAI o ra q
cF(c
(\
Fo
o
d
q
v
c
G
o Noeio
Itl
!
6o
!..loNci
N(tdc
oo:uiGh
frc
s
Gq
o
oF
G66
o 6
cl N oo
NN
o q
v s
c,i 6,@ t\6'{F
(\a
o
ev 6d osi c(\o
r.l
C!euq
Eullt
co
lrJ(!\6
aicut!
@olo o!N
a
(\
N\n ot .tt
R (\(,rGla
oo oq cf,i uo(!t
D6Duto
ro o
T ut
6
D c q
N
.!a
E
Icriacr,
oIulId
Io@lc
roa
6
NrO
r.J
to
N
d
N
a.4
a!oo
o
v
r:mt
N qo
o@ c.{
o
v
q
N NN
oa ud Fc?
(oclo
ev
e€oui oci o
s
EFo
4ul66
r,i
?IJ's6l
(!
a
E
F;
F€
c\i
No FF
N
ao tag
€oe
E
rn@
EeoE
E
E!Eo
EreIE(l
6eo
gto
o!
ot
E.!dJ
!ie
=
EE@!E.>o
o
.g
E5E0Et,
Ev)
E
Ea€E.E
F
t
E
.EoEF
o
5
o
E
E.2
EF
EoF
N
E
.tat
El
t
E5
=e
E
ct
E
=E
=ii
E5t!t!Es
q
Totat Threshotd Limit concentration (TTLC)Analysis on Dry-weight Basis
Oridized Lead\lron Residue
Table? 7
Constituent
Constituent
Pl l-l(2.0-2.5)
Concentration
(me/kg)
Ptt-2(2.0.2.s)
Concentration
(me&s)
Pl l-3(2.s-3.0)
Concentration
(mg/kg)
P24-l(0.8-1.0)
Concentration
(mg/kg)
Pll-l(2.s-3.0) Pl l-2(2.s-3.0)
Concentration Concentnation(mglkg) (mg/kg)
Plr-3(3.0-3.5) P24-l(0.8-1.0) P24-l(1.8-2.0)
Concentration Concenlration Conentration(me/ks) (mglkg) (me/kg)
/(
P24-l(l.E-2.0) P244(0.5-1.0)
Concentration Concentration(meiks) (mg/kg)
P24-5(o.s-1.0)
Conoentration
(me&s)
P244(0.5-1.0) P24-5(1.0-l.l
Concentration Concentration(mgAg) (mg/kg)
AntimonY <12 <12 <12 <12 <12 <12 <12
Arenic 4,6 47 5.3 24 11,2 3-t 1-7
Barlum 6.309 2.!.139 411 8.222 2.580 2290 45/t
Beryllium 105 12,7 20 58 3-7 16 2.6
Cadmium <4.0 <4.O <4.0 <4.0 <4.0 <t1.0 <4.0
Ghrornlum <2,O 1S <2.0 <2.0 56 <LO A5
Cobalt <10 33 13 58 30 <10 <10
C,oPPer 612 <5.0 64 <5.0 41 110 r5
Fluoride 72 9.02 3.1 122 47 3t 21
Lsad 262,410 _5./16!t 75,447 33.333 't2,043 228,9M 2.213
MerqJry 1.53 0.38 0.21 0.51 <0.t0 os <0,10
Molybdenum q <40 <40 <0 <40 <40 <40
Nlckel <8.0 25 <8.0 69 50 16 36
Selenium <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 11.2 €.0 <1.0
Silver <2.0 <2.0 <2.0 111 <2.0 40 <2.0
ThEllium <2.O <2.0 <2-0 <2,0 <2,O <2.0 <2.0
Thorium az 219.27 372.46 57t.56 749.5a 133.03 s954.13 6239
Thodum 1.54E44 9.72e44 2.61E{4 2.A1E-04 7.6dE{5 2.14E43 5.608{r5
Tlrodum ta 4.99E-08 1.19Ei7 1.25E{7 9.96E 08 1.T?E{,e 7.6'lE{7 8.05E{9
Iotal Thoriuq 219.27 372.44 571.56 749,54 133.03 5954.13 62.39
730u,Enrum 2525,%3502.S9 1197.60 80.56 20.15 s1737 5.93
Uranium 3ae.72 5.5.73 195.33 13.41 2-88 7323 1.04
-40Ulanium 135.14 198.20 104_80 12.61 LO4 126.13 0.57
ratal UrEniur 3054-79 4247.92 1497.74 106.56 25.07 51e.73 7.5s
Vanadlum <10 71 <10 't 11 E?72 ??
Zinc 700 534 911 297 229 71
Chloride 4,600 2.400 30.200 12.300 3.600 9.300 12.700
LnO 332,100 128,400 389,a00 280,500 3,300 305.700 84.800
Sulfate 1.1.600 8,4@ 135.300 145,200 113,7110 11.700 33.100
e/e H2O il,zlolo 2129o/n 9.87%55.m%53-50%30.12%14.14o/o
Totat Threshotd Limit Concentration (TTLC)Analysis on Dry-Weight Easis
MillTailings Cover in Pond P{
Table 3
P84(2.0-2.s) PE6(2.0-2.5Constituent Conctntration Conentration(mg/kg) (me/kg)
Antimony <12 <12
Arsenic 10.?11-0
Barium 11.7',7 12,6?S
EeMlium 4.7 6.8
Cadmium <4.0 4-O
Chromium <2,0 <2.0
Cobalt 11 14
Copper <5.0 <5.0
Fluodde 5.5 20.7
Lead 2,876 2.180
Mercilfy 0.15 o.a
Molvbdenum <40 <40
Nickel <8.0 <8.0
Selenium <5.0 <5.0
Silver <2.0 4.O
Thallium <2,0 4.0
Vanadium 17 32
Zinc 4?69
Constituent
P84(2.5-3.0)
Concentration
(ms/kg)
PE6(2.5-3.0)
Concentration
(ms/kg)
Chloride 4,1C0 2.700
LnO 30,200 67.800
Sulfate 83,000 Tt.'100
%H20 6.52%14,731e
r^..^^{-a*^- -f D.^araa E ^h,ic llr^lva m lna Nawamhor6 lclcl<
Total Threshotd Limit Concentration (TTLC) Analysis on Dry-Weight Basls
Comparison of Averaga Compositions of Barreled Material, Pond Material and Mill Tailings
Table 4
BarrelCompoxidizerlUnoxidizedMillTailings
Constituent Cor..ntotioi Concentration Concentation Concentration
6A;t - (me/ke) (mdke) (me/kg)
Antimony 4 <12 <12 <6
Arsenic 4.0 14.6 11 .5 12.4
Barium 4 6.629 6.884 23.150
Boryllium 90 31.1 a1 .,.<2
Cadmium 24 <4.0 0.89 <1
Chromlum 12 17 2.7 <2
Cobalt 18 19 21.7 <2
coDFrer 4BO 120 142,1 33
Fluorlde NA 4 10.3 NA
Lead 52.600 88.556 123,768 1.553
Mercury 2.00 0.46 0.544 022
Molvbdenum 56 <40 <40 <2
Ntckel 36 28.3 24,54 <2
Selenium <o,4 1.6 <5.0 <-4
Silver <1-0 15.8 29.7 <2
Thallium 84 <2.0 <2-0 <2
ToielThorium 240 1152 466 NA
TotalUranium 2800 1352 1 333 NA
Vanadium 20 52-7 42.2 <2
Znc 840 494 571.3 29
NA = Not Analyzed
REVIEW OF MOLYCORP INFORMATION
TO ASSESS THE POTENTIAL PRESENCE OF
RCRA LISTED HAZARDOUS WASTE
I have performed an independent evaluation of the information available to date on
Uranium Material from the Molycorp settling ponds to assess whether any RCRA Listed
Hazardous Waste is present.
IUSA has developed a "Protocol for Determining Whether Alternate Feed Materials are
Listed Hazardous Wastes" (the "Protocol") (November 22, 1999). This Protocol has
been developed in conjunction with, and accepted by, the State of Utah Department of
Environmental Quality ("UDEQ") (Letter of December 7, 1999). The evaluation and
recommendations in this Attachment were developed in accordance with this Protocol.
1.0 Source Investigation/Basis of This Evaluation
Sufficient site history and background information was available to perform the Source
Investigation required in Step 1 of the Protocol Decision Logic Diagram ("the Protocol
Diagram"). To perform my independent evaluation, I have reviewed the following
documents:
1.IUSAruDEQ Protocol for Determining Whether Altemate Feeds Are Listed
Hazardous Wastes (IUSA, November, 1999).
Process history and pond information from the Molycorp Lead Sulfide Ponds Closure
Plan (February,1997)
Molycorp letter of November l, 1999 in response to IUSA request for additional
process information.
4. Molycorp package of site and operational history information (April 14,2000)
5. Affidavit Regarding No RCRA Listed Hazardous Waste, Provided by Molycorp to
IUSA
6. Radioactive Material Profile Record ("RMPR") prepared by Molycorp for IUSA
The information is sufficient to conclude that the Uranium Material was generated from a
known process under the control ofthe generator.
2.
3.
2.0 Determination That Material is Known Not to Contain RCRA Listed
Hazardous Waste
The Protocol Diagram states in Decision Diamond 2, that if a material "is known not to
be or contain any listed hazardous waste", then IUSA and UDEQ will consider the
material not to be listed hazardous waste. Item 2 of the Protocol text states that to make
the determination in Decision Diamond 2, IUSA may,
"Determine whether specific information from the Source Investigation
exists about the generation and management of the material to support a
conclusion that the Material is not (and does not contain) any listed
hazardous waste. For example, if specific information exists that the
Material was not generated by a listed source and that the Material has not
been mixed with any listed wastes, the Material would not be a listed
hazardous waste."
Sufficient information does exist to support such a conclusion. Molycorp, based on site
history, analytical data, and generator's knowledge of their process, has indicated that the
Uranium Material contains no RCRA listed hazardous wastes. I have reviewed a copy of
The description of the ponds and the Process Diagram depicting how the pond contents
were generated, which state that the ponds contain thickened sludge from the clarifier
thickener step in the preparation of leach liquor from bastnasite ores for S)Vion
exchange.
I have also reviewed a copy of the Molycorp letter of November I, 1999, which states
that:
'None of the materials placed in the lead sulfide ponds are a listed
hazardous waste. . . The materials shipped to the White Mesa Mill, IUC,
from the lead ponds will not contain any compound, either inorganic or
organic, whose origin is a RCRA-listed process."
This information meets the requirement for specific Source Investigation information in
the Protocol Decision Diamond 2 and Step 2, and demonstrates that the Material neither
was generated by a listed waste source nor has been mixed with a listed waste.
Molycorp's statement is supported by the analytical data, which indicate that the
combination and levels of inorganic components are consistent with tailings from metal
extraction processing. That is, all the inorganics appear to come from extraction of rare
earth elements from natural ores.
Documentation to Support Determination of No RCRA Listed Hazardous
Waste
IUSA has obtained the following documentation to support the determination in Box 2
that the material is "known not to contain any listed hazardous waste".
3.0
. An affidavit from Molycorp confirming that the pond material is not and does not
contain RCRA listed hazardous waste associated with any of the four lists: F, P,
U, or K.
o { copy of the IUSA RMPR which contains a declaration that the pond material is
not and contains no RCRA listed hazardous waste.
I have reviewed both of these documents. These documents are consistent with the
document requirements in Protocol Diagram Box 3, for a determination based on site
history.
4.0 Conclusions
It is my professional judgement that:
1. The Molycorp Uranium material was generated by a known process under the control
of the generator.
2. The Molycorp Uranium material is not and does not contain RCRA listed hazardous
waste.
3. The information made available to me is consistent with the information requirements
set forth in the Protocol.
4. This determination of no RCRA listed hazardous waste is consistent with the decision
logic of the Protocol.
9"A* i,+eJ4-LL-
7Jo An, Tischler
Chemical Engineer
T
lNrrnNarro*ol
UneNruu (use)
ConponertoN
IndependencePlaza, Suite 950 . 1050 Seventeenth Street o Denver, CO 80265 . 303 628 7798 (main) o 303 389 af25 (fa;r)
October 17,2001
VIA E)GRESS COI.JRIER
Mr. Melvyn Leach, Director
Fuel Cycle Licensing Branch
Mail Stop T-8A33
Offrce ofNuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
2 White FlintNorth
11545 Rockville Pike
Rockville, lvD 20852-2738
Re: Information on Drummed Uranium Material
Amendment Request to Process an Alternate Feed Material from Molycorp at
White Mesa Uranium Mill
Source Material License No. SUA-I358
Dear Mr. Leach:
International Uranium (USA) Corporation ("IUSA') submitted on December 13, 2000 a request
to amend Source Material License No. SUA-1358 to authorize receipt and processing of a
uranium-bearing material from the Molycorp, Inc. ("Molycorp") facility located in Mountain
pass, Califomia (the "Mountain Pass Facility"). ffis material resulted from the mineral
recovery of natural ore for the production of lanthanides. ruSA also submitted supplemental
information to NRC on January 2,2001 relating to this amendment request. The material
addressed in IUSA's amendment request and supplemental information letter will be removed by
Molycorp's Lanthanide Division from three former impoundments at their mine and mill site at
the Mountain Pass facility. The amendment request and January 2,2001 letter referred to the
material to be removed from the three Molycorp impoundments as the "Uranium Material."
That Uranium Material is referred to herein as the "Pond Uranium Material." This letter
addresses a small quantity of additional material from the Mountain Pass facility, currently
stored in approximately 36 drums at that facility, which IUSA requests be included in the
foregoing requested license amendment. This additional material is referred to herein as the
"Drummed Uranium Material. "
The Drummed Uranium Material is similar to the Pond Uranium Material in source, chemical
composition, radiological composition, and physical properties, and is expected to be
indistinguishable from the Pond Uranium Material during and after processing at the White Mesa
Mill (the *Mill'), and in its impacts on Mill tailings. This letter provides a detailed comparison
of the Pond Uranium Material with the Drummed Uranium Material, and demonstates that the
6f?^2223.4/,.o- *
.f tt,t
^oN\'O '',.S-. -ts\
E $) ". ..ii' Et "'titp
sq
%r.rr"e
S:WRRWolycorpdrums\Molydrumsltrl 0 I 70 I .doc
Mr. Melvyn Leach October 17,2001
Drummed Uranium Material is suffrciently similar that it can properly be included with the Pond
Uranium Material in the same license amendment.
Historical Summary of Sources
As described in the January 2,2001 lefier, Molycorp has operated a surface mining and milling
operation for the mineral recovery and chemical separation of lanthanides and other rare earths
from bastnasite ores since the 1950's. From 1965 through 1984 Molycorp constructed and
operated three lead sulfide ponds for the evaporation of lead sulfide sludges from the
ciarifier/thickener operation. The lead sulfide sludges contain uranium, which is also
precipitated in the thickener. All three of the lead sulfide ponds were taken out of service prior
io tqgs. All of the pond Uranium Material comes from these ponds and is associated with these
pre-1985 activities.
From l9g5 onward, the same uranium-bearing lead sulfide stream that had previously been
transferred to the ponds, was managed as follows. From 1986 through 1995, this material was
filtered and accumulated in drums. In 1995, Molyco{p treated the drum contents with
stabilization cement and sodium silicate to stabilize the lead content. For the period from 1995
to 199g, the stabilized material was returned to the Molycorp mineral recovery circuit for further
recovery of lanthanides. During the same period, a portion was also shipped off site to recovery
facilities and/or land disposal facilities. A Molycorp flow sheet and text, which describe the
operations that generated the Drummed Uranium Material, are provided in Attachment l.
The stabilized material that was returned to the Molycorp mineral recovery circuit was
reintroduced just prior to the hydrochloric acid leaching step, and continued through the
remainder of ihe ciicuit with the roasted bastnasite ores. These activities ceased in March 1998.
The reintroduction area, containing only the equipment where the stabilized material was
repulped and slurried, was decommissioned under the oversight of the State of Califomia
envirfnmental authority after March 1998. The residuals from these decommissioning activities,
containing the original stabilized drum contents treated with leach acid, were returned to drums.
The appriximately 36 drums (approximately l1 tons) from this area constitute the "Drummed
Uranium Material."
The portion of the stabilized drummed material that Molycorp had previously shipped off site to
othei facilities was estimated to contain less than 0.05 percent total uranium and thorium. That
material exhibited the RCRA TCLP characteristic for lead, and was shipped as RCRA
characteristic waste D008. None of this previously shipped material will be included in the
Drummed Uranium Material to be shipped to the Mill.
The Drummed Uranium Material to be shipped to the Mill is estimated to contain greater than
0.05 percent total uranium and thorium. Amendment 10 to Molycorp's Radioactive Material
License, issued by the State of Califomia, indicates that all the drummed stabilized lead sulfide
sludges at the Mountain Pass facility have been classified as uranium and thorium source
material. A copy of Molycorp's License Amendment l0 is provided in Attachment2. Molycorp
personnel havi conducted ongoing telephone communications with the State of California
environmental authorities, throughout 2OOl, regarding modifications to Molycorp's
-2-
S:\Ir4RRWolycorpDrums\Molydrumsltrl 0 I 70 I'doc
Mr. Melvyn Leach October 17,2001
decommissioning work plans. According to Molycorp personnel, based on those
communications, the Drummed Uranium Material will be classified as uranium and thorium
source material.
The December 13, 2000 amendment request sought authorization to process approximately
21,300 tons (16,400 CY) of Pond Uranium Material at the Mill as an alternate feed/ore. This
letter requesti that up to approximately 50 additional drums (approximately 16 tons) of
Drummed Uranium Material be included in the same license amendment as the Pond Uranium
Material for processing as an altemate feed/ore at the Mill, to ensure that all of the Drummed
Uranium Material is also included in the requested amendment.
Radiochemical Data
Molycorp estimates that the Drummed Uranium Material has an approximate uranium content
,*girrg hom 0.10 percent to approximately 0.14 weight percent (0.12 to 0.18 percent U3Os), or
gr"it"l,with an estimated overall average grade of 0.12 percent uranium (0.14 percent U:Oa) for
fue entire volume of Drummed Uranium Material. This average uranium content is very similar
to the pond Uranium Material, which was estimated to have a uranium content ranging from
0.002 to 0.49 weight percent (0.0024 to 0.59 percent UsOs) and an approximate average of 0.15
weight percent uranium (0.18 percent UlOe). Data provided by Molycorp on the radiochemical
conGnt of the Drummed Uranium Material is included in Attachment 3.
According to data provided by Molyco{p, the Drummed Uranium Material may have an
approximate total thorium content ranging from I I to 288 mg/kg (ppm). According to data
piovided by Molycorp, the Pond Uranium Material may have an approximate total thorium
content ranging from 62 to 5954 mglkg Gpm).
Consequently, ur demonstrated by the Molycorp data, the Drummed Uranium Material is
expected to be comparable in uranium content, but may be significantly lower in thorium
content, than the Pond Uranium Material.
Hazardous Constituent Data
The December 13,2000 amendment request demonstrated that the Pond Uranium Material was
not and did not contain RCRA listed hazardous waste as defined in 40 CFR 261 et. seq. As will
be described under the Chemical Composition and Hazardous Waste Protocol Sections, below,
the Drummed Uranium Material also is not, and does not contain, RCRA listed hazardous waste.
-3-
S :WRR\MolycorpDrumsWolydrumsltrl 0 I 70 l.doc
Mr. Melvyn Leach October 17,2001
Chemical Composition of Drummed Uranium Material Compared to Pond Uranium
Material
Molycorp's characteization of the Drummed Uranium Material was based on known process
history and a sampling and analysis program, including:
l. Radiological samples from six drums analyzed fortotal uranium content, total thorium
content, and radium'228 conterft.
Z. Chemical characterization samples from six drums analyzed for TCLP, STLC, and TTLC
for 17 metals, and thorium and uranium.
Molycorp's analytical results from sampling of the Drummed Uranium Material is provided in
Attachment 3.
Based on the total metals analysis, thirteen metals, including antimony, arsenic, beryllium,
cadmium, chromium, cobalt, mercury, molybdenum, nickel, selenium, silver, thallium and
thorium, which were present at either moderate or very low (trace) levels in the Pond Uranium
Materiai, were also present at the same levels in the Drummed Uranium Material. Based on the
.total metals analysii, the concentrations of two metals, barium and lead, were lower in the
Drummed Uranium Material, and the concentrations of two metals, copper and zinc, were higher
in the Drummed Uranium Material. The presence of all of these metals is typical in bastnasite
ores, and in the ore body mined by Molycorp.
According to Molycorp personnel, the differences in levels of barium, lead, copper, and zinc in
the pond Uranium Material and Drummed Uranium Material was to be expected, for two
reasons. First, the material accumulated in the ponds was generated from ores managed up to
1985. The material stabilized and later returned to the operation was generated from ores
managed from 1985 to 1995. Because the mineral recovery operations can vary over time, it
would'be expected that levels of some of the secondary metals, such as barium and lead, in the
ores manag"d in those different decades would vary appreciably, either up or down.
Second, Molycorp began the reintroduction of stabilized lead sulfide sludges for further recovery
of lantahanidwilu.r in 1985. As a result of this reintroduction, higher levels of some metals
such as copper and zinc were precipitated with the lead sulfide sludge. The higher levels of
copper *d rir. in the Drummed Uranium Material relative to the Pond Uranium Material are
consistent with this process information. The higher levels of copper and zinc in the Drummed
Uranium Material are not expected to pose any additional worker safety, environmental or
process issues at the Mill.
Drummed lead sludges produced after 1985, including the portion to be shipped to IUSA, were
stabilized by the addition of sodium silicate and stabilization cement. Commercial stabilization
cements *. a.y mixtures of varying concentrations of silicq alumina, lime (calcium oxide), iron
oxide, and/or magnesia, which activate and harden when mixed with water to create an inorganic
matrix that binds specific metals. The constituents of the additives, such as silica and lime, are
not hazardous or RCRA regulated wastes themselves, and are made up primarily of naturally-
-4-
S :WRRMolycorpDrums\Molydrumsltrl 0 I 70 l.doc
Mr. Melvyn Leach October 17,2001
occurring cations such as calcium, iron, and silicon. These naturally-occurring materials are also
found irinahgal ores processed at the Mill and in the contents of the tailings impoundments at
the Mill. Their pr.r.n.. is not expected to pose any additional worker safety, environmental, or
processing issues at the Mill.
The stabilized drum contents were later mixed with mineral acids, such as hydrochloric acid, and
were reintroduced to the bastnasite circuit. The acidified material, a portion of which constitutes
the Drummed Uranium Material, would be expected to have higher levels of chloride or other
acid anions than the Pond Uranium Material. The Mill plans to introduce the Drummed Uranium
Material to the Mill circuit at the stage before the acid leach circuit, where it will be leached with
acid for recovery of contained uranium values. The mineral acid anions are not expected to pose
any additional worker safety, environmental, or processing issues at the Mill.
IUSA/UDEQ Hazardous Waste Protocol
The December 13, 2000 amendment request described in detail the IUSA/Utatr Department of
Environmental euality ("UDEQ") Protocol for Determining Whether Alternate Feed Materials
are Listed Hazardous Waste (the "Protocol").
In conformance with the requirements of the Protocol, IUSA has performed a source
investigation to collect information regarding the composition and history of the Drummed
Urani,ir Material and any existing generator or agency determinations regarding its regulatory
status. Based on this source investigation, IUSA has determined that:
1. The Drummed Uranium Material was generated from a known process under the control
ofthe generator.
2. Specific information exists about the generation and management of the Drummed
Uranium Material to support a conclusion that the Drummed Uranium Material is not and
does not contain any listed hazardous waste.
3. The generator and the State of California consider the Drummed Uranium Material to be
Uranium and Thorium Source Material.
Inthe Affidavit included as Attachment4, Molycorp confirms that the Uranium Material was
generated from a known process under the control of the generator.
Based on the findings above, both Molycorp and IUSA have concluded that the Drummed
Uranium Material is not a RCRA listed hazardous waste. IUSA has also engaged an independent
consultant, experienced in RCRA mafiers and chemical processing, who has reviewed the site
history, Drummed Uranium Material processing history, analyical data, correspondence,
IUSAruDEQ Protocol, and license termination plaruring documents available from Molycorp to
date. Ttre consultant has confirmed that the Drummed Uranium Material is not and does not
contain RCRA listed hazardous waste. A copy of the consultant's review is provided in
Attachment 5.
-5-
S :WlRRWlolycorpDrumsWolydrumsltrl 0 I 70 l.doc
Mr. Melvyn Leach October 17,2001
Compatibility with IUSA Mill Tailings
The processing of the Drummed Uranium Material will not increase the Mill's production to
.*"r"d the License Condition No. 10.1 limit of 4,380 tons of U3Os per calendar year. Because
production will remain within the limits assessed in the original Environmental Assessment, the
pro".5 will be essentially unchanged. Because the Drummed Uranium Material is similar
physically and in content to the Mill's existing tailings, processing of the Drummed Uranium
Mut"riut will result in no significant environmental impacts beyond those originally evaluated.
None of the differences between the Pond Uranium Material and the Drummed Uranium
Material will have any impact on the Mill's existing tailings or tailings impoundments.
The disposal of the lle.(2) byproduct material resulting from processing the Drummed Uranium
Material will not change the characteristics of the Mill tailings from the characteristics associated
with normal milling oPerations.
As described in the December 13, amendment request, it will be a condition of the license
amendment that the Mill shall not accept any Uranium Material at the site, including the
Drummed Uranium Material, until IUSA has determined, in accordance with a SERP-approved
procedure, that the Mill has sufficient licensed tailings capacity. The tailings capacity must be
sufficient to PermanentlY store:
(a).
o).
(c).
all 1le.(2) byproduct material that would result from the processing of all the Uranium
Material, including the Drummed Uranium Material;
all other ores and altemate feed materials on site; and
all other materials required to be disposed of in the Mill's tailings impoundments
pursuant to the Mill's reclamation plan.
Transportation Considerations
Molycorp anticipates that the total amount of Drummed Uranium Material will be approximately
36 t; s1drums, or approximately I I to 16 tons of material. The Drummed Uranium Material
will be shipped by exclusive-use truck from the Mountain Pass facility to the Mill in sealed
drums. Molycorp anticipates that all of the Drummed Uranium Material can be transported in
one or two trucks. The shipment(s) will leave the Mountain Pass facility before December 31,
2001. The DOT description selected by the transportation contractor for this Drummed Uranium
Material is "Environmentally Hazardous Substance, Solid, n.o.s., (lead, uranium) 9, UN3077,
pGIII." Molycorp will arrange with a materials-handling contractor for the proper labeling,
placarding, manifesting, and transport of the Drummed Uranium Material. The truck will be
i'dedicated exclusive use" (i.e., the only material on the truck will be the Drummed Uranium
Material).
The Drummed Uranium Material will be transported along the same route selected for the
Uranium Material in the amendment request: via I-15 and I-70 to U.S, Highway l9l at Crescent
Junction, Utah, and via Highway l9l south through Moab and Blanding to the Mill. For the
following reasons, it is not expected that transportation impacts associated with the movement of
S :\MRR\MolycorpDrums\Molydrumsltrl 0 I 70 l.doc
Mr. Melvyn Leach October 17,2001
the Drummed Uranium Material by truck from the Mountain Pass facility to the Mill will be
significant:
o The Drummed Uranium Material will be shipped as an "environmentally hazardous
substance" in one or two dedicated, exclusive-use truck(s) (i.e., no other material will be
transported on the truck(s) with the Drummed Uranium Material). The drums will be
appropriately labeled, placarded, and manifested, and the shipment will be tracked by the
ririppirrg company from the Mountain Pass site until it reaches the Mill.
. On average during 1998, 459 trucks per day traveled the stretch of State Road 191 between
Monticell-o, UT and Blanding, UT (December 12,2000 transmittal from State of Utah
Department of Transportation ("UDOT") to IUSA). The Drummed Uranium Material will
be shipped in one or two truckloads. The increased truck traffic load from one or two trucks
witl be negligible.
o The truck(s) involved in transporting the Drummed Uranium Material to the Mill site will be
surveyed -d dr.orrtaminated, as necessary, prior to leaving the Mountain Pass site for the
Mill and again prior to leaving the Mill site.
o The Drummed Uranium Material will be transported in drums with secured lids, which will
eliminate any risk of airborne dusts. Although the Drummed Uranium Material is known to
contain lead, there will be no lead related hazard associated with transport, because there will
be no exposure pathway for ingestion or inhalation of the covered drum contents during
transPort.
Process
The Drummed Uranium Material will be temporarily stored in drums on the existing ore storage
pad until a sufficient quantity of material is available to begin processing activities. The
brummed Uranium Material will be introduced into the Mill via the existing remote drum
handling station, which was previously installed to handle drums of other alternate feed materials
1i.e., f6H and Cotter Concentrate). This drum emptying system was designed to eliminate or
ieduce employee exposure to or contact with the material by use of remote operated mechanical
equipmenf *d 6. of water sprays as appropriate to suppress dust. The drum handling system
.rnpii.. drums into a mixing tank ahead of the leach circuit. Once the solution is transferred
from the mixing tank to the acid leach tank, processing will be identical to that described in the
amendment request for the Pond Uranium Material.
Safety Measures
The Drummed Uranium Material will be delivered to the Mill in closed drums. The Drummed
Uranium Material will be introduced through the existing drum handling equipment, and will
proceed through the leach circuit, CCD circuit, and solvent extraction or ion exchange circuit in
normal pror.Jr fashion. As described in the amendment request, because there are no major
changes to the Mill circuit, and since the process sequence will be similar to conventional
**iu1n solutions, it is anticipated that no extraordinary safety hazards will be encountered.
-7-
S:WlRRWolycorpDrums\lr4olydrumsltrl 0l 70 l -doc
Mr. Melvyn Leach October 17,2001
As was described in the amendment request:
l. Employee exposure potential is expected to be no more significant than what is
encountered in conventional milling operations.
2. IUSA does not anticipate any additional worker hazard due to lead, or any other
constituent of this material.
3. IUSA does not anticipate any unusual or extraordinary airborne contamination dispersion
due to this material.
4. The Mill's existing air monitoring procedures will be sufficient for this material.
5. The Mill's existing PPE apparel and spill response procedures will be sufficient for this
material.
6. Additional employee respiratory protection will be implemented as required.
Schedule
As mentioned above, Molycorp plans to ship all of the Drummed Uranium Material before
December 3l,2OOl. NRC's timely review of this letter will assist IUSA in meeting Molycorp's
mandated schedule. Therefore, IUSA requests that the NRC please review the enclosed
information on a timely basis as a supplement to the previously submitted license amendment
request for the Pond Uranium Materials. I can be reached at (303) 3 89.4 I 3 I .
MRR
Attachments
cc: John Espinoz4 MolYcorP
Ronald E. Berg,IUSA
Richard Bartlett,IUSA
David C. Frydenlund, IUSA
Ron F. Hochstein,IUSA
R. William von Till, NRC
William J. Sinclair, UDEQ
Don Verbica,UDEQ
Dennis Downs,UDEQ
Terr),Brown, EPA Region 8
Richard Gratram, EPA Region 8
Loren Setlow, EPA
Paul Giardina, EPA Region 2
-8-
Si*0relv./
ll 4*/, ^ [M+hellf R. Rehmanne*" En'iironmental Manager
S:\MRRWolycorpDrumsWolydrumsltrl 0 I 70 l.doc
Attachment I
Molycorp Operational History and Flowsheet
for Drummed Uranium Material
Molltcorp,lnc.
67750 Bailev Road
ruounrah P-ass. california 92366
Telephone t76O 8567697
racimite rr6tl ss&6622
John F. Espin-o - Hazardoue lisbrials Spcdallsl
lWolwaorP try{ata
October 15,2001
Material operation and Generation of current Drummed Material
This material resutts froa an operauon that involves t,e reinroduction of stab*ized lead
filtercake. Historically, lead, lead/iron, or iron filtercake was produced from ttre leaching
operation, explained utto*. This material was produced and packaged fur dntms
beginning in 1985 througb 1995. These dnrms were theu stabilized (with cemcnt and/or
sodium silicare) *i *pirraged iuto sting bins. some.of rhe filtercake was then
reinrroduced into tU" siorrytlnk and rewJrked' The reiuroductioo area has been
decommissioued arrd decoutaminated with DTSC (Cal-EPA) oversigtlt' The residues
contairred in drums are resulting from this activrty'
Materiat operation and Generation of Lead Ponds Material
In this stage (up to 1985), the material results from the lead removal from a lauthanide
chloridc solution, "r"o,u[Uy leachiug roasted basmasire with HCl' The liquid fraction
wirh +- 0.2 Eee nonn.l UCi ls neutr;lized to pH 3-5 with ammonia' Sodium hydrosulfide
is then added to precipitate dissoived lead' Tire precipitates are settled in a rhickenct and
tlren transferrcd ro any of tlre tluee lead sulfide ponds'
If you have any questions, please call me at 760-856-7697 '
-F'
simprified oporations Frow Diagram showing how the Lead Reintroduction system crean'up Material
comes from the ="ra-S-out"* as the Ponded LeadlUranium
NaOH or NH3
1 995
Stabilized
Barreled Material
Cemertt and Sodium Silicate -+i
1 995-1 998
Developed Low Uranium
Lead Waste OPeration
Sent to Lead RecYcler or
to Certified Land DisPosal
Crusher and RePulP
Clean out Material
that contains unstabilized
Lead and Uranium
ProPosed to IUC
Note: During the crushing and Repulping prooess which used low pH teach liquor' the Lead
becomes unstabilizect-in ii."qripment and does not pass the R6RA non-hazardous test'
Thustheleadanduraniumisthesame=o,,"'asthepondedleadmaterialasseeninthe
operations drawing'
RDW SePt 2001
JFE Oct 200t
Stabilized Lead is Crushed,
RepulPed and introduced into
Leach OPeration with Roasted
Bastnasite
PreciPitate
Lead
Downstream
Lanthanide
Separations
Operation
Prior to 1985
Lead and Uranium
ProPosed to
IUC
Attachment 2
Molycorp Radioactive Material License Amendment l0
o
AgGoary
EADIOACTIVE MATEBIAL UCETTISE
Flrr{ll;E,qrfi fia (l,fff,tid, W o, RcgIrfr,*E a,td'gp4, ffie ,?, ChretFr 6 $bolF,4l.,+ Arfrry Z tlcra*W Cl t|ofud,yo *f,lad/,, N h
rr,Hno; an sFramdl's end rwa*a,tdg/,,, tufifrlotc fl,EICB Oy t,l! *tenrt€, z &w B hotE/Dy fE,ued si,tfut*tQ dt, &ansae Io ,EcCye, $9t,pcrsr. a/E,arrlBt- ef fufr el n)iooottc ac,r,t** l;.tcfl *x: trl fu .rJG ilrC, t!,fu.l'vo fiaFri.l lor tfu putpett&,l tu at ,E ,6F,e/illl
df{isn,lrd b&w- 7h&t er,n,'t ls su&gt to d cwfifalle rrrer. ,?E Flt,rlE urn odan el ltn Ooe,rft*a, oI H'{i',t $rndceg rrow at hqdf,ltr,
h cficqt $d te eay st ntd?td ot Speclflc can&lJo, *aCtTtOC & lrdr }-,,se.
,- ticrttr*
2- ad@s
Atld.l.m,-
LicgrsG Nrubr IZA>IG * her*graded asltillotx
9. Aulhorlzad IIra
A- To ba pscd in a Tcxas NuclEBr Corporation sourcc holder Modrl 5190 for storege only.
B. To be used $ e cortponelu of an Ohman Cmprny sourEa holder Model SB-A for the mcrsurcmem of
derurry.
C. To bc used in a Tarrs Nuclcar soulog holdar Modcl 5201 m G sgmpol6ru in systems fuE thc slca$llrcrurDr
of demity.
D. & E. to bc rmd irddmat to strhilieetl,oo, stortga md prccessbg of Db/Er ftEsr o*tr*.
. SEP-I1-01 l0:33 From:
s!€tr D, Gatloroia.l{oJir end Wcllcrs
T-860 P.nzlBT Job-017
Dqrrtmrot ol l{oilth $rwiosr
Page 1 of
--*_
pages
.cmsrCramfilar 1O
MclyGorp. Iac'Mffiin Pa*s Plaot
P.O. hr Ul{
MouuniaP$s, CA 92366
Grovtr Earon
MmagEr of FemiHrq
3. lifrl,prtr.,
3U9-36
&rr
Arqusts, 1998
& h*cctimqenoy Rrdiologic IlGElth Er.ItIh
Le AugFIEs
(3)
6.Nrrlidc 7. Form 8. Pocscssim Limil
A. CEEiU 137
\
A. Seald sourroc (Tcxrs
Nuclcat ModEI STS'
5?r57C)
A, Ono sourrc trot to Bxcecd
2OO millisrics.
B. Ccsiurn f37 B. Scalcd sotrca (Ohmrrt
Corp. Model A-2r02)
B. One source Bot to excccd
I3O mitlicrri*.
C. Cesium 137 C, Sealed sorucas (Iexns
Nuclcar Modot 59689+)
C- Three Sousacs not to excced
I00 millicuries.
D, Urmim, uarrrnl r
ilCdcd
D, soil ubrturc D. Not to cm€Gd {llr00
pounds of Urenirm (6{m
rnilticu.fus).
F- Thorirrm, Drr$rrl E. Soil mirtrur E" Not to elrcccd f900 porurrs
of,lterirm (1OO nG).
SEP-11-01 l0:33 from:
totrot GrEteil{s{ao.trh -ld wdllrr llF lGI
T-860 P.03/07 iob-017
Deprtalcar d itcdlh Scrvlcat
Page 2 ol -J- psges
t,irg6tlt[rrtcn 17f2-o'?6
A[EnCmmr uurnhsr: Jp
BADIOACTIVE ilATEMAL UGEI{SE
SupplerncatarY sheet
{.rcEI*,tE c;Qlr,pITIONS
f0. Rsdiotsli\ro mBtErtrl sball bc usetl only et tbB fouowing loCrflons:
(a) 67750 Bailcy Roed, Mou$tsin pa;s' CA
I l. firis licegsg ia rubject u es aruilrl fce for oouroct of radiuctiw marcrtal autttodzed ro be Potsestcd $ aqy
ors ti-rr as rpccffica inltcm I ef rbis liciDlc. The annlt fco fu &ir lhsorc b rcqtrird by rrd conFre4
h accprdance tlith $ectims 3mg$30432 of the Crlifomia Radiadm Courot Bryufilbns asd h rtso snb.iect
to as a$s${ cosr-of-living adjuseurt putrruu[ to $cedou II3 of $e Callfornla llcrltb efil Safoty Code.
tz.- Ra.Ihscir\E matsrial flhrlt be sd bV, or rudsr the nrpervisbu of, tho fulloYiltg individualt:
(a) Tory D. GuEir tt
(b) JrEl(JoUoY '(c) Kcvh Corgrove(d) Ker'ia Clrratlr(e) Craig E. DiEI :' (D Jc,ftcY BorPstt
G) Drw Dorn(h) fim Eyree(i) Brhs A Fistdl(i) Irure Hcmeo(k) Jim lt(anlndri(t) Jim Maddco(B) MEtb SroYcbeo
13. Except as specifically prorrided olhenpisp by lhit licerrG, the liceotos rhall postess ad use radioq6tiv!
maerirl deccrlbEd io Ircrs 6,7. e aud 9 of fhis liceuse in asrordanca widr staresren s, rrprcrartariurs, ana
proc?duros co$8lncd ia llE docu$cots liatd below. Tha Deparuncu's reguladm shrll gOveru unle* Ac
$tet€rneoti, rcPrGse$ati0Dt, altd ptOCedurcg itr &e liCeosea'3 rfplinli6 and corrrrpogd.E.o lre o'E.
restrictive ttar thc ttgulnlirons.
(4) Thc application wi& atac,lruears dsted lvI{y 12, 1984, signed by Grorge H. Ducbr ar rnodifid by
thc tcttor witb rttaehenrts drtcd July 5, 1984, siEnod by Kei6 L. Ellioffi-
(b) The lcnrr wftlr aBac.hrnenrs fitcd Marc!,23,19A7, srg8cd by lGith t. EIIiott-
(c) TtE ameDdllent applicalioB witb anrcbmnuB dated Jnnuary lZ, 1989, sigtrEd by Jin Suuag,
Eavimruueotnl Bugtncer-
, (d) fhc lcten witl eoechrnBnts diled Merah I, 1989 rnd May 9. 1989, both sigiDcd by Jrck L. Iollcg.
-..__J+
qm ldt --tdilt#adseorh &tcd Novrmber ?,lyg4,Dccelnb* frl lltgq aad January lS, lg05,sII tfgrcd by Wil[ru J. Almas reeardint stahilimtim, Enore8B and pocaffig o[ putrl; fllcr
Gahc.
SEP-11-01 l0:33 trom:
SulRot Cdilsria*lcelrh .nd t VCtrte A'tltoy
T-880 P.01/AT Job-017
tlGfl.nm,lnt of ihrhh tscicrF
Page 3 of --3- peges
Licenre f,f,mhffi J?4&l6
Afitefldm*il ilurnher: -10
BADIOACTIVE HATEBIAL LICEII$E
Supplamantery Sheet
14. (e) The Rrdi*ion Saety A,ffisor i0 dri8 p'egren shll be IcEt( JoUEy.
O) Ttre Atre ntc 8silaflon Saftry OfEcEr ir thls progrEln $aII be Wtrllrun J" AIns'
$. Scded sourcgs .lsssrib€d it Snb-Xsos A. B, rrd C of eh liceorc ihall be tesEd for lcatrrgr ard/or
smaminat'rou af inBrvglS nctt ?o tfiE€ed &lrae yeers,
lG. Thr fou,ol[,i{S iadividBrh etB $Uhorizcd to collccr wipe terr sarnples {_*ol.d ?qrrcca poasc*sed urdff fii!
licsasc usinglicel rcst ldr acccprable to the Califomia Depargrcni of Hcalth Services:
rbs Rediilim $fcry Otrcar
guetified *..*ignetd in wriliug by 0tc Rrdiarion Safity Officer
euurdratiVr anglfdcel Frsayl fordrcpurpoc of tostr for leakage ard/orsontaminBtion of eealcd sourees shall
be pcrformed only by prsom specifically authoriZCd 16 pCrform th* ecwha.
Recordr of tea,k tesr results rhatt br hrpr io uuits of mirrocruies ald uaiatained for inspection. REEords rnsy
bc disporcd uf foUoring Dcpertrrrt inspcction- Any tcak rrfl rctcattrig rtre pierence of 0,005 olcrocruies
or moic of rcaovebtc mdionctivc maerial shall be reponed rc the Departm?nl of Heelth Serviccs, Radiologic
Hc.l6 Branch, 601 N. ?& $tc* P.O. Box 942:?3?, Srcranreop, CA 94234-73CO, wirhin fnra d*ys of eE
rcst. TbiE rcport sball ioclude a description of iltc defecdve source or derricc, the resultt of tbe test, end the
corrcedve acrion ]rlclt.
lg. Insrallation, relocacion, ard inifial ndiation survqr of devices rutaining radioactivc manrial dcacribed'itr
this liceasa ruay ba parfarrnrd by tbc foltowirg irdividuelsr
(a) IackJollcY
ZO. Thc tioensee sbdt cmdrrt a pqnicel iaverory every six monhr b accoufr for sll gaehd filutpcs and/or
deviccs receivcd and possessed undcr the license. Records of the invenmrios sbdl be mainreircd for
inspectio+ and may bE dirPoeed of fo[owirrg neparrncnt imSrction
2;1. Bsdimdve Estcrisls shntl bc ud by occupotimal wodsers in such a Baucr thrt the dce limfts
sp.xifed iu TiOe f0, Codi of Ferlcral ncguls$,Er nirt Zl, Sublnrt C (Sostimr n.Ylfrl tbron$
20.I21tf,, are Eot axru*dcd"
2:t. The [rqsce rhall mmits oontlnqtioral expoilDE8 to rediarion rnd sh.ll nudy eld rtqufue tb tI ; of
tnoMilud raonitoring it€vffsr Dy portomd as q$irEd by fi0e 10, Code of Bederrl negulrnms, PErt
?Il, Sedim t0.l5ltr (F)'
(a)
o)
17.
18.
- SEP-I1-01 l0:31 From:
5Ei.-o, Cetlbnfir-'brFh ild wct .cAD.ocu
fi ADIOACTNrc }IATENhL TICENSE
Supplemartrry ghoar
T-860 P.05/07 Job-017
Dtc|IEr'Il ot Hsdlh lEo'l,brr
Page 4 at --l- pega3
Ueame )tumoer: 3??+36
Arrondtsrn I'hlnrhrr: J0
B. The ticc[gen shill tnouitof octrrDs6oEd torrili* of rtdlosdvc Edotlrl W, {rd ttsrt3 the cmrnittod
eftcdirr dce eqdvaled tq ludM&nb rrto ruay hnte trmsdEd'tr lsi lilrtly to crecd, tlc UEfrs
sFecified in TiOe 10, Cod. of f,ieder:rl nqrtstions (CfR), Pari 2,0, Ecrfion 2lLlSUZ (p). &riHlils aud
tmety EesurqEerB used for detnminatim of slcb intersat GrposEs rhall bB pGrfffiEGd er rpedltad
by rocEB gtxl0a-
For ttre Sere Depanmsnt of Health Servlces
rat By: ':
Barl-rolo gic tlcolth Branctr
F.O. Eor. *2792,
- SEP-11-01 10:34 From: O
T-880 P.08/07 Job-04i
ndlC*BrSbIDrd?alD8r3SsrugberhtDl
ATST.IC^TIOil EOB NADIOAEITVE IIATESIAT IJCENSE
tmuusr*s t. BdG'. ro 6ril! fir aeeUram, loa 8It 2051. Z TtlhlIE er wE Frthd T *U^+E} is iud6da, fn+ rygmnte; p.*.st h Srr t"arf eryiilnl- 3. t$rw dl rnqnl F.+dFe E te Briblciic ILdb Blarn c ta AiIH ti}|Et soB
a. Utd..I atrr&an Aorts rqu*qf @
l. & Nusdapplim Mnhrrnm lnr:- fe l-lnaeal Camnnnul
Ir l&triry eddrrss Nudrtrnd Srng
cry ail s* Mountah Pas. GA Uo ggSE
-
e Tdrpftmcsp}m Aws$lh-i!9-@Emio al,p
L a 11rpofbndffi: EUrufonl trp*o"oUpsassodafIm Eaoryxdm
b. Lt* aII arldrctsu s rh,idL raditmtiw umid Yil bE usltl r 8sEd;
$nerAffi -t[f,r.50 Bailetr RoaC. P.O. Bu 124 Gty Motnmh Pqp. CA -4-8ffi-
gEECr A&lars
$!cst Addtcs
(IE
G.ty
--J WillrBdiosEircmmeddlbBE3a.tlrEmpcu'rjEbdE? EY* EX"
G ndsitu@la[mfin
El+now ndfioadts iffidlffi
Elneueunt sf ssrlorctivt rnmuiat Iire No,
El enmdncu o radoacriw rryudrl liffi I{o, 9229
3. s- I{udfde b. cDsbef rgillhnhttbalt+u g' Po$Estioaltlit
U eource maierial h a eoll t/pe maEllil. 4O,(x)O lbs
Materlat oplrtBkta !0?6 water-
Btored in 55 gal dnrne.
Th souroa rnaterial U lc as a sullidc and Th as an orrkle- rg00 h$
Aftar ctabili?allorr maprtat uflt be h a
vrealr concrete maUix h llnEO fabris hege.
+. Desosfta tte propo*d uae otrtprdoudw BrdL
Bee Anndrrd
4
EP
If,MO,,lo
,. i:[I;ll J'li Jg; -.*I**,.*..,T-860 P.gll0T Job-017
- Iln, rrdffiou s53ry ot6$r iffi. Arra& FffiI rg 26fi4 stttsrlst d Itnidng ud Errdcs, f8 6t& hffr'ieal
urbD wfl usg rodimEive tugndrl
Wlliam J- Almas, Hadlafon SdBtt Ofper
6- netfnlioq tlctecioiarmmn
See Athshed
Z- tgctsnA tr+acry, ed nrdd ud it crfi'*mG ilatrtms [sd abffi.
Sm Athfied
& mwf sodtuiug undtibmlY Foctfiis
SeB AttBchod
L Faci&ics rod oq@cd,
9ee Attachfil
---lf0. f,rfum rCcyfngro
EGo AfiEfiad
ll, EEriladanftmlouilUry
See AtEdmcl
ra WND fiSocrl
Eco AtiacftEd
13. Dacsrdsiorhs utl decounoidu dm$
Ece Atteohed
14r Cerlifrcm-
r?e q$m aod sy oEslit ercaniag 1& stifcaE o! b&alf of mE rySiosd rud ir nEo I ccrdfy itt s[iffidiotr co$aile.l lstsi4 iashdn8 g aapteq"qrr iltBcued Dtrts, is EtrE bld cuGct :h! hdr irlrl c*cmil0g
this ccnifcC hf ffidtyE aoffi fts q$[is5 rddrr to rusrrs inrpty&g iB efu qIllicdno.
Br
Attachment 3
Uranium Content Estimates and Analytical Data
for Drummed Uranium Material
Samole i,lo.Thorium Uranium Th+U
Th+U
Eouivalent Rad'
Ra?fi
Eouivalent Rad
Ra?28
Eouivalent Rad Total Aciivih
(ppm)(ppm)(ppm)(pCi/q)(pGi/s)(pCi/g)(pci/s)
WDRA-1 113 1 19C 1303 390.S s0 75 515.e
WDRA-2 11 122:0 1231 369.3 5C 75 49/..3
WD.RAA 26 144,O 1666 499.8 50 75 ozl.a
WDRA4 133 1030 1163 348.€g)75 473.8
WDRA6 '178 1370 1548 M.4 50 AE 589.4
WTLRA-7 zffi 1060 1W M.4 50 75 529.4
Averaoe 158..2 1218.3 1376.5 413.0 50 75 538.G
rh 57.€
Std Enon 413.1 23.6
8006 Conf.572.4
$
&hq,e10i
"l
PGi.l
cG
€
,_{q3 lc
l^
c
]tgoJ
F
laqqog "t
qtrr*dl
"l
%{rqo
t+r.l ,l
c av
ahrrg
vq
rrorqrt
Qra
.t...O
E!
!E
E
C
E
5 Ii t cu:€ra ul.\r0il In on afi ar
(r(i {d
eltorrerr ?tAJ
il
G
aattI(
cq
I
C
rtC
bxqcror
F
IG
c:
!i
!III
I
Ct!Iall
o
ic
I
s
aal
cA
I
(tt(
au
a
it
at
iit!
Ca
J
Ctt(
.JL
a
GC
Ct
s
aai
GA
I
CtItaI
atI
ai
iEta
Co
I!c
o!aoEa
Ga
o!(
G
E.J
c
E.
li
Ct!((E
T
tI
I
i
a(
aA
lig
CttI(Et
CI
I{
I
Ca
CA
I
o
bol,a,
o
!
o
a
!
Ea,
oL
t
C
gttaT
a
at
arl
t
ta
Ca
I
CttaaL
atI
a:l
,
Ia(a
I
CttaaI
at
a
a,
I
Ia
a!
I
Ct!(IE
a
aE
a{
t
II
CA
IIatta(TI
ItI
a
I
aa
co
I
Cttt(II(a
aI
!
aa
CA
ol
GI
EIat<l;l
EI
EI
a
I
t
Ia
E
Ct
I
!
n
It(
i
{
a
3
It
T
U
II
tt
at
Cs
I
I
3
a(:
!
G
E
o
oio
oE!
a
E
a
ttc
C
G3
aE!
a
a
EIlal
ili3I.i
Eli{iarl aElaElr3l:
61U
e
E
a
a!t
aE!
a
I
tInU
l!E!a
Eo
oItI
o2aBJ!ir
O!EE6U
Eo
oIGlJ
o=-LIif==0r8E6Ut
I
T
a
Eo
Eo
oI!i.,
o=-ll
if
E=8Eolt
Eo
oI!u
oZ.
itar!:ol,
Eo
a,Ial,
a,=-rl
XF==EttET6U
o lo loo t6 toielEe{5to alo |!l0 II EI! EIJ A
3 116 rl8 t!flilliir alE 6lll s
s itr glt i! cJ! el-! !
; flE flE;
aaG
3E
G
llE
Itt
G.J
c
C
o
a
Ia(
I
I(a
ta(
I
I
ao
n!
G
EaE
CG
cI
!og
a
io
I!.lc
iI(
c
E
iaEal
aa
C
E(g
ta
C
I(a
ta(
IIio
IaI(
t!(a
aa
I
t
ao
Ia
It
aa
ta{
t
I
aa
Ia
f!Io
ae
6
B
EEEEE-cl.EO{I
s5-e-:3Er
EI
EEgtt:
f,B-E
Eof
TE
Eco
l\toctrI
tk EtI
c
d
qrirlErra (c{
aq1rrfi
aarroru
c(c
qdo
*cf,"rr
rerrs n o
rqrqr,t qo \{ho
,.l5rt
tr,.r+C,{rorr
T v
!
Qra
'9f rrreqg
!
E a
E
iE
E E
E
Ct
c
E
C
E
E
E
E
E
E
EE
EJ
E
E
a !'l I a tl nn ll{rJ Ei Ea ctr:fI !x ta (t\oA cG t,nlfi !!
erro qcrorr Ea,t
00oI
cE
oon
G
!
tc
llc
co
!o
l0G
bffq&.,t N(EIoI
!I(!
I
!
q
cl
,(!
I
E
o!
Ii
U
att,
Tgo
oEoo
o
IE]E.l
!
Eo
oL
I
CtIaa
I
tI
III
IUo
IE]o!o
nsoH(
E
ca)
oL
at
C
aI(
i
Ia
cI
IIC
uIcaT
aiI
et{;EIo
cA
IIc
uta0Toi
Ee
C
a3
G!
I
ct!oo
o
GE
ai
nEao
oA
I!ot!ao
o
G
C
t)I(
E
E0
oL
I
G
a!oo
a
Ga
o
G
Co
oa
J
CttaaE
a
nI
at
i
ta
cA
It
atIatl
a
nItI(
!ta
CB
I
C
ItaIII
I
o
EE]3
IJ
EE
l
(
F
EIJ
I
I
CtEat
a
TI
oIi
IUo
frEaoI
al
na
o(
E
E.J
ot
J(tt!II
a(a
at{
I
Ia
Ca
T(tIIIc
I
II
a(
.!
Ia
a!
390
bIl,0I
l,
!
l)
(
!I
l,i
I
(tIt
au
atI
It(
IiIa
Ca
I
CtIaIT
ata
aI{
!
tI(a
jtat!taE
a
aI
alt
i
uI
CA
I
CtIaIu
I(
utI{
a
Ia
aa
I
CtttIEItg
a
!
II
Cq
I(t't(tI
a
n
I
a,(
I
I
a
aa
a
cI
Ita
a(I
tI(
i
I
aI
ar{
ata
aI
Ito
C
,:
IIt
IJ
t!
Etai
{E
I
(
E
Ig!
0E
!
a
E
a!
i
aI
IE!cE
I
l,E
Iaf
oE!
oE!
ii
IEI
a;E
I
0E
IIa
oEI
IE
Ig!
.JE
q
oE
a
T
U
Ii(
t(
IIt
u
a
T
v
a
5c
a
i:
aIt
u
cI
v
aI
C
aa
D
E
=o
oio
oEE
6
I
!v
!I
C
aiI
III
U
I
!,t
(I!
aI
&t
U
{
E!
I
I
3
a
E!
U
rt
U
a
CI
a
Et
!
tI
t
aIa
!I
.J
E
B
tII
e
E5
aIIt;
II
E
aII
U
a!ltt!
a!II
t
(Iai)
aI
Ea
EEt
,,
0JiU
attICiia
u
Eo
o5ou
t,=-EI
Ef
tt8E
Eo
L
1'IoJ
0=-rJ
-lir==oi!ENU
IEt
tr
En
Eo
oIGlJ
o=,ftii==llI!r6U
Eo
oI3I
o=-ITii==t(EE6U
Eo
oI!tJ
o=.LIu!lf
E=!t6!
o lo lo9trt9E ^lE ^lE -vllvllvto Elo 3lo tr tt.E o.tJ BI 116 tl6 r
E TIi EIi IlL olL 6lE arEhEEi! elJ! el! !
E EtE it3 ih 6to 610 g
I!
I
Ea
ut
U
C.ttI
!I
aa
(
!I(
c
ia{
C
j
aI
(
a(
C
Ii0
i{{
c
!ao
ta
(
t
an
(a(
C
!tE
Go(
o
E
on
!{{
C
Iao
!a
I
t
!a
a
!a!
Ta(
C
ta(
CI
II(
C
I
ta(
C
alJ
o
Eo
Ia
a
C
I
aI
iI
C
ttq
Ia
a
C
I
Ia
Ct
ia
C
!(o
(
a
Itto
to(
o
Eo0l
!a
a
g
oE
II
t
tI!
iI
C
I
e!
tt{
C
CIo
Ia
a
Itq
,a(
(
I(!
a
P
E
B3
B
EEEE.C6!Ero-tsbt
BEqi!rEI
EE.gu
^P<
Ei-o
Eou
T
E
E
eo
Attachment 4
Molycorp Affrdavit
Confirming No RCRA Listed Hazardous Waste
in Drummed Uranium Material
0CT-16-01 0$:36 Fron:T-006 ?.92/01 Job-397
$Sdavit 9f Wilnen [- S[rynr
I, William L. Sharrer, bcing duly ssronr accorrding to hw, dcpo:e ead statc rs
folbqlt:
l. Sire 1999,I harrc bem emptoyed as the Public aud Eaviromemal AffiB
I\{aoag6r uy tvtolyco+, Inc- stthe coryar:y's ttlor+ein hss frdlfu. fttls Facilitf). I
am rcryougrle for ensudng that tbe Facility opcrates in cowliaocp with mlicable laulle.
I brrc pcmsoul lcaowledga ofthe taw uaterieb use{ the prodrrrion pmcessci aploye4
aod thp rDEstE h""dling proocdures follou,Ed u tbe facifty. I an alm ed[ar ctlh thc
hazardou u/astpregulatiors Efi out inU.S. Code ofFedercl Rsgulstion& Titb 40, Prfi
2@-262.
Z* Ildolporp propo*li to ship ro IUSA's Urhito ldes MiU iB Bliding Lrtl&t
&e fr[ou,ipg mareriah: dnrmed leed fl{fide sludgeresidttc, co'rFidFg uorc thaO.05
percg63 uanfinn aud thorium, toro decommirsixing ofthe gtabiEzd tEBd trhEslLc
relrodupriou area, frr prosEssigg as altsuarF &cd mmials, All ofrh ;roFoEEd
s.lpf;aate Ecd nrat€diab arc secondaql producrr or wEEatr srsarlls prodtrped inrhe
exrastbnofrare carthqincrals at thc Facility, rud codeinCIo ursstes frooraty other
SOIEEA
3. The drguned lEad nilfidn stu,&Bmsidue consi*s ofstahilircd prrciptmc
of Iead gulfide ud ofher wtals fiom the straction of rtre earfh misEnats from hrtrrsite
orea Baslnasitp src fioiltr a frst sragc flotation plaut rrns roasrod to convfi caatongroe to
oxidp+ tbcn lsacfred ba hdrocbloric acid sotrrion The dissoh,Ed &action was sEd to t
lead sdfdc removal rtop, where mapuifl" soitirmhydro t$de d flocsulcw ursre
adde4 sgd rhc Ebfirc frd to a qlarifiEr. Tbiskffid clarifier shdgr fionthis arc4
cor*airiug taad fidfdcn iron 6alsi End urauluq uas ro#red to th lqd stlEdc tnlinsr
0CT-16-01 09:37 Fromr T-008 P.03/01 Job-397
poDds pfrrr to h,Iarch 19t5. hom 1986 to 1995, a portiop ofthe shrdgp corfiainin8 lcss
rhan 0.05 peraent uranilm d thorium uas shipped ofrsite either for reaovery of lsad or
for dispoeal. From 1995 to 1998, tte statrilized kad flmcala wns acidificd rnd
reiutrrodused to tbs Molycorp ninerat circuit for firther recDvery ofhrtbanideg. This
reintrrod;uction arEa was decoTrrraissiorpd affer!{affh 1998. Thsdnurd lead srffdo
sludge rcsiduE oonsists of marcrial rrmorcd fion the cfusuit during tbe decomissiouiw
of rbis area All consdhnnB oftte drumcd lead sulfide shtdgs residui com fion ths
rarp earth €crtracticn pocess. No waste ftom anf, othcr sotucc has beGB or will be addcd
to tb dnrmeat lead $lfide strdsa
4- Bssed on the proees*ing +t+Fs ryh,,ed in the recovrry ofrere crt;h
ele,rcrrt& &e Fposed alrcrnate &ed ruatsrials do not cofiEin my ofth listpd \f,BstGs
ggrr'n+snied in U,S. Codc ofF'sdcael Roguletbua, Titb 40, Patt 261, Subpat D as
apendcd tD,thc U.S. Fcder.l RcBHcrAryr$t 5, 1P98.
5. BsEsd ou ry lcoouiledge ofun*e ?ru'ritprfic{rt ilt thr FaciliSr, ths popotea
atternme H rueriak hrrc not bcon mipd witL wastc* ton ary other sourcg urtich
aay harrc bcon dcfmd Es or which my barrc coutairpd listed wastes Eurunrffired in U.S.
Codc ofFedcral Brguhdon+ TtlE 40, Pur 261, SuUpEt D as qnropdp4 Uytbe U.S.
Federal R4glffr eugu$ 6, 199t.
6. Specificallx tha pnoposed alteroate feerl rnaterirls do rot coilain haardou$
wasrgs tom norspceific sorrues (U.S. RCRA F t,lpe wastcs) becans (a) Molfroorp does
rutI opemtc a8y processe8 at $E facilirywhich produce the tf,pes of uasrcs tistgd b
$stioB?5I-3I ofTilb 4{t oftb U,S. Code ofFedcral Rceuhtbffi, aqd (b) Motporp hm
aflve( ac*pred d &E Fadliry, nor hanctbe proposed aherDfl0B fred natariah cvErbecur
combincd wift, rvastes fiorn uy other souree u&ich contab U.S. RCRA F qrpe rilEsrtcs ss
defiocdtberein
7. Specifica0y, theproposcd aIcrtme feed rnarerials alo aot cortahhazqrd6p
rf,rastcs ftu ryeaific s.rllrEcs (U.S. RCRA K type ursst€s) becarsc lrrotycorp does not
0CT-16-01 09:37 From:T-008 P.01101 Job-397
olrErarc ary of tle roccs6cs whhh p;pdBoe the tlpes of unstes li$ed ia secdon 2dl.3l of
TitlE 40 ofthe U.S- Corb ofrederat RsEBldioEs, aDd (b) h{otysorp hs IEvEr accAtcd U
the Facitity. norhaw the poposed ateroarc ftcil rraeriah everbeencodbirEd$,ith'
wastffi fiom ay othrr sourea wbir.b coutain U.S. RCRA K qPG wa$Es as dpfin:d theitt
B. Spcsificary, the pxopoaed attcrnatc feed mrcrisls HrE Dst U.S' RCRA P or
U type wastes as definsrl iu Semion 261.33 ofTitle 40 ofthc U-S. Code ofFcdcrrl
Rr.g,rl'tion$ bccalsc thry (a) ac rst "enug{trrred nor foroulsted comcrciallyprc
g3ds chsfcels, off+cc comercial chr,mical prcfucte or mmnfrcuning cr+miaal
ixcrrediat*s, resi&s $6ssowtqift.rt that held cwchl cheudcql products or
ffigg36uring GhEEiEst iatcmedist€sr or stry residuc or couamiogtcd toil wucr or othcr
d6bris rg$rhing &oma spillcleaoup, and (b) Motycorp has nerrcr aoctptD4 norbarn thc
proposodalcsrato frodmstEriBb ever beeo cornbfued wit\ uascs Soa agr oth solEEE
u,&,h coBtain u.s. RoRA P or u tylr rile3t# as d.fuld thErcb.
@q.fu
Sworn ro afif s$scdbod bcfqe mr
rhis lf dsy ofJ2IlIl 2ool
Ir{ycommissi,m nry"a
NOT FTV F[raue
STATE OT NB,,OA
CilrtU otq#PAIIJ I: SIMPSOT{
NotryPubliu
Attachment 5
Memorandum from Independent Consultant
RegardingNo RCRA Listed Hazardous Waste
in Drummed Uranium Material
Review of Chemical Contaminants in Molycorp Drummed Uranium Material to
Determine the Potential Presence of RCRA Listed Hazardous Waste
I have performed an independent evaluation of the environmental regulatory status of the
Molycorp drummed recycle material, referred to as the "Drummed Uranium Material" in
the IUSA letter to NRC dated October 17 '2001.
1.0 Site HistorY and Background
Since 1951, Molycorp has operated a surface mining and milling operation for the
recovery and chemical separation of lanthanides and other rare earths from bastnasite
ores. Bastnasite ore from a first stage flotation plant was roasted to remove excess
carbonates, then leached in a hydrochloric acid solution. Insolubles from the leach
solutions are fed to a cerium circuit. The dissolved fraction (leach liquor) is sent to a lead
sulfide removal process. Ammonia, sodium hydrosulfide and flocculants are added to the
leach liquor, which is fed to a clarifier. Thickened clarifier sludge from this operation,
containing lead sulfide, iron salts, and uranium was transferred to the lead sulfide tailings
ponds. The clarified leach liquor was fed to the SX-ion exchange circuit for recovery of
lanthanides and other rare earth minerals.
From 1965 through 1984 Molycorp constructed and operated three lead sulfide ponds, for
the evaporation of lead sulfide sludges from the clarifier/thickener operation. The lead
sulfide rludg"r contain uranium, which is also precipitated in the thickener. All three of
the lead sulfide ponds were taken out of service prior to 1935. All of the Pond Uranium
Material comes from these ponds and is associated with these pre-l985 activities.
From 1985 onward, the same uranium-bearing lead sulfide stream that had previously
been transferred to the ponds was managed in one of several ways. From 1986 through
1995, this material was filtered and accumulated in drums. In 1995, Molycorp treated the
drum contents with cement and sodium silicate to stabilize the lead content. For the
period from 1995 to 1998, a portion of the stabilized material was returned to the-lt4olycorp
process circuit for further recovery of lanthanides and rare earths. During the
tu111i p.rioa, a portion that was estimate to contain less than 0.05 percent total uranium
and thbrium was also shipped offsite to recycling facilities and/or land disposal facilities.
The portion of the stabilized material that Molycorp had previously shipped off site to
othei facilities exhibited the RCRA TCLP characteristic for lead, and was shipped as
RCRA characteristic waste D008. The material previously shipped off site is not
included in the Drummed Uranium Material to be shipped to the IUSA White Mesa Mill
(the "Mill").
The stabilized material was reintroduced into the Molycorp mineral recovery circuit just
prior to the hydrochloric acid leaching step, and continued through the remainder of the
circuit with the roasted bastnasite ores. These activities ceased in March 1998. The
reintroduction area, containing only the equipment where the stabilized material was acid
leached, was decommissioned under the oversight of the State of California
environmental authority after March 1998. The residuals from these reprocessing
activities, containing the original stabilized drum contents treated with leach acid, were
returned to drums. The approximately 36 drums from this area constitute the "Drummed
Uranium Material" referred to in the IUSA letter of October 17, 2001. The Drummed
Uranium Material to be shipped to the Mill is estimated by Molycorp to contain greater
than 0.05 percent total uranium and thorium. Amendment l0 to Molycorp's Radioactive
Material ii""rr. indicated that all the drummed stabilized lead sulfide sludges at the
Mountain Pass facility have been classified as uranium and thorium source material.
According to Molycorp personnel, based on ongoing discussions with the State of
Califond;Department of Health Services, the Drummed Uranium Material to be shipped
to IUSA will be classified as uranium and thorium source material.
2.0 Basis of this Evaluation
In a February 1999 decision regarding the Mill, the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board
presiding Offrcer suggested there was a general need for more specific protocols for
determinlng if altemate feed materials contain hazardous components. In their
Memorandum and Order of February 14,2000,the Commission concluded that this issue
warranted further staff refinement and standardization.
IUSA has taken a proactive role in the development of a "Protocol for Determining
Whether Alternate Feed Materials are Listed Hazardous Wastes" (November 22, 1999).
This Protocol was developed in conjunction with, and accepted by, the State of Utah
Department of Environmental Quality ("UDEQ") (Letter of December 7, 1999).
Sufficient site history and background information was available to perform the Source
Investigation required by the Protocol in Step I of the Protocol Decision Logic Diagram
("the Frotocol Diagram") for the Drummed Uranium Material. To perform my
independent evaluation, I have reviewed the following documents:
1. IUSA/UDEQ Protocol for Determining Whether Alternate Feeds Are Listed
Hazardous Wastes (IUSA, November, 1999).
2. The Molycorp letter to IUSA of October 15, 2001 and attached flow sheets, which
describe the bastnasite circuit operational history and the management of the
uranium-bearing lead sulfide sludges in the ponds and drums.
3. Additional operational history from the Molycorp Lead Sulfide Ponds Closure Plan
(February, 1997)
4. Chemical characteization and radiological information for the Drummed Uranium
Material provided bY MolYcorP.
5. The Molycorp Affidavit of October 15, 2001 confirming that the Drummed Uranium
Material contains no RCRA listed hazardous waste.
6. The Mountain Pass Facility Radioactive Material License Amendment 10, issued by
the State of California Department of Health Services, dated January 19, 1995.
7. Additional telephone discussions with Molycorp personnel regarding the source of
cement used in stabilization of the Drummed Uranium Material.
The information is sufficient to conclude that the Drummed Uranium Material was
generated from a known process under the control of the generator. As described below,
Ihe information was also iufficient to confirm that the Drummed Uranium Material is not
and does not contain any RCRA listed hazardous waste.
3.0 Application of IUSA^IDEQ Hazardous Waste Protocol to Molycorp
Drummed Uranium Material
3.1 Source Investigation
Several of the information sources enumerated above were used to perform the Source
Investigation indicated in Box I of the Protocol Diagram. Molycorp's characterization of
the Drummed Uranium Material was based on a number of radiological and chemical
char acteization sampl es including :
l. Radiological samples from six drums analyzed for total uranium content, total
thorium content, and radium-228 content.
2. Chemical characteiz.ation samples from six drums analyzed for TCLP, STLC,
and TTLC for 17 metals, and thorium and uranium.
It should be noted that the frequency of six samples from 36 containers, or one-in-six, is
higher than the one-in-ten to one-in-twenty sampling frequency recommendgd by U.S.
pie for environmental characterizationof homogeneous drummed material. That is, the
Drummed Uranium Material can be considered well-characterized.
Molycorp's characteization of the Drummed Uranium Material was also based on the
known pio""tr history of a material that has remained, for its entire life cycle to date,
under control ofthe generator.
3.2 Other Determination Methods in the IUSA^IDEQ Protocol
Even when a proposed alternate feed material was produced by a known process under
the control of th" generator, IUSA requires that its regulatory consultant perform, as a
mater of due diligence, an independent evaluation of any hazardous waste or
hazardous/toxic material requirements that may apply to the material based on its
chemical composition, process source, or handling history.
The protocol describes additional steps IUSA will take to assess whether contaminants
*.o.iut.d with any potential RCRA waste listings are present in the material, and the
likelihood that they resulted from RCRA listed hazardous wastes or RCRA listed
processes. These include tabulation of all potential listings associated with each known
chemical contaminant in the material, and the review of chemical process and
materiaVwaste handling history at the site to assess whether the known chemical
contaminants in the material resulted from listed or non-listed sources. This evaluation is
described in Box 8 and Decision Diamonds 9 through 11 in the Protocol Diagram.
Although the requirements of Box 8 and Decision Diamonds 9 through l l are not
applicable to the Drummed Uranium Material (because the Drummed Uranium Material
was produced by a known process under the control of the generator), I have nonetheless
utilized this approach to perform a rigorous and complete evaluation.
4.0 Chemical Contaminants in Molycorp Drummed Uranium Material
The chemical charact eizationdata used in this evaluation is discussed below.
Chemistly of Bastnasite Ores
Bastnasite ores contain uranium, thorium, and a wide range of secondary metals, in
addition to lanthanide series elements and other rare earth elements. The concentrations
of secondary metals vary depending on the source and grade of the ore body. According
to Molycorp personnel, the Mountain Pass facility mines and recovers minerals from an
ore body that contains barium, copper, lead, zinc and a number of other metals.
In the Molycorp mineral recovery circuit, leach liquor solution containing the desired rare
earths is separated into a solid cerium portion and a liquid heavier lanthanide portion.
The ceriumportion is either packaged or further purified. Lead and iron are removed
from the liquid portion, which is then sent to further product refining and production
steps. Othei metals, such as copper and zinc, are co-precipitated with the lead to varying
degrees. The quality of Molycorp's lanthanide and rare earth products depends to a large
de$ee on the efficiency at which lead and these other metals are removed in the
precipitation/clarification steps. The purer the rare earth products are (lower
concintrations of these metals), the greater the concentrations of these metals will be in
the lead sulfide sludges and lead sulfide filter cake. As operations at Mountain Pass have
been improved over the years, more copper and zinc have been precipitated with the lead.
Molycorp began the reintroduction of stabilized lead sulfide sludges for further recovery
of lantatranidevaluesin 1985. Asaresultof thisreintroduction,higherlevelsof some
metals such as copper and zinc were precipitated with the lead sulfide sludge. As a
result, the lead sulfide sludges that were drummed after 1985 for offsite recovery, on-site
stabilization, and later on-site recovery, contained higher levels of copper and zinc than
the sludges transferred to the ponds before 1985.
Hence, it should be expected that analytical data provided by Molycorp for the Drummed
Uranium Material, which was produced after 1985, should show higher concentrations of
these metals than the analytical data from the Pond Uranium Material, which was
produced earlier.
Chemistry of Stabilization
As described in Section 1.0, above, the drummed sludges to be shipped to IUSA were
produced from a lead sulfide filter cake that was stabilized by the addition of commercial
iodium silicate and commercial stabilization cement. Commercial stabilization (or
.,chemical fixation") cements are dry mixtures of varying concentrations of silica,
alumina, lime (calcium oxide), iron oxide, and/or magnesia, which activate and harden
when mixed with water to create an inorganic matrix that binds specific metals. Since
stabilization is generally performed to prepare materials for transport or disposal, addition
systems that do not significantly increase the resulting volume of material are preferred.
sltilization is generally performed under conditions that result in a total addition of
treatment agents (silicatisplus cements) of 3 to 15 percentby weight. The constituents
of the additives, such as silica and lime, are not RCRA regulated wastes themselves, and
are made up primarily of naturally occurring cations such as calcium, iron, and silicon.
In summary, the stabilization agants added to the Molycorp lead sulfide sludge would
have been:
l. small in volume, and
2. non-hazardous
The stabilized drum contents were later treated by the addition of mineral acids, such as
hydrochloric acid, to break the inorganic matrix, and were reintroduced to the bastnasite
circuit. The acidified material, a portion of which constitutes the Drummed Uranium
Material, would be expected to have higher levels of chloride or other acid anions than
the Pond Uranium Material-
Comparison of Pond Uranium Material And Drummed Uranium Material Data
Based on the total metals analysis, thirteen metals, antimony, arsenic, beryllium,
cadmium, chromium, cobalt, mercury, molybdenum, nickel, selenium, silver, thallium
and thorium, which were present at either moderate or very low (trace) levels in the Pond
Uranium Material, were also present at the same levels in the Drummed Uranium
Material. Based on the total metals analysis, the concentrations of trvo metals, barium
and lead, were at least one order of magnitude (ten times) lower in the Drummed
Uranium Material, and the concentrations of two metals, copper and zinc, were one order
of magnitude higher in the Drummed Uranium Material.
According to Molycorp personnel, the presence of each of these metals is typical in
bastnasitJ ores at vurying concentrations. As described above, variations in
concentrations of barium and lead are also typical in the range of bastnasites ores
managed at MolYcorP.
The material accumulated in the ponds was generated from ores managed up to 1985.
The material stabilized and later returned to the mineral recovery operation was generated
from ores managed from 1985 to 1995. It would be expected that levels of some of the
secondary metals, such as barium and lead, in the ores managed in those different
decades would vary appreciably, either up or down.
As described at the beginning of this section, Molycorp made operational changes after
1985 that would be expected to increase the levels of copper and zinc in lead sludges
collected after 1985. The higher levels of copper and zinc in the Drummed Uranium
Material relative to the Pond Uranium Material are consistent with this process
information.
Based on all of the above information, it can be concluded that:
l. The metals content of Molycorp Pond Uranium Material and Drummed Uranium
Material are reasonablY similar.
2. Natural variation in the quality of ores contributed to differences between
concentrations of some metals in Pond Uranium Materials and Drummed
Uranium Material.
3. Operational modifications after 1985 appear to have increased copper and zinc
levels in Drummed Uranium Material produced after 1985, compared to Pond
Uranium Material, which was produced prior to 1985.
4.1 Organic Contaminants at Molycorp
According to the Molycorp flowsheet and operational description, the Drummed
Uranium Material, like the Pond Uranium Material, would not be expected to contain any
organic contamination. This is consistent with site operating history as described by
t"f,phon. conversations with Molycorp personnel, and in the Lead Sulfide Ponds Closure
plan, indicating that no organic compounds were produced at the facility and no organic
chemicals were introduced into the mineral recovery operation.
4.2 RCRA Status of Metals at Molycorp
Lead
The major inorganic contaminants in the Molycorp sludges, both in the ponds and drums,
are inoiganic compounds of lead. The analytical data provided by Molycorp indicate that
six of the drums were tested for total lead, and one was tested for TCLP lead'
The test results for all six drums of the drums tested indicated elevated levels of total
lead. The leachate test results for the one drum sample tested for TCLP contained a lead
level in excess of the RCRA TCLP threshold value of 5 mg/L in 40 CFR 261 Table l,
..Maximum Concentration of Contaminants for the Toxicity Characteristic." That is, the
material in only one drum is known to contain the toxicity characteristic ("TC") for lead.
However, Molycorp has assumed, based on generator knowledge and the total lead data,
that all six drums contain lead in concentrations above the RCRA TCLP threshold.
According to Molycorp personnel, the presence of varying concentrations of lead is
typical in bastnasite ores. Extraction of bastnasite ore is not a RCRA listed process.
However, for thoroughness of this evaluation, all potential RCRA listed waste sources
associated with lead have been reviewed.
Depending on their industrial source, some lead-bearing wastes may carry RCRA
hazardouJwaste listings. No non-specific (no "P" or "IJ") listings are associated with
lead or lead compounds. According to 40 CFR 261 Appendix VII, eighteen specific
sogrce listings may apply to wastes containing lead. The potential RCRA listings are
itemized in the attached Table l. Each listing is based on a specific chemical or
industrial process. However, as described below, none of the 18 listings is applicable to
the Drummed Uranium Material.
Four "F" listings are associated with lead. They specifically apply to wood treating
wastewater, refinery wastewater, or leachates from land disposal of six F-listed chemicals
and solvents. No wood treating, petroleum refining, or land disposal of chemical waste
was conducted on the Molycorp site. None of the F listings is applicable to the Drummed
Uranium Material.
Fourteen "K" listings are associated with lead. They apply specifically to wastes from
pigment production, petroleum refining, steel furnaces, iron and steel pickling, copper
production blowdown streams, lead smelting, or ink formulation. No pigment
production, petroleum refining, steel milling, iron or steel pickling, copper production,
iead smelting, or ink formulation was conducted on the Molycorp site. None of the K
listings is applicable to the Drummed Uranium Material.
Based on all of the above information, none of the lead compounds in Drummed
Uranium Material are indicative of RCRA listed hazardous waste.
Zinc
No RCRA TCLP threshold has been established for zinc. However, based on the total
metals analysis, nearly all the drums analyzed had elevated levels of zinc. According to
Molycorp personnel, the presence of zinc is typical in bastnasite ores. As described in
Section 4.0, above, the elevated levels of zinc in the Drummed Uranium Material can be
attributed to operational changes that increased zinc removal from the rare earth products.
However, for thoroughness of this evaluation, all potential RCRA listed waste sources
associated with zinc have been reviewed. These are itemized in the attached Table2.
One "IJ" listing, tJ24g, is associated with zinc. It applies specifically to disposal of less
than l0 percent solutions of the commercial chemical zinc phosphide, which is used
solely aJ a rodenticide. Molycorp did not synthesize or use this compound. The U
listing is not applicable to Drummed Uranium Material.
Three "P" listings are associated with zinc. Pl22 applies specifically to disposal of
greater than 10 percent solutions of the commercial chemical zinc phosphide, which is
used solely as a rodenticide. Molycorp did not synthesize or use this compound. Pl2l
applies specifically to disposal of the commercial chemical zinc cyanide, wlich is used as
"itt., an insecticid. or in plating solutions. Molycorp did not synthesize or use this
compound. P2O5 applies specifically to the disposal of the commercial chemical zinc bis
ldimethylcarbamodithioato S-S'), which is used as an accelerator in synthesis of vinyllic
potymers via"zipper" polymerizationreactions. Molycorp did not synthesize or use this
lompound. NonL of the P listings is applicable to the Drummed Uranium Material.
Based on all of the above information, the presence of zinc in the Drummed Uranium
Material is not indicative of RCRA listed hazardous waste'
Copper
No RCRA TCLP threshold has been established for copper. However, based on the total
metals analysis, half of the drums analyzed had elevated levels of copper. According to
Molycorp plrsonnel, the presence of copper is typical in bastnasite ores. As described in
Sectlon 4.6, above, the eievated levels of copper in the Drummed Uranium Material can
be attributed to process changes designed to increase copper removal from the rare earth
products. However, for thoroughness of this evaluation, all potential RCRA listed waste
iources associated with copper have been reviewed.
One .,p" listing, P}2g,is associated with copper. It applies specifically to disposal of the
commercial chimical cuprous cyanide, which is used in copper electroplating solutions,
as an antifoulant in commercial paint formulation, as an insecticide and as a reaction
catalyst in organic synthesis plants. No electroplating, commercial paint formulation, or
org#" synth-esis octurred on the Molycorp site. Molycorp did not synthesiz-e or use this
coirpound. The U listing is not applicable to Drummed Uranium Material.
There are no "IJ," "F," or "K" listings associated with copper'
Based on all of the above information, the presence of copper in the Drummed Uranium
Material is not indicative of RCRA listed hazardous waste.
Other Metals
The TTLC data from the six drums indicated that the Drummed Uranium Material
contained trace or low levels of antimony, arsenic, barium, beryllium, cadmium,
chromium, cobalt, mercury, molybdenum, nickel, selenium, silver, thallium and
vanadium. The Drummed Uranium Material did not exceed the RCRA TCLP threshold
values for any of these metals.
As described above, according to Molycorp personnel, the presence of all of these metals
is typical of bastnasite ores. However, for thoroughness of this evaluation, an additional
potlntial, but unlikely, source for these metals was considered.
The Drummed Uranium Material consists of material from two sources, which could
have potentially introduced metals. First, the lead sulfide sludges were generated directly
from the rare earth recovery process. Because the only operation Molycorp conducted at
the site was rare earth mineral recovery, and because the only material fed to the circuit
was bastnasite ore, all metals in the lead sulfide byproduct itself must have originated in
the bastnasite ore. Rare earth recovery from bastnasite ore is not a RCRA listed process.
Second, the drummed sludges were stabilized by the addition of commercial sodium
silicate and commercial Jtabilization cement. As described above, commercial
stabilization cements are dry mixtures of silica, alumina, lime, iron oxide, and/or
magnesia. Depending on the cement producer, the source of any of these components
,nu! U. either
-fresh riineral feeds or reclaimed waste materials fed to'the cement kilns
*d fu*u".r. As a result, some commercial cements derived from reclaimed materials
can contain levels of RCRA metals, or other contaminants, from the feed sources.
In order to assess the potential for introduction of additional metals via the stabilization
cement, I requested that Molycorp provide the name of the supplier from which they
obtained the tement. Molycorp used only one supplier, Mitsubishi Cement, of Luceme
Valley, Califomia for stabilization cement.
According to Ube Industries-Mitsubishi, the Mitsubishi U.S. cement facilities are not
reclaimin! kilns. That is, they utilize only freshly quarried or newly-mined mineral
feedstocki, and do not reclaim or burn wastes. Mitsubishi does, in fact, reclaim waste
such as coal ash, blast fumace slag, tire rubber, and sewage sludge, but only in their six
facilities in Japan. The cement purchased by Molyco{p was produced in a Mitsubishi
U.S. (California) facility that is not a reclaiming kiln.
Hence the stabilization cement added to the drummed lead sulfide sludge would not be a
secondary contributor of metals, or other RCRA contaminants, to the Drummed Uranium
Material, It can therefore be concluded that the metals identified in the Drummed
Uranium Material analytical data derived from the bastnasite ore source.
5.0 Conclusions
In summary, the following conclusions can be drawn from the Molycorp site information
presented above:
L There are no organic compounds in the Drummed Uranium Material. No RCRA
hazardous waste listings based on organic contaminants apply.
2. None of the metals or other inorganic elements in the Drummed Uranium Material
came from RCRA listed hazardous waste sources. No RCRA hazardous waste listings
based on inorganic contaminants apply.
3. The Drummed Uranium Material was generated by a known process under the control
ofthe generator.
4.
5.
6.
7.
The Drummed Uranium Material is not and does not contain RCRA listed hazardous
waste.
The information made available to me is consistent with the information requirements
set forth in the Protocol.
This determination of no RCRA listed hazardous waste is consistent with the decision
logic of the Protocol.
The determination via the Protocol Decision Diamond 2 that the Drummed Uranium
Material is not and does not contain RCRA listed hazardous waste is supported and
confirmed by the rigorous evaluation of every potential RCRA listing described in
this report.
/o//z/ol
October 17,2001Jo Ann Tischler
Consulting Chemical Engineer
l0
o
RCRA LISTINGSTABLE I @ev.0): SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL
ASSOCIATED WITH LEAI)
IN 40 CFR 261 APPENDIX VII
Commercial
Chemicals
Acutely
Toxic
U List
Commercial
Chemicals
Acutely
Hazardous
P List
Non-Specilic
Sources
F List
Specilic
Sources
K List
Is This Listing
Applicable to
Molycorp Lead
Sulfide Sludge?
NONE No U Llsungs
NONE No P Listings
F035
Wood treating wastewater
No. Molycorp
sludge is not from
this industry.
F037
Refinery oiVwater seParator
solids
No. Molycorp
sludge is not from
this indusfiry.
F038
Refinery secondary
oiUwater separator solids
No. Molycorp
sludge is not from
this industry.
F039
Leachates from land
disposal of wastes F20
through F22 andF26
throughF2S
No. Molycorp
sludge is not from
this industry.
K002
Wastewater treatnent sludge
from production of chrome
yellow pigment
No. Molycorp
sludge is not from
this industry.
K003
Wastewater treatment sludge
from production of chrome
molybdate orange pigment
No. Molycorp
sludge is not from
this industry.
K005
Wastewater treatment sludge
from production of chrome
green pigment
No. Molycorp
sludge is not from
this industry.
Page I
oo
TABLE I (Rev. 0): SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL RCRA LISTINGS
ASSOCIATED WITH LEAI)
IN 40 CFR 261 APPENDIX YII
Commercial
Chemicals
Acutely
Toxic
U List
Commercial
Chemicals
Acutely
Hazardous
P List
Non-SpeciIic
Sources
F List
Specific
Sources
K List
Is This Listing
Applicable to
Molycorp Lead
Sulfide Sludge?
K046
Wastewater treatnent sludge
from production of lead based
explosive initiators
No. Molycorp
sludge is not from
this industry.
K048
Petroleum refining dissolved
air flotation ("DAP"; solids
No. Molycorp
sludge is not from
this indusfiy.
K049
Petroleum refining slop oil
emulsion solids
No. Molycorp
sludge is not from
this industry.
K05l
Petroleum refining API
separator solids
No. Molycorp
sludge is not from
this industry.
K052 Petroleum refining
leaded tank bottoms
No. Molycorp
sludge is not from
this industry.
K06l
Steel electric furnace emission
control dust/sludge
No. Molycorp
sludge is not from
this indusky.
K062
Iron and steel manufacturing
pickle liquor
No. Molycorp
sludge is not from
this industry.
K064
Acid plant blowdown
thickener slurry/sludge from
primary copper production
blowdown
No. Molycorp
sludge is not from
this industry.
K069
Emission control dust/sludge
from secondary lead smelting
No. Molycorp
sludge is not from
this industry.
Page2
oo
TABLE I (Rev. 0): SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL RCRA LISTINGS
ASSOCIATED WITH LEAD
IN 40 CFR 261 APPENDIX VII
Commercial
Chemicals
Acutely
Toxic
U List
Commercial
Chemicals
Acutely
Hazardous
P List
Non-Specific
Sources
F List
Specilic
Sources
K List
Is I'his Listing
Applicable to
Molycorp Lead
Sulfide Sludge?
K086
Solvent, caustic and water
wash sludges from ink
formulation
No. Molycorp
sludge is not from
this industry.
Kt00
Waste leach solution from acid
leaching of emission control
dusVsludge from secondary
lead smelting
No. Molycorp
sludge is not from
this industry.
Page 3
t
I TABLE 2
o
@ev.0):
o
RCRA LISTINGSSUMMARY OF POTENTIAL
ASSOCIATED WITH ZINC
IN 40 CFR 267
Commercial Chemicals
Acutely Toxic
U List
Commercial Chemicals
Acutely Hazardous
P List
Non-Specilic
Sources
F List
Specilic
Sources
K List
Is This Listing
Applicable to
Molycorp Lead Sulfide
Sludge?
u249
Zinc phosphide
<1006 solution
No. Sole use is as a
rodenticide. Molycorp
did not synthesize or use
this product.
P205
Zinc bis (dimethylcarbamo
dithioato S-S')
No. Used as polymer
accelerator. Molycorp
did not synthesize or use
this product.
Pt2l
Zinc cyanide
No. Used as an
insecticide or as plating
solution. Molycorp did
not synthesize or use
this product.
Pt22
Zinc phosphide
>llYo solution
No. Sole use ls as a
rodenticide. Molycorp
did not synthesize or use
this product.
NONE No F Listings
NONE No K Lrsttngs
Page I
INrsnNATro*orO
UneNIul,t (use)
ConponATIoN
IndependencePlaza, Suite 950. 1050 Seventeenth Street. Denver, CO 80265.303 628 7798 (main)'303 389 4125 (fax)
July 20, 2001
VIA FACSIMILE AND US MAIL
Mr. Dennis Downs
Utah Department of Environmental Quality
168 North 1950 West
P.O. Box 144850
Salt Lake City, UT 84114-4850
Re: IUSA's Request for a License Amendment
Material From the Molycorp Site
Source Materials License No. SUA- 1358
Dear Mr. Downs:
N\"t\$f-)
0)A
to Receive arrd Process
I refer to your letter dated May 2,2001 in which you asked us to address certain questions
relating to tlre application of RCRA recycling guidance to the Molycorp alternate feed materials.
As I discussed with Mr. Don Verbica of your department in early June of this year, IUSA is
currently in discussiorts with both EPA and NRC on the issue of whether or not RCRA recycling
guidance is applicable to alternate feed materials that are approved by NRC for processing at a
uranium mill.
We are in the process of preparing a submission to NRC on this matter, which we expect to
complete and submit during the week of July 30,2001. We will provide you witlr a copy of our
submission at tlrat time, for your review and consideration.
As the issue of whetlrer or not RCRA recycling guidarrce is applicable to the Molycorp materials
is still under discussion, we felt it more appropriate to address that issue first, rather tlran to
respond to the specific questions in your letter of May 2"d atthis time.
If you have any questions or concerns, or disagree
contact me at your convenience at [phone].
with the approach outlined above, please
cc: William J. Sinclair, UDEQ
Scott Anderson, UDEQ
Don Verbica, UDEQ
R. William von Till, NRC
Ron F. Hoclrstein,IUSA
Michelle R. Rehmann, IUSA
John Espinoza, Molycorp
C :/EXEC/Dave/Letters/200 I /l USA-Molycorp Letterdenn isdowns07200 I .doc
,e^ 1., i.J,, 3I?-v(rr^. ."t"Ytrrerar'9
t and General Counsel
INrBnNerro*ol
UneNtuu
ConponerloN
Independence Plaza, Suite 950 . 1050 Seventeenth Street . Denver CO 80265 . 303 628 7798 (main) . 303 389 4125 (fax)
July 20,2001
VIA FACSIMILE AND US MAIL
Mr. Melvin Leach, Director
Fuel Cycle Licensing Branch
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Mail Stop T-8A33
2 White Flint North
11545 Rockville Pike
Rockville, MD 20852
Re: Request for a License Amendment to Receive and Process Alternate Feed
Material from the Molycorp Site
Source Material License SUA-I358
Dear Mr. Leach:
Futher to our conversations with Mr. Bill von Till of your staffi we confirm that
International Uranium (USA) Corporation is currently in the process of preparing a
supplemental submission to the above referenced license amendment request. This
supplemental submission will address concerns raised by the Environmental Protection
Agency relating to regulatory authority over the lead sulphide contained in the Molycorp
materials. We expect to file this supplemental submission during the week of July 30,
2001.
We therefore request that NRC maintain the above referenced license amendment request
open, pending receipt of this supplemental filing.
Vice President and General Counsel
cc: William J. Sinclair, UDEQ
R. William von Till, NRC
Ron F. Hochstein, IUSA
Michelle R. Rehmann, IUSA
G :/EXEC/Dav elLettersl2}}l ll USA-mleach 07200 I .doc
"ru
Sltli'",#*^,O**T-885 P.0l/01 Job-623
uneNruu (usA)
Conrona
InOcpeqd€ocePlsza,SuiEg5O , 1050Sev€atEer&Street , Denver,C080265 ,303628798(unio) , 3033894125(fo0
FACSIMILE TNANSMITTAL
William Sinclair, Director F'AINo: (8ol) s33.4097
UDEQ Division ofRadiation Control PHoNENoT (8ol) 5364255
FRoM: Michelle Rehmann DATE; Mrrch 20,2W
International Uranium Corporation PAOE I OF: 7
IF' ALL PAGES ARE NOT RECEIIED, PIEASB CALL: ShgTon CTTToII
PttomNo: [phone]
IMPORTAIiIT/CONFIDENTIAL: FAX rrnsuges aw someimss received by
of cquipmcnr failue or human error. TNs Communicatiort is intended sotely for Ure addressee shopn above. Hease mb$ orr offce imrcr
at any of &e telcphqrc or Fas nurnbers shown ebow if you are not the sddr€rsce tx sqneooc rocpotible for dotivering it to ttp addrcssoe, Wcrights and privileges as to this coqmunicatioo and prohibit any dissemination, di*ribution or copyirrg by u to ailrone ott o tnan 0E ddrpssee.r gfiiq) will errsnfg fglits rcturn uv the United ShLu postd S€,n ice or bv cornmercial carrier to rrr it no "o.t to *r.
\
'MAR-20-01 1 6:23 Fromr-oINTSnNATIoNAL
Unr;uuu (usl)
ConponlrroN
T-885 P.0?/01 Job-623
Independence Plcza Suite 950 o I05{) Seventeenth Street r f)enver, CO 8020,5 r 303 628 7798 (nrain) o 303 389 aL95 (fax)
March 20,2001
\lIA .EAq$MrrE ANp O\mRNrcTrT ExpRH.$
Mr. Phillip Ting, Branch Chief
Fuel Cycle Licensing Branch
U.S. Nuclerr Rqguletory Commiceion
2 Whito Flint Norttu Mail Stop T.BA33
I1545 Rockville Pike
Rockville, MD 20852
SUBJECT: AI\{ENDMENT 19 TO TVIATERIALS LICENSE SUA-13S8
AIVIENDMENT REQIJEST TO RECETIE A}'ID PROCESS AIIERNATE
FEED IT{ATERIAL FROM THE MOLYCORP SITE AT IIIE WHITE MESA
I.JRANIT.JM MILL
Deer lt[r. Ting:
InternationalUranium (USA) Corporation ('IUSA') hereby submits the following supplomentalinformatioq as req-uested by Mr. von Till, for consideration by thc U.S. Ifuclear iiegulatory
Commission (NRC") as it prepares an Environmental Assessment ('EA) relative to-ruSA's
request to receive and process alternrte feed materigl from the Molycorp site d thG White Mese
Uranium Mill (the l'y!tt"). In particular, ruSA herein summlrizes practices in place to (l)
minimize the potential for airborne lead exposure, ro borh rhe worker and tho public;-(Z) mitigiti
potential dust from the Mill sito; and (3) apply ALARA mearuros to interim managemlnt olthe
materisl prior to procesing which includes air monitoring appropriate to the fi:ed materiel.
PRACTICES TO MINIMIZE POTENTHL FOR AIRBOR}.IE LEAD E)(POSIJRE
IUSA has-in place the following practices to minimize the potential for airborne lead exposure,
to protect both the worker urd the public.
Mi n i m i zation g.f. Potenti al lVorker Ex, po-.s. lue.lo Airborne Lead
In a submittal darcd-January 5, 2001, ruSA firther evalu*ed the potential for worker cxpoEureto airborne lead during offloading operations. As detailed in the i*r.ry 5 submifid, based on
discussions with Molycorp, and as docurnented in the letter from Molycorp drted irnuary S,
3ry1' air monitoring dua for an operstion in which Molycorp handled comparaUle lead materiai
indicated there were no rosutts exceeding either the OSHA PEL limit (0.05 ;g/m3) or the OSHA
\UUCE6nniSYS\STAFnMRR\l{olpotp\MolyoorpEAinfo03l00 I tor&o
't1AR-20-01 l6:23 From:
Mr. Phillip Ting
March 20,200[
Page 2 of6
T-885 P.0g/07 Job-623
Action Lovel (0.03 mg/mt) for area and breathing zone samples. Molycorp indicated that it
believes thst there will be no significant rirborne leod expoures reuhing from the handling of
the lead sulfide pond material at IUSA because it has essentially identical composition and
moisture contont as the material handled during this operation. As Molycorp indicated, the air
monitoring results showed that the use of respiratory protection was not necesslry to meet
worker protcstion reguiremonts for lead, because tho resrlts wero below both action levels and
the PEL for lead.
As an addpd precautiott, dudng initial ofrloading of the material, ruSA will analyze breathirrg
zone and uer drbome semples for totel lead to cnslre th* thg volues obtcined are below the
PEL limit and Action Level for lead listed above. If either of theee valuee are met or e:rceeded,
IUSA will require use of respintory protection until and unless monitoring data indicate that this
requirement may be safely reduced. In addition, depending upon initial lead reurlts, IUSA will
determine the frequency to be used for any follow+rp air lead analysis during offloading of the
motcrid.
Finally, IUSA understands, based upon discussions with Molycorp's Industrial Hygienist, that
the OSIIA and MOSH standards are typically designed to be conscrryative, in thet they typically
proteot against the more bioavailable form of a chemical. The biorvailEbility of lead sulfidc is
low rolativc to ccrtain othcr morc bioavailablc forms of lcad; thcrcforc, mccting thc OSTIA PEL
limit and OSHA Action Level listed above is more protective for a lead compound such as leEd
sulfida, the form of lead in the Molycorp material, than for more bioavaileble lead compounds.
As reported in Impact of lxad-Contaminated Soil on hrblic Health (U.S. Department of Health
and Human Services, Public Health Service, Centers for Disease Control, Agency for Toxic
Substanccc and Discasc Rcgietry, Chorlcs Xintaras, ScD., Ivlay 1, 1992):
"The impact of exposure to lead-contaminated soil on PbB levels is also
influenced by the chemical and physical form of the lead. Data from animal
feeding studies suggest that the oral bioavailability of lead snrlfide and lead
chromate is signifioontly less than the bioavailability of other leod salts (oxide,
acetate) @arltrop and Meek 1974)." "The reducod bioavailability of lead ftom
mine tailings may be related to its chemical form (lead sulfide) and itr larger
paniorlate size." (p. 12-13)
Minimization ofPotcntial Fublic Expo,Srtfq.lg.Airbomc l*ad during Transport
By letter dated Janulry 26,2001, ruSA detEiled the measures that Molycorp will omploy to
ensure thet no dust from the material will be roleased ftom transport vessels being transported
ftom the Molycorp site to the White Mesa Mill. Molycorp's trilBportation specialist, MP
Environmental Services, lno. ('MP";, provided details thst IUSA thon tranrmittcd to tho NRC
regarding tho issr.re of restricting potential firgitive dust to the interior of the transpofiation
vessels. The trmsportation specialist provided deteils on meesurer to be employed and
equipment specifications, as well (see letter from M.P. Environmental Services, Inc. to
International Uranium Corporetiorl lanuary 22,2001, Atachrnent I to IUSA submittal to NRC
\UUcCoRPlSYs\sTAf f${RR\N{ol ycorrp\rrdotyoupEAinltr03200 I hrdos
'[lAR-20-01 l6:23 Fromr
Mr. Phillip Ting
March 20,20ol
Page 3 of6
T-885 P.04/07 Job-623
of Janrary 26, 20ol). MP indicated thu multipto rodundant me4surcs will be employed to
ensure thEt both potential fugitivc duat and potential froe liquids will bo re$ristod to tho interior
ofthe transport har.rl vessel
tvteesuroe for rectrioting potentiel fugftive duct to the interior of the transport veosels, witl includo
the following:
l. Prior to loading materids at,Molycorp. each end-dump trailer will be lined with pre-
fitted, durable linerg which nrill sorve as the primary containment for both potential dust
and liquid.
i
Z. -Free liquids" will bo decanted frorn materials prior to tho materials being placod in the
MP trailers for transpoG but the material will have'some moisfirre cotilent.
3. The dursble linere will be clpred end eeeled around the metoriel in e "Burito Wrap"
configuration, which wilt fully contain all materials. MP notes that "Bunito Wraps"
crcatc airtisht environments,,restricting any fugitive dusts &om escaping the tnnsport
vecsel, and that thoy aro commonly used in the transportation of friable asboetos msterials
and other corrumdities where airborno dust must be re$ricted to the interior of the
treneport voesol.
,
4. The "Bunito \I/rap" will be protected by a permanently attached vinyl tarpaulirq which ir
raery effective in keeping moiinrre out of the trailers during precipitation events ald also
5. Preventative maintenan@, censisting of instelling new rubber gssketq using silioone
caulklng around the gasket gur&ce and adjusting the alr opcrated tailgate locks in a
rnamer that allows the tigtrte$ seel, will be performed on each end-dump trailer
immediately prior to EtErtup ofthe project.
6. MP will maintain an inspection ohecklist that will include visual inspectionr of all Mpequipment (lncludlng tarpaqlins) related to Department of Truisportdion (DoT)
regulations.
7. Each MP unit will be checked for DOT oomplianoe prior to loading materiala et
Molycorp for shipmerrt to IUC.
ON.SITE DUST SI,'PPRES SION
IUSA's extensive Progrrm for rupprdeeing du*t *om the Mill site, ogtlined bolow, will oontinueto be performed routinely, In addition, certain additional meEEures described below underAPPLICATION OF ALARA PRINCIPLES TO INTERIM Ii,IAIVAGBMENT witl bo u*pfoy"O
for the Molycorp material.
\WTCORRSYs\sTAFfWRR\IttolycorprMotycqrpEAinfo032m t brdoc
't{AR-20-01 16:24 From:
Mr. Phillip Ting
Mardr 20,2001
Page 4 of6
T-885 P.05/07 Job-623
Dust Supgression Progrun
IUSA ro$inely conducts an extensive program for dust Buppression at tho Mitl, in eccordsnce
with the following permits and licenses:
l. September I I, 1997 Utah Division of Air Quality Approval Ordcr for White Mosa Mitt (Air
Quality Permit Conditions)
2. NRC Licens€ Renewal Applicarion for white Mesa Mill, sectione 2.0 , and 4.0
f!9 fgUoying mrbsections describe the dust suppression measures IUSA porforms in eocordancewith the forgoing permit and liconso roquirements.
I. Utah Air Quality Approvat Order
The Utah Air Quality Approval Order, ("AO") spociftes the steps the Mill must tako for fugitive
dust management. The AO reguires that all unpaved roads and operational aregs be wat-er or
chemically sprsyed to maintain opacity ct or bplow 20 percent. itre Mill complies with this
requirement, and in fact usog ilt even more protective standard, requring walering wery dry day,
6t/€ry windy dey, and any time any dust is viaiblo, ovcn if conaitions a,rc bcJow io po"orrt
opacrty.
The AO also requires the following:
l. Thot unpaved haul and Boteess rcads, rnd thc Mill arcn itrclf, have at lcest onc inch of
gravel cover or be watered to meet the 20 percent opacity requirement.
2. Watering of storoge piles as conditions warant,
3. Watoring of disturbed arcas.
4. Limits to the speed of compactors.
5. Minimum moisture content of four percent for offloaded materials.
6. Limits to the speed of hearry equipment to 12 mph during offloading operations
7. Minimum oquipment height during oftloading.
8. uee of duet controle, i.o. baghouse filters, for the ore grizzly.
9. Water spraying oflhe nillngs retention areas as neoded.
10. Spraying, as required, of soiland overburden stockpiles.
\UtrcCORHSY$\$IATnMRR\lt{otporp\MolycupEAinltf 3200I t€t doc
IlAR-z0-01 l6:21 From:
Mr. Phillip Ting
March 20,2001
Page 5 of5
T-885 P.06/07 Job-623
2. l99l Mll NRC License Renewal Applicetion
Tho August l99l NRC Liconsa Rcnowal Applicatioq tlcction 4.1.1 spocifice dust and fumc
oontrol meffures that will be used in each area of the Mill cirorit, the ore Btoakpiles, urd the
laboreiory. [n sccordsncc with this sectioq the ore *ockpilee will be inepeoted at least weekly,
watered as neoetsBry, and the water application logged. IUSA records demonstrate thgt
inspections are more &equent than required by the application.
For all stochild org including altcnratc feed ore$ the effrcicncy of airborne contamination
control meaEurcs will be daermined once the materid is in etoclcpile. Ae with all ore or altornate
fird *ockpiles, the Mill radiation staff inspect tho ore pad cockpile area daily to determine
whether or not any additional control measures may be required.
APPLICATION OF ALARA PRJNCIPLES TO INTERIM NfiNAC,EMEI{T
IUSA notcs that, while the ore prd and windborne measures routinely appliod are srfficient to
provide protoctive interim managernent of most feed materials, addcd measurps are available and
may be utilized in certain airoqmstoncer for low-volumo, high moifirrc contcnt matorials that
contain elevued metals. fu with all conventional oroe and eltenratE feed materiels, the Mill
routinely applies ALARA mea$res to interim management of the material prior to prooessing.
Such ALARA practices include air monitoring appropriate to the fced materiEl.
Consistont with its ALARA program, IUSA evoluated alternEtiver for ma,neging thc Molycorp
alternate feed material and intends to employ the following additional precautions:
The muerial will be placed on I concrcf,e pad that will be bermed around tlre edges to
contain moisture. The pad near the sample plant will be modifred to handle this materiat
(including remoral of the concrete dividers and tcmponry berming of the edges). Irt
addition to the foregoing pad, a ooncreto pad near the trommel Ecroen will also be used.
We beliove that the concrete pads will be sufficient to hardle all of the material.
However. if the voluma is Ereatcr then that which can be accommodated on tho concrote
pads, comparable methods will be considered forthe exce$r volume.
Due to the high moisturo content of the Molycorp material, ruSA anticipates tlur the
routine dust suppression program detailed above will be adeguate to mitigato any dustingpotentiel. However, should conditions warrant furthcr meerurcs to prwcnt potentii
windborne contamination from the piles one of two methods will be considered:
application of a zurfactantl or, oovering of the piles with reinforoed plastio. The final
confrguration of the piles will determine which application will be used.
To minimize the duration between receipt of the material and processing the tdolyaorp
mrtarirl.will be prooocrod prior to the processing of ehher the Iriado or Ashlerd natorial.
l.
3.
\UUCCORHSySUSf, AFFMRR\Molycorp\MolycorpEAinfo03200 I tcr.doc
T-885 P.fi/01 Job-623
Mr. Phillip Ting
March 20,2001
Page 5 of5
AIR SAMPLING
Consistent with IUSNs ALARA progrrm, addcd air sampling applopri*c to the dternrte feed
will be conducted rs desoribcd above under Min-irUiaation -O[ Pgtrntisl-lU-o,gkgf -Brposure to
Airborne Leod
rusA apprecisteE NRC'I timely rcvicw of this r€quest, and we will be pleaeed to rospond
promptly to rny further questions NRC mry have. As always, I oan be reached at 303.389.4131.
Sincerely,--V7"fur*
Michelle R. Rehmann
Environmentel Menoger
MRR
cc: Roneld E. Borg
WilliamN. Deal
John Esplnoza/Ivlolycorp
David C. Frydenlund
Ron F. Hochstein
R. lViltiem von Till/NRC
William J. Sinclei/IJDEQ
Don Verbloa/UDEQ
Terry Browq U.S, EPA
Milt Iammering U.S. EPA
lnren Setlow, U.S. EPA
\UUcCOnP\SYS\STATRMRRU{otycorp\ltotycorpEAinfcfi2m I l€r".loc
INrgnNATro*orO
UneNIuu (use)
ConponerloN
Independenceplaza, Suite g50. 1050 Seventeenth Street o Denver, CO 80265.303 628 7798 (main) ' 303 389 al% $ax)
February 2,2001
Via Facsimile and Overnieht Mail
Mr. Phillip Ting, Branch Chief
Fuel Cycle and Safety and Safeguards Branch
Division of Fuel Cycle Licensing
Office ofNuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
2 White Flint North, Mail Stop T-7J9
11545 Rockville Pike
Rockville, MD 20852
SUBJECT: AMENDMENT 19 TO MATERIALS LICENSE SUA.1358
AMENDMENT REQUEST TO RECEIVE AND PROCESS ALTERNATE
FEED MATERIAL FROM THE MOLYCORP SITE AT THE WHITE MESA
URANIUM MILL
Dear Mr. Ting:
Intemational Uranium (USA) Corporation ("IUSA") hereby transmits the enclosed replacement
pages for the subject license amendment request. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
('NRC") staff contacted IUSA on January 18, 2001 with questions regarding this amendment
request, and also asked that IUSA provide a clearer copy of the NEL Laboratories report of
March 5, 1998. In IUSA's January 29,2001response, IUSA stated that a clearer printout of the
NEL Laboratories data report for radiometric analyses was being sent to IUSA from NEL
Laboratories, and would be transmitted to the NRC as soon as we received it, which we expected
to be no later than February 7.
IUSA notes that the enclosed copy of this data report is a new printout supplied by the
laboratory, and that the reprinting has resulted in more data printed per page than in the earlier
copy of the report provided in the December 19,2000 amendment request package. Therefore,
to avoid future confusion, IUSA suggests that the NRC please replace the previously-transmitted,
less legible copy of the data report contained in Attachment 2 of the December 19 amendment
request with the data report transmitted herewith.
As indicated in our submittal letter of December 19,2000, Molycorp plans to start shipping on
April 1, 2001. IUSA appreciates NRC's timely review of this request, and we will be pleased to
S :\MRR\Molycorp\MolycorpresptoNRCquestions02020 I letter.doc
Mr. Phillip Ting a -2-Or.o** z,zoor
respond promptly to any further questions NRC may have. As always, I can be reached at
303.389.4131.
, Sincerely,
)a
Michelle R. Rehmann
Environmental Manager
MRR
Attachments
cc: Ronald E. Berg
William N. Deal
John Espino zalMoly corp
David C. Frydenlund
Ron F. Hochstein
Bill von TillNRCEDEQ
Don Verbica/UDEQ
S :\MRR\[,Io lycorp\Mo lycorpresptoNRcquestions02O20 I letter. doc
*=k,T:?r",i:'=t
Phoenix . Burbank
ore*, way, suire o . *TJS,?ofLi[8
(7O?) 6s7-1010 . Fax (l02l 6l-15n
l€88€6&3282
CLIENT: Molycorp,Inc.
67750 Bailey Road
Mountain Pass, CA 92366
ATTN: GeoffNason
PROJECT NAME: NA
PROJECTNTJMBER NA
Arizona AZ,0520
California 1707
US Army Corps Certified
of Engineen
JAN 3 3 E[?
NELORDERID: L9802117
Attached are the analytical results for samples in support of the above referenced project.
Samples submitted for this project were not sampled by NEL Laboratories. Samples were received by NEL in
good condition, under chain of custody on2ll2l98.
Samples were analyzed as received.
Where applicable we have included the following quality control data:
Method blank - used to demonstate absence of contrmination or interferences in the analytical process.
Laboratory Contol Spike (LCS) - used to demonstrate laboratory ability to perform the method
within specificafions by spiking representative analytes into a clean marix.
Surrogates - compounds added to each sample to ensure that the method requirements are met
for each individual sample.
Should you have any questions or comments, please feel free to contact our Client Services departnent at (702)
657-1010.
s.\.rr,sislqt
Date
CERTIFICATIONS:
Reno Las Vesas Burbank
AZ05t8 A203252002 tt92
Certified Certified
Reno Las Veeas BurbankIdaho Certified CertifiedMontana Certified CertifiedNevada I.[V033 ]W052 CA084Washington Certified
Corporate Office & Reno Division . 1030 Matley Lane . Reno, NV 89502 . [phone]
z
rn
3P rg3rx'E'F9@a J)
463^o a
ffi@
at.
S t-.
!Es?O5.!r
ni;dg6
;=$s:ioSF:?ir60D
E$6-r,N-B?
E
o.I
zo
11oca,
-o
tr,
ot0D
zo:tJD-
+@-
N+I
o
z
m
eo3*
oDq
no
-o
oo_CL
CI'oer
=r0)C)
r)
;
'z
r}.I o\'
\)
W
F
rEfl
E
EI
oI
CL
d,{=o
=olo!o
oEL
I at
a
s
ilil
{-hI
=N\
S
\a-
H
I)
N
Nt
it
T---=
3.Ej.a,-,.4
^g!
:,e
U,
EItDtrd
\
Sr.D
:
r^,{.I
\N
!n
t\,
\Ar
I
oDof3o
s
\r(\'
rl
S
lh
$
N
t'\+
F\)
N
\1
!..
I)
t.,It o?t
E
!
5
ao,Dtro
{t
\
\
.r$
*
S
s
s
NW)I
oDof3o
..9=
Es53aJ.ri
TEl-e8
=Joo3s7.!--=
=.a-oOzte
,=a-oet
E
J-
E
3
=a-g
t
€5
5-3
o
=a!
E5
!)ait
=--E
a'-.
E-{
=-I
53.GtL3alo. l
1lOIrlAI=l-lrlilttt't3lclEI
=t3t
3l-tgltt*latolTIrlltIItl
EI<t{Ittrlit
puanterrat*r\t Ewfioanegrml
Services
Ouantqra Incotgatcd
t-lZ t 5 Ridcr frail North
Eatth CitY, Mis s oun 6 3 04 5
314 298'8566TebPhotu
314 298'8757 Fax
March 4,1998
Project Name
Quanterra Project Number
Date Received bY Lab
Number of SarnPles
CERTIFICATE OF AT.IALYSIS
Nevada Environmenal laboratories
758.01
February 13, 1998
Nine (9)
Soil
t., *@rra St. Iouis laboraory from Nevada
Environmenal I-aboratories. The following is a list of ttre samples and tre Qranterra identification
nurnbers:
CLIENT ID
P-Ll+z.2-2.5
P-8-2-5.&5.5
P-8-l{.0.6.5
P-8-5{.0{.5
P-2+1.BAG
ggnena fO
16940{01
16940403
16940005
rc940{07
r6940409
CLIENT ID
P-114.8-5.0
P-8-5-2.0-2.5
P-8-5:3.0-3.5
P-8{{.06.5
Oranterra ID
t6940N2
r69404M
16940{06
16940008
II. Analyrical Resuls/Methodology
The anaiytical results for this reporr are presented by analytical tests. Each set of daa will include sample
identification information, ttre analytical resuls, and the appropriae detecdon limits'
The anralysis requested: Gross Alpha/Beta. Gamma. Isotopic Thorium. Isotopic Uranium and Radium
226t228
m. Qualit-v Control
rne qa;q6 information can be found immediately following tre analytical data. This QA/@ data are
*.0 il T.* ttre laboraory's accuracy and precision during t5e analytisd procedure'
V. Comments/Nonconforlnances
There were no nonconformances experienced wi*r these samples.
Reviewed and aPProved:
Jfhn D. Powell
z
IT.rt r6= -:: h'IQ@(a JJ
=<>g3:40, \.'^oa
ffi
@
5-o
aB
SA;egr s.
-Ldo,c)5.NiBx>;gs6:=ts\chqF,:?iroo@oP<oJooGrOD&-osio@oo,o
oJ
Pz
c'Ti
ec.a
-.1otr
f,o-oEooo
CL
tr
!,oc:,o.
ooof3
@
(,l
ooQ!,az!-9o3Eg
5o-
N5
J-i
o
=o
7
rfl!-
CLof
6'o
6':t
oE)!,oa.
@
,
sa
Matrix (Box #1)
oca,oCL
@o!t
=8Ba .\)
=3<{-
=1o
-2.8eedoa
9o'o{o-6
[-EI
ls'l;ll
I :-l
I
-is&
I
L_l
H
Lfl
H
li'Fl
c{4AF;=t59Ecs€o 1ais6qfocae:609=6o,66P
Eo
eoo?8q
3oo6co
FIo
6E
o
ooroc
IL
o
=o
P
E7!Ddq
a
o!It5
6
E6
c
oo
o.c3ottoeo.of':
6
3Ij-6
Do*6
oI
EAcEI
=o
ed
E,t
3o
5)
E!I!rE-rIae:
--! : r{a&,-.::::..i o E N-OO o -Cr<; a6Do <o a6 a ..D-ti.. o >a.. D O llt'l, o:. a<- D-.D:E-qt olcL .<3EGDO€)moR). (,. O<C'
1Foo:qB;,oaa0(,?
?oolog
o
o
oo
N:|.o-:co.D.','oi*t:o
€o€c,
-rrOD:toooAO
nt at!.,>8oaarlJ>O-Baaa!o
a
; ft. --E'F
o,
troro-lD
o
!o
x
3t, oDO€r
o(L
-E'oooo
8.
>9too,
Noo.
E'gDAaoo!
!D
E6
o
,tooc
^ att U,
>38
E
5
,
-'! -
a
Ia-Il\,
NiN
vl
.F
o
Ut
o
!-'-- ! - "'!- !-' -!
[e-mail],lNaaaalOrirl 6Nt,l
00crcroiarltO\lIOrNf,lututuvlu
JJsggs-tF5.\OC'OC'tall8rt8SlraN
J6O\O\ro€\oJ\55ocro
tllcroc,croo{o.u
aro66or0rF a! .1, \OAFBEJJ'Ioi6CrOrn rt c, c,6crtOOA\ ,Fto(,ta J
C'q,
o0
0q
o6
oI€vl
c,q,
c€
IUI
ooA'N\\d9r ar\\\O€oc!
croerogeoo90EFNFIU1uFNNNdlrtNtrrrlYN^rNt!Nuuuiiitinvtul-urvr
66€649€to9966666666o8
crc)er9.99099c,E F. F F: F : F . . N' .N 11' Iv
rsNI\iNNNN!v!!NlJ i.- i, ii rri it ti in vr vr
6666e4€ese686d6666co8
!oaoo
6! 6' 6t g, 6r 6, 6' E' G' O q ? 3) l, G! c) o 6t o o a E'+- - - - - - i i - - - - - - a I :!'t r I ! ?d 6 d .t d d d d ct d d g ct c, I I 9 o o c I Id 6 6 t, It 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 c O 10 o o o 1! I6 6 6 ii Vt ni 6 6 6 si o @ h o o ut o o o o o o
5 Es Es Ei Eig 3g 3 g 3 g 3g sEBF
OrIo\
C'Io\
Ut
N
I
aE
6!
66Vru,ooo0o ,t, ut u, v, a4 U'66-ooOooa.-
ooGa@\\c, c)rO \O\\!O \Ouvt
cron, lu\\JJlrl l,f\\\O€cao
oooI
\ovt
oN
lrls
CD
ooo60e\\\oclorO !O .\O\\\iOtOorrr r,l v!
croc,|\'IuN\\\JJur tr l,\\\€€€c)oc,
E=fiilASSEESi{sSss3sEESE
r.N^rNe.N{=r..orP66tsti :," ii a I S d u $ b !o E f e ur : { vr o { N--iEao
. . lrl 9l Ut Ur { { 9r O .,. 5 Ul { t,. .r u Jt P I I 6aaa,; ; B iHs3 B a:tsusEBssuuEi,
rTT 8 BTB BtTEs E8B TEEBEEE6fiiiiiiiii-F-a--H ii\ \ \ \ { \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ }d ct d 6 d d d ct 6t 3t 6 ct 6 6 6, 6 6, C, o G,
.' DtrNOO ta-O<b. A O.Do <o --ooo>!a ra>l.. o OmrD E:. rt<- O-lD-1
E ofcL .<3i6.Dto2mea
=9ao<o
ar9gfvt;:to-aBo .'
?oDOcfo
o
o
oo
tu.o-c0r'o1)r,,ro
90<to
-croo.
=.to6AO
tn,'tt>A
H5.nC'N\Go\t\,No
Ae
o5
E'O
EToaD
oa
-0,
1
x
vr060€r
oo.
ateoo
oo
8.
>9,oo-
6o-
!D
I
i6
o
-ooc
^ ,ll (rl
>3t
C'!DA,oot
E
ct
a
!-I
a.
N
N
N
tt
l
a
aiq,
ul
C)
uroooa4oo.oooU' V' U' U'oooou, |t,oo
s$$,\5Fooottl8t8(,rt\rr
o\ O\ O.{r€\oara.5oooalc)oc)oooorUr5
38ddd--i,\o!gir-55!aixocroJlt$$8ttoo€c.{ur vlo€,
a -
oooggeo660c66-6odooocee.5 5 € 6 a -€ .€66G.o€99firirJrtirrrrvt
crooo\\--oc,-\\\o rouur
ooooI!?oICoc,NNNFEFN-NN.NnrnlriNNNrNnrNNNoro\s\'d66ii6-oo'-o'€<r<r.o!t9€€96<l68d866d6660
- - - - - - ,, - ,, 4 ? - = - - - - - - - - -I s1 I 4 I I I I I Il g I i + i i I i I i i5it5 5.i5. 5 5 i i i i I ?,!, tI :.! LLuuuHSNSH$HHHHHSN$HNH$N
(30NN\\JJtl,\\rOOoo
oN
NC'
\oo
oN
No
rOo
oocNNN\\\Jrr lI ua\\\<) ro \ocaoE
oooNNN\\\NNNc)cro\\\<, <, roo@E
crooi\'NN\\\JJJlrJ lf l,\\\iorc\Oocp@
ocr(tIUNN\\\NNNocro\\\<, io toqr00E
oN
t,
\o@
C'N
NC'
rO@
oN
NC'
iOo
-
oN
No
rO
CD
to€o
B ilPPie&H!siidtsiillssuH
5 5 o o iv tu o\ q, O 5 g\ oE 5 il i I { a' G
Or
,. l,,o,o"- _i.o\ rra N rr cr..c, N',rv o ,9. g gr I s !, !,,a; ; N c, o\ o i, L 6 c, o n, N E 14 J q. l, N,F o c):;E-i6ONvtcr'Fuo
. . G, G, G, G, - G) - (, C, O C, O C, C, O r Ct r !'aa; ; bEhFdEBEBFsEBEilEtsE6S
rTET;EEBBHHB;sEsEEEEEEfifiii,;ii;.a-E-ii ii ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; -- ; ; ;
.o r tr a\--, OGNOo gl -.cr<E i60o <o e6 'D >D; ao >',t. D .llll., o,- a<
- O-.6-'te <. GoB. q3o89mcra,9aD<c)is
=oaaoo .'
?ooog
B
o.'
oo
t\, .::.0-:CO:E1-,
:l:io
r.to€c,
!clOD,o.lGAO
tB->,U'Oaa-outt
fra OC)ct{.r'o
5
(,F
ot
E'Otro.'
D
o.|
E'!&'laoo!
-0)
x
at, 0EO€r
.DA
-e,oooioo
o(L
>C',oo,?o
NoEL
!o
D!6
o
,ooE
'^fiui
\aaoro3Yt o
5
a
g
a-
!
I
Itu
I\,
J\,
o\<la\C'Ioo
o\\o5oIoC)n
!
I.F
5
0P
tt
!
CDINIU!c
v!
ortO5e
C'o
!- !aaqrcoa a.-vrt'lO.Nooal_o.Nut v!
?TcDo.h .ia-aI:"C' C'e&vr ul
;
a@
or
or
C'
ao\u
o.<t.\oooa-
o\rO5C'
oovr
o\IsC)
C'oor
o\tO5o
aoo
6<t.\C'oo@
U'oU'ou,ou,ou,oU'ot,oU'o
o@
c)s
I
c,l\,
II
\oc
oN
I\,UI
I@
c!N
N
rOct
c,o
C'\o
I
oN
9r€o
(,N
n,vr
rOo
eN
N
\o.D
oCD
o€€UI
o
II
Ie
oI\,
N
\o
Ca
(,N
N
\oo
C)o
c,€
I
(f
Ll€o
oN
N
iOo
oN
N
rOo
c,o
ct6
\ol,I
(f,\,
ur
Io0
C'N
tUl,I
\oo
oT\,
N
rOo
oC'
C)rOI
C'tu
II
rO
CD
o!\,
Nvl
iOo
C'N
tu
oo
oE
C'II
c,N
9a
I6
e-N
]\,vl€o
oN
N
tOo
c,6
otO
\orrr
o,u
II
rOta
C'N
Nu!
tOq,
C'N
N
!Oo
!oGo
i s i i i i i i i i i i i i li i i iii i i iFI iE iiF iiiiIiiii i i F i i.5,?I*u**s**8**8*HBUHSHHEUHBB
Ii;igiEIiIEi[;;il[ilIiiIII
- a .l-.l-i { *'- ,r--- q. !e t o\ u q i I - o\ 'ar { { to -'
t i i t b i \ b I b b L i! d b' s ts I { vr o o o\ b
- r r r tt, - r G' r o G) n N 5 U! O I Ct I J - - i I
=
il I I i I h i 5 i I I I b h ; I i b k ii i? li i
E E E EE E EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE;;;;;;s;5;;; ;;; ;;; ;;;;; ;
!.:-:f:(ri&Z:1 OEN'o g, -cr<b. iODo <o -ra.a o >D.t lo >l -:ro t. Ontcl t:r i(- D-a--t
!i o,(L .<3DOO!O,mcra,I,.D<C'-troogEo.,3Da.aoo .,
7.Drol,ro
o
o
oo
-F>agroa,-ooa
t,.oC'C, -a5e
5
N :o-cDOa.)o.*,o
\oo\o6
!ftOD
toOGAO
Ct-
o,
C'Or
D
o
C'!ot,ootl
!D
I
o0DD€r
oo.
,coo
oo
oe
>E,too6
N
&
.E
E?E
6
o
-o..E
^?a u,
>3E
E
5
a!
-
N
a
aE
6t
o.rooIC'o<,
ortE7x
OrvtE
R
oo
clU'
o\urocoa-I
ano
3'Oo
ctl\,
IIo6
oN
Nu
roo
oN
N
1oE
-
oN
rOo
oN
N
rO
GE
o
Nvt
ro@
oN
N
tOo
6atoo
oq,
c,{-I
.rrerooNa\!.|.rl.-g...c)crc).o oturN,\'€
.r.o)Grocr-oaal.!"==n8d8
r r rE 3 t t B tmmmts-.r3r.ib;;;;;
--=====r-600000000.-iat'rt't'lrtqqqqllfNNAT,\'NNA'NNSBtsSEBHBts
8B8i3i3F*cr{o{or{5-€
! '.- a}.-
' DENOa 6 -ct<b aoDo <.D o-6 0 >D.. ,t Otnla o5. ,<
- DJTo=l* 93it E -lt\Ofmc)-
=frlO1c,'tFctDtq=oaaoo .,
?oo.Dg
o
o
oo
,\),,o!coo1,
=o
roE<)E
!ootto
&B
-->!U'Oaa-ooa
LoEccr.l
3I
C'F
ot
C'DI
D
o
-o
x
rt, c,oo€r
6o-
,coooo
o(L
>E,,ooaFO
N
8.
!o
E
6
o
,,ooc
^filUt>3Ev-t D
c.oD'l,oo1,
E
e,
aa
.o
t
a.aN
N
N
Or<ta\o
oc)
iO!IoIA'IUI
oI
UT
UI
o\r.,..o
C)ol,
!Io,ur
aN
C'aN
o\rOa.oI(,oF
!
aoa
Ior
ct
ao.
vt
o\<)&ooou
...'j1::. ,.:: '' :::1. .
!!alOEaarrt tlaaor l,.
C, C)tagr lI
v! ur
!toIo\Ior
c,Ioru
&I5oat,o
o\{t5oaooN
o\tO
C'
ac,c,o\
o\ro
C)
c)o
Orict5(,
C'0E
ooooooooU'oU'oato
fslt$$hilili5 $rHE:IGiB$f B s
i B'u i il s E il ; il'E H i * . : i ; I s s l H s
sssEBlPPP 8es8$SiiiiFFFSa
I ;,, L b o N = - o b N { r. b b o -'F'tr lrl o r -'r.
EE EE E E E E EE E EEEEEEEEE EFE E;;;;;;;; ;;;;;;;;; ;;; ;;; ;
u,o
oE
c,I
I
oN
frf
tOo
C'N
Nrn
tOo
C'N
NOr
rOq,
oeo!O
rO
otu
II
\oo
oN
Nt,l
rOo
oN
No.
rO@
oo
c,\o
\o
oN
t,
\oo
oN
Nvl
rO
ca
C)N
Ng.
\o0o
ooooI
o
'\'
tl
!O
cD
oN
Nvr
rO@
oN
Ng\
rOE
oo
o!O
iO
cN
u
\o
GD
oN
NUI
\o@
otU
Nor
iO@
o0a
C'rO
rOlrr
eI\,
t,
!OE
oN
NUI
\o
OD
C'N
No.
rC)E
oE
C'\o
I
eN
a,
!Occ
eN
Ntr
rO@
ow
No.
rO
GD
oe
c,€€tl
oN
ur
Iqt
oN
NUI€o
oN
Nor
\oca
!oaoo
CCGGCECGgEq:FCCtrEE:CCtrgEF E- r a a -t't ?'r - i - - - - i - - - :: : :t ti ii 3 I i.g !!!.ii i_: : : i: : ii 2: iii' riF i55F5 r q I I I q f q 5I I I i I$* tU * tt $i tt * *$ * *$ B x$ B H$ B H
t\rNNt\iISNNNHHiXiTHHHB
'g . .r gr!5-I o c t\roO to *O<s. i6Do <.9 o-f' r! >Da ao >a'.. o c,rncl o,r ,(
- D-.fD-ao o,o. .<=oootO,mcral9,os.o'lFoo
*[foaaoo I
FOoos
o
o
oo
N ,o-co&rtoa=o
8oo
-oOD
toooo.o
-->oU'Oaa-ooato9cC'AD:t
5
C,-
o)
t,og
ao
oa
-0)
x
oooo€e
.D.L
-ooooo
oA
>E,aoo,FO
N.Do-
!!,
e
t5
o
-ooc
atmUt
\'G.o3vt o
rr!D.,,oott
E
C)
,
=o !Itua\
ID
G'
o
o\\oJ-oIoorO
oclFr:o
o.o6o\
ano
oN
N
\o@
otu
NOr
rOo
o
N
<,e
o
No\
!O
OE
oN
Nvr
\oo
C'N
No.
Io
or,Ex
o\\rl6d,o\
oo qto
oo
o\o€vl
oN
lrl
!Oo
cccEccccrrl'r.,aa'l!iDDOOOOg
=5=rr5r's5555555-rfrlaalNNA'A'NN'\'Nu irr l, (I l, lI lrl lra6a.vtcr5ulqr5\\A'NlI lraOr Or
SBPPPUN6uc)ct.55 a- c, lraNC'C'
. r c) t, O t,. r g'rrO.C,Errcrocrt{o T'ENI.IJUI
r.croc, lll\r!...st.rCrrOC,C,a6olrl{-lrl C, Or
rara!'E!!!!5-6ttflrlal.lEElfct\\\\\\66tCtarlr6,
! F Urar-', ocNoO o -Cl<E 'q'Do <o o-oo>t- G>t.. o otllo o). i<- D-o=1B_ q3orcEoroJmoattro<o
'Foo3gOa,oatoo a
?oDOr
D
o
Go
N, .:o-cD,O1:.
:to
roooo
-tltotoooAO
-;FI
arlc, ut.T
,C'ODo.too
o.L
E,!D1ilDot
T,F
o)
E'Otro
o
o
-o
x
u, e,ir
.Do.
>C',Doa
x.Do-
!o
Til
o
toIc
^ ,ll g,
>3tva o
ct
a
E
!
a
N
'\,t\,
o\<,F(,
oo
.o
a
a5
at\
o
ut
C'
!c
aN
avroaul
o\<la\C'
aool\
o\tO5oIool,
o
anoU'o
o@
o9'
\c,
oN
II
<,o
o!\,
!oo
oG'
o.\o
\o
oIV
lrl
\oo
oN
\oo
C'N
Nt
too
oq,
o\o
\o
o,v
t,
\oo
otU
roo
0N
N
rOo
!Dtao
8 E I -e{ il I I e g a 8 B e I E'r n'E E a E E I
7 < ^r Ui N ii aI 6 \r N i, - N + l.l !4 o. {.i-iJJa5..rrrN59N.'ur6i5ErE
oN
Nt
\oE
rB 688 I Ef d d i E B I 6 FF6 8i SHE ES i - [ : t 6 b. o' t 1,. i, : b i b o' i, o o i, r
tt ur c, ar o.lra lrl + { ut tll r or I N lu lJ{ ur 9{ !+ r vl 'a -h h- I ih I I il i b i h I : : ! b 3 b i i h i h
3XBE8 88TB B E 3 TBBSTBHS TSBB
- ;i -. i - F F -
1", l,: r d ] = N N P B ! P 6:I., l.'l t f ts u I d :hbat.Lebrro.ra5N€eE'
! F arr a--3 DENOO o-O<,ro6 <o a-c!0>Di o>t.. ! c'lno o,. ,<- D-.,D-''a <. GoE e3ocDo<r)tncrRtrro,:.o:t-oo:ET30ol
=oa.aoo ?
FOoog
o
ot.oo
tut..o-cD.Da,:oito
8o@
-rtot,oOGeo;
Eg
lraet0G'!
3
E)e
o)
90,g
o
o
-o
x
ArOoo:t-!o
8.
-9oooaoo
IDA
>C',ot,,
N.Do.
9!o:aoot
!D
og6
o
-ooc
^lltg,>31v-l D
E
t,
!I
ODaI\,at,t
ct
a
!
OD
v!Itu
oI
'\,t],t
o!O5otoC)5
o.<,a-C'Ioou
o\rO5C'Ioelra
U'oaD0U'o
oq,
o_€
\ou
oN'
(,
€E
oN
\oo
oN
N9a
rO
GD
ee
o!O€
oN
lrl€@
oN
\oo
oN
Nlr|
\oo
C'B
C'!o
!otl
C'lU
1I
!oE
C'N
tOo
C'N
Nul
<,6
!o€o
N
r b ;'7I I r 3- r.8 s 3 s il I I e 19. i E I Ii * + i s : ii f, ? i i r ? [ B i i i ? r i In - r\, i'- - N N l, lr,! .r - N N 1r. . -t.i.I:aLrarario.{Nlr.NLlor{Nts=.FE5r,lBt.F.o6
J O -..i-i.rlrNoooN
sGiStdEuiE BIIBB=B3E liIFiIii,LtoL{ LEtsLbbbb EBUi{
iA r l\t lra lrl - r Ur - r N lrl C, r i Or t, { C, J O O O
NEgTHLbI\SSSEEBgBBXE€SP
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!?!.; .i .i .i 6 6 Ci 6 .i 6 6 6 .i fl f' c, .' rt .t tt rl al 3!-a-tstsF
d d si -i 6 ct 6 ct 6 F 6 6 ct 6 6 6 rt c, c, s, o Er E
I l$ l\, rn € - N 5 r r N t G' N lr { ul N
:- ar iO { N - € l- . ar 9 I ul l,. a\ olNvl6N\a
! .rgra.-::-r DEIVOO c, -.O<i. .t BD!D <O .o-.) o >Da a(t>t.. o .ltngl D:'r ,(- o-rG-aa <. roa o,$ Gr <E!o2tnc)a,to<c)
1?ooIg
=9oa,Daaoo .'
FOoo
ETo
D
o
t!o
R)0-cOD1)f}a
=.o
8oe
-.:loo,n
r.E;
-61>D?1
lrlAU'.T
-E'o!,oo
oo.
E'!o-l.+Oot
Ha,Elp
ot
trocro.lo
o
-o
x
U'Oto€r
oA
>C',ooa
a!o-
?o
o
t5
o
-ooc
^mg,
Jq e
U
5
o
!!o@
r,lo\
oolI O.
vr vl
o\ O.€9ar a-cro
ooooOi l,
!
@
avl
o.o
6
ul
o.Ia-ooo
!o
OrIor
C'
o\
Ut
o\rO5o
c)c)o
u, aiooU'ov,o
oocDocrororO.
<, torn ul
ooNN
II I,.
ro !Ooe
(, c)NA'
to€60
OC'NN
h, ,va.l (I
!O \O6E
t 5 [ fi i 3 6' ]-s. E E ;5 e I r F ; E' r 3 I Rlttiiiriir !ittiirii$i1i
C'@orO
tOra
o
'\'ul
!Oo
oN
rO
GD
o
N9r
rO
GE
ocDoiO
!Ott
C)N
t€o
oN
rOo
o,\,
!vu
\oo
!otoo
9l
HH$ ae IIil E s f dtE E iS i i I E=f
J vr I i r G, r - i.l s'! r'
i\, 6 ; :- 6 { I c) -' or I { t'rt S' t'r
* o !V r !a 9 P f t j- d i ut N - N o - - r 5 ct l'ti il ; i I I u i { u b i i i \ iB h i{ il t ir iI i
TsTEBTBEBT ETFEEEEEEEEEE
- ;a r -a ts - -;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;; ;;;;
.0 -r gt aa:-:--,---::A OEt\'Oo e-o<L .toDo <o ..4.6- O .tD'a G>!E D .'tll'gr D'r ,<- D-.6-t- < GOr_ q3oqro<t,mcl ,flro<c,
-tFooiv6;,o froo!
FOooE':o
E
o
oo
AIt:aao-'cooa::,o',!to'.i:,
8oGD
-f,no
,oOGo.o
rgC' U'.T
-oODO.roo
.Do.
E'!ola.Do!
C'T
o,
C'Ds
o
o
-D
x
ooir
IDA
>E'fDb,PO
la.Do.
!o
Et
o
,,o6C
^![gl>aEva lD
G,aa
E
!c
aort6
oIo.
!
Na\
.a
IID
o
o\€5o
t)oc,
g fr I g il =
F t 3' 6' 5' x 3 k 1 i 3' r Friiiiiiiiftgiiiiii$s
sTXEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEii ii ii ; ; ; ; ; .- ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
(u-
a
o.\o5oIo(f<t
oort cl7Ear,.U'Ao\0\ur urC' C}rn utNN
UIoaoV' U'oo
o6o9.-Ivr
o.N
lrl
Ico
oN
!OE
.oN
N(r{
€E
o
CE
C'!C,
rO
otu
t
\o@
oN
!O@
oN
N
\o6
oolu lU
rO rOGi' GD
C' C'NN
NNfra 9l
ro tOqro
!ooo
tss6H=iH€HlFEErpS*8N6vtOa-
. . I . N - r N r N .- =. ! O + \t !4 J I\l; ;.. .; a in ro - iV tr.5 .r 5 .i - or .- i -. o'. r . . ;- i, . l r \Ord c, c, io
:::PPP=l$:',dAryreiuId: ; .; ii, B E a : : B L a I I t B b N i,
INrnnNarro*orO
Une.Ntutvt (use)
ConponerloN
Independence Plaza, Suite 950 . 1050 Seventeenth Street . Denver, CO 80265 ' 303 628 7798 (main) ' 303 389 4125 (fax)
January 29,2001
Via Facsimile and Overnieht Mail
Mr. Phillip Ting, Branch Chief
Fuel Cycle and Safety and Safeguards Branch
Division of Fuel Cycle Licensing
Office of Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
2 White Flint North, Mail Stop T-7J9
I 1545 Rockville Pike
Rockville, MD 20852
SUBJECT: AMENDMENT 19 TO MATERIALS LICENSE SUA-1358
AMENDMENT REQUEST TO RECEIVE AND PROCESS ALTERNATE
FEED MATERIAL FROM THE MOLYCORP SITE AT THE WHITE MESA
URANIUM MILL
Dear Mr. Ting:
International Uranium (USA) Corporation ("IUSA") hereby acknowledges receipt of the U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission's ('NRC's") acceptance letter regarding Amendment 19 to
Materials License SUA-1358, and submits the following supplemental information in response to
questions regarding this amendment request received by IUSA from Mr. von Till of the NRC
staff on January 1 8, 2001.
Comment
The NRC asked that further detail be provided as to the measures that Molycorp will employ to
ensure that there will be no leakage of liquid from transport vessels being transported from the
Molycorp site to the White Mesa Mill.
Response
IUSA requested that Molycorp ask their transportation specialist, MP Environmental Services,
Inc. ("MP") to provide additional detail regarding the issue of preventing leakage of liquid from
vessels being transported from the Molycorp site to the IUSA Mill. IUSA asked that the
transportation specialist provide detail on measures to be employed and equipment
specifications, as well. MP has done so, by addressing this issue in the attached letter (see
enclosed Attachment 1, letter from M.P. Environmental Services, Inc. to International Uranium
Corporation, January 22, 2001). MP indicates that multiple redundant measures will be
employed to ensure that both potential free liquids and potential fugitive dust will be restricted to
L34
.sti:rq
7LZ(
nu%
N
s
^.s!
,\
N
(^,
.N
dt
,'y
/"ro/,?
6N
N\s\s
S:\MRR\Molycorp\MolycorpresptoNRCquestions0 I 2901 letter.doc
Mr. Phillip Ting -2-Or*.r* 2g,2oo1
the interior of the transport haul vessel. Measures for ensuring no leakage from transport vessels
will include the following:
1. Prior to loading materials at Molycorp, each end-dump trailer will be lined with
pre-fitted, durable, 6-mil liners, which will serve as the primary containment for
both potential liquid and dust.
2. "Free liquids" will be decanted from materials prior to the materials being placed
in the MP trailers for transport.
3. The durable liners will be closed and sealed around the material in a "Burrito
Wrap" configuration, which will fully contain all materials.
4. The "Burrito Wrap" will be protected by a permanently attached l8-ounce vinyl
tarpaulin, which is very effective in keeping moisture out of the trailers during
precipitation events, and also protects the "Burrito Wrap".
5. Preventative maintenance, consisting of installing new rubber gaskets, using
silicone caulking around the gasket surface and adjusting the air operated tailgate
locks in a manner that allows the tightest seal, will be performed on each end-
dump trailer immediately prior to startup of the project.
6. MP will maintain an inspection checklist that will include visual inspections of all
MP equipment (including tarpaulins) related to Department of Transportation
(DOT) regulations.
7. Each MP unit will be checked for DOT compliance prior to loading materials at
Molycorp for shipment to IUC.
Comment
The NRC asked that further detail be provided as to the measures that Molycorp will employ to
ensure that no dust from the material will be released from transport vessels being transported
from the Molycorp site to the White Mesa Mill.
Response
IUSA requested that Molycorp ask their transportation specialist, MP, to provide additional
detail regarding the issue of restricting potential fugitive dust to the interior of the transportation
vessels. IUSA asked that the transportation specialist provide detail on measures to be employed
and equipment specifications, as well. MP has done so, by addressing this issue in the attached
letter (see enclosed Attachment 1). MP indicates that multiple redundant measures will be
employed to ensure that both potential fugitive dust and potential free liquids will be restricted to
the interior of the transport haul vessel.
S :\MRR\Molycorp\MolycorpresptoNRCquestions0 I 2901 letter.doc
Mr. Phillip Ting Or*u* zg,2ool
Measures for restricting potential fugitive dust to the interior of the transport vessels, will include
the following:
1. Prior to loading materials at Molycorp, each end-dump trailer will be lined with
pre-fitted, durable liners, which will serve as the primary containment for both
potential dust and liquid.
2. "Free liquids" will be decanted from materials prior to the materials being placed
in the MP trailers for transport, but the material will have some moisture content.
3. The durable liners will be closed and sealed around the material in a "Burrito
Wrap" configuration, which will fully contain all materials. MP notes that
"Burrito Wraps" create airtight environments, restricting any fugitive dusts from
escaping the transport vessel, and that they are commonly used in the
transportation of friable asbestos materials and other commodities where airborne
dust must be restricted to the interior of the transport vessel.
4. The "Burrito Wrap" will be protected by a permanently attached vinyl tarpaulin,
which is very effective in keeping moisture out of the trailers during precipitation
events and also protects the "Burrito Wrap".
5. Preventative maintenance, consisting of installing new rubber gaskets, using
silicone caulking around the gasket surface and adjusting the air operated tailgate
locks in a manner that allows the tightest seal, will be performed on each end-
dump trailer immediately prior to startup of the project.
6. MP will maintain an inspection checklist that will include visual inspections of all
MP equipment (including tarpaulins) related to Department of Transportation
(DOT) regulations.
7. Each MP unit will be checked for DOT compliance prior to loading materials at
Molycorp for shipment to IUC.
Comment
The NRC asked IUC to describe how Molycorp will ensure that each shipment of material fallswithin proper DOT classifications. In particular, the NRC asked whether Molycorp would
perform scanning or other sampling, to ensure that s.ome loads do not exceed the 2,000 pCi/gm
DOT limit, or that f they do, that they would be properly placarded, in accordance with DOT
requirements.
Response
IUSA requested that Molycorp provide additional written detail as to their plans for ensuring that
each shipment of material falls within proper DOT classifications. In response, Molycorp has
-J-
S:\MRR\MolycorpWolycorpresptoNRCquestions0 I 290 I letter.doc
Mr. Phillip Ting Or*u* 2s,2oo1
indicated the following (see enclosed Attachment 2,letter from Molycorp to IUSA dated January
25,2001):
l. Molycorp believes that current radiochemistry of the three lead sulfide ponds (P-
8, P-l1, and P-24) provides sufficient information to characterize each pond (see
Attachment 3, e-mail transmittal from Molycorp to IUSA dated January 22,200I,
including table used by Molycorp in characterizing the material).
2. Molycorp will collect and analyze twelve (12) additional samples from P-l I to
provide further assurance that the material contained in this pond, which exhibited
higher levels based upon previous characterization results than the other two
ponds, will be below the DOT limit of 2,000 pCi/gm.
3. If the 12 additional samples indicate higher levels of activity in P-ll than, previously characterized, then Molycorp will ship this material with appropriate
DOT placarding.
Comment
The NRC asked IUC to provide a clearer copy of the NEL Laboratories report of March 5, 1998,
and also provide a description ond/or maps showing where characterization samples, described
in attachment D.l to the RMPR, were obtained.
Response
A clearer copy of the NEL Laboratories data report for radiometric analyses of March 5, 1998 is
being sent to IUSA from NEL Laboratories, and will be transmitted immediately after we receive
it, to the NRC. IUSA expects to be able to transmit the report to the NRC no later than February
7 . The enclosed Attachment 4 contains maps and cross-sections showing where characterizations
samples, described in attachment D.1 to the RMPR, were obtained.
As indicated in our submittal letter of December 19,2000, Molycorp plans to start shipping on
April I ,2001. IUSA appreciates NRC's timely review of this request, and we will be pleased to
respond promptly to any further questions NRC may have. As always, I can be reached at
303.389.4131.
-4-
Sincerelvv -.._v- _-J )
2r)Arr*fu
Michelle R. Rehmann
Environmental Manager
MRR
Attachments
S:\MRR\Molycorp\MolycorpresptoNRCquestionsOl 2901 letter.doc
-5-OJ*u* 2g,2oolMr. Phillip Ting
Ronald E. Berg
William N. Deal
John E spinoza/Irdolycorp
David C. Frydenlund
Ron F. Hochstein
Bill von TiIYNRCffi'a
S :\M RR\Molycorp\MolycorprcsptoNRCqucstiors0 I 290 I lcttcr.doc
ATTACHMENT 1
Letter from M.P. Environmental Services,Inc., to
International Uranium Corporation
January 22,2001
S lMRR\It4olycorpWolycorpresptoNRCquestions0 I 260 I attsheets.doc
January 22,20OL
Michelle Rehmann
International Uranium Corporation
1050 17th Street
Suite 950
Denver, Colorado
80265
Dear Ms Rehmann,
Mp Environmental Seruices, Inc (MP) has been contracted by Molycorp Mountain Pass,
California facility to transport various materials to Molycorp selected vendors. MP was
contacted today by Molycorp with a request to provide additional information regarding
the transpoftation plan submitted to International Uranium Corporation (IUC). MP
understands that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has additional questions in
regards to the safe transportation of materials from Molycorp. The following information
Oetaits how MP trucks will transpoft material from Mountain Pass, California to the IUC
Blanding Utah facility. MP will explain in detail how both free liquids and fugitive dust
will be restricted to the interior of the transport haul vessel.
The transpoftation plan prepared by MP for Molycorp details the movement of recyclable
materials in semi tractor-trailer end-dump combinations between Molycorp and IUC.
Each unit is constructed of lightweight aluminum and has a net weight capacity of
twenty-five tons per trailer. All MP aluminum trailers are equipped with vinyl tarpaulins,
which are permanently affixed to the front or sides of the trailers. MP utilizes two
different types of end-dump trailers. Each trailer equipped with exterior surface
tarpaulins is approximately fofi feet long and has rubber tarp strap attachments every
two feet along both sides of the trailer. The tarpaulins extend downward from the sides
approximately twelve inches and are secured by the rubber tarp straps which insures a
tight fitting cover during transpoft. The second type of trailer has a permanently
attached side mounted tarpaulin that is affixed to a large roller. This type of equipment
is designed to have the driver turn the crank handle, which allows the tarpaulin to roll
sideways over the interior suface of the trailer. There is no overhang of the tarpaulin in
this design. The attached tarpaulins serue primarily as secondarycontainment for these
selectedlhipments. Primarycontainment of soils includes " Burrito Wraps" which create
airtight environments and restrict any fugitive dusts from escaping the transport vessel.
Burrito wraps are described in detail later in this document.
It is important to note that "free liquids" will be removed at the loading point prior to
placing soils into the MP trailers for transport. The ponds being excavated are situated in
a manner that will allow MP an opportunity to decant any waters prior to loading.
Obviously there will be some moisture content with each load shipped but "free liquids"
will not be intentionally shipped in an MP transpoft vessel.
PHOENIX Az 85043 fiz27842333045 S. 5ls AVE.
CAI.JFORNIA . ARIZONA . WASHINGTON . OKLAHOMA . UTAH
FAx [phone]/,
Prior to loading soils at Molycorp each end-dump trailer will be lined with pre fitted six
mil poly sheeting liners. These liners are very durable and will serue as the primary
containment for both fugitive dust emissions and possible free liquid retention. The
liners will be installed in the trailers in a manner that allows them to fully contain all
soils. This is accomplished by enclosing the soils in a "Burrito Wrap". The plastic liner
when installed has excess length to the sides, front and rear. Once loaded MP
technicians will enter the trailer and take the excess plastic from the rear and front of
the trailer and fold them toward the center of the load. The sides are then draped over
the center and both the ends and sides of the liner are adhered together with industrial
spray glue in a manner that resembles a burrito. Burrito wrapping is commonly used in
the transportation of friable asbestos materials and other commodities where airborne
dust must be restricted to the interior of the transport vessel.
Alt MP aluminum end-dump trailers have permanently attached tarpaulins at the front or
sides of the trailers. These tarpaulins are constructed of 18 ounce vinyl material and are
very effective in keeping moisture out of the trailers during rain events, snow, etc. They
contribute as secondary containment,during transportation. These tarpaulins do not
have to be fully removed from the trailer prior to unloading at IUC. The driver will fold
the portion that covers the tailgate of the trailer fonruard which will allow the tailgate to
properly operate during unloading. The end-dump trailer will then lift to approximately a
45-degree angle and the Burrito Wrapped soils will slide out of the tailgate.
In addition to installing the liners in every load shipped to IUC, MP will include
preventative maintenance on each end-dump trailer tailgate just prior to the startup of
the project. This maintenance will consist of installing new rubber gaskets, using silicone
caulking around the gasket suface and adjusting the air operated tailgate locks in a
manner that allows the tightest seal. MP will also maintain an inspection checklist that
will include visual inspections of all MP equipment (including tarpaulins) related to
Department of Transportation (DOT) regulations. Each MP unit will be checked for DOT
compliance prior to loading materials at Molycorp for shipment to IUC.
MP understands the importance of these issues to Molycorp, IUC, and NRC. MP will
assist you with any other concerns you may have. Please contact me at our Phoenix
office to further discuss any questions or concerns.
",],r,n"'o''
=\z-Mark Fisk
Technical Seruices Manager
Cc;
J. Espinoza / Molycorp
G. Blankenship / MP
D. Adams / MP
L. Chase / MP
ATTACHMENT 2
Letter from Molycorp to
lntemational Uranium (USA) Corporation
January 25,2001
S :\MRR\Molycorp\lr4olycorpresptoNRCquestions0 I 260 I attsheets. doc
JAN 2 ] R]ECII
Molycorp, lnc.
67750 Bailey Road
It/bunlain Pass, Califomia 92366
Telephone (760) 85&2201
Facsimile (760) 85&2253
January 26,2001
Ms. Michelle Rehmarxl
International Uranium Corporation
Environmental Manager
Independenc e Plaza, Suite 95 0
I 050 Seventeenth Street
Denver, CO 80265
Re: Proposal to Collect Additional Samples of Lead Sulfide Pond-ll and Pond-24
Dear Ms. Rehmanrl
Current radiochemistry of the three lead sulfide ponds (P-8, P-l1, and P-24) provide sufficient
information to characteriz,e eachpond. Regarding the NRC's concem about appropriate DOT
classification of the "Ore for Recycling" material, Molycorp is confidert that each load of this
material shipped to IUC will be below DOT's 2,000 pCi/gm placarding limit.
Please reference the attached table regarding the following text. The sample results of P-8 provide
statistical data to charucleiz,ethis pond's activity levels below 2,000 pClg (DOT limit) with
certaintv. Although some of the individual sample results approached the DOT limit, any
combination ofthis material during loading will not exceed the limit. The composite sample result
representing P-24 is comprised of up to 5 individual sample points. This pond is small in volume
and the composite sample is representative of this pond's activit-!'being belorv 2,000 pCi/g. It is
reasonable to expect the activiq,'in P-I1 to be as variable as P-8. Therefore, the excavation and
stockpiling of this pond's material rvould produce an activir,"* level approaching the average total
activrt-v. This activitv will be below 2,000 pCrlg.
Holever, in order to provide data to support conclusions, Molycorp proposes to collect 12
additional samples from P-l I and 4 from P-24 and analyze for isotopic uranium. Mol.vcorp will
provide IUC with a Sampling and Analysis Plan regarding the additional samples and their detailed
rationale for collection rvithin the next few days. Molycorp will continue with the current plan to
ship this material without Class 7 placarding unless resuhs of the samples wa:nant otherwise. The
existing data for P-8, P-l l. and P-24 alorryrvith the additional data from P-l1 and P-24 sampling
rvill be used as the onlv characterization data for DOT classification.
Please contaqt me by telephone at 760-856-7697 or fa.x at 760-856-6691 if vou have any-' questions
regarding this correspondence.
Cc: Bill Sharrer
John Vialpando
John Pugh
to
ott
a?lool
!tNN
E*R=$E
]\ (ofi,rl.):xNod)
-AlLltCtOOt!
L *;$HXfr
:=(,
EoF
f
lE
oF
o)
Io(f)
Nl-@
@d
ft RPSN$E
= c9oi-d'to
555sSP(O-F$(ol'-
?oro-oSEu':, - G) N i- i-
NIOOr@O(f)dq<'id-oi
-lO-r$|J)
Sr-c"lSh
9r.-oro9olP"ici-&E
o? co t- or oQ c!R"i.,-8S
!ooo(o o)(aN
olq
FNc!N
-q\
-fi)C)-
o^ats
=r
c? c?
(f) (f,@to
OF-o) (oOr(f)
oq\N(f)(f,ot
sE
I\ro@c! (o
aaoto(f) (o
ta, oci rrt
!lc! 0qflTTT
o- o-
?oN
=
F
.EoF
NoNEF
ooN
=l-
o
N
F
od
G
oF
€Nou,
o{dGtr
E')
o
CL
aozoo.o
IJJJ
tNo-oz
!F
-o.
oo
o-lro
uFLE
UJ
IoIo
u,
c!o+,go
EF
-o(E+,+.
loN
$
qo
CL
Eo(,
Bo@I
ItNo-
@o)ro^o)o,@(\lFvi-{-i6 (\l to -'N (\l
t\ lr) 6| r.,- ll OcinJa)iJ(Y)ls-F6$
eg lorororoloroI rrtutc,ic'tctdErrttrrE qqqqce996yG?99
-Nl(lrOlt)@rtaaal@o@oo€@Go.O.o.Ao.
ATTACIIMENT 3
E-mail Letter from Molycorp to
International Uranium (USA) Corporation
January 22,2001
Includes Table used by Molycorp in Characterizing the Material
S :\MRR\Molycorp\MolycorpresptoNRCquestions0 I 260 I attsheets.doc
l x' pr@l tr,!1-! 02- M, -u!J??gr;!@ Ponds Radiochemistry.xls
Return-Path : <j ohn. es pinoza@tnocal. com>
From : "Espinoza, John" <j ohn.espin oza@txocaL com)
To: "'michelle"' <[e-mail]>
Subject: Lead Ponds Radiochemistry.xls
Date: Mon,22 Jan 2001 I l:09:07 -0800
Importance: high
<<Lead Ponds Radiochemistry.xl*>
This is another table I created to assist me in characterizing the pond
material.
Attachment Converted : h:\supernet\eudora\attach\LeadPond.xls
i Piinteq-fro.lyiclelF_E:-nfr,m
ts8-Bps" ili'JA<obD{<,l H
I@
s rr ul}BIBn ii &,&(h5&Ni fi &,&,dr&tir&F lre bbbbbb g
E oN r t r r r t r
E 3 t i't ir, tD i'r i'r i'r ts3Et,
E\:dpt, ili.Jbcrtbro! B
{oSS-t-.- q
v!l
tSlB=l +b"Ni\boG H
NN.^@<.rrN {99Xip1is r-(o(o-@(,t(o t
(l)(,
s,@
Cn.tr,rJr(rl {N:pgrsrt, r-(r)o@I\r(oqt s
{oiipqr<",+ S6S@o)ior -
+
5
CD OJ(,to
5S
CDNpo sn
{J
;i <rrEo,
No)!rN!@
J (JO
S^, j\,1 5
Nor
N o)@E oor
(o
J
o) (oo) (o{o
n
Ioo
Jm
=U,{veil!o-o=!3-io
-sJ
z_tr,;1"I\'+rm
o
1'ozo
@
@ N)N):.t lu i{ o) l\)
-t<r.llOl-i Cdss33s E
N ** HX€if: i
H EE 35$3F: i
$$=BH" 3
olPgB55o
{o
!,ral
sooNIl:or d(,o) {r L
lNoq,505So5
ATTACHMENT 4
Maps and Cross Sections Showing where Chwacterization Samples
Described in Attachment D.l to the RMPR were Obtained
S :\MRR\MolycorpWolycorprespoNRCquestions0 I 260 I attsheets.doc
\
,
,
/
\\r \+E 6eoo
\H\oo\
+It\t
\
c,t-rrt
elel{l
"-l
$loolool5=la<ltrol
gBl
dEla<to ='ltrol*a I
rJrl
E*t
El il.lJl
(r)
f"ooo {,,ooo
=P<fo
P.T;Rtsx(,, -1,3=df)
ocf
g.
fTg,
U'
-tnoE
o
=E'
rlTI!lol!l&t
el
=
o
ao
=()gt()o
\FL_PI i {lH
rn
=mz{
Cz
-=l,oz
C]
1't@
@
=m't
Fz
E'6a
r{
\\
\
\
-o
E
E>ot
*H
5T9il
is
lnaa=il= fr
=e 8Eroils B
=i =BT
E=EEqoetnFET(,x=
Inzo
!
I
No
+oNo
o(,
-olro tsl
EEItrl
Hl
t
I/Ii,/
)*"k'8
-.-(E:2
i-U MNffiIH
EE;iHIPT= P:
IrtBBIC
=Ftoz
=@{m
z
om
mz-{Cz
-=!ozo
P@of,oaa
@mo-{oz)<l
ml
=l@t
=oIooT
-!z
c)
IE
l_"
1,,'
l^,lo
oE<t*Og.E
-o 9.!rfEt-q)gE
+>O='jo
6'
JI EEl o
ill-l'< l(o
6)
E
olelal
$l
ootool
==lo<ltrol
gBl
dElo<to ='ltrolr{.r I
-Jl.Jrl
6dtPilI
Bl 9l
El el
.1,.1.
ls lr
!
aI:
CD:w!
itz9
+,*
q
d
I--I
ts
T
$
=CN{m
z
orn
mz{
Cz
=1'ozU
I
CN+m
1'
Fz
=oE<sE <5'=. o
il3=(n _\t-(,,Joa?iliis' -E
=S=o e'z
=6f)6'
oooo
==o<tro
gB
dEa<o='tror*-
-J)-
=J;o
FT
--5o
\'r Fr"' l*
\,tr- L, T-tlE
'ljlj[]
Eltf,l
B.lE'l
,IIXEIilr
t,
l",lot'
3o
29
+oNo
o+--(E----2
:.t MNffiIH
=H 5 g HSIP
FHE=HEHgIC
=Fto2
€
@
m
z
om
mz-{Cz
-{
;ozU
Iof,o@
CN
CNmoIoz
m
=a
o
=<DE S5'= orE. tl
Hin- Fr=gE -t
=S:O='Z
=6 S)
E'
(El
oolool
==lcr<lEol
gBl
dEtlo?lo ='ltrolrlr I
-JlJ-l
EdlPdt
ElElf,lFls.l-.l-.F
ll
3lE il P
E ilHEle'
tt6lls
+,,,,
oooo
I
I+E 7900
I
It
rorooo
€
CN-{rn
=oE<
grE s
='f. oJ3!U' _\,-C,Jo
SHFE3=O='43d r)
E'
EIEIiIFIH
]JJH ls
5ltfll Irlt rl-tN t6lq lBllF
(Jt
CEI
oolool
==la<ltrol
gEl
dErlailo ='ltrolrlr I
-JlrJrl
Fdt
FtsI
c>ot-!=-6t
ETC) -{trFI
5p
I E= t=BqiEi$tt
\\f- | i r'\t ' L D B {
Pt
F
o?
=o
=
--(E-=-2
i.$ MNffiIH
=H 5 E ESIP
sxp=HE
EE
=rtP
€
cl){m
z
om
=mz{
Cz
{
;ozo
1'Ilusof,oa
@
@mc){oz
rn
=CN
(El
oolool
==lo<ltrol
$BlsdEtl 5=ail g.E
=E='I +dE
EilIgglr-l Y= == I io s,' l"
I
I
I
I
ilElglFls
]-]JH ls
El- il *;liEl ?
Ol rlt rl.
wtEtE
llE
INrrnNerro*o0
UneNturvr (use)
ConponauoN
Independence Plaza, Suite 950 . 1050 Seventeenth Street . Denver, CO 80265 . 303 628 7798 (main) . 303 389 4125 (fax)
December 19,2000
Via Overnight Mail
Mr. Phillip Ting, Branch Chief
Fuel Cycle and Safety and Safeguards Branch
Division of Fuel Cycle Licensing
Office of Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
2 White Flint North, Mail Stop T-7J9
11545 Rockville Pike
Rockville, MD 20852
Re: Amendment Request to Process
Mesa Uranium Mill
an Alternate Feed Material from Molycorp at White
Source Material License No. SUA-I358
Dear Mr. Ting:
International Uranium (USA) Corporation ("IUSA") hereby submits the enclosed request to
amend Source Material License No. SUA-1358 to authorize receipt and processing of a uranium-
bearing material resulting from the processing of natural ore for the extraction of lanthanides and
other rare earth minerals. For ease of reference, this material is referred to herein as the
"Uranium Material". The Uranium Material will be removed by Molycorp's Lanthanide
Division ("Mblycorp") from three former impoundments at their mine and mill site in Mountain
Pass, California (the "Mountain Pass site").
Since the 1950's, Molycorp has operated a surface mining and milling operation for the recovery
and chemical separation of lanthanides and other rare earths from bastnasite ores. From 1965
through 1984 Molycorp constructed and operated three lead sulfide ponds, pond areas P-8, P-l1,
andP-24, for the evaporation of lead sulfide sludges from the clarifier/thickener operation. The
lead sulfide sludges contain uranium, which is also precipitated in the thickener. All three of the
lead sulfide ponds were taken out of service prior to 1984. ln 1997, Molycorp published a
Closure Plan for the decommissioning of the three lead sulfide ponds, which required the
removal and offsite disposal or recovery of the lead sulfide sludges contained in the ponds. This
amendment request seeks authorization to process the lead sulfide sludges, referred to herein as
the Uranium Material, at IUSA's White Mesa Mill (the "Mill") as an alternate feed/ore.
After excavation of the lead sulfide ponds, Molycorp plans to segregate a portion of the pond
contents - flotation tailings - from the excavated material. Molycorp estimates that after
separation of the flotation tailings, from 7,750 tons to a conservative estimate of 17,750 tons of
tr'\'g E', tEr tr
$ * s;:,u ,,\Q"e*\g
S :\M RR\Molycorp\Molycorpltr.doc
Mr. Phillip Ting Or"""-ber 19,2ooo
lead sulfide sludges, containing uranium, will remain to be shipped off site. Material that will be
shipped off site comprises the Uranium Material addressed in this request for amendment.
Molycorp estimates that the Uranium Material has a uranium content ranging from 0.002 percent
to approximately 0.49 weight percent (0.0024 to 0.59 percent UsOr), or greater, with an
estimated overall average grade of 0.15 percent uranium (0.18 percent U3Os) for the entire
volume of Uranium Material.
The processing of the Uranium Material will not increase the Mill's production to exceed the
License Condition No. 10.1 limit of 4,380 tons of U3Os per calendar year. Because production
will remain within the limits assessed in the original Environmental Assessment; the process will
be essentially unchanged; and the Uranium Material is similar physically and in content to the
Mill's existing tailings, this amendment will result in no significant environmental impacts
beyond those originally evaluated.
The disposal of the l1e.(2) byproduct material resulting from processing the Uranium Material
will not change the characteristics of the Mill tailings from the characteristics associated with
normal milling operations.
It will be a condition of the license amendment that the Mill shall not accept any Uranium
Material at the site until IUSA has determined, in accordance with a SERP-approved procedure,
that the Mill has sufficient licensed tailings capacity. The tailings capacity must be sufficient to
permanently store:
(a). all 1le.(2) byproduct material that would result from the processing of all the Uranium
Material;(b). all other ores and alternate feed materials on site; and(c). all other materials required to be disposed of in the Mill's tailings impoundments
pursuant to the Mill's reclamation plan.
Complete details are provided in the attached request to amend, which includes the following
sections:
INTRODUCTION
Material Composition and Volume1.1 Historical Summary of Sources1.2 Radiochemical Data1.3 Hazardous Constituent Data1.4 RegulatoryConsiderations
Transportation Considerations
Process
Safety Measures
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
S lM RR\Molycorp\Molycorpltr.doc
Mr. Phillip Ting Q"""-uer 19,2000
4.1 Control of Airbome Contamination
4.2 Radiation Safety
4.3 Vehicle Scan
5.0 Other Information
5.1 Added Advantage of Recycling
CERTIFICATION
Attachment I Molycorp Site Location Maps, Volume Estimates, and Process History
Attachment 2 Uranium Content Estimates, Material Description, and Analytical Data for
Uranium Material
Attachment 3 IUSAruDEQ Protocol for Determining Whether Alternate Feed Materials
are RCRA Listed Hazardous Wastes
Attachment 4 Molycorp Affidavit Confirming No RCRA Listed Hazardous Waste in
Uranium Material
Attachment 5 Radioactive Material Profile Record
Attachment 6 Memorandum from Independent Consultant Regarding No RCRA Listed
Hazardous Waste in Uranium Material
Attachment 7 White Mesa Mill Equipment Release/Radiological Survey Procedure
To ensure that all pertinent information is included in this and anticipated supplemental
submittals, the following guidelines were used in preparing this request to amend:
o U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ("NRC") Final Position ond Guidance on the Use of
Uranium Mill Feed Material Other Than Natural Ores (Federal Register Volume 60, No.
1 84, September 22, 1 995).
. Energy Fuels Nuclear ("EFN") request to the NRC for the amendment to process uranium-
bearing potassium diuranate (K2U2O7) in a solution of potassium hydroxide/potassium
fluoride in water ("KOH Amendment").
o NRC and State of Utah comments and requests for information relative to the KOH
Amendment.
o EFN request to NRC for the Rhone-Poulenc altemate feed amendment.
o NRC and State of Utah comments and requests for information relative to the EFN request
for the Rhone-Poulenc alternate feed amendment.
--, -
S lMRR\Molycorp\Molycorpltr.doc
Mr. Phillip Ting Q"""-uer 19,2ooo
o EFN request to the NRC for the amendment to process uranium-bearing material owned by
the Cabot Corporation.
o EFN request to the NRC for the amendment to process uranium-bearing material owned by
the U.S. Department of Energy.
o IUSA request to the NRC for the amendment to process uranium-bearing material from U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers Ashland 2 Site.
. NRC and State of Utah comments and requests for information relative to the IUSA request
for the Ashland 2 Site alternate feed amendment, and procedures for determining whether or
not the materials contain RCRA listed hazardous wastes.
o IUSA request to the NRC for license amendment to process uranium-bearing material owned
by Cameco Corporation.
o IUSA request to the NRC for license amendment to process uranium bearing material from
US Army Corps of Engineers Ashland I Site.
o IUSA request to the NRC for license amendment to process uranium bearing material from
US Army Corps of Engineers St. Louis Site.
o IUSA request to the NRC for license amendment to process uranium bearing material from
US Army Corps of Engineers Linde Site
o IUSA request to the NRC for license amendment to process uranium-bearing material owned
by W.R. Grace Corporation.
o NRC and UDEQ comments and requests for information relative to the IUSA request for the
W.R. Grace alternate feed amendment and dust control for the W.R. Grace Uranium
Material.
o Protocol for Determining Whether Alternate Feed Materials Are Listed Hazardous Wastes,
developed by IUSA with the concurrence of Utah DEQ, November 1999.
. NRC Initial Decision, February g,7ggg, in the Matter of IUSA Receipt of Material from
Tonawanda, New York.
o NRC Memorandum and Order, February 14,2000, in the Matter of IUSA Receipt of Material
from Tonawanda, New York, Affrrming the Presiding Officers' Initial Decision to Uphold
the Ashland 2 License Amendment.
o IUSA request to the NRC for license amendment to process uranium-bearing material owned
by Heritage Minerals, Inc.
-4-
S :\M RR\Molycorp\Mol ycorpltr.doc
-5-Q"..*uer 19, 2oooMr. Phillip Ting
Molycorp plans to start shipping on April l, 2001. Their current excavation plan, as approved by
Regional Water Quality Control Board, requires all pond material to be removed within ninety
days of the commencement of shipping. NRC's timely review and approval of this request will
assist IUSA in meeting Molycorp's mandated schedule.
We believe that use of the above guidance materials, supported by our discussions with the NRC
concerning these amendment requests, has allowed us to prepare a complete, concise submittal.
Therefore, IUSA requests that the NRC please review the enclosed information, and then attempt
to reply to this request within 30 days of submittal. I can be reached at [phone].
Sincerely,
)"-tuLL
Michelle R. Rehmann
Environmental Manager
MRR
Attachments
cc: Ronald E. Berg
William N. Deal
John Espinoza,/Molycorp
David C. Frydenlund
Ron F. Hochstein
Bill von TiIIAIRC
William J. SinclairAJDEQ
Don Verbica/UDEQ
S :\M RR\Molycorp\Molycorpltr.doc
Request to Amend
Source Material License SUA-1358
White Mesa Mill
Docket No. 40-8681
December 19,2000
Prepared by:
International Uranium (USA) Corporation
1050 17th Street, Suite 950
Denver, CO 80265
Contact: Michelle R. Rehmann, Environmental Manager
Phone: [phone]
Submitted to:
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission
2 White Flint North, Mail Stop T-7J9
11545 Rockville Pike
Rockville, MD 20852
S:\MRR\Molycorp\MolycorpARfi nal I 2 I 900.doc
TABLE OT'CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
1.0 Material Composition and Volume1.1 Historical Summary of SourcesI.2 Radiochemical Data1.3 Hazardous Constituent Data
1.3.1 IUSAruDEQ Listed Hazmdous Waste protocol
1.3.2 Application of the Listed Hazardous Waste protocol
1.3.3 Review by IUSA Independent Consultant
1.3.4 Compatibility with IUSA Mill Tailings1.4 RegulatoryConsiderations
2.0 TransportationConsiderations
3.0 Process
4.0 Safety Measures4.1 Control of Airbome Contamination4.2 Radiation Safety4.3 Vehicle Scan
5.0 Other Information5.1 Added Advantage of Recycling
CERTIFICATION
Attachment I Molycorp Location Maps, Process History, and Flow Diagram
Attachment 2 Uranium Content Estimates, Material Description, and Analytical Data for
Uranium Material
Attachment 3 IUSAruDEQ Protocol for Determining Whether Alternate Feed Materials
are RCRA Listed Hazardous Wastes
Attachment 4 Molycorp Affidavit Confirming No Listed Waste in Uranium Material
Attachment 5 Radioactive Material Profile Record
Attachment 6 Memorandum from Independent Consultant Regarding No RCRA Listed
Hazardous Waste in Uranium Material
Attachment 7 White Mesa Mill Equipment Release/Radiological Survey Procedure
S:\MRR\Molycorp\MolycorpARfi nal I 2 I 900.doc
1.0
Amendment Request
Molycorp
License No.SUA-1358
December 19,2000
Page I
INTRODUCTION
International Uranium (USA) Corporation ("IUSA") operates the NRC-licensed White Mesa
Uranium Mill (the "MilI") located approximately six miles south of Blanding, Utah. The Mill
processes natural (native, raw) uranium ores and feed materials other than natural ores. These
alternate feed materials are generally processing products from other extraction procedures,
which IUSA processes at the Mill, primarily for the source material content. All waste
associated with this processing is, therefore, 11e.(2) byproduct material.
This application requests an amendment to NRC Source Material License No. SUA-1358 to
allow IUSA to process a specific alternate feed, and to dispose of the associated 11e.(2)
byproduct material in accordance with the Mill operating procedures.
MATERIAL COMPOSITION AND VOLUME
IUSA is requesting an amendment to Source Material License No. SUA-1358 to authorize
receipt and processing of certain uranium-containing materials resulting from the processing of
natural ore for the extraction of lanthanides and other rare earth minerals. For ease of reference,
this material is referred to herein as the "Uranium Material". The Uranium Material is located at
Molycorp's Lanthanide Division ("Molycorp") mine and mill site in Mountain Pass, Califomia
(the "Mountain Pass site").
The Uranium Material will be transported by Molycorp's transportation contractor from the
Mountain Pass site to the Mill. The Uranium Material will be removed from three areas
associated with former ponds at the Mountain Pass site. The Site Location Map in Attachment I
shows the specific location of the Mountain Pass site.
1.1 Historical Summary of Sources
Since 1951, Molycorp has operated a surface mining and milling operation for the recovery and
chemical separation of lanthanides and other rare earths from bastnasite ores. Bastnasite ore
from a first stage flotation plant is roasted to remove excess carbonates, then leached in a
hydrochloric acid solution. Insolubles from the leach solutions are fed to a cerium circuit. The
dissolved fraction (leach liquor) is sent to a lead sulfide removal process. Ammonia, sodium
hydrosulfide and flocculant are added to the leach liquor, which is fed to a clarifier. Thickened
clarifier sludge from this process, containing lead sulfide, iron salts and uranium was transferred
. to the lead sulfide tailings ponds described in the paragraph below. The clarified leach liquor
was fed to the SX-ion exchange circuit for recovery of lanthanides and other rare earth minerals.
The process sketch in Attachment 1 is a schematic diagram of the lead sulfide removal process
step that preceded the SX-ion exchange circuit.
S :\MRR\Molycorp\MolycorpARfi nal l2 I 900.doc
Amendment Request
Molycorp
License No.SUA-1358
December 19,2000
Page2
From 1965 through 1984 Molycorp constructed and operated three lead sulfide ponds. Pond
areas P-8, P-l 1, and P-24, for the evaporation of lead sulfide sludges from the clarifier/thickener
operation. The lead sulfide sludges contain uranium, which is also precipitated in the thickener.
All three of the lead sulfide ponds were taken out of service prior to 1984. ln 1997, Molycorp
published a Closure Plan for the decommissioning of the three ponds, which required the
removal and offsite disposal or recovery of the lead sulfide sludges contained in the ponds. This
amendment request seeks authorization to process the lead sulfide sludges, i.e., the Uranium
Material, at the Mill.
Molycorp has requested that IUSA recycle the Uranium Material, and has asked that we submit
this amendment request. After excavation of the lead sulfide ponds, Molycorp plans to segregate
a portion of the pond contents - flotation tailings - from the excavated material. Molycorp
estimates that after separation of the flotation tailings, from 7 ,7 50 tons to a conservative estimate
of 17,750 tons of lead sulfide sludges, containing uranium, will remain to be shipped off site.
Material that will be shipped off site comprises the Uranium Material addressed in this request
for amendment.
Attachment I includes the following items describing Molycorp's process history and pond
decommissioning plans :
l. Portions of the Molycorp letter to the California Regional Water Quality Control Board
Regarding Investigation of the Process Ponds (Molycorp, Inc., November, 1995), which
describe the operational history of the facility and the ponds, and summarize the
analytical results from the initial characterization of the ponds.
2. A portion of the Closure Plan" Lead Sulfide Ponds (Molycorp, Inc., February l9g7),
which describes the ponds, their physical setting, and their contents.
3. Location maps of the Molycorp Mountain Pass site and the ponds.
4. Molycorp's letter to IUSA (November 1,1999), which provides a regulatory history of
the Uranium Material.
Attachment 2 contains the following information on the composition of the uranium material:
1. A radiochemistry table, which provides a summary of activity levels of uranium and other
radionuclides in the Uranium Material.
2. Total Threshold Limit Concentration (TTLC) Tables 1 and 2 and the Unocal/Molycorp
internal memos, which provide analytical results from samples of the lead iron filter cake thit
was fed to the ponds during their operation.
Physically, the Uranium Material is a partially dewatered sediment (sludge) consisting of dense,
finely divided solids including uranium.
S :\MRR\Molycorp\MolycorpARfi nal I 2 I 900.doc
Amendment Request
Molycorp
License No.SUA-1358
December 19,2000
Page 3
1.2 Radiochemical Data
As noted above, process history demonstrates that the Uranium Material results from the
processing of natural, mined uranium-bearing ores, which were processed for the recovery of
lanthanides and other rare earth minerals.
Analytical data provided to IUSA indicate uranium content ranging from 0.002 weight percent to
approximately 0.49 weight percent (0.0024 to 0.59 percent UrOa), or greater, with an estimated
overall average grade of 0.15 percent uranium (0.18 percent UgOs) for the entire volume of
Uranium Material. Summaries of radionuclide concentrations in the Molycorp Pond Sludges are
provided in Tables I and 2 and the Unocal intemal information memo in Attachment 2. The
values reported in the Unocal memo were reported as total concentration for each analyte. The
values in Tables I and 2 were reported as TTLC values. These values were used to estimate the
maximum uranium concentration of 0.49 weight percent and the overall average uranium content
of 0.15 weight percent, stated above. However, total concentration is generally a somewhat
higher value than TTLC values, for most metal analytes. Hence, the actual content of uranium
may be somewhat higher than the reported maximum concentration of 0.49 percent, and the
estimated overall average of 0.15 percent uranium.
1.3 Hazardous Constituent Data
NRC guidance suggests that if a proposed feed material consists of hazardous waste, listed under
Section 261.30-33, Subpart D, of 40 CFR (or comparable RCRA authorized State regulations), it
would be subject to EPA (or State) regulation under RCRA. To avoid the complexities of
NRC/EPA dual regulation, such feed material may not be approved for processing at a licensed
mill. If the licensee can show that the proposed feed material does not consist of a listed
hazardous waste, this issue is resolved. NRC guidance further states that feed material exhibiting
only a characteristic of hazardous waste (ignitable, corrosive, reactive, toxic) that is being
recycled would not be regulated as hazardous waste and could therefore be approved for
recycling and extraction of source material. The NRC Alternate Feed Guidance also states that
NRC staff may consult with EPA (or the State) before making a determination on whether the
feed material contains listed hazardous waste.
1.3.1 IUSA IDEQ Listed Hazardous Waste Protocol
In a February 1999 decision regarding the Mill, the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board
Presiding Officer suggested there was a general need for more specific protocols for determining
if alternate feed materials contain hazardous components. In their Memorandum and Order of
February 14,2000, the Commission concluded that this issue warranted fuither staff refinement
and standardization.
IUSA has been cognizant of the need for specific protocols to be used in making determinations
as to whether or not any alternate feeds considered for processing at the Mill contain listed
S :\MRR\Molycorp\MolycorpARfi nal I 2 I 900.doc
Amendment Request
Molycorp
License No.SUA-1358
December 19,2000
Page 4
hazardous wastes, and has taken a proactive role in the development of such a protocol. IUSA
has established a "Protocol for Determining Whether Altemate Feed Materials are Listed
Hazardous Wastes" (November 22, 1999). This Protocol was developed in conjunction with,
and accepted by, the State of Utah Department of Environmental Quality ("UDEQ") (Letter of
December 7,1999). Copies of the Protocol and UDEQ letter are provided in Attachment 3. The
provisions of the protocol can be summarized as follows:
In all cases, the protocol requires that IUSA perform a source investigation to collect
information regarding the composition and history of the material, and any existing generator
or agency determinations regarding its regulatory status.
The protocol states that if the material is known -- by means of chemical data or site history -
- to contain no listed hazardous waste, IUSA and UDEQ will agree that the material is not a
listed hazardous waste.
If such a direct confirmation is not available, the protocol describes the additional chemical
process and material handling history information that IUSA will collect and evaluate to
assess whether the chemical contaminants in the material resulted from listed or non-listed
sources.
The protocol also specifies the situations in which ongoing confirmation/acceptance
sampling will be used, in addition to the chemical process and handling history, to make a
listed waste evaluation.
. If the results from any of the decision steps indicate that the material or a constituent of the
material did result from a RCRA listed hazardous waste or RCRA listed process, the material
will be rejected.
. The protocol also identifies the types of documentation that IUSA will obtain and maintain
on file, to support the assessment for each different decision scenario.
The above components and conditions of the Protocol are summarized in a decision tree
diagram, or logic flow diagram, included in Attachment 3, and hereinafter referred to as the
"Protocol Diagram".
1.3.2 Application of the Listed Hazardous Waste Protocol
This section describes the relevant portions of the Protocol as they were applied to the Uranium
Material.
The IUSAfuDEQ Protocol Diagram states in Decision Step 1, that IUSA will perform a source
investigation regarding whether any listed hazardous wastes are located at the site from which
the alternate feed material originates. The explanatory text for Protocol step I (on page l, Item
S:\MRR\Molycorp\MolycorpARfi nal I 2 I 900.doc
Amendment Request
Molycorp
License No.SUA-1358
December 19,2000
Page 5
l, bullet 1) states that the following is one type of information that would be considered
satisfactory for decision making purposes in the subsequent Protocol Diagram steps:
'oWhere the material is or has been generated from a known process under the
control of the generator: (a) an affidavit, certificate, profile record or similar
document from the Generator or Site Manager, to that effect, together with (b) a
Material Safety Data Sheet ("MSDS") for the material, limited profile sampling,
or a material composition determined by the generator/operator based on a
process material balance."
The Protocol Diagram states in Decision Diamond 2, that if a material "is known not to be or
contain any listed hazardous waste", then IUSA and UDEQ will consider the material not to be
listed hazardous waste. Item 2 of the Protocol text states that to make the determination in
Decision Diamond 2,IUSA may,
"Determine whether specific information from the Source Investigation exists
about the generation and management of the material to support a conclusion that
the Material is not (and does not contain) any listed hazardous waste. For
example, if specific information exists that the Material was not generated by a
listed source and that the Material has not been mixed with any listed wastes, the
Material would not be a listed hazardous waste."
In the Affidavit included as Attachment 4, Molycorp confirms that the Uranium Material was
generated from a known process under the control of the generator. Molycorp, based on site
history, and generator's knowledge of their process, has also certified in the Radioactive Material
Profile record ("RMPR") included as Attachment 5, that the Uranium Material contains no
RCRA listed hazardous wastes.
Historic Process Review
All components of the Uranium Material are byproducts from the recovery of lanthanides and
rare earths, which is not a RCRA listed process. The lead sulfides and uranium were precipitated
before the SX-ion exchange circuit, hence, these materials were never in contact with any of the
organic extractants applied downstream in the lanthanide circuit. In addition, the lead sulfide
ponds were not used for disposal or treatment of any other organic or inorganic wastes at the site.
At IUSA's request, Molycorp operations personnel investigated historic operational records to
identi$ whether any other process or industrial wastes were disposed of in the ponds during their
history. Molycorp has confirmed that the ponds were used solely for lead sulfide-uranium
precipitates, ffid there are no records that the ponds have ever received any other wastes.
Molycorp has further confirmed that during the pond decommissioning excavations, pond
sludges will be segregated, containerized, and shipped separately from any other wastes at the
site. Molycorp's confirmation that the Uranium Material contains no RCRA listed hazardous
waste appears in their letter to IUSA of November 1,1999 in Attachment 1.
S:\MRR\Molycorp\MolycorpARfi nal I 2 I 900.doc
Amendment Request
Molycorp
License No.SUA-1358
December 19,2000
Page 6
Affidavit
IUSA has required that Molycorp provide an affidavit with a declaration that the Uranium
Material is not and does not contain listed hazardous waste. This Affidavit is provided in
Attachment 4.
Because the Uranium Material was generated from a known process under the control of the
generator, the Affidavit meets the requirement for specific Source Investigation information in
the Protocol Diagram Diamond I and Step 1. Also, the Affidavit contains specific information
about the generation and management of the Uranium Material to support a conclusion that the
Uranium Material is not and does not contain any RCRA listed waste as required by Protocol
Diagram Diamond 2 and Step 2.
Hence, based on the Molycorp information and the Protocol, IUSA concurs that the Uranium
Material is not a listed hazardous waste.
In order for IUSA to characterize the Uranium Material, Molycorp has completed IUSA's RMPR
form, stating that the material is not RCRA listed waste. The certification section of the RMPR
includes the following text:
"I certifu that the material described in this profile has been fully characterized and that
hazardous constituents listed in 10 CFR 40 Appendix A Criterion l3 which are applicable
to this material have been indicated on this form. I further certifr and warrant to IUC that
the material represented on this form is not a hazardous waste as identified by 40 CFR
261 and/or that this material is exempt from RCRA regulation under 40 CFR
261.4(a)(4);'
A copy of the RMPR prepared by Molycorp for IUSA is provided in Auachment 5.
1.3.3 Review by IUSA Independent Consultant
IUSA has also engaged an independent consultant, experienced in RCRA matters and chemical
processing, who has reviewed the site history, analytical data, correspondence, IUSA/UDEQ
Protocol, the Affidavit, the RMPR, and closure planning documents available from Molycorp to
date. The consultant has confirmed that the Uranium Material is not and does not contain RCRA
listed hazardous waste. A copy of the consultant's review is provided in Attachment 6.
S :\M RR\Molycorp\MolycorpARfi nal I 2 I 900.doc
Amendment Request
Molycorp
License No.SUA-1358
December 19,2000
Page 7
1.3.4 Compatibility with IUSA Mill Tailings
The Uranium Material contains metals and other constituents that are already present in the Mill
tailings disposed of in the Cell 3 impoundment. Generally, the composition of the Uranium
Material is similar to the composition of the materials currently present in the Mill's tailings
impoundments, because the Uranium Material resulted from the processing of uranium-bearing
ores, and will not have an adverse impact on the overall Cell 3 tailings composition. Although
the Uranium Material is known to contain elevated concentrations of lead, the lead is present at
levels compatible with all other inorganic and organic components of the tailings system
Furthermore, the amount of tailings that would potentially be generated is comparable to the
volume that would be generated from processing an equivalent volume of conventional ore.
Molycorp, as described above, may be expected to excavate and ship, approximately 7,750 tons
to at most, 17,750 tons of Uranium Material from the Mountain Pass site in the year 2001. This
additional volume is well within the maximum annual throughput rate and tailings generation
rate for the Mill of 680,000 tons per year. Additionally, the design of the existing impoundments
has previously been approved by the NRC, and IUSA is required to conduct regular monitoring
of the impoundment leak detection systems and of the groundwater in the vicinity of the
impoundments to detect leakage if it should occur.
It will be a condition of the license amendment that the Mill shall not accept any Uranium
Material at the site unless and until IUSA has determined that sufficient licensed tailings capacity
is available to permanently store:
(a) all l1e.(2) byproduct material that would result from the processing of all the Uranium
Materials,(b) all other ores and alternate feed materials on site; and(c) all other materials required to be disposed of in the Mill's tailings impoundments
pursuant to the Mill's Reclamation Plan.
1.4 Regulatory Considerations
Uranium Material Oualifies as "Ore"
According to NRC guidance, for the tailings and wastes from the proposed processing to qualify
as 1le.(2) byproduct material, the feed material must qualify as "ore". NRC has established the
following definition of ore:
"Ore is a natural or native matter that may be mined and treated for the extraction
of any of its constituents or any other matter from which source material is
extracted in a licensed uranium or thorium mill."
The Uranium Material is an "other matter" which will be processed primarily for its source
material content in a licensed uranium mill, and therefore qualifies as "ore" under this definition.
S :\MRR\Molycorp\MolycorpARfi nal I 2 I 900.doc
Amendment Request
Molycorp
License No.SUA-1358
December 19,2000
Page 8
Uranium Material Not Subject to RCRA
As described under Section 1.3 above, the Uranium Material to be processed at the Mill will not
be subject to regulation as a listed hazardous waste as defined in the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. Section 6901-6991 and its implementing regulations, or
comparable State laws or regulations governing the regulation of listed hazardous wastes.
Based on the site history, the determinations by Molycorp, and the analysis of IUSA's
independent expert consultant, IUSA has concluded that Uranium Material from the Mountain
Pass site does not contain any listed hazardous wastes subject to RCRA.
Justification of Certification Under Certification Test
In the Licensee Certification and Justification test set out in the NRC's Finol Position and
Guidance on the Use of Uranium Mill Feed Material Other Than Natural Ores, the licensee
must certify under oath or affirmation that the feed material is to be processed primarily for the
recovery of uranium and for no other primary purpose. IUSA makes this certification below.
Under this Guidance, the licensee must also justifu, with reasonable documentation, the
certification. The justification can be based on financial considerations, the high uranium
content of the feed material, or other grounds.
Uranium Content
As stated above, site history and available data indicate that recoverable uranium is present in the
Uranium Material. Analytical data provided to IUSA indicate uranium content ranging from
0.002 to approximately 0.49 weight percent, or greater. Based on Molycorp's characterization
and volume information, the overall average uranium content of the Uranium Material is
estimated to be 0.15 percent uranium (0.18 percent U3Os) or higher. This value was derived
from an arithmetic average of ten samples collected in the solid phase of the pond sludge, which
were analy zed for U -234, U -23 5, and U-23 8.
This grade of approximately 0.15 percent uranium (0.18 percent U3Os) is higher than many
grades of natural ores that have been processed at the Mill. The Mill has successfully extracted
uranium from ores and alternate feed materials containing similar levels of uranium.
Financial C ons iderations
In addition to other financial considerations, IUSA will commit contractually to process the
Uranium Material at the Mill for recycling of uranium in consideration of receiving a recycling
fee.
S :\MRR\Molycorp\MolycorpARfrnal I 2 I 900.doc
2.0
Amendment Request
Molycorp
License No.SUA-1358
December 19,2000
Page 9
Other Considerations
There are several other grounds to support the certification test, including the fact that IUSA has
a history of successfully extracting uranium from alternate feed materials, and should be
considered to have developed credibility with the NRC, not only for being technically
competent, but also for fulfilling its proposals to recover uranium from alternate feeds.
Conclusion
As a result of the above factors, and based on the Commission's reasoning in the NRC
Memorandum and Order, February 14, 2000, In the Matter of Internationql Uranium (USA)
Corporation (Request for Materials License Amendment), Docket No. 40-8681-MLA-4, it is
reasonable for the NRC staff to conclude that uranium can be recovered from the Uranium
Material and that the processing will indeed occur. As a result, this license amendment satisfies
the Certification Test, and the other requirements of the Alternate Feed Guidance, and the
tailings resulting from the processing of the Uranium Material will therefore be 11e.(2)
byproduct material.
TRANSPORTATION CONSIDERATIONS
The Uranium Material will be shipped by exclusive-use trucks from the Mountain Pass facility to
the Mill in lined, covered, aluminum end-dump trailers. The Uranium Material will be
manifested, in accordance with U.S. DOT regulations, as ore for recycling. Molycorp will
arrange with a materials handling contractor for the proper labeling, manifesting, and transport of
each shipment of the Uranium Material. Each shipment will be "dedicated exclusive use" (i.e.,
the only material in each container will be the Uranium Material). Molycorp estimates it will
ship approximately 60 to 70 trucks per week for an estimated period of less than sixty to, at most,
ninety days.
After evaluation of several potential routes, Molycorp's transportation contractor has selected a
route via I-15 and I-70 to U.S. Highway l9l at Crescent Junction, Utah, and via Highway 191
south to the Mill. For the following reasons, it is not expected that transportation impacts
associated with the movement of the Uranium Material by truck from the Mountain Pass facility
to the Mill will be significant:
. The material will be shipped as "ore for recycling" in dedicated, exclusive-use containers
(i.e., no other material will be in the containers with the Uranium Material). The containers
will be appropriately labeled and manifested, and shipments will be tracked by the shipping
company from the Mountain Pass site until they reach the Mill.
o On average during 1998, 459 trucks per day traveled the stretch of State Road 191 between
Monticello, UT and Blanding, UT (December 12, 2000 transmittal from State of Utah
Department of Transportation ("UDOT") to IUSA).
S :\MRR\Molycorp\MolycorpARfi nal I 2 I 900.doc
3.0
Amendment Request
Molycorp
License No.SUA-1358
December 19,2000
Page l0
Based on the 1998 UDOT truck traffic information, an average of 60 to 70 additional trucks
per week traveling this route to the Mill represents an increased traffic load of approximately
2 percent. Shipments are expected to take place over the course of a limited time period,
from less than 60 to, at most, 90 days.
o The containers and trucks involved in transporting the material to the mill site will be
surveyed and decontaminated, as necessary, prior to leaving the Mountain Pass site for the
Mill and again prior to leaving the Mill site for the return trip.
. The uranium material will be transported in lined, covered containers, and airborne dusts will
be minimal. Although the Uranium material is known to contain lead, there will be no lead
related hazard associated with transport, because there will be no exposure pathway for
ingestion or inhalation of the contents of the lined, covered containers during transport.
PROCESS
The Uranium Material will be temporarily stored on the existing ore storage pad until a sufficient
quantity of material is available to begin processing activities. Provisions will be made to utilize
water sprays, as required, to minimize dusting during dumping operations. The material will be
processed utilizing an acid leach, in existing Mill equipment, to dissolve the uranium values.
The solution will be advanced through the remainder of the Mill circuitry with no significant
modifications to either the circuit or recovery process anticipated. Since no significant physical
changes to the Mill circuit will be necessary to process this Material, no significant construction
impacts beyond those previously assessed will be involved.
Yellowcake produced from the processing of this material will not cause the currently-approved
yellowcake production limit of 4,380 tons per year to be exceeded.
4.0 SAFETY MEASURES
Mill employees involved in handling the Uranium Material will be provided with personal
protective equipment, including respiratory protection, as required. Airborne particulate and
breathing zone sampling results will be used to establish health and safety guidelines to be
implemented throughout the processing operations.
The Uranium Material will be delivered to the mill primarily in self-dumping trailers via truck. A
small portion may arrive in drums via truck. The Uranium Material will be introduced into the
mill circuit either through the trommel screen or through the existing dmm handling equipment,
previously installed to handle drums of other alternate feed materials. The material will proceed
through the leach circuit, CCD circuit, and into the solvent extraction or ion exchange circuit in
normal process fashion as detailed in Section 3.0 above. Since there are no major process
S lMRR\Molycorp\MolycorpARfi nal I 2 I 900.doc
Amendment Request
Molycorp
License No.SUA-1358
December 19,2000
Page I I
changes to the mill circuit, and since the extraction process sequence is very similar to
processing conventional uranium solutions, it is anticipated that no extraordinary safety hazards
will be encountered.
Employee exposure potential during material handling operations is expected to be no more
significant than what is normally encountered during conventional milling operations.
Employees will be provided with personal protective equipment including full-face respirators, if
required. Airborne particulate samples will be collected and analyzed for gross alpha
concentrations. If uranium airbome concentrations exceed 25 percent of the Derived Air
Concentration ("DAC"), full-face respiratory protection will be implemented during the entire
sequence of material dumping operations. Spills and splashed material that may be encountered
during this initial material processing will be wetted and collected during routine work activity.
Samples of the Uranium Material indicate it is a neutral material. Therefore, it is anticipated that
no unusual PPE apparel will be required other than coveralls and rubber gloves during material
handling activities. Respiratory protection will be implemented as determined.
Although the Uranium Material is known to contain lead compounds, IUSA does not anticipate
any additional worker hazards due to lead. The primary potential hazards associated with lead
result from inhalation or ingestion of particulates of lead or lead compounds. As described
above, the Mill already maintains a particulate monitoring procedure and PPE appropriate for
protection from airbome dust hazards.
4.1 Control of Airborne Contamination
IUSA does not anticipate unusual or extraordinary airborne contamination dispersion when
handling and processing the Uranium Material. IUSA also does not anticipate unusual radon gas
accumulation or radon exposure from storing or processing the Uranium Material. The
contamination potential is expected to be comparable to what is normally encountered when
handling or processing conventional uranium ore. The successive extraction process circuitry
including leaching, CCD, solvent extraction or ion exchange, and precipitation are all liquid
processes, and the potential for airborne contamination dispersion is minimal. The Uranium
Material will already be in a moist solid or in a slurry form when it arrives at the Mill.
The efficiency of airborne contamination control measures during the material handling
operations will be assessed after the Uranium Material is received at the Mill. Appropriate dust
suppression techniques will be implemented as per the Mill Standard Operating Procedures.
Airborne particulate samples and breathing zone samples will be collected in those areas during
initial material processing activities and analyzed for gross alpha. The results will establish
health and safety guidelines, which will be implemented throughout the material processing
operations.
Personal protective equipment, including respiratory protection as required, will be provided to
those individuals engaged in material processing. Additional environmental air samples will be
taken at nearby locations in the vicinity of material processing activities to ensure adequate
S :\MRR\Molycorp\MolycorpARfi nal I 2 I 900.doc
4.3
Amendment Request
Molycorp
License No.SUA-1358
December 19,2000
Page 12
contamination control measures are effective and that the spread of uranium airborne particulates
has been prevented.
4.2 Radiation Safety
The radiation safety program which exists at the Mill, pursuant to the conditions and provisions
of NRC License No. SUA-1358, and applicable Regulations of the Code of Federal Regulations,
Title 10, is adequate to ensure the maximum protection of the worker and environment, and is
consistent with the principle of maintaining exposures of radiation to individual workers and to
the general public to levels As Low As Reasonably Achievable (ALARA).
Radiological doses to members of the public in the vicinity of the Mill will not be elevated above
levels previously assessed and approved.
Vehicle Scan
After the cargo has been offloaded at the Mill site, a radiation survey of the vehicle and container
will be performed consistent with standard Mill procedures (Attachment 7).ln general, radiation
levels are in accordance with applicable values contained in the NRC Guidelines for
Decontamination of Facilities and Equipment Prior to Release for Unrestricted Use or
Termination of Licenses for Byproduct. Source. or Special Nuclear Material, U.S. NRC, May,1987. If radiation levels indicate values in excess of the above limits, appropriate
decontamination procedures would be implemented. However, these limits are appropriate for
materials and equipment released for unrestricted use only, and do not apply to restricted
exclusive use shipments. As stated in Section 2.0 above, the shipments of uranium material to
and from the Mill will be dedicated, exclusive loads; therefore, radiation surveys and radiation
levels consistent with DOT requirements will be applied to returning vehicles and cargo.
5.0 OTHER INFORMATION
5.1 Added Advantage of Recycling
Molycorp has expressed its preference for use of recycling and mineral recovery technologies for
the Uranium Material to be removed from the lead sulfide ponds for three reasons: 1) for the
environmental benefit of reclaiming valuable minerals; 2) for the added benefit of reducing
radioactive material disposal costs; and 3) for the added benefit of minimizing or eliminating any
long term contingent liability for the waste materials generated during processing.
Molycorp has noted that the NRC-licensed Mill has the technology necessary to recycle
materials for the extraction of uranium, and to provide for disposal of the l1e.(2) byproduct
material, resulting from processing primarily for the uranium, in the Mill's fully lined existing
S :\MRR\Molycorp\MolycorpARfi nal I 2 I 900.doc
Amendment Requcst
Molycorp
Licensc No.SUA-1358
December 19,2000
Page 13
tailings impoundments. As a result, Molycorp will contractually require IUSA to recycle the
Uranium Material at the Mill primarily for the recovery of uranium.
S:\MRRWolycorp\MolycorpARfi nal I 2 I 900.doc
Amendment Request
Molycorp
License No.SUA-1358
December 19,2000
Page 14
Certification of International Uranium (USA) Corporation
(the "Licenseefr)
I, David C. Frydenlund, the undersigned, for and on behalf of the Licensee, do hereby
certifu as follows:
l. The Licensee intends to enter into a contract with Unocal Molycorp Division (the
"Material Supplier") under which the Licensee will process certain alternate feed material (the
"Material") at the White Mesa Uranium Mill for the recovery of uranium. As demonstrated in
the foregoing amendment application, based on the uranium content, financial considerations,
and other considerations surrounding the Material and the processing transaction, the Licensee
hereby certifies and affirms that the Material is being processed primarily for the recovery of
uranium and for no other primary purpose.
2. The Licensee further certifies and affirms that the Material, as altemate feed to a
licensed uranium mill, is not subject to regulation as a listed hazardous waste as defined in the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. Section 6901-6991 and its
implementing regulations, or comparable State laws or regulations governing the regulation of
listed hazardous The Licensee is obtaining the Material as an alternate feed, consistent
for the uranium recovery process being conducted at the White Mesa Mill.
December 19. 2000
Date
David C. Frydenlund
Vice President and General Counsel
International Uranium (USA) Corporation
S:\MRR\Molycorp\MolycorpARfi nal l2 I 900.doc
ATTACHMENT 1
Molycorp Location Maps,
Process History, and
Flow Diagram
S :\l\4 RR\Molycorp\MolycorpAR. doc
cArffiF
B
yz7)
DSTn ----2
w
f.-Mtll/F
.\\....-
\\S
)\
NJ
^ sTRAINING
4fr\euren
GENERAL FACILITIES
MAP
Jn -20'oo(t,loN) ss:51 t;NocAL LAO TEL:[phone];O
Molycorp lnc.
P.O. Box t24
lvlountain Pass, Calilornia 92355
I::"sti:: i ll lill?i;i?3'
UNOCALT9
MOLYCORP
$qs AT( Lc+aq (e""le)
P. 002
t
T
I
I
t
I
I
T
T
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
Mr. Curt Shifrer
Catifornia Regional Water Qualtty Control Board
Lahontan Region
Victorville Branch Office
15428 Civic Drive, Suite 100
Victorville, CA 92392'23 59
\ q15r toc ru\ztyw - Li*k#"*,'w,i+*kffi
Rc: Investigation of Process Ponds P'8r P' llrP'?4
Dear Mr. Shifrer:
Moiycorp, Inc. has prepared this letter report ro satisfy requirements set forth in Section II
(9) (b) of Board Order 6-91-835 for the investigation and inventory of process ponds.
Thu=" ponds contain materials with lauthanide concentrations averaging over 20% with
elevated concentrations of lead sulfidc. The ponds addressed in this letter report are P-8,
P-1 I and P-24.
PRODIJCTTON HI.STORY
Molycorp began operations at Mountain Pass in 1952 using a rod mill left from a
predecessor company operating a small gold operation at Mountain Pass. Molycorp
installed a ball mill and flotation cells. Production was initially very limited with only
bastnasite concentrate being produced.
In Ore fall of 1964 Molycorp leamed that one of the minor metals, eruopium, was in
critical demand as a red phosphor for color televisions. To meet the new demand for
europium, Molycorp constructed the Europium Plant, Irow the Chemical Plant, and
placed it in operation inNovember of 1965.
As a consequence of tJre new process used in the recoverl' of europium, a process slream
was generated which contained lanthanide minerals with elevated levels of lead sulfide
and iron hYdroxide.
IJIELISSA M. ALLAIN
Nov 1 3 1995
Jn -20'oo(MoN)
I
TEL:ifOSliZif
lnvesLigation of Process Ponds
Noventber 6,1995
PaEe2
Bastnasite concentrate was delivered from the flotation plant to tlre Europium Plant where
it was roasted to drive offcarbon dioxide and oxidize the cerium to a less soluble (+3 to
+4) valence state. This material was then subjected to a HCI leach which solubilized all
the lanthanides exoept cerium. Thc cerium was settled out as a solid residue, filtere4
dried and packaged as a finished product. The solution remaining after cerium removal
was processed to remove iron hydroxide and lead sulfide.
The Lead and iron removal was I continuous separation process- Iron was precipitafd
first by using arnmonia to increase the pH. The iron-free supernatant overflowed to a
,u"orrd tanklor lead precipitation using sodium hydrogen sulfidc' The remaining
solution was then circulated in preparation for introduction into the solvent extraction
circuits.
The process stream enriched in ianthanide chlorides, iron hydroxide and lead sulfide was
grurity discharged at various times to three unlined impoundment's as showu on the
attached facilitY maP.
Dgring the initial startup at the Ewopium Plan! iron was not precipitated into the process
stream. However, at a iater date iron hydroxide was introduced to this stream. The
efguent frorn this initial activity was gravity discharged into P-24 fiom approximately
1965 to 1967. Pond P-8 was the next facility used to store the lead iron residue. It was
operaled from approximately 1967 to I981. The last pond to receive this waste stream
was p-l I whichwas operated from 1981 to I984. None of the ponds received additional
material after 1984.
The process resulting in the production of the lead iron residue was the same basic
pro".rr that resulted in the production of lead iron filter cake barreled and stored at
Motycorp after 1984. The major difference was that the barreled material was placed in a
filter priss to reduce free moistue before storage. Also, tie lead iron pond residues have
greatei concentations of lanthanides than filter cake because of the lanthanide rich
solutions that canied the residue. Barreled lead iron fi.lter cake was stabilized by
Molycorp under the terms of a Settlement Agreement finalized with the California
Department of Toxic Substaaces in 1995, and is cr:rrently being fed to process for the
purpose of lanthanide recovery.
gg:51 UN0CALLAO P,00r
I
t
I
I
T
I
I
I
I
T
t
T
I
I
t
T
I
Jn.-zo'oo(lloN) ss:sl t;NocAL LAO TEL:i14517214 P,004
T
t
T
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
T
I
lnvcst igation of Process Ponds
Novembcr 6, 1995
Page 3
WASTE CII{RJACTERIZATION STUDY
A field project was undertaken on AugUst 8, 1995 to quantify volumes and characterize
ttre materijt in the Process ponds. The site sampling Program was conducted by
Converse Consultants Southwest, Las Vegas. Pond profiles were developed by logging
of pond materials retrieved fiom split spoon auger samples obtained from pmd Power
augering or hand auger saurples where more appropriate. A complete description of the
sampling program including sampling procedures and calculated pond volumes are
attacUeJas .attachment d "Lead Pond Waste Management Unit Characterization".
Samples were shipped to Loc}fieed Analytical Laboratory, a Califomia state oertified
laboiatory for anilysis. Analysis pcrformed by Lockheed included metals listed in Title
22 of the California Healtlr and Safety code and total uranium and thorium
concentrations. Sample splits were analyzed at Molycorp's in-house laboratory for
chloride, sulfate, lanthanides aud moisnrre content. All oonstituents are rcPorted on a dry
weight basis.
POND NtrSCRIPflON
Volumes and cross-sections of the ponds ar€ presented in Attachment A. Ponds were
found to contain a total of benrreen 3,t51 and 4,326 cubic yards of lead iron residue.
pond P-8 was found to consist of approxim arely 445 cubic yards of lead iron residue.
This material is overlain with approximately 1,445 cubic yards of mill tailings averaging
five fect in thickncss. The lead iron residue in pond P-E appears to be in the reduced state
due to flre tailittgs cover.
pond P-l 1 was found to have a cap of oxidized lead iron residue overlyiqg unoxidized
lead iron residue. The oxidized residuc is estimated to have a volume of between 300 to
775 cubic yards with a maximum thickness of 4.5 feet near the center ofthe pond. The
reduced lead iron residuc consists of approximately 2,815 cubio yards'
Pond P-24 was found to be very shallow with a depth of approximately I foot of mixed
oxidized and reduced lead iron residue encountered. TIre total volume of lead iron
residue inP-24 is cstimated to be 285 cubic yards.
ln -ro oo(lloN) ss:52 uNocAL LAO TEL:7145ii2?a P. 005
I
lnvestigation of Process Ponds
t };'r'.'ln*'6'
rees
t
ANALYTICAL RFSUI TS
I Analytical results for the lead iron residue containing lead and iron are summarized in
. Tables I and 2. Table 3 summarizes analytical results of the mill tailings in P-8. Table 4
I compaf,es analysis of barreled lead iron filter cake that was subsequently stabilized and isI ueini fed back to process with pond lead iron residue.
I Figrue 2 and3 show graphical representations of comparative concentations of key! chemical constituents in each pond. Figure 4 shows a graphical comparison of tailings
r material to lead iron residue, clearly establishing the distinct chenrical composition of
I each material, A discussion of the diflerences found between the bareled material priorIto stabilization and the pond material follows.
I l.eao
I Lead concentations in the barreled material ranges from 52,000 to lO0,O00 mg/kg while
I the material in the ponds mnges from 1,544 to262,4lO mg/kg. The low lead values are
r believed to occur in zones interuringled with mill tailings. Further evidenoe for this is the
I high barium content ofthe material containing comparatively low lead concentrations.r As indicated above, the Iead concentation in the pond material is much greater than the
r ba:reled stabilized material.I
I Barium
T
Barium in the barreled material averages 4 mg/kg while barium in the pmdcd mamrirl
I areps 6629 mg&;fuhln idiood lead iron residue and 5884 melkCin the unoxidized
I lead iron residue (Refer to Figure 2 for illustration). The high barium values are
attributable to the interlayering of milt tailings'
t
Lanthanidqq
I The total lanthanide content reported as an oxide in the oxidized lead/iron residue
averages 21.77% while the average in tbe reduoed material averages l4o/o. 'I\e
I unoxidized material may have a lower average coDtenl due to more interbedded mill
I tailings- The baneled material averaged 60% lantharrides reported as ctrlorides.
T
I
]n zo'oo (MoN)08:52 UN0CALtOO TEL:il]lnna
lnvestigation of Process Ponds
November 5, 1995
Page 5
Radionuclides
Total uranium in the barreled rnaterial sverages 2800 mg/ks' oxidized matcrial in the
pond averagcs 1351 mg/kg while the unoxidizcd material averagcs 1333 mg/kg. These
,"lr.t are lower than the barreled material due to the intermingling of mill tailings with
the lead iron residue-
pond P-24 contains lower ruanium and thorium values than the other two prccess ponds.
This could be a result of this pond receiving effluentbefore iron was precipitated aod
added to the Process stream.
Total.tlrorium in the barreled material averages 240 mgtkg, The oxidized lead iron residue
in the ponds averages Ll'Zmghg. The concentation offfi lCad
iron rrrinhl6for&o,po*mages 457 mglkg.. The thorium concenhation is much
higher in one sample of oxidized lead iron residue from P'24 (5954 mg/kg). The
cJmposition of lead iron residue is well knorrrn and this thorium concentration is much
higher than expected. Therefore, this sample has uot been included in the calculation of
the average concentrations within the ponds, since it is considered ao anomaly.
Trtce Constituents
The concentrations ofthe remaining TitteZ2metal concentrations are similar between the
barreled material and lead iron residue contained in thc pouds.
ECONOMCS OF THE RECOVFRY OF LANTI{ NTNE'S FROM PONN RESTDTTFS
Anachment B to this letter discusses the value of reintoduction of the lead iron residue
Iurthanide material oontaining lead and iron to tJre current lanthanide recoveU Process .
If rein6oduced to the Chemical Plant using facilities curently beiag utilized for
stabilized filter cake iutoduction, a cost for processing of the material is estimated at
$0.50 a pound of recovered lanthanum oxide with a cunent market value of
approximately $1.154b. Thus, the prooessing of pond residues forttre recovery of
lanthanides is economically justitied.
P,006
I
I
I
I
t
T
I
T
I
t
T
T
I
I
I
T
T
T
Jn-:o
I
00(n,'N) 08:52 UNSCAL tOtD TEL:i145772i1
Investigatiott of Process Ponds
November 6, 1995
Page 6
Pr AN FOR DETERMINING MFTIIOn EOR POI'trD CLOSIIRF
Molycorp is working diligently towards the processiug or disposal of mining by-products
at Mouniain Pass. During 1995, lantlranide lead iron filter cake was stabilized at the
Mor:ntain Pass site. The stabilized material is cunently being fed to the Chemical Plant
for the recovery of lanthanides. The schedule mandated in the Settleurent Agreement
rvith the California Department of Toxic Substances requires tlat all stabilized material
be processed for recovery of lanthanides or removed for disposal withia a three year
period beginning in August, 1995.
The reintroduction of stabilized filter cake has requircd the development of new process
knowledge and techniques to keep lanthanide products within quality specifications while
macimizing lanthanide recovery from the stabilized material. The sume types of
considerations Bre inherent to the processing of Iead iron residue contained in the ponds.
For this reason, Molycorp proposes to evaluate several options for the perrranent closure
of the ponds. These options are listed below.
Processing of Pond Material inthe Chemical'Plant
Processing of Pond Material in the Mill
Close Ponds in Place Using an Engineered Cover and Diversion Ditches
As feasibitity is considered, it is possiblc that other options may become atkactive for the
processing, containment or offsite processing of the lead iron residue for lead recovery.
scHFr\I Ir tr FOR FVALIIATTON OF OPTIONS
Molycorp proposcs to conduct the necessary eugineering and process feasibilip studies
during the next six months. A report that provides a comparison of the feasibility and
results of bench testing for the various options will be submitted by May 1, 1996. A
preferred option(s) will be proposed at that time.
After submittal of this feasibility report, the recommended option(s) will be pilot tested
under actual operating conditions. This process will take up to 6 months. At the
conclusion of the pilot testing, Molycorp will submit a project schedule and detailed plan
for the processing or contairunent of the pond residues.
P,00;
t
I
I
t
t
T
I
I
T
I
T
I
I
T
I
I
!
!n ro'oo(n,oN) ss:sJ ,tNocAL LAJ TEL:ifqSliZO P,008
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
T
I
T
T
tnvcstigation of Proccss Ponds
Novcmber 6, 1995
Pagal
CONCLUSION
. Molycory has determined the volume and charaoterized the pond materials contained
in P-8, p-11, P-24. These results are submitted as part of this report'
. Analysis of the pond rnaterials shows it contains significant lanthanide and lead
,alu"s and could be economically processed for the recovely of lanthanides'
r Reintroductiol of sinrilar, stabilized material presently being introduce{ t9 -the
Chemical plant indicates that the pond residue can be introduced to the Molycorp
process for the recovery oflanthanides'
. Molycorp proposcs a schedule allowing systematic engineering and economic
eraluation of ihe various options available for processing or containment'
. Results of feasibility and bench testing of the pond residues witl be summarized and
submitted in a report on May l, 1996. A detailed plan and schedule for the
processing or covering of *rL pond material based on actual pilot testing in operating
tonditions will be ,ub*itt"d no later than one year from the date of this submittal
(November 1, 1996).
Depending on the best method for processing or containment, action will either
,o**.rr"J immediately afler review or approval of thc detailcd plarq or be sequenoed to
Jb* processing o, .or", after the stabilized lead/iron filter cake has been fed to Prcccss'
Please do not hesitate to call me if you lrave any questions conceming this matter'
attachments
cc: M. Allain, Unocal Law
o,e,:;,ij'-= :. 25 7:ei5:l--H{a .-:
LO INTTROI,UCTION
This cl€,'e p,.r bas bGEo Fed frr fG &* d$rec rcrd'iuwti: poods (P{' P-l I' -"P'24'
b(ilGd*rhelr,{otycrr'rr.G{olrrcre)oicinuomahPgs.CrlibraLsurfroc@:[il[o&
rrrdttndpblllDdldmdlrdrailbdoHnrccrrtsrapcrerocdartiriaTbdG!
pord, nsr usri h *" p.,. to -rr.r d ffilr rrd ro corc.. tcdrfoo @ E,sirl er
ioll.ricsinfr.frrmdeailfdgdlDlcil(currsrwtuptrlcci}uc+
Scptctrt,l99t
nis plil tn3 bGa g'EFEd rrdcr t- catfrni Raicd w&, auaEy Goilrol Eild (cnrr,Q@I
I,ffi ReioE, Bodd ordrNo 541{s( rE t 10.\'u rccuese sil rdc zl oftb crffirnlr
cdc dnl3uldc @ ccRI Ch4tE 15, Arriclcs ? sd t' ctorc troGIiIE lu 6rsld
bdd. A Se'rrsng urr rrtyricrt H'n (S&ApI xNiC[ diso|t3lc d4 GIGL d cl"fllP
codnrdo aaooaoro', b p,"scrod ," Amrdurlrs r- Arlahh a sey Pr.o Gl&sL q'tict
disasscc tE r.,al d,tc rtryiraruns rtd t9atrG !r&ty GDrcEIl3 fu 6dd ,o'l$ 'r prcracd '
Anrclunra 2-
LO TACILITY INNON}IATIOI|
,.l Lo.rlhr
TlciliEl.cd h dr Eccn crnbrnie Moirc D.!.rt d rn deraiim c+podo*y 4'tm
E to,' m r brd. r," lir ir tsd h r Fsr baser rhc rvrrh rd odMsc&
ia e rrjicr cfrgbf r mrntrius. tb c&Blt b r *nriuil' Tt !fu ts eoqs
+eromay llol .Et3D dlfiici +Fu&Bdy 355 scr r'c iwohrcd i! dh,l EiliE d
D,oEdE, eoctrnyo&rruy*rdbuq'hlilEreHuhr.y l5 o-l5l r delsto
r,{jt-v'IRF Lr".:t
r -tr
?SaeE;.-vCLi':lRP Flvl -JriE lt:R!o
Bail.' Rgd Bccasc 6! mfu b loc'tEd in d'E vic,!ily of a rmjor frec*ay. the sitl is c corid.,d
r.lr.ta
. -.-T-
TtE tnc b.r $$dc poods rtc tan&d gffii[r dotm SndieG to tlE lonh rnd e.3 ofthc opst
dtgiElldaetrci4frcfiLlarlplvlcainhssE'i'E.ThGDo.dlE?fcil'otGudduhdy
boredfiqno.eyrdic. TbrocrriodirpdrrGcpqrdseraillurtrrpdonFgurc r' Frgprc rA
i[ssu rtrtogognghy hth vidnitry of tlr pdds'
22 e'edo6l
Tb il,hc ir fr,,cd qrifio e rrttrwcs*rding frrh$oundad bbcr drn:aoeplfc 'o
tr' TbB
roe Grpoecd !o t,-n'.i, r,,E fh Ctrt,ou,.hf..tlt' rrC cqi*d Pti'Iily d EGc
rddolorita.TorhccesdrbcmaurupucooEcdisquacrnrydhruirm"
Itb nanordric oonpld t arracrrtzltD, Fdir.5 drrrytgcilttPddotq PryDed: i'al:l-
md celtcaia illtruliuti Thc crftondc irrnrduts 6lria tlE rir''rl uastre*r' tb8 dEdPd
irrgE drhc mirc's opcrlims Brsttrtsitc 6tCIin3 dl ddtc trt"dF! ladboidh tsilt dm'
inchrduq csilm. Irrdunm. Nco+ynrtm' pnsodyrnern rttd fuL
,3 Bydrotoal
Yarryfiryioi3&Finrywrb.ili]EuIilGrqudnalanE.PDrui'ildy''0]6rorqtlt
undcf 62iq dErilichoEfc, +[E .od Eut3 a$lfty wrtdt lvrtPrhDryLLc adrr*cily
tcladi strrddv&y. ArEttl E ficBraionl wiltl. aefity cdol Bdtd Gu'acB) ordcr
No- 6Ol{36, D11l urslE .s!r dTos{ Op.dig13 hrw clsed dcgldadoo drndcrliog gqrnd
y t4rclr b t undurdE ucbciryunn.Fd udlf r rP'recorEdiEAditEPh'
ffi,ol
- -E.a
/bdE:cc=:ta -A!r- - a
3.0 WAS'TE IUANAGEMENT UNTN|
3.1 fttftd DcrriPtbr
TIr;GG pond rus. P4, P-t I, rd E-21, fuIn6ty rps4trd c'A1;,
'[3chrg!'
Em U ;tfl !d
hdud{c r6\rcry oDg,di;1 TIE Pstdr ralrgE h ia tqa {Jm f to l+mO il in lrftce erte'
fhG ponds re rddirdy StEI6o, rnd ere d.etd by 30il dlttl 'nd
b6lr' TtG Pondd nrmhl
oGld3 b e rnrxinum dcarh of rppruiudy I I ft€t bdog Endc nrncc (q80 h pmds P{ E'd
p-ll, iEd 2 fta bgr h pEd P-2{.. At&ot{F thc srfrcc doE Patd! b &y. ruiort b rtrsl
id=bdorro' et acc h soa' tocrios. Th. pdtd rldimld b'ndcrlrb si6 bc&o*'.,d'.'r
div3 tol] in il tuG! |tEtrgt]tst uiE A Ph visw ttry sf th 3 Dottd rrces b DtIsGnd hHgtrE
r- Effib rery&rgrhc Grirnrld o*r[ drn:adm rnd nrgLts dthc podr b srerid
ir thc ublc bclflr-
Tlr sodrss dqriEd h pon& p-t r nd F.2f rc pro h wcd tryr drcrd iril r=ifr,o rd
qidEdt!.dLu'db(drft3ldorrlrdllEdttlie,EhtrGYidlsilDm).(Lidzdlced
Lg1 rd&t" b foud in ftG upq, lsgs ofthc Ponds. !6 Pgud P+ $G lcd irur tcd&|3 aatcrids
art owrlain by d[ blinc' m.'Glil croc*cdqer fugfoEF oflDdld P{, P.l l' .,dP.2+enfu!d
by cmrrersEnimrmgrd cqr$t8l sartlnrc' Im (covrsal lIG rcsEtilcd asEgrre2A/2ts"
Frgrrrtr 3A/38, and Figurct {AJ|'B, rcfcctv*y'
The poodcd EnEirl ir dEfiDGd W A GCR. rs r Grurp B ninftry rnsq d L rEguld t' dE
RWQ@. IrhorU leio. Tb poads lrrc rct bGGn h oprntiqr sirrcc prior !o lgt''
ffi-rt
(D
Sodium
Hydrosulfitle
NaHS
@
Ammonia, NH3
lmpurity Containing
Leach Liquor
PbS Pond Residue Procega Diagram
@Flocrulant
Clarified Leadt LiqJor
b Uquit/liquil lon
Erclteng€ Clurits
l- Brsoasia coDocoEstc &o@ thc flotrtion plot is rorstcd b fcmvc clcslll c|It@iE5 pdor to 6c
lcaching proc€ss- The torsted bas;uasirc ir lcachcd in e $dochloric acid sobtio. Th! irsolublc
oatsriel becom 6c ccriro ftcdstgct and rhe lcech liquc is scnt fc firrbrr ir[Fssy rcovrl rnd
ladeoide recwery rsi4g SX-Im cxchmg;'
2. A,rffimir *rs eddcd b 6c circtil !o pGciPihrc iIu- IscidcEtrl trndtani& pccipirim also
occurrcd.
3. Sodiu6 bydrosplfrdc *rs addcd b trc circuit to precipinr tcrd Thr trair fuIlorrcd 6G lcd iD
prwipiauou.
4. Thc slurry rcportt b tr thictsoa fq scding.
5. Floccultst i! ddtd b fu sluuy u 6c thickos'
6. Thc thickog wcrflou tiquor rcpors m 6c SX cirwit'
7. Thc thictcoa undcrf,m, PbS rcsiduc' nporad b 6t PbS 36rting @t'
Hrf *r3 f;;,*, ;,,,,-r'* :;,
6775C Earley Road P O 8or 124 '-
= tf = - --
Mounrarn Pass. cA 92366- -
f I j.-i ,; - - i, -fe€pho(€ (7e0) 855.2201 -l
Facsimile (760) 65e2253
I Novsmba 1999
CadhlB Yarr
,tj l{0v'51999 >1
Ms. Vichclle Rehmemt
tnternaoonal Ururtum CorPoraion
Environrnenral Mztrger
Indcpcrdcncc Plara Surtc 950
t050 Scvcntetrth Smct
Denver, CO t0265
Rc: hfoturtioa Nccdcd fer Filiag tt AE.odocor fcr R:ccptio tf l-Grd sollE lfrulrt
tlar Ms. Rchmann:
tn respoasc to yol[ lcrtcr dUcd 14 OcobGI 1999 od orr tclcphonc dilgrssioo' &c folhsirU ir givco in rc+Gs' to
your$reiuolu:
l. Thc cnimuc{ volur* of irc lcad sulndc poltd rtsklucs'
Thc cstirotdwlytu ia thc thtu potds is tss.Nol/ nnl isclding qpmrinouly $.mf .{lotdb uihngs
that Motycotp *A -or,r-, srpiatc Iw^ thc td *lidc nsUtuci .ih aawty,g tk potd m6at
2. A proccss skctclr or dcscriptiou of thc lldrsrirtc rcsovGry trlct!! 1|a gatr5cd drc sg!'!lt ditcittGd E lhc
thrr pods.
Scc attodred diagron.
3. A dcscriprion of orhcr rourccs (if rty) of strc$nt dischqpd o fr: thtE podt"
Appro*ady Jg,OUlf o{turcrbl coauued ie rtc pudt ts.lll lofilaFl@ bllmfir-cwuaiu of
beiltasitc m-c,a1ts *iich'bccotrc rtcfedstoe *at ita*od thc led nlfdt utifus- I'lotpo vill mnqt rc
separok thts aatcrialfrn thc led nffi nsidt{s vhih crcovotiag thc ptd mo;als'
4. Con6rmuim 91 sr.iilocc bet tbc noonrrdioecrivc maals in thc thrcc purdr did on cmr, fio e RCRA liscd
,,o.o|;. It rrould bc rno31 rucful m rccciw a forrrtrl stlcmena or stLs cmfrurmsr h 6G Pood oqltclrt3 lrc
irc,tpr Eom RCRA rudstc Bevill artmdmcntr
Nonc o{thc natcrials fccd it tb ld ailfrc pnds or a lind borbs *as-u
j. Orguric uralysis of 6e 6rcc pondsr g qrfirmuio thd h. pod shdgcs conain no ongric corstituatr
No aalysis ts ouilabb at this tirc. MotltuV lxlliclwls fiat w sigpifwtt onl4,ttttt ofotgoic', ,l-,y, qi,, h th'
hd xtfidcPoednsidta-
6. Confirmrrisr sr cyilsr rhn ugth corapornds (if my) in 6c dncc Podt di.l tu G(lE e(E RmA htd
pr9€csscs.
fhc n*rialsshipdatkYhitoMao Mill. tuc,Itornthcbdpdsyill riltuituyrlrrplnd-ar}cjr
inorguric oe oqali'. vfrrr. orQir is o RCf,./'lttad pftncsl
7. lnfrnrirn o orguic lotvttlt ucc (if sry) rr drc sirc.
Thc Me s11,,{lmtiljI.t gtoc,gxt ta,3t ,{1t\os',tc ia tk 9( cinnit. Hwta,ct. fu lcd nlf& retifucs vcr!
cnatd. A tt*,wd ltw thc poas. ugstt=ot { tlv SX arrUlr.
If you hrv: ury finrhcr qrsi55. flcerc emun nt by tctcphotr rs (760) t5&76a5 or frr r (760) tJffigl'
ATTACHMENT 2
Uranium Content Estimates
Material Description and Analytical Data
for Uranium Material
S :\MRR\Molycorp\MolycorpAR.doc
UJ/ LA' LQUU
5
E EH!$sE HE Hgol-
E =H$=$E Ea 3l-
9seNss EsGt-(rrOvo =s
D
fl3
9 -otqx$cb e;sB=d;n
3 u)or\rlloE iisiiis
CD
at oqrtr) loCIF r
Bf
t-
G
o
iantF
o
NEF
555qSS 8E---(Da.Crtt\CDq)
PEERiE 38
l{r@N@6c4, N(o'qdtod-oi -6ilOe-rtlf! (\l(\l
\o
lt)(v1
o)roG,-cDctSIF@v:;;ot u:l Go v' N N
c? ('?
(I' G'o|o
q\
$l (r,(rit Gl
oozoro
EIJ
tNroz
!Fso-
6o.
ILo
tFC"
=UIIoeo
t
..io
a,-Lo
E-s(,
rE-a+,
o-Sna$E EE
E c:r:QsrQct rqaE "i.jR-BS gE ao
l-coQrog$ -:\ coie9-EE RB ;
Etr
3oF
-soE
eeE-E qq.f|qqur F3 Eg loN.EG|(9(9 r r ;E . . . t t . 31€ =E eeeoeq c,ij !t("
".Igqrq€ 3J =cr9E9"? J+ +€€O€OaD F? C\lo.o-o.Ggo. o.o- a-
l* -ro' oo (,,oN) o8:54 ,,NocAL LAt TEL:?l4sii27, P.ol)
Tables 1,2,3 and 4
Total Threshold Limit Concentrations
for Constituents Listed
t tnvestigation of Process Ponds, Molycorp, tnc., November 6, igss
I
t
P. 016TEL:il45ii2OJ*, -rt,' oo(ltoN) o8:s4 ttNocAL LO
T
I
I
I
I n
tl,
tg
o
IEco
t$e
T9c FrE *
I Ei E
ollox
I gs
E
IE
o6lrf
P
I
UIoart
rot
E
Boz
t
dg
o
!too-
Etr
o
-5oa
3E
I
I
T
I
al6-
gIEE
:E'lc=':
EJO...:.
'r-Hm
$IHE
iElf,ri
nt c.
N 6a @o o
v
qri o F oa N
oq
o'
oY h oD qnl or.l
DrgI
+ul
;9
oa
rlt
E
Gi
1r)!?qmv,
E\vt
o
D
..io
alc.ai\
FDo
E
o e
N or.l €a o c(\Fo
yi
o
E&stt i
o 3 E
|n
o
!o
Glv
c
EatE
6
uto@
.oe
lrl5r0(c
Ed
$
aqo6o
oo.6o
Eio
clEci
ft
E Rc{
iiJlrrr-1
fiHl6!I:rulr&!
ial,E$
ffiIE-E
IUIgE
'E lie.
6l \
@
+
@N
f,qt vN aN
6h ho U)
€!c
ct F?
qut
o
N
o
c.l !
uio
?
uJot
Eor!oq
{
.alG
ood oaN c oGIo Gl?
N c6l Eo6 a o
u
eci @o N
oo
14
koE
{
c
6s ln
oD o
N c b!ot.)a
tc
rit3
@
Iuoc
nY6!mt,
oFot
aNo
o
l.l,Nb
a.!|a@loN
(,
Y
i\Ni\
$l q orvh qe
q
Y
oci o
R
olo
q6e
ts
Erd6
oJ oFI
ou c q
N aut
o
riloo
GsuloGd
N
c)D
oo.
Cr
N
@!oo
ts c
EG
o)ocl
a?
(\a qN a @o o
v csl ra @ lol-
NF3N o
ov c{
o@ c
6ri c6t
ulo
IgtT
!orial\
GIUJl,
!l
Eq$h!
a?h6
E
aI
k
6Ot
€
oq
oo
o @h6
ri.lql,i
:it't.ld1i
oN EoF
@ct
o
<.,1
o 16 q
o
6a
N
Fo
o c
Y
q
Nv
o
..1
NoGo
clrJ
a
G6
!J6N
o,i
Nodc
@o:Dcrh
oc.
clN
6q
o
oFoo6
o .D
ffiffi
ffi
ffiffi
o@
NN
o q
v G c o tN
c{
E
ev oc'Esi q(\l oci
4!eu!
I
l,lJrovFl
@o
lrlrD\o
o.q
Gln!
Goo @
Gi
b
^l
6r\fi o!|r!
N o
s o,olt:
ho ov o.,i Do!t !t
tt6Dg)oo{
e ov h
ch ori q
N 6doo
!c
slEcu
oIuJId
.q
G@r0
roG
ov
4h
c
N
oi
N
o.q
aoog!
o ts)at
N qq
!6@.c (\t
o
Y
oF,i N
oa eci Fh
(\c
c
n
o€eYi oci c$
E
o
EIu@6
c,:
qu€(l
(!
o E
F.
FEn
Nr?tsF
t!
o(I ut!r
o";E1,o :.,1,u.,
E6
.EE4
.Eoe
Et{@
E
Eoo
E
E!Eo
E
EgEo
=oaoo
0op6o
o!
o
!na
I
o5
EEo!!!o
=
t
.!,i2
E5?oEaa
Eaa
E
Eaf
I
EEaf
t
E5EoE
o
E!
9F
E
!IF
!6F
z
E.tE!
l
E
c
G
rl
EI>l
EtTE
s
.!N
UNOCALLAO TEL:?l457i2ia P,oli
Total Threshold Limit Concentration (TTLC) Analysis on Dry-Weight Basis
Oxidized Lead\lron Residue
20 00 (il4ON) 08:55I*
I
I
I
I
T
I
I
t
t
I
I
t
I
t
I
T
T
t
Table 2
1I:f i(Z;utr!3r'r,r',Pl rL2 ,12:0:2:5y',:J''1255-01$'rrl P2:{:tllOISll:01 i1 P2rlr{:l,l:8.:2:01:, : :'F24T4ll0:6rr,.Or|}Efl F.Z4-D;(ujE:J,.r
Constituent Cohceritration'. lmalko)
ConcenEation I, .'lmolkql ..1
;oncsntl?tlb'n'i (Ei;rkdl Gonoelluauon'.,r, lma/kal' ,'.EohcentrEtlorT. ":,'lmolkol ,r ,
Antimony <12 <12 <12 <12 <12 <12 <12
AGenic 4,6 47 5.3 ?4 11,2 s.t 1.?
E.rlum €,309 2a,199 411 8,222 2,580 2290 451
Beryllium 105 12,7 20 5B 3_7 16 2.6
Cadmium <4-0 <4.0 <4.0 <4,0 <4.0 <t.0 <4.0
chromlum <2,O 19 <2.0 <2.0 56 <20 45
Cobalt <10 33 13 58 30 <10 <10
Copper 612 <5.0 84 <5,0 41 110 15
Fluoride 72 9.02 3.1 122 17 3t 23
Lred 282.410 5.463 75.447 33,333 12,O43 zza,9a1 2,213
Mercury 1.53 0.34 0.21 0.51 <0.10 0-6 <0,,10
Molvbdenum q <40 <40 <40 <40 <40 <40
Nlckgl <8.0 23 <0.0 69 50 15 36
Selenium <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 1'.|.2 <5,0 <1.0
Silver <2.O <2.0 <2.0 '111 <2.0 <20 <2.0
ThEllium <2.O <2.O <20 4,o <2,O <2.0 <2,O
Thodurn E"?19.?7 37?,.46 571.56 749.54 133.03 5954.13 62.39
..JI nonum 1.54E44 g.72e4t 2.61E{4 2.81E-04 7.66E{5 2.14E 03 5.50E.05
. 141tnonum 4.99E{8 1.19E47 1.25E-07 9.96E 08 1-77E44 7,0'tE47 8.05E-09
IotalThoriun 219.27 372.44 571.56 749,54 133.03 5954.13 62.39
23Eu16nium 252e.94 3502.99 1197.60 80.5.20,15 3r7-37 5.S3
Uranium t-3e9.72 5.6.73 't95.33 13.41 2-ea ?s23 1.04
Uranium 135.14 198.20 104.40 12.61 2.04 1 26,1 3 0,57
3054.7S 4247.92 1497.74 106,56 25.07 518.73 7.5s
Vanadlum <10 71 <'10 111 a2 72 ?a
Zinc 700 534 TN s11 237 229 71
Constltusnt Concentrallond,(mqlkql' ,,.,
Cohcentration
' lmqlkqllmcrkcl' ., lmslks) i (mslkcl . "'i.'r:,,,, tmdfts)' .,1
Chloride 4,600 2,400 30,200 12.s00 3,600 9,300 12,700
LnO 332.100 126,400 s89.400 200,9)0 3.300 305.700 84.800
Sulfate 14't.600 8,400 135.300 145.200 r 13.700 il.700 33.100
e/oH2O g.no/o 21.294/a 9.87%s5.m%53.50%go,12.A 14,'.|40/o
Iln 20 oo(lloN) ss:s5 ttNocAL LO TEL:il45ii2a P.018
Total Threshotd Limit Concentration (TTLC) Analysis on Dry-Weight Basis
MillTailings Cover in Pond P.8
Table 3
P84'(2$-2.5I1.1 PI
troncenril$onl,,':' rnitihditri ;concan'
''qUmo
Antimonv <12 <12
Arsenic 10.7 11.0
Barium 11.7''7 12,6?i
Beryllium 4.7 6.8
Cadmlum <4.0 4.O
Chromium <2,0 <2.0
Cobalt 11 14
CoDDer <5,0 <5.0
Fluodde E(20.7
Lead 2,87e 2.140
Mercury 0.15 o.u
Molybdenum <40 <40
Nickel <8.0 <8.0
Selenium <5.0 <5.0
Silvet <2.0 4.O
Thatlium <2,0 <2.0
Vanadium 17 52
Zinc 4?69
In ro'oo(lloN) ss:55 tlNocAL LAa TEL:il45ii20 P.019
t
T
I Totat Threshold Limit Concentration (TTLC) Analysis on Dry-Weight BaslsI Comparison of Averaga Compositions of Barreled Materiat, Pond Material and Mill Tailings
t rabte 4
'Barrel'comD Oiitlized {Inbildizqd:u
i?{8qr
r -{lrlCr! |
'i'.Cohstltuont',Con'ceritratlon(mdlks)ebiic'diitr:itiirii
;r.r.'t(mqll(9)'ll, i .
Antimonv <4 <12 <12 <6
Arsenic 4.0 14-6 11.5 12.4
Barium 4 6,629 6.884 23.150
Beryllium 90 31.1 37.3 <2
Cadmium 24 <4.0 0.E9 <1
Chromlum 12 17 2.7 <2
Cobalt 18 19 21-7 <2
CoDper 400 120 142.1 33
Fluorlde NA 44 10-3 NA
Lead 52.600 88,556 12s.768 1.553
Mercury 2.00 0,46 0.il4 0.22
Molybdenum 56 <40 <40 <2
Nlckel 36 28.3 24,54 <2
Selenium <0,4 1.6 <5.0 <-4
Silver <1.0 15.8 29.7 <2
Thallium 84 <2.0 <2-0 <2
Totel Thoilum 240 1152 466 NA
TotalUranium 2800 1352 1 333 NA
Vanadium 20 52-7 42.2 <2
Zjnc 840 494 571.s 29
NA = Not Anallzed
I
I
I
T
T
t
I
I
I
T
I
I
I
T
8Jt t4/ tgao dr:(J1
ll i ll- ': {?'--r:--
NEL LaeonnronrEs
:,a(i:_
Fleno . Las VcoasPhoenh . Burbank
4Po8 Arcare way, Suno o . t"rT.yff.ffffil
fr02) B87-tor0 . Far: Croz.l €t|ii.iin
t€88.368.S2E2
TLIENT: Molycorp.lnc.
67750 Bailey Road
Mounaiq pass, CA 92366
ATTN: GeoffNason
PROJECTNAME:
PROJECTNUMBE,R:NEL ORDER tD: LgE}Ztt?
Artached are the anaryicar results for samples in support of thc Ebove refcrcaccd project.
;ffi:f"i:il:ffi"Ji::ri:?trff;Uffi1" bv NEL Laboratorics. Sarnpres wens ncoived by NEi- in
Sunplcs wcrc rnallzod ss receivcd
Whcre epplicablc we havc inctuded thc following quality conlrol dah:
Method blenk ' used to deuonsoaE abseace of conamination or inrcrftrsnccr ia tba arralyticar process.Laboramry Controt spire (LCS) - tlsed to dononsrare ,"lo*a.y ability to pcrform the mcthodwithin specilicatiocr by spiking r€presenrative analyrcr into a clero marix.Surrogates - cornpoun& aaaed to caih saruple ,o _r*.Luidrc mqhod rcquiremern are merfor cach inditidual sarnple.
:!|:jf ;:t have any qucstioos or conn,ncn,s, pleasr: r'csr frcc ,o conbcr oru clienr scrwiccs dcparcnenr u (702)
NA
NA
l.5+u TZr-pt?.rt L d*,4*{.*l
S.\'to.
Arizonr
Californir
IJS Army Corps
of Engineerr
t707
Ceniticd
AZ05 I t
2002
Cenified
Ae0325
I t92
Cortificd
Idaho
Monuna
Ncvada
Washingon
Ecng- . Las Vccss .BurbaElkLertllred CenifiedCertified CcrtitiedNvo33 'wos2 Ef,H.
Stan Van wag-nen
Reno
AZos20
igggi$gsig$iiigsgg
3
E
R
F-
l\,o
IOe
eq.g
$$$
88esEs
6o
rO
g
E-NnC'
$$$
$$$
I5.\
g
Eoa{!
i:eBB488
eY6gd3
od
gHEEEBEl$iiE
qaf?c6Udd?irOG++iAAi \1-:r i!:iii
,:r:n6
TTgdQo6tTTT.;ryqr;;Pdii,loait
EF[;EiE'iFi;EEEiirH
SsEsstE!g:ErE3i3 i:
3I:5i:I3::;t3:BSri
!::3;;I:;;];;:EEpr
E$$sB$qEBs=BEB-Sti
$$$$$5=rn
R,I;C'
E; i E E E s i;
,
Al 5l:JllVc-rl;l ljr]?at?^
,
E
T
gts
!a.lt
It
IC
T
5
E-"DCo{
co
L'aa
r
oE-oaa,A3
I
OB,EtrA6
t
Laa-
tc!iI
kta
6
go
Eq
gH
T$
l!fri
:{s9+.-'at3,Eitk.:,i.A-
trn.,i:i
!bgatEgr^s25Fa BIET.
Ei;EE: .- -
lr,lJ E ..L< 6 eaa t ot o> oatt?>et.- - ol|!:, 6A-yt) a
iiruv{/u,Ll
r;5
a
?qqEET
rtEC)l.n
.OrD
o
3lo&;E
-Jt!F t
oI
E
$
ao.
)(,
E
Rl.tio
E
B
.t
C,o
c,
Oia
;
^,€
o:.:.;.Y,L;..:i
^^d= lL- lr-,. i-:..-'
a
3
I
t !in[,t,
=aa:
E
IE
;'\ i ::.i:ri,lr3V- 13't
C3au(.!EC
Tg
lt<a--tc<
xt
flduaooc
E
J-*|Iaa6
t
!a
$*
Ii
Eta-,csl
t!tI
_:e
T
-6tJi
:
5-'!i3iiiE
E,EfLt5)-El esu I ._
!.e;9 !.Ig;j i
q elV, Va-
,,,-r,Le-ri.. ,ts ,l-J,JL.- -, ':Ll dbt, l,"rrillttrcoaoctroq/ Ta:sa aaa7./b7./tra
,. ' 'o
E' F E- *- ;
'-
i $ r. ; ; ; E ,. ,. ,- _s ,- E- :
! 5 -q : r ; ; : ; *= i 3 fi r i o. E E i ? ! X ;
igi $g;iiigiEliitli s gi i g
t
E
553!sIXI:i Sr : :If : l;IrE I
qryqs.\r -: o.j ; n;: 3: S I: i p: n i i;:: I
lei
ItLe
t
t-iIG3B
f?loB
n
fi,
E
G
R
c,
s
g
€
G'
nC'
Eq
NE'
Qo
,r)
c,
D0
oI3ta
st
\o6€
I€
A
og
E
o
o.€
rt
a>
c
a
t
Ti
ot
nocc(r\D
tr
C'
l^
6
c
BJ
t34a
tg
iE
Io3I!
z
sE-oCrJ'
T!It
$rtt!=a-o-
lta-
.G., I
ro
e
.8E6
!;e
a.!tIIhI
E
a,UL1,
Eb,f!Dr
U
ol-lat
s
%at.JitF
lit
!'i
C)
3
ha
zg
is:ir r
<a ---l-tu 6LF6!_)O- oGAr f Ia-0J
l'-V=
6Atn.-ts \O ,al
,o
o
E
q,
ta ri;;; F;iE ; ; ;F F iii i ; i i
r3: ! !r: :!i:: ; 3! I r 3 ; ! ; I I
;riSiI:3:is:F;:r::!o
; r 3 ; ; I S ; r : I s ; F F E : ; e e ft ; fr
,
E
tui
Isi,
IFIar
oo\
Ro
I
l-\
I
E6
u
trt
R.It
o
-gr
iuiC'
EOr
B
€q
g
Ioor9
nfqfrO
+aril-rt :::iilir:iTB:6A AZAZ/VZ/E.A
s?EtG
n
<i
d
rO
a
&
$ il rilr gis ii i ! il r i ii s ii
O-od
C'O
.EGoall-- ^\
96
88
trt n'
ect
n8
g= e-8E
nrOEBA3
g\q9<,
rtr Yl€Ftg?
riO ft
6t
Ad
C,E,04
:r!:i='i;ri-
r6999E809/
/:-: 53Idrrl\/duAvl l3r
NXT AN? JNNIA-]NhJ
SE
lr
..
BI
TE
t3d
q,o?a/EE
xxL
.J
qgrt
B,aa-Ua.,ad
E!o.e5at ct
-
I
t
t
Eag
c!
-aaJ j.
a
-3LazL
-8Iit-ll-ecIE-. DtJa, EEci:IE15
;:*!aa oEU t! ..L< -€<.,8 IaE- .:>EE 6 c'!s;: 5
!,j' lI,Vr
a : lnH -..1
^-r 53Irr-;lle:^:ljl
ri
-. .ltrl
iiifililrsillilrliE
EnEi;;iEii;i[;i;rst
;3;:;r$;;3;=I::! i:;
oc!97tx=h:io;iIilEEIen::i;
E E f;;; g 3;; il g s T: H T 5 B B
E
ll{oi,{
.t
d
I
N
A
oDoL
38
.Y^.EO
-Gfs
cro
q,tl
N
o
I
6
E.L
G,C'
B
B
d6
t
E
a!I
atOr
he
6r
tl
No
I
B*Do
9O01/,l
AB
IB38
ogl
oo€
e
6rO
e
ioI€
€
4
E
E
T
Eis
U
t-!
ote
aG
a,a
L'a-6
TI
.J
ET
!gTaotrE
E
:Eo6
I
aI
\
IaL3.C'
+c
*'
Ii
8,.EXa<te6I
Ia
E',a
hotS)
*-nFEzh-sz BEtoBtoCi6-EN}Tqlt32 . ttr. rlrtu 6 ..c<s6<, O u8.!5 .1>€- a oaJN 5 - i
-{LJ a
fs --:' :
EiiiE-F;iiEaiiEiail
3 : : ; 3 : : : : ! E : ! F i -q 7:
E ^q I : q ? : q q q q r : q t! q r\ qct - s a - ri ri i,n ri ; : lJ g = d =
:tn:;;;3!::;H;;:fit
$F$$F$$FFFEHfi5fiEES!lillitli3liiEliiiEE!EIE!EEIEETETiEE
E
N
c
E.
o
EFI
ie
E
eI
n(.
E
Ga
B
3
o
hb
E
a
5{oo
€c€
&
c
oP
E
o
EG
tA
nc,
E3
o
Or
BI
a
Io6
Ea
4
Totr
€
A
E6
i0
Gt
eg
E(a
,t
Sc,
II
B
c
hE(,
$
c€oo
.b
A
oo
o
a,
,\l
g
ltrq
(D
I
6t>C'
I
t
e
G€
f|
NIo
1
,i,
c
E
aN.5
Go
f'r
IYo
E
R,F!
o
6a)
3
ovl
B63
$
o
T
.i
d
:
EC)o
GB
I{CF€
\o
qI€
G
d
a
5
E
I b"tlL\
il,l 5v
T
La
jIIa
Ix
!t
?
sB-tao
x
,
a-)9uL'c(}
r
rf-aAoa
Bo
a
Ilo
5
J6L'.
3
isTE
!t!I
i
BEEfao(,t
_gLcPaL
,{G-)zOC4.CTT.loJL o;anaE E:?b x
L-O
-o IEE "ilJrU g ..Ll ts vC{ G uX-!2 ge8;s P!.tt^J a
j'-
-
twwo, vl_
-r-i-E'ir-Ff,Hf;
5:55iIiii
B:;33:
E;i$5FrNr
E-
E
E
TEI. ol0e
tso
C'*s
IE
a
IaI
ggilii!iif
III.L
f\,
l,D3A
3*\qrto
B
6
B
niCt
4R5a{&CI
(d.
u
B
e
.rli!D
otil)(f
rt9r
qC'
Ect
E--
o,l
3s
Eod
r
iat
r)
E
oe
rr).CO
I
Er.rB
DTtACI
-I
$T.IL,T
A!
a.o
Brl:
5T
Iol:rOZ
E
E-rOE
xt
Ja
o5LP?a
!E:
3|.I4
-!jEi
-iiEea1LcEf, p5
Er o ft' t 5
-o ;>!Ca 6sq G -ri<B :5-i> et_I$Ei os
'- F --=:o=
i;Eiii;E.;iE;ii;iil
3::;lii=;;::=:I;;;;
8SI e-;;:.sEiHI;:!EErlEE;
5::EE;Est3I:s$;E:I
I
=
iiisigilIiigirgEil
E
C!t6
I-nl
a\.G,
Ea^
lc
cI
€
C'
C.tt
r{?I
6
otnno
Go,
Nal
e
B
e
66
a.tiC'
I
6
o6
3
GIC'
o
Et
oal
I
E.,
s
ttIDJV
o
aO!.
rc
o
I
B
B
B
l!6
=I
Gc5@
6I
8at!g
(
,lno
I
C'
6
GC'
GE
E
I
,a
$
EE
C,
Dq
I\.g
I
D
na,
o
Eoc
o6 a,v,
{C'C'
,5
$
yl
IcIca
f.o
o,
oU,
6(,
AuI
in
Ilf
o
19
3
A
\o
o
?€I-IA
11 hGrO;..Y
=cref"d?T\;G*J
Eai
:-i:-EraBi. -f :..;
I
BiC
,pe
3I&
t
IIGG-
?tO-;ra<
Iot?1,toatc
1c!IL'ao
!ffaa
-=
5
o
aL.t6o
Ea,
u-
J
Is
E&
Ti
$:oa,C,-
*
T"F
r.EE
$iiLarr,
::.i
!
b-b!lqv
Ca
-i.k5E
oLEFf2CrclIa I {ot E &-a r(; .'uU 6 ..r: I.9 I
l$5r F
'.r I :'r'T j
t
- , -:_!-r .
rc oaacaaq /
$ruffr'UlI
:.F.F. r, -i' I r'
aas7. /b7, /ra
ii.r.Iip'f,s
-.rrrA3!Erii3:: ii
Ei;353;;
ES;:E:gH
FFr(il$*{il8fEifiiii
,r
U
aa
t
s
g
ro
R
fl'
6
rI
€
R!Oal
lrr.I,
t
,rav
rG'
a
I
oat
*
tO
nt,t
6ra
*fi.o
L
il
x
3
a
!oo
6N
G.rD
t
ltF
B
EI
a
I
hll
eo.O
o
a
A Is
: 53l;.i-::ja',,': 13l l. ? :1p
TB:gA
a
3
E
ti?o9\I lr, a,
T
!
Io"tET3r--:r
xh
IEa-ca.iJt
t
E
r.l
O-
iE
gi
t
9
da,arptoal
T
i-BG-
t
aI
t
3
fa6
go
-E
:Loo
E,rtB:
G-IIi 8 i
Eo s J
::: {
Llal € .,!i;s ii8E; ?=<0- a
':' .
Li a.:=
(
s
$,1
ff
1f$
6'5
GtrGI
t6
.E.
I*
0cl lq/ 1600 aa.oL
L-r ' :l: i JJ! ii: .::
i
/
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
o{d
EoE
,ozfi6'd-
d
(1j xo6) rp1ey1
eraurBluoc lo ,
o
=,o
IL
ltl
lb'EC2
T.vo'
l-l
/'/lltl
IT
rls.:
\0()
I
,i
69
md/j ff
/{ #l //d-/l
H$/i rffi
,\Bld-elE\q,Eii
ntzs
>5
^- tl
L'O(!O
.E
(g
0,a
E
IblrtlsI trtI orBJIIs r
I xiEeI
f xlEari
I
s
3
lo
t,
=
r.Jri\cl
s.-l
vrl\$
l.
I
o
t"i
irl
1l
wl
I lr.
I \s
I
1\trl
t^,1
;l
s.l
l\"lrt;
o.
)-t
ts\
t4
s'
!
?t0,
'il
pI
!^
s
I!.J
I
T
\I\l
tul'r
lne
I
+1srl\l
o\i
IL\$
ll+l
+l
oo,-o
o
TLoza
o
U)
UJE-o EfF rF< >:
5s9Clx
. Oq,J Eol #.'Ui7l
il:', il5/i!g! t.,..._. ,:,,r5t ilEu L.lBrlrE,rtlro- ru ,-Aa;,4
NEL LaaoEAroRtES
Reno . Las Vegas ,1208 Arcsh way. sune
^
.*TJffT^lIsS;
[r0A 6S7.tOtO. Far: grOZy SSZ-rSZZ
,€8&368-3282
Phoenix . BurOenk
TO.
COMPANY:
PHONE:
FAX:
FROfr/r:
OATE:
NO. OF PAGES:
(including cover page)
E Hanl copy willfollow f; Hea copy wiil not foltow
fr'':; ctl<
FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION
a
corOnr:ta /!.,iaa c 6--- ar .
F:CE .].irrE- -AErlFl;lf _v
E;E;
EqEE(r-6J
:q15tl.6raN
.LAEEiE&g
tF{l.rdii
e,
32
FFHfliffia
It
I!OrV
NCI
(I
a
t
9ia
I
d;€
t
\an.
g
t
f,tiCt
o6
;t
a\ao
I
o-E'
6o
F$gg
2qT91tTI
;';
3aq
$q
gP
!<IGIE
Er!!aarlr
I
Io<
atcr<
AO
L'rLc
rbsfIUOaaf
ra
Jat
r;E!aa0
o
!
I.
tIt-;
UJI aal LUUU uJt Ul- '-.j:.. ri:,r I ?'j:-l iF : .;:
:t€TA5-!Lt,Uffi
7:i
aa
g
!!iEirE EHh:Ii; -: !
rrrat - -r:;r iiet_! E
t.,tr r \ni,c\.,TiC-itr:---- o/ Dfl'lIODO l-i
aUO o, g,
{{EeEsEiPPEia
5
q{qqi?
FF-j
E
-:toCrOrrL=oljr.l.o-j
Tqtvr\t\.aniri dis
ttfrL\quv
:aae
iiii!!iEiE!E'
a,
Itt4
tto
Ng
ae
tcg
(
2
B
E3
o5
t,l,r
tv
!t
l!q,
lc
6
6o
rn
iao
eAE
GE
I
II
3rrta<
aat
6
s
a6a.,I
a
C'o
CIIo
J
fHpi
oata<br
il
8,9a.a
,lf
(Lr
qaa6
R
eEitCG
I
OAdEaao,
I
-t
!o
a
,Taa
5
::6
8
!r!gi!IE BE
=Ctatrrei
;;31
!-r;9 iIEE! !
Itlul- T gul\r !l tv lr\!
c -l--ri ,-\ 5r rEr_ LAEor-.:r,-tI=, .,,
eEqqeeEEEHTT
{-ortraaaa.6.anra.a--ra66,\ra
-l.ln.6-Ens:!;
oBrtrrE!4s=3H88
TH<aa--{-c\xttr*333i!irtrEi,55E55s5t355
E<t
^.Nc,
GC
EnO
I
a
na,
I
g-
GCI
ofr
I
tO
N6
I
t0n
ae,t
I
Gi
g
3
oU,
I
I
t
f
,
xIa
$
oar^€I.,
aa,
3o
rn
A,
.\l
n
ra
aJ
t
t
lPl
a f.Y
Jaac
It3a-
r
3{
EI
lo
IOAr
T
E-36b
4L.t..L'16
I
I
;
b
ata.a
81.
63/'.14/ t6A6 6:: Ul
.iri. ri1. i:'i5 n'::'J-
!
fs
E+O-aa
t-
ET.8,
atu-
!taaTELJoa-rEII
= eI,oGllalt-DILll
E: r- r'
ii;i !!E! i .e
ll,l:f i:-,I.IEL LAPI.FAII'Us Li
gHsH
qs(s.ErEP
3{qqrtslrrli
era;Btr<
Et
r^eI
E
EEi
aUy
6 z i 2--a.-sc;!
-
I
ag
IE$$
EE$$.La3elal\A
Iaar8at
tit6(
ra
LI
egis
nq
^.Ii*Ad..! iii -i I
Qlt L1l -Qoa ! J. QL' r}:'. 05/ l3tu i:-i: ,l j
aDta,I?r-Arl'ta-t-ta'O ..1
i..trr€t!L.I
F€?Iaa
2?Ii:
-a
5PaJIiEiI
E EEFs:!it'rl#fi
in
Igo,
i
TN3€afrJt
u,aa-
o
T
EL-4
Ig
rl3{
CLOa!
LA
r
a-:8AT?
Ig$.aAI
t
a.t
d
a
Jaa
c
t
-.6
#sf
d.#:tl!\l
=i
!tI!rf
iE
E EEII;IEE --Ea auY t --L<a -i#: i
i,AGE g7r.lEL ,*B[lF'aT05E L'i. if :;:iii:?
F E l ; ;; i ; r ; F E ; ; ; ; $ E. ; i $
=;I;I:;III;:IEI;iI$I!
i A: ii I I5 3: I I ; i E: n i =: I i
r iI*e;E;;E;; eifi !;r i;;
aI
1
Ite
CaLv
i $ EiiriIiil iii; ii i gi g
sg
s
B
toq,,tFio
EIi
eRi
aae
B
E
Ti
dc
Eg
g-
c0
6t
.YI
A
$
it
trla
!,I
E3I!
ai
a,
.T
l\,
)
O
ATTACHMENT 3
IUSA/UDEQ Protocol
for Determining Whether Alternate feed Materials
are RCRA Listed Hazaidous Wastes
S :\MRR\Molycorp\MolycorpAR.doc
Stile of
D E P A I1'|'N.1EN -r oF E\ \''l R()N.\4 l-\'iAL Q I- J Ai.il"Y
DIVISION OF SOLIT) AND HAZAR.I)OU.S \\'ASTE
218 fionh 1460 Wcst
f.O. tlox l44tt0
Sdt Lrkc Ciq. Utih t4 t l4jt80
(ml) 5lE-5170
(tOl) 5lt-6715 Fu
(t0l) -i36414 T D.D.
wrnv. dcq stirts.uUrs Wcb
1999
tah
Miihsrl O [':cvrn(irv6o.
Diar.nc L Nielsln. t'h.O
f:\cut.vc frusgtot
Dcnnis R. Dcrrnslirc6r
Deccmber 7,
M. Lindsay Ford
Parsous, Behle and Latimer
One Utah Center
201 Soutb Main Street
Suite l80o
Post Office Box 45898
Salt Lake City, Utah 84145-089
RE: Protocol for Determinbg Whethcr Alternetc Feed Meterials are Listed Hazsrdous
Westcs
Dear Mr. Ford:
On Novemfu ?2,1999, we received, the linal protocol to be used by lnternational Uraniunr
Corporation (USA) in detennining whctber alternate feed materials proposcd for processing at
the White Mcsa Mill are listed hazardous wastcs. Wc appreciate thc effort that went into
prepariag this procedure and feel that it wilt be a useful gride for IUSA in its alternate fced
detenninalions.
As was discussd pleasc be advised that it is IUSA's responsibility to ersurc that the alternate
feed materials tsed arc not listcd hazardous wastes and that the use of this protocol cannot be
used as a defense if listed hazardous waste is somchow proccssed at thc White Mesa Mill.
Tha* you again for your corporatiou. If you havc any questions, please contact Don Vcrbica at
538-6170.
Sinccrely,
Utah Solid and Hazardous Wastc Control Board
c: Bill Sinclair. Utah Division of Radiation Control
F. \SHW\Hw0\DVERDIOi\wnwhit6ncsr. s,id
Occ (lurh Ccnts
1cl suut:r !\{sin smer
Suitc l!0o
Pas! Ofiict Bor ,rJ89i
sllr Lrlc ciry. utrlr
9r r{5-08r8
Tcicphon.80l 512.:zla
Fasrinilc tol l!6'61I t
A I'i0fts5l0!.1r
LAT corPorrlrofi
Novcmbcr 22,1999
Don Verbica
Utah Divisiou of Solid & Hazardous Wastc
288 North 1460 West
Salt Lake City, Utah
Re:Protocol for Determiniug Whetbcr AltcrEete Feed Msteriels lre
Listed Eazardous Wastcs
Dear Doru
1 am pleased to present the fiaal protocol to be used by lnternational Urmium
(USA) Corporation ("IUSA') in determining whether alternate feed materials proposcd for
processing at the Whirc Mesa Mill are listed hazardous westcs. Also attached is a red-tined
versiou of the protocol roflecting Enal changcs arade to the documcnt based oa our last
discussiou with you as well as some miuor editorial changcs from our final read-through 6f
the document We appreciate tbe thougbtfrrl input of you and Scoft Aaderson in
developing this protocol We understand the Division concurs that materials detersrined
not to be listcd wastes pursuatrt to this protocol are not listed hazardous wastcs.
We alrc rccognize the protocol does not addrcss thc sinration where, after a material
fuas becn determincd not to bc a listcd hazardors waste undcr the protocol, nanr unrefirtable
information comes to light that indicates thc material is a listcd bazardous waste. Shottld
such an evcntu,rlity arisg wc understand an appropriate rcsponsq if any, would nced to be
worked out on a case-by-case basis.
103 r07.t
Don Verbicl
Utah Division of Solid & Hazardcrus Waste
Novenrber 22,1999
Page Two
Thaxi( you again for you cooperation on this manet. Please call me if you havc
any questions.
Very uuly youls,
(wi& copy of final protocol only)
DianneMelson
Fred Nelson
Breut Bradford
Don Ostlcr
Lorcn Morton
Bill Sinclair
David Frydenh:nd
David Bird
Tony Thompson
ParsonsBehle&tatimer
tcoz
Eoo
o
E
siI
EI
I
Eoc
.E
o]
5oIEoE
o
oo
d
E
=5c
Eco
E.
o6
E
6
t
0)6E
$;r!
SE
s!
9,,E)U
8o
Po
E
o
8
JIoc()oII
EI
ZoEo
ESo-au
es EE *E
=.EEE
E E$E
E
I
U
EgEgBgtE-
c
f;
P
6!o6
7
Eod)boEo
=
,!
EE
EE-(J
Do
=
-o
0)
E
cocE-s
o
oIJaoo
;5
oeo
q
t;
Icpoo8€eo>
f€
=.E
#E
EEgE
5rcx
oPo9150Eo&8..
p
EI
.9
6t
R
;
g
o
i
o
o3
o
8o
6a
IE
E=!l
hTgE
E;E
[*E
€ g,B
EEiF6 Tv€ E
8E=
Bfi}
E
6tt
cog
:;
Eq
6
o
E
o-li
6
=
EEEEp
?gE?E
i"EHEEc
EEr
$EErt EE7g
E
tr
tr
0)+v)o
=U)
oo
oNo-.l,
q)
.9
o
E
o+o
o
a)
0)LL
0)+oc
o+
O)C
:E
E
a)
0)o
o
6
Oo+IL EgFogi'
;iEETEaa
Qc
lEiEEEa;r
EIllitigr!
EEshog
Q eEE a5?
E;E E E
EtE IsE
"sEii=?EEsEEsflE85E
6l EqEEEEISg
=l
+;*
"E-[es
dl r;9 I !3i
Ei
u. .",
l.
PRorocol FoR Dnrnnrun-lrc WnrrHER
r\rTERxnTE FEED MArerulLS ARX LrSren Haz.tnnous wlsres'
No\ryMBER 16, 1999
S OURCE II\NTESTIGAT ION.
perform a good faith investigation (a "seurce lnvestigatiod' or "S[")2 rcgardi"g whether
any listed hazardous wastesi are locued at the site from which alteraate feed material'
(.Mat€rial') originates (the "Site"). This invcstigation will be corrducted in couformance
with EPA guidancet and the extent of information rcquired will vary with the
circumstances of each case. Following are examples of investigatioos that would be
considered satisfactory under EPA guidance and this Protocol for some sclectcd
sinrations:
o Where the Material is or has bccn generated from a loowu process under the
conbol of the generaton (a) an affidavit, certificatc, profile record or similar
documcnt from thc Gencrator or Sitc Manager, to that effecg together with (b)
a Material Safcty Data Shcct ("MSDS') for tbc Material, limitcd profile
sampling, or a matcrial composition determined by the gonerator/operator
bascd on a process material balarrcc-
I Ttris protocol reflects the procedr:res that will be followcd by International Uranium (USA)
Corpor.tion (-ruSA') for detcrmining whcthcr alternatc fced matcrials proposcd for proccssing at the
White Mcsa Mill "r. (or conAin) tisted traz:raous wastes. It is based on currcnt Utah and EPA rules and
EpA guidasce rmder thc Rcsourcc Cooscrvation and Recovery Act ('T.CRA"), 42 U.S.C. $$ 6901 et seq'
This irotocol will bc ctrangcd zrs tresessiry to rcflcct any patineot changes to RCRA rulcs or EPA
guidancc.
2 This investigation wilt bc pcrformed by [USA, by thc cntity rcsponsible for the site from which the
Matcrial originatcs (the "Gcocrator-), or by a combinatiqr of thc turo-
3 Attachmcut I to this protocol providcs a $rnrmary of the diffcrcnt classificatioos of RCRA hsted
trazardous wastcs.
4 Altc"oatc fccd marcrials that are prinrary or intcrmcdiatc groducts of the generator of the material (e'g',
*gre1,, or.tlack" sals) are uot RCR.lrI "sccondatT materials" or "solid wastes," as dcfiDed is 40 CFR
261, andare not covercd by this Protocol-
5 f,pA guidarrcc identifics the followiug soruces of sits- 6d wastc'specific information tbat mav'
dependirig on thc circumstances, be considered in such an invcstigation: hazardous wastc ruanifests'
uou"hos,- bills of lading, sales and inventory rccords, matcrial safety data shccts' storage records,
sampling and analysiS reporB, accidcot rcPorts, sitc investiption reportst intervicrws with
",npioy.-"Vfor-"r
employccs and formcr owners/opcrators, spill rcports, inspcction rcports end logs.
porit, and erforcemctrt ordcrs. fu2 e.g..6l Fed. Rcg. IES05 (April29, 1996)-
ztt3t76.t
pRoTocoL FoR DETER.\u.\Nc WxErxrn AlTERr...{TE I.'r.e o lUnmruAls.ARE LISTED H.IZARDollS wAsTE<
. Where specifrc inflornration exists about the generation Process and
rnanagepent of thc Material: (a) ar affidavit, certificate, Profile rerord or
similar document from thc Geuerator or Site Manager, to that effect, toS,ethcr
with (b) an MSDS for the MatErial, Iimited profi.lc sampling data or a
prcexisting investigation performed at the Sitc pursuant to CERCLA. RCI{A
or other state or fcderal environmental laws or Programs.
o Where potortialty listed processes arc knoum to have been couductcd at a Sitc,
an investigation considering the foltowing sources of information: sitc
investigation reports prepared urrdcr CERCLA, RCRA or other statc or Ibderal
environmsntal laws or progpms (e,g., an R[/TS, ROD, RFUCMS, hazardous
waste inspection repon); iuterviews with persons possessiBg howledge about
the Material and/or Site; and revicw of publicly available documents
concerning process activities or thc history of waste geueration and
managemeot at the Site.
o lf nraterial from the sarDe source is bcing or has been acceptcd for direct
disposal as l le.(2) byproduct matcrial in au NRC-rcgulad facility in the
State of Utah with tbe conseD.t or acquicscence of the State of Utab, the Source
Investigation performcd by such facility-
Proceed to Step 2.
2. SPECIFIC INT'ORIVIATION OR AGREEMENT/DETERIVIINATION BY
RCRA REGI'LATORY AUTHORITY TTTAT IITATERIAL TS NOT A
LISTED HAZARDOUS WASTE?
a Detcrmine nfrethcr specific information ftom the Source Investigation exists about the
generation and managemsnt of the Material to support a conclusion that the Matcrial is
not (and docs not contain) any lisrcd hazardous waste. For exauplc, if specific
information exists that the Material was not generated by a listcd wastc souroe and that
the Material has not been mixcd with any listed wastes, the Material would uot be a listed
hazardous waste.
b. Alteruatively, determine whether the appropriate state or lideral authority with RCRA
jgrisdictiou over thc Site agrees in writing with the geoerator's detcrrninatim tbat tbe
tvtaterial is not a listed hazardous waste, has madc a "contained-out''detcrminatiou6 with
rcspect to the Matcrial or has concluded the Material or Site is not subjcct to RCRA
6 Epn explains the "contained-out" (also referred to as 'tontaincd-in") principlc as follows:
In practice, EPA has applicd the containcd-in principlc to refer to I ptoccss whac a sitc-
specific dctcrmination is madc that conccntrations of hazardous constitutns io any givea
(footrrotc conrinucd on next Prgc)
243t76. I
3.
PROTOCOI, F(,R DETERMI}-h-G WTIETIIERALTER.{.{TE F[:ED 'IIATT'RIALS ARE LISTED HEZ.*'OOTS WASTES
If yes to either questiott, proceed to Stcp j'
lf no to both qucstions, proceed to Step 6'
PROVIDE INI"ORI\'IATION TO t''{RC AI\D UTAE'
a I^f speciEc information exists to support a concluiou that the Material is not, and does
not contain" any tisted hazardous waste, ruSA will provide a description of the Soruce
lnvestigarion to NRC and/or the state of utah Department of Environnrentat Quality,
Divisiou of Solid and Hazardous Waste (the "State"), together with an alfidavit
explaining why the Materid is not a listed hazardous waste.
b. Alternatively, if the rypropriate regulatory authority with RCRA jurisdiction ovcr thc
ii," "gr.o in writi.g rritU tU" generator's derermination that thc Matcrid is not a listed
hazardous wastg -"t o a contained-out detemiaation or determines thc Material or Sitc
is not subjcct to RCRA ruSA will providc documcntation of the rcgulatory authority's
dctermination to NRC and tbe Stato. ruSA may rcly on such detcrmination provided
that thc State agrccs the conclusions of the regulatory authority n/er€ reasonable and madc
ingood faitb-
Proceed to Stq l.
DOES STATE OF I.ITAE AGREE THAT ALL PREYIOUS STEPS HA\{E
BEEN PERFORMED IN ACCORDAI{CE WTIE TEIS PROTOCOL?
Determiue whether the State agrees that this Protocol has been properly followed
(including that proper dccisions were rnade at each decision Point). The State shall
review the informadon provided by IUSA in Step 3 or 16 with reasonable spccd and
advise ruSA if it belio,es IUSA has not properly followed this Protocql in dgjsrmining
(foouote continued &om prcvious pagc)
volume of environgcnbl media are low cnough to dctcrminc that thc media does not
..co'taitx" hazardOrs wrstc. Typically, thesc io'callcd 'containcd-in" [or "contsined-
out'.] dctcrminations do not rncan
-that no lrazardous constihrents are prcsent in
cnvirmmental mcdia but simply that the conccntratiolls of trazardous constinrcnts
present do nOt warrant mslrageE€nt of thc uCdia 6 haeerdOg5 wAStC. ...
EpA has not, to date, rssucd dcfrnitivc gurdancc to cstabtish thc oonocntrations at which
contained-in determinations may be *"a"- As notei. above, decisions that mcdia do not
or no longcr contain hazardots wasrc are tryicelly ma& on a case-by'case basis
corsidcring thc risks poscd by thc contamrnatcd mcdia'
63 Fed. R.eg.28619, 28621-22(May 26, 1998) (Phase IV LDRp,r'earrblc).
2{18?6. I
PRO'I'OCOL FOR DETERYh'L\C WITE'TtlER ALT}:R\Al E FEED }fTTCNIUS AJTf LIS'I'ED IL{ZARDOUS W'{S Trs
that the Material is not listed hazardous waste, speciffing the particular areas of
dcficiencY.
If this Protocol lras not been properly followed by IUSA in makiug its determination that
the Material is not a listed hazardous wast€, then IUSA shall redo its analysis in
accordancc with this Protocol and, ifjustified, resubmit the information described in Step
3 or 16 explaining why thc Material is not a listed hazardou waste. The State shall
notiff IUSA with reasonablc specd if the State still believes this Protocol has uot been
followed.
Ifyo, proceel, to SteP 5-
If no, proceed to Stqt l-
5. I},IATERIAL IS NOT A LISTED EAZARDOUS WASTE.
The Material is not a listcd hazryfl6us waste and no further samplirrg or evduation is
necessary in thc following circulnstances:
. Where the Material is determined uot to be a listcd hazardous waste
based ou specific information about the gc,nerdion/managcment of the
Material B the appropriate RCRA regulatory authcity with
jwisdiction over thc Site agrees with the geDerator's detenrrination that
the Material is not a listcd HW, mqkes a contained-out dctermination'
or concludcs the Matcrial or Site is not srbject to RCttA (and the State
agrecs the conchsious of the rcgulatory authority wcre reasonable and
made in good faith) (Step 2); or
o Where the Materiat is deterrnined Dot to be a listed hazardous waste (io
Steps 6 through 11, 13 or l5) and Confumation/Acceptance Sampliug
are detcrnrined not to bc nrcessary (rmder SteP l7).
6. IS MATERIAL A PROCESS WASTE KNOWN TO BE A LISTEI)
IIAZARDOUS WASTE ORTO BE MIXED WITH A LISTED
EAZARDOUS WASTE?
Based on the Source lnvestigation, dctcrmine whether thc Material is a process waste
known to be a tistcd hazardous waste or to be mixed with a listed hazardous waste. If the
Matcrial is a proccss vrsste aud is from a listed hazardous waste souroc, it is a listed
hazardous waste. $imil4[y, if the Material is a proccss wast€ and has been mixed with a
listed hazardous wastg it is a listcd hazardous waltte under the RCRA "mixturc nde." [f
2.1E76. I
pRoTocoL FoR DETERitt$til\c wHETHER ALTER\ATE fEED ill.\TERIAT-S ARE LISTED H.'t'Z,tmOUS WA-STES
the Material is ag EuviroDnrcutal Mediunt.' it cu:not be a listed bazardous waste by direct
listing or urder the RCRA "mjxture rute."s If the Material is a process waste but is not
knowu to be from a listed source or to be mixed with a listed waste, or if the Material is
a1 Environnrental Med,iu.rr, proceed to Steps 7 through t L to dctermine whcther it is a
Ify"s, proceed to Step t2.
:
If no, proced to Step 7-
I
7. DOES MATERHL CONTAIN ANTY POTENTIALLY LISTED
I
Bascd ou the Sourcc Investigatiou (and, if applicable, Confirmation and Aoceptance
Sa6plingl, determine whether the Material coutains auy hazardous constitueuts list€d in
the theu most recent version of a0 CFR 261, Appendix VII (which identifies hazardous
constituents for which F- and K-listed wastes were listed) or 40 CFR 261.33(e) or (0 (the
P and. U Listed wastes) (collectively "Potentially Listed Hazardous Constitucns'). If the
Material contains such constitucots, a source evaluation is ncccssary @urstrant to Stcps 8
through 1l). If the Matcrial docs pllcontain any Potcnlially Listcd H:rzardous
Constituents, it is not a [i51gd hazardous lwaste. Thc Matqial also is not a [sted
hazardous waste i! whcre applicabtc, Confinnation and Acccptance Sanrpling rcsults do
not reveal the presence of any "neur" Potentially Listed Hazardous Constitucats (i.e.,
constinrents othcr than tlrosc that havc atready becn identified by thc Source Invcstigation
(or previous Confirmation/Acccptanss $nrnpling) and dctermined not to originate from a
listcd source).
Ifyes, proceed to Step 8. :
If no, proced to Step 16.
;
E. IDENTIF"T POTENTIALLY LISTED WASTES.
Identify potcntially listed hazardous wirstcs ("Potentially Listed Wastcs') bascd ou
Potentia[y Listcd Hazardous C-onstitr,rcrrts dctectcd in thc Mucrial, t'.e., wastes whicb are
listcd for any of the Potcntially Listed Hazardous Constihrents dctccted in thc Material, as
I
7 Thc tcrm "Environmcntal Mcdia" mcans soils, grourd or surfacc natcr and scdimcns.
8 Thc "mixtrrc rulc" applics only o mixhrcs of listcd hazardor.rs qrastcs and othcr "solid wastcs-" .tee
40 CF-R S 261.3(aX2[iv). Thc mixure rulc docsl not apply to mixtrrcs of listcd wastcs and
Environrnental Mcdia, becausc Envirourneoal Media alc not "solid wast6" rurder RCRA. See 63 Fcd-
Rcg. 28556,28621(May 26, t99E).
2{lE76.l
PROTOCOL FOR I)ETERMI.\rr-C Wr{L-TltER AlTEtt\,\rE t'EED }[,rrenlrts AHE LTSTED TIAZARDOUS $"\sTfs
idenrifred in the then most current versiort of 40 CFR 261 Appendix VII or 40 CFR
261.33(c) or (0., With respecr ro Poreutially Listed Hazardous Constituents identiEed
through Confirmation and./or Acceptance Sampling, a sourcc cvaluatiou (pursuant to
Steps 8 through I t) is uecessary only for "new" Potentially Listed Hazardous
Constitueuts (j.;., constituents other than those that have alrcady been identified by thc
Sogrcc lnvestigatron (or previous Confimration/Acoeptance Sampling) and dacrmincd
not to originate from a listed source).
Procql to Step 9-
9. WERE A-T\NT OF THE POTENTI.ALLY LISTED WASTES KNOWDI TO BE
GENERATED OR IUANAGED AT STTE?
Based on information from the Source luvestigation, determine whcther any of the
potentially Listed Wastcs identified in Step 8 are known to havc been gcuerated or
managed at thc Sitc. This detern:ination involves ideoti$ing whcttrer auy of thc spccrfic
or noi-specific sourccs idenfiEed in the K- or F-lists has wer been conducted or located
at tbe Site, whether any wa.ste fron such proccsscs bas been managcd at the Site, and
whether auy of the P- or U-listed comtnercial ohemical products has ever been use4
spilled or 1nanagcd therc. In panicular, this detemiDatioo should be based on the
following EPA critcrie
Solveut Listiuss (F001-F005)
Undcr EPA guidaucc, "to determine if solvent consitue,uB coutaorinating a waste
are RCRA stent solvent F00t-F005 wastes, the [site maoager] must know if:
i The solvcuts ate spent aad cannot be ratsed witlout reclattution ot
c,[saning.
o The solveuts were &sed etclusivelyfor their solvent propenies.
o The solvents arc speut mixtures and blends that antained, before use,
a 6al of I0 percent or more (by volume) of the solvents tistcd iu
F001, F002, F004, andF005.
If the solvents conteincd in thc [wastes] are RCRA listed wastes, ttre
[wastes] are RC?A trazardous waste. When the [site ."rnager] does not
have guidance inforuration on the use of thc solvcnts and their
characteristics before use, the [wastes] cannot be classified as containfurg a
9 For .xamplc, if rhc Matcrial contains teuachlorocthyleng thc following wotrld bc Potcotially Listed
lrVastcs: Fobl, F002. F024, KOl9, K020, Kl50, Kl5l or uzt0. see 40 cFR 261 Ap. VII
62{ll7lr.l
pRorocoL FOR DETERITT\l\c WHF.THER AL'rtR\ATE FEF.D M.^TF.RtAI-s -Anr LNreo Heu-rnoo('s W^sTrs
iisted spent solvent."'c The person perfonning the Source Investigation
wiil malie a good faith effort to obtain infomration on any solvent use at
the Site. If soivents were used at the Site, general indusry standards for
solvent use in effect at the time of use will be considered in d*ermining
whether those solvents contained l0 percent or morc of thc solvents listcd
in F001, F002, F004 or F005.
K-Listed Wastes and F-Listed Wastes Otber Tban F001-F005
Under EPA guidance, to determine whethcr K wastes and F wastes other than
F00t-F005 arc RCRA listcd wastcs, the gcncrator "must know f&le generatiotr
process information (about cach wastc containcd in the RCRA wastc) dcscribed in
the lis6ng- For examplc, for [wastes] to bc idcntificd as couaining K00l wastos
that arc described sg '$ottom sedimcnt sludge &om the tcafuont of wastewatcrs
from wood prese,nring processes that use crcosoto aod/or pe,ntacblorophcnol,' the
[site managcrJ must ]now thc murufactrxbg process that gcocratcd thc wastes
(treabent of wastcwatcrs from wood prcscrving process), fecdstocls uscd in thc
proccss (creosotc and peutaohlorophenol), ild,thc proccss identificatios of the
wastcs (bottom sedimcnt sludgc)-"l t
P- end U-Listcd'Wrcres
EPA guidance provides that "P aud IJ wastes @ver only uuused and unmixed
comrnercial chanical products, particularly spilled or oFspcc produots. Not
every waste containing a P or U chemical is a hazardotrs w8ste. To determine
whethsr a [waste] contains a P or U wastc, thc [sitc mauagcrJ must have direct
evideuce of product use. I-u particular, the [sitc manager] s]rould ascertain, if
possible, whether the chemicds are:
o Discardcd (as dcsoribed in 40 CFR 261.2(aX2)).
o Either off-spec con'mercial products or a commcrcially sold grade.
. Not used (soil contamhated with spilled unused wast6 is a P or U
waste).
l0 Managgmcnt of Invcstigation-Dcrived Wastes During Site Inspcctions, EPA./54UG-91/009, Mey l99l
(cmphasis addcd).
I I Manag.-errt of Invcstigation-Dcrivcd Wastes During Sitc Inspcctions, EPA/54OG-91/009' May l99l
(emphasis addcd).
261S76. I
o The sole active ingredient in a tormulation"'r2
If Potentially Listert Wastes *"r" ]s'lown to be generated or managed at the Site, further
evaluation is nccessary to determine whethsr these wastes were disposert of or
conrmingled with the Material (Steps l0 aud possibly 11). If Potentially Listed w'astes
were not lnown to bc generated, or managed at the Site, then information conceming the
source of potentiaUy iistcO Hazardous Constituents in the Material will be considercd
'tnavailable or inJnclusive" aod, utder EPA gUidarce," the Material will be assumed
not to be a listcd hazardous waste-
12 tvtanagemeot of Investigation-Derivcd Wastcs During Site llspectioru, EPA/540/G-9[/009' May
1991.
13 fBa guidance consisteutly provides that, whcrc informatiou conceruing the origin of a wastc is
nnsvailablc or inconclusivc, lhe wastc o.ay be assumed not to be a listed hazardors wastc. see e-9.,
Memorandum from Timothy Ficlds (Acting Assistant Administrator fr Solid vrlastc & Emergency
Responscl !o RCRA/aERCI-A Senior Policy Managers regarding 'Managcmeot of Rcmediation Waste
Under RCRA,, dated Ostobcr 14, l99t g*Vfrerc " f""itity owucr/opcrator makcs a good faith effort to
determine if a material is a listcd hazardons waste but carmot makc sush a detcrminatioa because
documcntation regarding 1 so'ee of contaninatiorq contaminao! or waste is torsvailoble or
inconclusiye, EpA has statcd that one nra], sssume thc sortrcc' contarDirant' or westE is not listed
fiazard6s5 waste,,); NC? Preamble, 55 rca. RCS. 8758 (March 8, 1990) (Noting tht "it is -oftcn
necessary .o lnow tlrc origin of the *,astc to aeterrrinc whethcr it is a listcd waste ad that. if sz,ch
documenbtion b lacking,-ihe tead aSenqt ,nd)) a:rsume it b not a lbted waste); Preamble to proPos€d
Hazardous Wastc ldeudicatiou Rt l", Ot Fed- Rcg. 1E805 (April 29, l99O ('Facility orirer/opcrators
should make a good feith cffqt to detcrmiuc whethir media verc contaminatcd by hazardorrs qastes and
ascertain the datcs of placcmcot Thc Agency believes that by using snailablc site-.and waste-specific
informatiou ... facilityowtrGr/opcrators would tlpically bc ablc to makc tbcse dAemrinations' However'
as discussed carlia io tU" pto-Ule of Oday's ptopot"l, if infonrution is not available u inconclusive'
facility own*loperators marl ger4?a\y a;ume tint the material contaminating the media were not
hazardous urssr6-"); prroirUlc to Lbn Phase IV Rutc. 63 Fcd- Rcg' 28619 (May 26' 1998) ("As
discusscd in 6G April 29, 1996 proposal, the Agcncy contintrcs to bcricvc that, r/ brlornation is not
a,ailoblc or inconclusive it it gineially reasotsble to d3stst' tlul contanhated soils do nol contau
unteatcd hazardous wastas ..."); and Memorendum &om Iohn !I- Skmnrr (Directq. EPA Officc of
solid wastc) !o David wagmer (Dircctor, EpA Air and wastc Maoagcurcnt Divisioo, Rcgion vlt)
rcgardiug 'Soils from Missouri Dioxin Sitcs," datcd January 6, 1984 (The anelyscs indicetc thc
pressnee of a numbcr of toxic compounds in many of thc soil saurplcs taken frmr variotx sites'
Howevetr, the prcscncc of thcsc toxicants in thc soii dOcs Dot autonatically ruake thc soil a RCRA
hazardous wastc. The origin of the toxicants must be lalow[ in ordcr to &tsrninc 6at thcy arc dcnvcd
from a listed hazardous wasE(s). If the uact origin of thc axicaz,s rs T l kaown' the soils qnnot be
(footnotc continucd on ncxtPegc)
l,RorocoL r-oK DETERMtNu.ic WHETTTEK AT.TERNATT Fr.r.o MATERITuS ARE LISTED lhzeltutotts wAsrfs
24t876. I
10.
pR()ToCoL FOR L)ETERMTNtNc Wruruf,R.A,LTEIL\ATE FEED.\tr{TERTA'LS ARE LISTED H^Z^R.Dous \U.{STES
If y"s.proceed to Step 10.
If no, proceed to Step l6-
WERE LISTED WASTES KNOWN TO BE DISPOSED OF OR
C OITtrITINGLED WITH MATERIAL?
If listed wastes identified in Step 9 were lorown to be generated at tha Site, determine
whether they were loovn to be disposed of or commingled with the Material?
If yu, proc.eed to Step 12.
If no, proceed to Step lI.
AIrE THERE ONE OR IVIORE POTENThL NON-LISTED SOI.,RCES OT.
LISTED SA24RDOUS WASTE CONSTITUENTS?
In a sitgation whcre Potcutially Listed 'tfi/ast€s werc looum to have beetl
generated/man4ged at thc Site, but the wastes were uot known to havc beeo disposcd of
or commingled with the Material, determine wbether there are potentid non-listed
sources of Poteutially Listed Hazardous Constitueuts in the Material. If nol r-rnlcss the
State agrees otherwise, tbe constinrens will be assumod to be from listed sources
(proceed to Step 12). If so, the Material will be assumed not to bc a listed hazardou
wastc (proceed to Stcp 16). Nonrithstanding the existence of potential non-listed sourc€s
at a Site, the Potentially Listed Hazardous Constinrcats in thc Marcrial will be considcred
to be from the lisred soruc{s) i4, based on thc relative proximity of the Material to the
listed and noa-listed sourcds) and/or information concerning wastc managemart at the
Site rhe evidence is compelling that the listed sorucds) is the sourcc of Potsntially Listed
Hazardous Coustitucuts in tbe Matsrial.
If yes, proceed to Step 16.
If'no. proceed to Stq lZ :
.
MATERIAL IS A LISTED HAZARDOUS WASIE.
The Material is a listed bazardous waste under thc following circumstances:
(footnotc continucd &om prcviots pagr;)
i
corcidetd RCfU- hu,ardous wglJtet unlcss they cxhibit onc or morc of the ctraractcristics of lnzardous
wastc...").
11.
t2.
21lt?6. l
13.
pROTOCOL FOR DETERMtTitNC WHETHER ALI'EI{\.{1'r: Fr:ED p1A1'ERIALS .{RE LISTED HAZARIT()U.S w^sTEs
o [f the Material is a process wuste and is knowu to be a listcd hazardous
waste or to be nrixed with a listed hazardous wastc (Step 6)'
. If Potentially Listcd Wastes were hrowu to be generated/nranaged at
the Site and to be disposed oflcomnringled with the Material (StEp l0)
(subject to a "contained-out" determination in Stcp 13), or
i If Poteutially Listed Wastes were lmowu to be gerrerated/managed at
the Sitc, were not known to be disposed oflcommingled with tbc
Material but there are not any potential non-listcd sources of the
Potentially Listed Hazardous Constinrents daectcd in the N4aterial
(Step t l) (subject to a "contained-ouf' deterurinatiou in Ste,p l3).
Proceed to Step 13.
IIAS STATE OF U"TAII IIIADE A CONTAII\TED-OUT DETERMINATION.
If the Matcrial is an Environmental Mcd.ium, and:i
:o ttre level of any listed waste constitueub in the Material is "de minimis"; or
r all of the listed wase constitucnts or classes thcroof arc already prcsent in the
White Mesa Mill's taitings ponds as a result of proccssing conveutioual ores
or other alternate feed materials in concentations at least as hig! as found rn
the Materials
the State of Utah will consider whcther it isiappropristc to make a containod-out
determination witb respect to thc Material.
If the Slarc malces a containdout determination, proceed to SteP 16-
If the State does not makt a contained-out determination, proed to Stq 14-
IS IT POSSIBLE TO SEGREGATE LISTED HAZARDOUS WASTES
F'ROM OTHERMATERHLS?
Determine whethcr thcrc is a reasonablc way to segregate material that is a listed
hazardous waste from alternate feed materials that are oot lisrcd hazardous wastes that
will bc sent to IUSA's Whitc Mcsa Mill. For example, it nray bc possible to isotue
matc,ri&l from a certain area of a renrediation site and exclude that material &om Matcrials
that will be sent to the Whitc Mesa Mill. Altenratively, it may be possibte to increase
14.
t0
pROToCOl, FOR DETERTIil\t\C lVHF;rHER AITERh'ATE FEED IvLTSRIIU ARE Lls'rfD HATT.ARDOUS WASTES
l
sampling frequency and exclude materials *ith respect to which the increased sampting
idenrifies corutirucnts which havc been attriUuted to listed hazardous waste.
[f yes, proceecl to Step 15.
:;
lf no, proceed o Srep t2.
l;
!
15. SEPARATE LISTED HAZARDOUS WASTES FROM MATERIALS.
Bascd on the method of segregation detcrmined under Stcp 14, materials that arc listed
hazardous wastes are s€,parated from Materials that witl be seut to the White Mesa Mill.
For materials tlut are listed hazardous wastes, Proced to Step 12.
For Materials to be sent to the White Mesa MiII, proceed to Step 16-
16. PROVIDE INFORIUATION TO NRC 11YPI g11611.
ii
If the Matorial does not coutain any Poteatially Listed llazardotu Consdhreots (a!l
determined in Ste,p 7), wherc inforaatiou conceming thc source of Potcntially Listed
Hazardoqs Constinrens in the Material is *unavailable or inconclusive" (as dctem,ined in
Steps E through l1), of where tbe State of Utah has made a contained-out detcrmination
with respect to the Material (Step l3), the Material will bc asnrmed not to bc (or contain)
a listed hazardous rvaslc. In such circumstances, IUSA will submit the following
(6grrms6[6tion to NRC and the State:
:;
a A description of the Source Investigation;
r An explanation of why tbc Matcrial is not a listed hazardous waste.
. Wherc applicable, au orplanation of why Conlirmatior/Acceptance
Sarnpling hrs beeu dctcrmined not to be necessary in Step 17.
o If Confirnratiory'Accrytance Sampling has been determincd uecessary
in Step 17 , a copy of IUSA'i agd the Generator's Sampling and
anaVsis Plaus. i ,. A copy of Confirmation and Acccptancc Sampting rcsults, if
applicabtc. ruSA will submit theqc results only if tbcy identiry thc
presence of "new" Potentially Listed Hazardous Constiruents (as
defined in Stc,ps 7 aDd 8).
,l
17. ARE SAMPLING RESULTS OR DATA REPRESENTATIVE?
i
Dctcrmioc whether the sampling resuls or data fiom the Sourcc lovestigation (or, where
applioablc, Confirmatior/Acccptancc Sampling rcsults) arc representative- The purposc
of this step ) is to detenninc wbethcr Confirmation and Acceptarcc Sanrpling (or
:li
:nr1.J876. I
I
tl
pRoroCoL fOR DETER{INt:tc \vHET}tER AI,rE.RN^TE FEED m{,TERIArs .dRE LI.STED IIAZARDOUS W.{.S'!'ES
conrinued Confirmatiou and Acceptaucc Sampling) are necessary. If the sampling resulls
or dara are representative of all Material destined for the White Mesa Mill, based on the
extent of sampling conducted, the uanre of the Material and/or the nature of the Site
(e.g., whether ctremical operations ey wast€ disposal were knowu to be conductcd at the
Site), future Confi.rmation/Acceptance Samplinglwiil uot be necessary. If the sampling
results are not represenutive of dl Material,destined for the White Mesa Mill, then
additional Confimration/Acceptance sarrpling rnay be appropriatc. Confirmation and
Acceptance Sampling wiU be rcquired only where it is reasonable to exPect that
additional sarnpling will dctect additional contanrinants not already dctected- For
exaruple:
o Wherc the Matc,rial is scgrcgatcd from Environmental Modia, e.g., the
Matcrial is containerize{ thcrc is a high probability the sarupling results or
data from thc Souce Investigation arc rcprcsentativc of the Material and
Conf rmatiory'Acceptance Samf ling, would uot be requircd.
o Wbere ruSA will be accepting Material Eom a discretc portion of a Sitg e.g,
a storage pilc or othcr defined areai aud adequate saupling characterized the
area Of co.scr' for radioactive and cbeurical sssteminants, the sampling for
that area would be considered representativc and Confirmation/Acceptance
sampling would not bc required- i I
o Whcre Material will be received from a wide area of a Site aod ttre Site has
becn carefully characterizcd for rahioactive contaminants, but not chemical
conlanrinants, Confirmation/Acceptance sa-pling would be required.
o Wbere thc Sitc was not uscd for indultrial activity or disposal bcfore or a-fter
uranium material disposal, and the Sitc bas bccn adcquatcly ctraractcrized for
radioacdvc and chemical contaminants, thc existiug s'mplinE would be
considcrcd srrfficicnt and ConfirmatibryAcccptancc samPling would not be
required.I.I
o Where listed wastes *src hlown to beidisposed of on the Sitc and the limis of
the area where listed wastcs r were managod is not lqtown,
ConErmatiou/Acceptance sampling, dould be required to eosttrc that listed
wastes are Dot shipped to IUSA (scc, Step 14).
I{yes, proceed to Step 4-
I
If ao, proceel a Step IE.
;
I
DOES STATE OF UTAII AGREE THAT ALL PRE\IOUS STEPS II/{VE
BEEN PERFORJVIED IN ACCORDANCE \MIifH THIS PROTOCOL?il
Dctcrminc whcthcr tbc State agrees that thislProtocol has bccn prorpcrly followcd
(including that propcr dccisions were made at 'gach dscision point). Ttc Statc shall
18.
243876. I t2
pt(oTocoL FoR DETERvT\tNc WHr-THER.ALTE1\A'rE FEED )LlrExrc'Ls ARE LISTED t{Az{R-DoUs w'{sTEs
review the inlormation provided by IUSA in Step l6 with reasonable speed and advise
IUSA if it bclieves IUSA has not properly followed this Protocol in determining ttrat ttte
Material is not listed hazardous waite, speciffing the particular arcas of defrcicncy.
I
If this Prorocol has not becn propeity followed byiruSe in making its determination that
the Matcrial is not a iisted hazirdous waste, ,then IUSA shall redo its analysis in
accordancc with tfuis Protocol and,lif3ustific( resribmit the informatiou described in Step
16 explaining why the Material i{ not a lisled hazardous waste. The Statc shall notiff
19.
Ayes, proceed to Step 19.
If no, proceed to Ste.p 1.
IVTATERIAL IS NOT A LISTEq HAZARDOUS WASTE, BUT
| ' r :;'
that results from proccssing alterrrite feed msteriili.
Proceeln Step 7.
i
I
i
,
13 i
such sa:npling reveals thc prcsencc of 'bew" conitinrcns, Potentially Listod Wastes must
Ue identified (Srep 8) and evaluatcd (Steps 9 thrbugb I l) to determiue whettrer the new
constinrent is from a listed hazard{us waste i;ourcci Generally, in each case, the SAP will
specify samplinE comparable to t{e levcl and fref,uency of sampling performed by other
facilities in the State of Utah that dispose ofi 1le.(2) byproduct material, either directly or
CoN}'IRMATION AIYD ACCEPTAT.TCE SAT]PLING ARE REQI IRED.
The Material is uot a listed trazarafus waste, Uut bonfirmuion and Accepance Sampting
are required, as determined necessary under Step 17.
Proceed to Step 20. I ; i :l,li
CO ITDUCT ON GOING C ONFIRMAT I ON AITD ACCEPTAI\ICESAMPLING. I ; iil,li
Conlirmation and Acccptance Sirmpliug will lcontinue until dctcrmined no longcr
necessary under Step 17. Such saimpting will bc gonductod pursuant to a Sampling and
Analysis Plan f'SAP') that specifies the frequenCy and tyrye of sampling rcquired- tf
such sampling does not reveal an5i "nen/'Potcntially Listed Hazardous Constihrcuts (as
defined in Steps 7 and 8), further ivaluatiou is not necessary (as indicated h St€P 7)- It
243R76.r
Attachment I
Summary of R(iRA I'isted Hazardous Westes
:
There are tluee different catcgories cif tisted hazardor:s waste rrnder RCRA:
o F-listed wastr5 from non-spccific sources (40 CFR { 261.31(a)): Tbese wa'stes
include ,p"o, ,oir.nts (F001-F6OS1, specified wastes from electroplating operations
(F006-F0b9), specified wastcs :from metal heat tr9agE operations (F01GF0I2)'
speci6ed wastes &om chemical conversion m$inq of aluminum (F019), wastes &om
th" production/manufacnrring :of specified i chJorophenols, chlorobenzerres, and
chlorinatedatiphatichydrocarboru(F019-F028),specifiedwastesfromwood
preserving processes (F032-F035), specified wastes-!9m petrolanm refinery primary
and secondary oiVwater/solids separatiod sludge (F037-F038), and leachate rcsulting
from the disposal ofmore than one listedhazadorrs waste (F039).
. K-lisrcd leasres from spectfic sources (,iO Cfn $ 261.32): Thesc includc spccified
wastesfrom.*ooaPreseffation,inorgauicpigmcntproducEon,oqanicchc,micd
productiou, chlorilc productioni, pesticide production" petroleum refin'l& iron and
iteel production, coppcr production, priinary:and secondary lead smelting primary
zinc productioq P,n"r4y aluminum rcductiono ferroal'loy productio'n, vetcrinary
pharmaceutical productioq ink {ormulation an{ coking'
o P- and (JJistd commercial chbnical pr,gduc! K|-CFR $ 261.33): These include
commercial chemical products, ior manufactur-ing chemical interrrcdiatcs baving the
gencric namc listed in the "P' d,t "LI" liCt of #astes' containerr residueg and residues
in soil or debris rcsulting 6om a spill of thesi materials.r "The phraso 'commcrcial
cherdcal product or mai:ufacturin! chemicali iutemediate "'' reIbm to a chemical
zubstancc whicb is rnarrufacnrrcd or fomrulatid for commercial or manufacn[ing use
which consists of the commercially p,uq grade of the che;rrical, any tcchBical gndes
of the chemical that arc produbj o, ,o"rt"t"O, and all formulations in which the
chsrnical is thc solc active ingredient. i It dous not_refer to a matcria!' srch as a
manufiacruring process waste' tiirt cont'ins anyiof the [P- orU-listed substancesl'"z
1 p-listcd wastcs are idcntificd as "acutely *lrruo*l*r,o'l and arc subjcct to addidonal management
contols undcr RCRA. 40 CFR g 261.33(e) (1997). UJiisted wastes arc idantificd as "t'oxis wastcs." Id'
Appendix VII to 40 CFR partz6| identifiis thc hrrardoir! "o"stinrents for which thc F- and K-
listcd wastes werc listod-
5 26r.33(0.
2 co cFn $ 261.33(d) notc (1997).
2al176. l
ATTACHMENT 4
Molycorp Affidavit
Confirming No RCRA Listed Hazardous Waste
in Uranium Material
S :\MRR\Molycorp\MolycorpAR.doc
Molycorp, lnc.
67750 Bailey Road
i/bunlain Pass, Califomia 92366
Uo!,vcprp
EIttfE
L 4 2000
Ms. Michelle Rehmann
International Uranium Corporation
Environmental Manager
Independen ce Plaz4 Suite 950
I 050 Seventeenth Street
Denver, CO 80265
Re: Molycorpr Inc. Lead Pond Documentation
Dear Ms. Rehmann,
This letter is a follow up to my previous letter dated Iuly 18, 2OOO.I have enclosed an
afrdavit signed by Mr. Sharrer for your review. This afrdavit will replace the unsigned
July 18, 2000 affdavit.
I look fonryard to talking with you about any comments or suggestions you may have
regarding this zubmittal
Please contact me by telephone at 760-856-7697 or fa:r at 760-856-6691.
Sincerely,
--'-
*-l
t:'): ': -' t),.-..-'
:"-'- - *.
John F. Espinoza
Environmental Specialist
July 18, ,* l;"
AFFIDAYIT
I, William L. Sharrer, being duly sworn according to law, depose and state as
follows:
l. I am presently employed as the Public and Environmental Aftairs Manager
by Molycorp, Inc. at the company's Mountain Pass facility. ("the Facility"). In that
capacity I am responsible for insuring that the Facility operates in a clean, safe, and
environmentally responsible manner. My experience with the Mountain Pass facility
dates back to 1999 when I was first employed at that facility. I have personal knowledge
of the raw materials used, the production procedures employed, and the waste handling
procedures followed at the Facility. I am also familiar with the hazardous waste
regulations set out in U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40261, Subpart D, as
amended by the U.S. Federal Register August 6, 1998.
2. Molycorp proposes to ship to IUSA's White Mesa Mill in Blanding Utah,
the following materials: lead sulfide pond sludges from three ponds areas, P-8, P-l1, and
P-23, for processing as alternate feed materials. All of the proposed alternate feed
materials are secondary products or waste streams produced in the extraction of rare earth
minerals at the Facility, and contain no materials or wastes from any other source.
3. The settling pond residues consist of material from the extaction of rare
earth minerals from bastnasite ores. Bastrasite ore is generated from a first stage
flotation plant where the ore is separated from tailing. The ore was then roasted to
remove excess carbonates, then leached in a hydrochloric acid solution. The dissolved
fraction was sent to a lead sulfide removal process, where ammoni4 sodium hydrosulfide
and flocculant were added, and the mixture fed to a clarifier. Thickened clarifier sludge
from this process, containing lead sulfide, iron salts, and uranium, was transferred to the
lead sulfide ponds. All constituents of the lead sulfide pond sludges come from the rare
earth extraction process. No material from any other source has been or will be added to
the lead sulfide pond sludges.
4. Based on the production steps employed in the recovery of rare earth
elements, the proposed alternate feed materials do not contain any of the listed wastes
enumerated in U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40 Part26l, Subpart D as
amended by the U.S. Federal Register August 6, 1998.
5. Based on my knowledge of waste management at the Facility, the
proposed alternate feed materials have not been mixed with wastes from any other source,
which may have been defined as or which may have contained listed wastes enumerated
in U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40 Section 261, Subpart D as amended by the
U.S. Federal Register August 6,1998.
6. Specifically, the proposed alternate feed materials do not contain
hazardous wastes from non-specific sources (U.S. RCRA F type wastes) because (a)
Molycorp does not conduct any operations at the Facility which produce the types of
wastes listed in Section 261.31 of Title 40 of the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, and
(b) Molycorp has never accepted at the Facility, nor have the proposed alternate feed
materials ever been combined with, wastes from any other source which contains U.S.
RCRA F type wastes as defined therein.
7. Specifically, the proposed altemate feed materials do not contain
hazardous wastes from specific sources (U.S. RCRA K type wastes) because Molycorp
does not conduct any operations which produce the types of wastes listed in Section
262.31 of Title 40 of the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, and (b) Molycorp has never
accepted at the Facility, nor have the proposed altemate feed materials ever been
combined with, wastes from any other source which contain U.S. RCRA K type wastes as
defined therein.
8. Specifically, the proposed alternate feed materials are not U.S. RCRA P or
U type wastes as defined in Section 261.33 of Title 40 of the U.S. Code of Federal
Regulations because they (a) are not manufactured or formulated commercially pure
grade chemicals, offspec commercial chemical products or manufacturing chemical
intermediates, residues from containers that held commercial chemical products or
manufacturing chemical intermediates, or any residue or contaminated soil, water or other
debris resulting form a spill cleanup as these terms are defined in 40 CFR Section 261.33,
and O) Molycorp has never accepted, nor have the proposed altemate feed materials ever
been combined with, wastes from any other source which contain U.S. RCRA P or U
type wastes as defined therein.
(Signature)
My CommissionExpires: $ft Aera Ooa
Sworn to and subscribed before me
ATTACHMENT 5
Radioactive Material Profile Record
S :\MRR\Ir4olycorp\MolycorpAR.doc
nlLe/28A2 L2:17 75685556q1
Exhibit A
RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL PROFILE RECORD
GcncrstorNatre,lTTa/)laaAp ocncraror/wasre Saam#: fED I VolurrrofwesteMatrial 7756' l7^75O 76aS
Conrector Nrrnc , Y/a .wesrc Strscm Na rr*, bd POAd.S- , Delivery Darcz 7 - ,BD
Check appropriate borca: Liccrrscd Y
-
N
-
NORM/NARM -, ; LLRW
-l
MW
-i
MW Trcstcd
-;
MW Needing Trtrot i
ME_; llc.(Z)-i
Ori6inalSubmission; y
-
N-; Rcvisiort# :
NamcsndTitlcorPerson CornpletingForrn, 7o.fu F, ESPtaaia Yt:rr"t'?Aa- .aab- 76?7
A. CUSTOMERINFORMATION:
GENERAL: plsasc read carefully and cornplclc this form for one waste strcum. This information will be used to daermine
how to propcrly manage the material. ShoulO thcrc bc any questions while cornplcting this form, contact IUC al
303.389.4I}I. MATERIALS CANNOT BE ACCEPTED AT IUC WHITE MESA MILL UNLESS THIS FORM IS
COMpLETED. If a catcgory docs not apply, please indicstc- This form must be updated annually-
I. GENERATORTNFORMATION
EPA ID#^/,/*1 EPA Hazardous Waste Number(s) (if applicablc) -ry
Mailing Addrcss:
?hwrc: 7@'95b'ZZo',.--?Aa-a5b-2254
Locarion ofMaterial (City, Sr1:,2oArz*' o fu.>5, &t
pnone, 76O- #. h'7G?7 Fox:7AO - *5G- aaz/ _
MATERIAL PHYSICAL PROPERTIES (Should you have Bny qucstions whilc completing this section, cottact IUC
Environmenlal Managcmcnt st (303) 389'4131-
l. pHySICAL DATA (Indicate percentag€ of matcrial that will pass through the following
grid sizcs, e,g, l2n 70A"/o,4" 96%, l" 'l4o/o, ll4" 50o/o, 1140" 3U/', ]/20O" 'syo)
2. DESCRIPTION : Color
-
ntowrvTvlulti-'/Odor- Odorlcss-'{
Liqurd- Solid-/ Sludge- Powdcr/Du-st-
3.
4.
DENSITY RANGE: (lndicate dimcnsions) ?4 ' ./OO s.C' (tt,'a)
'U'yo'
GENERAL CHARACTERISTTCS (% OF EACH)
Soil- Building Debris Rubblc- Pipc Scale- TulingsZ5 Prcdl.oa:76 Concrstc-
Plasic,/Resin-
Other constiruents and approximate 7o contribution of cach: l/a
5. MOISTURE CONTENT: (For soil or soil-lile matcrials)'
(usc std Proctor Mcthod ASTM D'698)
MOLYCORP ENVIRO t'AuE- 0z
Dac of Rcvision:
GRADATION OF
MATERIAL:
t2' _100%
_9So/o
1" _90%
tH" _84%
v40" _65%
l/200' _570/"
Optimum Moisture Contenc 65 X
Avcragc Moisturc Contcnr: 15 V"
Moisturc Contcnt Rangc, /Z--b5-x
\rgltgOtul UuIrBUrr verZ, a ' -- -
Mailing Addrcss (if diffcrent fiom above):
1.2/1.8/2822 L2:L7
6. DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL (Please anach a description of the rnaterial with respeq to its physical composition
and characrcristics. This dcscription can bc anachcd scparatcly or includcd wi*r thc attachrncot for ltcrn
o-D Sec,- 4ilachmenf D.2.
Generator or Conractor Initials:7FE
7588555591o MOLYCORP ENVIHU
lsotopes Concenuation Range
(PCire)
to
rH(:E- UJ
C. RADIOLOGICAL EVALUATION
l- MATERIAL INFORMATION. For each rsdioactivc isotope essociated with the matefisl, plcasc list thc following
information- IUC'g license assumes daughtcr products o bc pltssnt in equilibrium, thqsc arc not rcquircd to bc lislod
below and do not require manifesting. (Use additional copies of dris form if necessary)-
Weighted
Isotopes ConcenFation Range Average(pci/g) (PCi/g)
b.
-to-
.. (a#a@Lr" D.4
ND - AnalYtc not dctcctcd.
Z. y 6) Is the radioactivify connind in thc wastc matcrial [ow-[,cvcl Radioactivc Waste as dcfincd in thc Low'\'7 Hr"i n aio*tire wasrc Policy Amcndmcnts Act of 1985 or in DOE Order 5E20.2A' Cbeptcr trI? (Plcasc
-cr Circle) If yes, check "LLRW' block on line 3 of pagc I -
3. y fr)iicr:isdp MATENAL; Is thc wastc -atcnJlistcd or includcd on an actjve Nuclear Regulatory- v Comrnission or Agrccmcnt Statc liccnse? (Please Circle)
(If yes) Ty?E OF LICENSE, Sourcc
-;
Spccial Nuclcar Material
-;
By'Product
-;
Norm
-;
Weighted
Average
(pcue)
d.
f.
NARM-;
LICENSING AGENCY:
D.CHEMICAL AND HAZARDOUS CHARACTERISTICS
I. DESCRJPTION AND HISTORY OF MATERI.AL
pteasc attach a dcscription of thc material to this profite- lnclude the foltowing as applicable: The process by which the
*"G"f was generated. Available process knowledge of the materisl- Thc basis of hazardous rratcrial or waste
Jeterminationi e tirt of the chemicats, marerials or Jastes uscd in or comninglcd witr thc matcrial; a list of any and
all applicabte EpA Hazardous wasre Numberc, cuffenl or formcG and s list of any and all applicable land-disposal
piorrifiti"n or hszardous-wastc exclusions, extmsiong exemptions, effectivc &rtcs. varisnccs or dclistings, Attach the
Lost reccnt or applicublc analytical rcsultsof the marerial's hazardous-lvastG charactcristiqs or corrsbtuqnt6- Atcch eny
,ppti""Ut, analytical tr.rtts iiror"ing thc composition of thc material. Atrach any producl information or Material
S"F"ay O.o Sheets associated with rhi materiat- It a catcgory on lhis Matcrial Profilc Rccord docs not ryply, describe
why it does not.
Plcasc dcscribe the history, and include the following:
yff,)Was this material mixe4 trarted, neu6Blizcd. solidificd, comminglcd, dried, or otherwise processed at any time
- ,ft", seneration?y 6fi;;h-iri"i"ri"r bcefl trsnsportcd or othcrrvisc rcmoved from the location or site where it was originally
"d$flf,Jmgtcrial
derived from (or is the material a rcsidue of) the ueatmett" storaSp, md/or dispossl of
-^ hazardous wasle defincd by A0 CFR 261?
V@Has this material been treated at any time to m€et uty applicsblc rcatment sandards?
L2/L8/2ZZZ t2:L7 76885666qr
Lead
Barium
Mercury
Cadmium
Zinc
Chromium
Copper
ND - Anal)rtc not dctected
ANALYTICAL RESULM FOR REQUIRED PARAMETERS:
provided. Attached additional shees if needed)'
MOLYCORP ENVIRO PATjL Oq
(Pleasc transcribc rcsults on the blurk spaces
NoFree Liqtfi:a
ms/ks
rrrg/kg
2. LIST ALL KNOWN AND POSSIBLE CHEMICAL COMPONENTS OR HAZARDOUS WASTE
CHARACTERISTICS
a, Listed HW U) qL b. 'Dcrived-From'HW '{Y) I c. Toxic _9- ^'
j. Erptosives
- Z ;: i';ilffis
- -- l. solvents
-
-7-
p. Ignitable
-
< q. Corrostvc
--7
r' Reasdvc -----
v. Nickel - r
=
w. Thallium - / x. vangdium r'=-
-y. Alcohots
-
--7 z. Arssnic ..* 11 9*P" 4
-bb- Cadmirrm : -T cc. Chromium ./ dd' L'€ad '/
€e. Mercury Z: ff. Selenium
---7.
g.t' g]':t e
-hh. Barzrnc -7
ii. Niuate Z-= Jl Itq*
-
t=
kk. Ftuoride ,Z-- ll. Oil - /- nnn.Fuel
-
/
nn. Chelating Agcflts- .../ oo. Residue from water t€almertt -pp. CIherKnownorpossiUfTGiahorChemicals Sut*)O-*t UalArtd.-, Lan4rqntdetOxdas
Generamr or Conractor Initials: ,4FE
i- ANALYTICAL RES1JLTS FOR TOXICITY CHARACTERISTICS. (Pleasc mnssribc rcsultr on the blank spaces
prcvided- Anach additiorrsl shcsts if nc*ded, indicare range orwotst-case results)- ( See" ,4lzb4rox.trD3 )
Mctals(circleone)l@.TCLP(mgfl)organics(circleone):Total(m/ks)orTCLP(mg/t)
SoilpH S'7
eaini rinerG leoslnaiii- ,
Cyanide
-
Not detected {
Sulfidc
-
Not detected---11-
s, ICNTTABILITY (40 cFR 26l.2tlalt2l.[+]')
Flash Point tr/A "F oc
--_---7_-
(5.- Al+a.r,h..4 f;ltprr*%m*e
Liquids
Released
Released
lsthcwastcaRCRrq, oxidizer? t @
applicable concenEationCHEMICAL COMPOSITION (Lis all krtotm chcmical
dimensions. Use anachments to complctc. if neccssary,)
Chemical ComPonent Conccltbation
componcnts and circle the
Chcmical Component Concentration
%mclke
o/e mg&g
o/omgkB
"/omgil4g
!"m9lk9
E. REQUIRED CHEMICAL LABORATORY ANALYSIS- Ccncrator must submit rcsults of analyscs of samples -9.f 6u-
marerial. Results rr. r"quir"a from a qualified laboratory fot the following qnalytical paramctcrs-unless uonqplicabili-ty.^of
thc analysis for the mathal can be srated and jusiificdin sttschcd statsmcnts. Attach all srslytical rcsults and QA/QC
L2/LB/2SSZ L2:L7 75485555 MOLYCORP ENVIRO rAUE VC
documentation avsilablc. (CAUTION: PRJOR TO ARRANGING FOR LABORATORY ANALYSIS, CHECK wlm ruC
AND LABORATORY REGAR.DING UTAH LABORATORY CERTIFICATIONS.)
FOR ALL MATERIAL TYPES: CHEMICAL ANALYSIS: Soil pH (9045), Paint Filrer Liquids Test (9095): Rcactivitv
(cyanide and sulfidc).
I. MINIMUM ADDITIONAL ANALYTICAL REQUIRED FOR:
& Non-RCRA Wasc (Non Mixed Waste e.g-, LLRW, NORM): TCLP including thc 32 organics, 8 metals, ar:d
copPcr (Cu) and zinc (Zn).
Z- REeUIRED RADIOLOCICAT ANALYSES. Please obtain suffrcient samples to adoqustcly dctcrminc a rauge and
weiitrted aver4gc of activity in thc matcrial. Have a suffrcient number of sarnples anelyz,ed !V Sarrrna spcctral aoalysis
for il narural tsotopcs such tt at they support lhe range and weighted average information for the mEtcrisl that will bc
recorded in item D- t - If Ururiunr, Ihorium, or othcr non-gamma emitting nuclides atc PreEcrlt irr thc matcrisl, havc at
leasr (l) sample evaluated Uy rad;ochcmistry to dctcrmin" tre cor,""ntrafion of these additional c-ontatninsnE in tlre
material.
Generator or Contractor lnitials:fFL
Sutc or Othcr Agctry Contacr Pcrson Gficrator's Statc Tctcphonc Number
91.o
3. PRE.SHIPMENT SAMPLES OF MATEzuAL TO ruC
Once petmission has bcen obraincd from IUC, and untcss amcnability samples_have prwiously been sent to IUC'
please'send 5 representarive samples of thc matcrial to ruC, A complctcd chain of cusody form nust be included with
ihe sampling containers Thase samplcs will bc uscd to estsblish thc matcrial's incoming shipment a.cTPtanc.e
paramer;r ro"l*r*r., and may L a"aiyz"a fot additional parsmetcrs. Scnd about two pounds (onc liter) for each
sample in an air-tight clean glass conrainer via Unired Parccl Post (UPS) or Fdcral Exprcss to:
Internarional Uranium (USA) Corporation, Ann: Ssmple Conrol, 6425 S- HiShway I9l, P-O- Box E09, Blanding, UT
8451 I
Phone [phone]t
4. LABORATORY CERTIFTCATION TNFORMATION. Pleese indicate below which of the followinS categoric6
applies to your laboratorY data'
a. All radiologic data used to suppon the dara in item C.l - musr be from a certified laborotory.
L-fTAH CERTIFIED. Thc laboratory holds a crxrent certification for the applicable chemical or radiological
-p"*rra"o from the Urah Dqarrneni of Health insofar as such ofhcial certifications are given .
:4cgr.rgnnroR.s STATE CERTIFICATIoN. The laboratory lroJd-s a current certification for rhe applicable
-chcmical
pargmctcrs from thc gcncrator's State insofar as such oflicial certifications are given, or
_GENERATOR'S STATE LABORATORY REQUIREMENTS. The laboratory rnee$ the requirements of rhe
-generator's
State or cogniTrrlt aSEncy for chcmical laboratorica' oI'
If using a non-Utsh certifi6d laborstory, bricfly dcseribc thc gcncrator sbtc's rcquircmcnts for shcmical anElytical
laboratorics to dcfdrd thc dcrcrmination that the laboratory uscd mects thosc rcquiremcnts' cspccially in tcrms of
whcthcr thc rcquircments *" pura* spccific, method spccific-, or involve CLP or othcr QA data packagcs'
Note: When p-..o or p-ieit knowtedge of tiris waste is appliod, additional analytical results may not bc
ncccssary to cbmplac Section B. D.2. D'5, or D.6. of this form'
b. For analytical work donc by Utah-catified laborarorics, pleasc provide a coPy 9f 9-" t**Iory's cuteot
certification letter for each pr13*"to analyzed and each method usea for analyses required by tbis form'
c. For unalytical work donc by laborgtorics which arc not Utah-Ccrtificd plcesc providc thc following informstion:
ffik-ffi
L2/LB/2ZZZ L2:L7 75485
Generator's or Conractor's SignanrreDate-E:4.'&
(Sien for the above cenifications).
55591o MULYUUI(I- LNVIKU rHgL qU
F. CERTIFICATION
GENERATOR'S CERTIFICATION: I also ccrtify that where ne,cessaq/ lhose representative samplcs wenB or shall be
providcd to IUC and to qualilicd laborarories for the analyical rcsults reported hetein- I atso ccrtify that thc informetion
pro"idcd on this form is completc, true and corect and is accurarcty supponed and doc{mentcd by any leborsmry tcstingss
iequircd by IUC. I ocrtify ihat thc rcsults of any said resting have been submined to lUC. t c€airy 0lat thc ntstcrial
dcscribed in this profile has been fully characterized and that hazadous constituents listed in l0 CFR 40 Appcndix A
Criterion 13 which are applicable ro drii material have been indicsted on this form- I ftrrther certify snd wsrrant to IUC that
the material represented on this form is not a hazrdous waste as detirrcd by 40 CFR 261 and/or that this material is exemPt
from RCRA regutation under40 CFR 261.a(a)(a).
The Generator's responsibilities with respect to the material described in dris form arrc for poliry, proparnmatig firnding
and scheduling dcciiions, as well as general oversighr. The Contractor's responsibilities with resPect to tlris malerid are for
thc day-to{st opcratons (in accorJancc with gcieral dircctions givcn by the Generator as ryrt of its general oversight
.csponitultityl, inauaing but not limircd ro ttrJfottowing rcsponsibilirics: wastc charaotcrization, uralysis and htmdling;
sempling; *onitoring; rtord kccpiug; rcporting and contiugcnry planning. Accordingly, lhe Contractor has fie rgquisite
tcrowtcage arf aut-ority to sign'this'certificaion on behalf of ilsef, and as agent fordrg !-en-erator, on behalf of the
Gcncratoi. By signing this "crtification, thc Confractor is signing on its own behalf and on bchalf of the Gmerator.
tn"@-
Frtttron runlz/ 4#a,
]n -20' oo(,,oN) ss:st .,NocAL LAP P, 002
D,L .Molycorp lnc.
P,O. Box 124
lvlotrntain Pass, Calilornia 92366
Tolophone: (61 9) S56-2201
Facsimile: (61 9) 856-2253
UNOCALEg
MOLYCORP
I Mr. c,rt Shifrer $qs AT( Le+qq (@/6+L)
california Regional water Qualrty conrrol Board \1151 loCtu\zt\?W .L\d^wro?*tI i.Tlffi5ffitor*e 'w'lnhi{rW
15428 Civic Drive, Suite 100
I Victorville, CA 92392'23s9
I
Rc: Invcstigation of Process Ponds P-8' P- LLtP-14
Dear Mr. Shifrer:
I Molycorp, Inc. has prepared this letter report to satisfy requirements set forlh in Section II
(9) (b) of Board Order 6-91-836 for the investigation and inventory of process ponds.
I These ponds contain materials with lanthanide concentratiotrs averagiqg over 20% withI elevated concentrations oflead sulfidc. The ponds addressed in this letter report are P-8,
P-l1 and P-24.
t
PRODIJCTTON HISTORY
t Molycorp began operations at Mountain Pass in 1952 using a rod mill left fiom a
predecessor cornpany operating a small gold operation at Mountain Pass. Molycorp
t installed a ball mill and flotation cells. Production was initially very limited with onlyI bastnasite concentrate beingproduced.
I In the fall of 1964 Molycorp tearned that one of the minor metals, er:ropium, was inr critical demand as a red phosphor for color televisions. To meet thc new demurd for
europium, Molycorp consfructed the Europium Plurt, now the Chemical Plant, and
I ptacea it in operation inNovember of 1965.
- As a consequence of tlre new process used in lhe recoverl, of europium, a process steam
I ffif:1"#lr1;li:t contained lanthanide minerars with elevated levels of lead sulfide
T
T
I
I
t
t
I'ELISSA M. ALLATN
Nou 1 3 1Sg5
Jn -20'oo(t,toN)
I
TEL:ifqSliZO
lnvestigation of Process Ponds
Novenrber 6,1995
Page2
Bastnasite concertate was delivered from the flotation plant to the Europium Plant where
it was roasted to drive offcarbon dioxide and oxidize the cerium to a less soluble (+3 to
+4) valence state. This material was then subjected to a HCI leach which solubilized all
the lanthanides except cerium. Thc cerium was settled out as a solid residue, filtere4
dried and packaged as a finished product The solution remaining after cerium removal
was processed to remove iron hydroxide and lead sulfide.
The lead and iron removal was 8 continuous separation prccess- Iron rms precipitated
first by using arnrnonia to increase the pH. The iron-free supernatant overflowed to a
second tank for lead precipitation using sodium hydrogen sulfide. Thc remaining
solution was thcn circulated m preparation for introduction into the solvent extraction
circuits.
The process stream eruiched in lanthanide chlorides, iron hydroxide and lead sulfide was
gravity discharged at various times to three unlined impoundment's as shovrn on the
attached facilitY maP.
Druing the initial startup at the Europium Plant iron was not precipitated iuto the process
stream. However, at a later date iron hydroxide was introduced to this stream. The
effluent ftom this initial activity was gravity discharged into P-24 from approximately
1965 to 1967. Pond P-8 was the next facilfiy used to store the lead iron residue. It was
operated from approxim^tely 1967 to 1981. The last pond to receive this waste steam
was P-l l which was operated from 1981 to I984. None of the ponds received additional
material after 1984.
The process resul'irE in the production of the lead iron residue was the same basic
process that resulted in the production of lead iron fllter cake barreled aud stored at
Molycorp after 1984. The major difference was that the barreled material was placed in a
filter press to reduce free moistrue before storage. Also, ttre lead iron pond residues have
greater concentrations of lanthanides than filter cake because of the lanthanide rich
solutions that carried the residue. Barreled lead iron filter cake was stabilized by
Molycorp under the terms of a Settlement Agreement fualized with thc California
Department of Toxic Substances in 1995, and is currenfly being Ibd to prooess for the
purpose of lanthanide recovery.
gg:51 UNoCALLAO P,00i
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
T
I
I
Jn
I
-20'00(M0Nl gg:51 UN0CAL tOO TEL:7145i72?O P,004
I
I
I
T
T
I
I
T
t
t
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
lnvcstigation of Process Ponds
Novembcr 6, 1995
Page 3
WASTE CHARACTERIZATION STUDY
A field projeot was undertaken on August 8, 1995 to quantiff volumes and characterize
the material in the process ponds. The site sampling program was conducted by
Converse Consultauts Souttrwest, Las Vegas. Pond profiles were developed by logging
of pond materials rebieved from split spoon auger semples obtained from pond power
augering or hand auger saurples where more appropriate. A complete description of the
srmphng program including samplingprocedures and calculated pond volumes are
attached as Attachment d "Lcad Pond Waste Management Unit Characterization".
Sarrples were shipped to Loctrheed Amlytical Laboratory, a Califomia state oertified
laboratory for analysis, fuialysis pcrformod by Lockhced included metals listed in Title
22 of the California Healttr and Safety code and total uranium and thorium
concentrations. Sample splits were analyzsd at Molycorp's in-house laboratory for
chloride, suHate, lanthanides and moisnrre content. All oonstituents are reported on a dry
weight basis.
POND NtrSCRIPTION
Volumes and cross-sections of the ponds arc presented in Attachment A Ponds were
found to contain a total of between 3,851 and 4,326 cubic yards of lead iron residue.
Pond P-8 was found to consist of approximately 445 cubic yards of lead iron residue.
This material is overlain with approximately 1,445 cubic yards of miil tailings averaging
five fcet in thickness. Thc lead iron residue in pond P-8 appears to be inthe reduced state
due to the tailings cover.
Pond P-I1 was fourd to have a cap of oxidized lead iron residue overlying unoxidized
lead iron residue. The oxidized residue is estimated to have a volume of between 300 to
775 cubic yards with a murimum ttrickness of 4.5 feet near the center ofthe pond. The
reduced lead iron residue consists of approximately 2,815 cubio yards.
Pond P-24 was forurd to be very shallow with a depth of approxinrately I foot of mixed
oxidized and reduced lead iron residue encountered. The total volumo of lead iron
residue .unP-24 is estirnated to be 285 cubic yards.
ln, ro oo{t'loN) o8:52 uNocAL LAO TEL:i145i727O P. 005
I
I nvestigation of Process Ponds
I |"::1"'*6' rees
t
ANALYTICAL RFSIII TS
I Analytical resutts for the lead iron residue containing lead and iron are summarized in
. Tables 1 and 2. Table 3 summarizes analytical results of tbe mill tailings in P-E. Table 4
I compares analysis of baneled lead iron filter cake that was subsequeutly stabilized and isr being fed baok to process with pond lead iron residue.
I Figrue 2 and3 show graphical representations of comparative concentations of keyr chemical constituents in each pond. Figrrre 4 shorus a graphical comparison ef railings
r material to lead iron residue, clearly establishing the distinot chemical composition of
I each material, A discussion of the differences found between the barreled material prior
- to stabilization arrd the pond material follows.
T l.eao
I Lead concentations in the barreled material ranges ftom 52,000 to 100,000 mg/kg while
the material in the pouds raDges from 1,544 $2A,410 mg/kg. The low lead vdues are
I believed to occur in zones intenningled with mill tailings. Further evidence for this is the
I high barium content ofthe material containing comparatively low lead conceutrations.
As indicated above, the lead concentration in the pond material is much greater than the
I
barreled stabilized material.
I BariumI
Barium in the barreled material averages 4 mglk1while barium in the pouded material
I averages 6629 agkginthe oxidized lead iron residue and 6884 mglkginthe unoxidized
I lead iron residue (Refer to Figure 2 for illustratiou). The high barium values are
attributable to the interlayering of mill tailings.
T
Lsnthanideq
I The total lanthanide content reported as an oxide in the oxidized lead/iron residue
averages 2L,77Vo while the average in the reduced material averages l4o/o. Ttre
I unoxidized material may have a lower average cotrtcnt due to more interbedded mill
I tailings- The baneled material averaged 60% lanthanides reported as chlorides.
T
t
In. 20'oo(MoNl o8:s2 tlNocAL LAa
I
I
I
I
T
t
I
I
I
t
T
I
t
I
T
!
T
T
TEL:il457i2O
lnvestigation of Process Ponds
November 6, 1995
Page 5
Radinnuclides
Total uranium in the barreled material averages 2800 mg&g. Oxidized material in the
pond averages l35l mg/kg while the unoxidized material averages 1333 mg/kg. These
values are lower than the barreled material due to the intermingling of mill tailings with
t}e lead iron residue-
Pond P-24 contains lower ruarrirun and thorium values than the other two process ponds.
This could be a result of this pond receiving effluentbeforo ironwas precipitated and
added to the proeess stream.
Total tlrorir:m in the barreled material averages 240 u;glkg, The oxidizcd lead imn residue
in the ponds averages Ll52mgkg. The concentation ofthorium in the unoxidized lead
iron residue in the ponds averages 457 mgkg.. The thorium concenhation is much
higher in one sample of oxidized lead iron residue from P-24 (5954 mg&g). The
composition of lead imn residue is well known and this thorium eoncentratiou is rnuch
hig'her than expeoted. Therefore, this sample has not been included in the calculation of
the average concentrations within the ponds, since it is considered ao anomaly.
Trrrcc Constihrents
The concentrations of the remaining TitleZ2 metal concentrations are similar between the
barreled material and lead iron residue conteined in thc ponds.
ECONOMICS OF TrrE RECOVFRY OF LANTI{ANIDES FROM PONn RESIDUTFS
Attaohment B to this lefter discusses the valuc ofreintroduction ofthe lead iron residue
lanthanide material containing lead and iron to the curront lauthanide re@very prccess .
If reintoduced to the Chemical Plant using facilities cunently beiug utilized for
stabilized filter cake intoduction, a cost for processing of the material is estimated at
S0.50 a porurd of recovered lanthanum oxide with a current market value of
approximately $1.154b. Thus, the prooessing of pond residues forthe recovery of
lanthanides is economioally justified.
P.006
tn,-:o oo(MoN) ss:s2 uNocAL LAO TEL:i145772O P.00i
t
T
T
I
I
t
T
I
I
t
I
T
I
I
I
T
I
T
hrvestigation of Process Ponds
Novembcr 6, 1995
Page 6
PI AN FOR DETERMINTNG MFTI{ON FOR POND CI,OSIIRF
Molycorp is working diligently towards the processiug or disposal of mining by-products
at Mouutain Pass. Druing 1995, larrthanide lead iron filter caks was stabilized at the
Mountain Pass site. The stabilized material is cturontly being fcd to thc Chemical Plant
for the recovery of lanthanidos. The schedule mandated in the Settleurent Agreement
with the California Department of Toxic Substances reguires that dl stabilized material
be processed for recovery of lantbanides orremoved for disposal u,ithia a three year
period beginning in August, 1995.
The reintroduction of stabilized filter cakc has rcquircd the development of new process
knowtedge and teohniques to keep lanthanide products within quallty qpecifications while
modmizing lanthanide rccovery from the stabilized material. The same tlpes of
considerations are inherent to the processing oflead iron residue contained in the ponds.
For this reasou, Molycorp proposes to evaluate several options for the pennanent closure
of the ponds. These options are listed below.
Processing of Poud Material in the ChemicalPlant
Processing of Pond Material in the Mill
Close Ponds in Place Using an Engineered Cover and Diversion Ditches
As feasibility is considered" it is possiblc that other options may become attactive for the
processi4g, oontainment or offsite processing of the lead iron residue for lead recovery,
SCHFNUT F F'ORFVALUATION OF OP'NONS
Molycorp proposes to conduct the necessary eugineering and process feasibihg studies
during the next six months. A report that provides a comparison of the feasibility and
results of benctr testing for the various options will be zubmitted by May l, 1996. A
prefemed option(s) will be proposed at that time.
After submittal of this feasibility report, the recommended option(s) will be pilot tested
uider actual operating conditions. This process will take up to 6 months. At the
conclusion of the pilot testing, Molycorp will submit a project schedule and detailed plan
for the processing or containmcnt of the pond residues.
In.-20'oo(MoN) ss:5i ttNocAL LO TEL:il457i2O
tnvesrigation of Proccss Ponds
Novcmber 6, 1995
PagcT
CONCLTISION
. Molycorp has determined the volume aud charaoterized the pond materials contained
in p-g, p-l1, P-24. These results are submitted as part of this report.
. Analysis of the pond materials shows it contains signilicant lanthanide and lead
values and could be economically processed for the recovery of lanthsnides-
o Reintroductiou of sinrilar, stabilizcd material presently being introduced to the
Chemical Plant indicates that the pond residue can be introduccd to the Molyoorp
process for the recovery of lanthanides-
. Molycorp proposes a schedule allowing systematic engineering aud economic
evaluation of the various options available for processing or containment.
. Results of feasibility and bench testing of the pond residues will be summarized and
submitted in a report on May I, 1996. A detailed plao and schedule for the
processing or covering of the pond material based on actual pilot testing in operating
conditions will be submitted no later than one year from the date of this submittal
(November 1, 1996).
Depending on ttre best method for processing or containmen! action will either
cosrmence immediately after review or approval of thc dctailed plarq or be sequenced to
allow processing or cover after the stabilized lead/iron filter cake has been fed to Proccss'
please do not hesitate to call me if you Irave any questions concerning this matter.
attachments
cc: M. Allain, Unocal Law
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
T
T
I
I
T
I
T
T
I
o
.E
oF
E
oF
G
d
=
5oND
+
R
=
tF
(E
oF
osF
ooNsF
a
sF
a!u
tE
oF
G
NGt,
o
Nlgtr.
aozoo.
o
]UJ
.fNo.oz
-rF
o.
ooo.lro
u
F-a
=lrJIoIo
t
I
T
li
+,IE
TEu*,
^.i\ (o6r, ttfl.tntGloG, OSntll-tO€ GrO-- l! - N F
=REs$E $g
esRNSs Es6.*i-<orj$o =s
;+*3+fi Efi
555$$P
--(O<|C)l-
PsERig 3E
r()o)(\@o(?) c\l(ou?1vj19o-c.,i -nilO---liflr) (\1 (\l
cDro@^o)9,6I-@-l;;olroo-'(\lN
Ol-o) (o o)O)c) r
\N@
n\ oq
- (Y) lO(Y)r-
ro 6 1\ r''- !{ coaJeiA)IJl\F(Ol'-6t
@F ro<ri ci 6r)CrJN -
toN
qq(\t !o
laqqNttatt.I
o.O.
ro-teoSH E$
r-oQroQc! r\
"idP-FE KB
or.,-oQor09\ nn
"icjR-8S 83
$
oqo
GL
Eoo
E'IG'oI
atNo.
og qqqqqu?EL uirN@Clr@.0Ertrrt.(E eoooooo ".r"Ig.?gg$9E9P9600@GrGEr@o,o.o.O,O-o.I
I
t
:rfJi:';iT
NEL LnaonnroRtEs
r.rEL LAEORATT:]Fr IOLrr
Rgno .
Phoenlx
Las Vegas. Burbank
4208 Arcata way, sune o . r.a"t}ff.tr;$SS
fr02) B5z-toto. Fax: fioej esz-iizz
1€88-368-3282
il;adu_
ffiCertified CertifiedNvo33 ls/052 8ffil,
I
I
T
I
I
T
T
I
t
T
T
T
t
I
t
t
lEtu B^>r?=l Ld,'-\t=\
5.\.rr.
CLIENT: Molycorp, tnc.
67750 Bailey Road
Mountain pass, CA 92366ATfi: GeoffNason
PROJECTNAME: NA
PROJECTNUIvIBER: NA NEL ORDER ID: L9802117
Attacbed are tho anarytical results for samples in suppon o[the above refereoccd projecr.
;ffi:""','JlHhTJil;'riff:Hffffiilift bv NEL Laboratorics. sampres werc recoived by NEL in
Samples wero analyzad as received.
where appricablo we have included tlre forowing quarity control datr:
Metlod blsnk - used to demonstate absencc of contaminatiou or interferences in thc analytical process.Laboratory control Spike (LCS)'used to a"*onrr.i.'il"i
"ry abirity to pcrform the methodwithin specitications by spiking.representrtive anatytes into e clean marix.Surrogates - compounds added to caih sampte ,o "ntur.Lrithe method requirements are metfor each individual sample.
Should you have any qucsrioos or conurents, ptease tcer free lo contacr657-1010. -vr-e"v'rw' t,'!aE rGEr .rcc Io contact our Client Services departmcnt at (702)
cERTrFrcATroNg,
Ariz.ooa
Californra
US Army Corps
of Engineers
t707
Certified
Az05t8
2002
Cenitied
A20325
n92
Certified
Idaho
Montana
Nevada
Washingron
Stan Van Wagenen
R.eno
A20520
i 9wv. v^a
,
rara
F!
x,
ro.-e,
Er
aa
Eo9aL.,{cJL-OEetiEa sEucturC6tt € !
L2,U?e IE. sUaJ E ..L< o ccrt a, (,u (r> oCIId>Crr- o Of N,6 LZgOJ A
:*,a.o.(.-'.Ggt-€ct:=-fi"
i:.i.t::
T
I
T
t
I
t
t
t
I
I
T
T
!
T
I
t
T
T
T
i;l;il;E-[;;E;;iiEH
3sE33rg:::Sr:rrsii
33:5riIS::;:3:ESi:
35:s;;I-=;;]I::E:pr
sri$s$gs$gIiisrsg$
.JoF
E
F
o
€6
ct!
o
t
$$$$$$$$
$$$$$s$$
sS=e$9.€q;!$;Si=-;r
og7
C'g
6I
UIIJ
go
$$$$Es$=r
-E H l illn E i
Ac.Bcr6eo,-tl<tdrO aJo
HBEHEEEis$iE
16l VV{/ V.(a
rtH
4(qc, la rr
rt5
,
.oro
.ts,N
E?3!o3iFi!E
q
s6
o(r.
)o
€q
la
o
I
$
E
0oIc,
orI
C'
IGt
o
c
a
a
5
T
E!C
aa ur {,
!
aca
$r
ti
i
Tio2.tUeEi
Lo
Ia4
Txat<a.j3Cal r(
qa,a9c!AO
E'30IOaalAC
?!$!dai
x
L
6-
tt3I!e
TEg
T
!
b
E
T{rE$E
EuriEg--Ett ,uu a ..LcOl-'g s -Ugtri I
T
t
I
I
T
t
I
T
I
I
T
T
I
I
T
T
t
I
tl vvs, vas
i ; fi E ; ; [ 5iu f s- ; , ; $ F ; E i- ; F ;
553IsIi!3!Sr i :IS:trI: SI
3 I3: ; I:.:::SI : ; e : ni ii I : I
I553rlt :;;:Ifi e i fi Hfi ;li ;t
lEi
]| !re
Io-
ign gB'!iilii g;itln
s gi i i
l9laA
e
AI
GI6
6G
l--
No
t
a
tlr
.,r
Bt
I
NC'
Ilo
c,
ao.
i6
€oc,t
o0
croe
$
l.l
tO
A
6
I6IA
oq
o6tc!
(>ro
,1,
o
I
cIg
e
tlarJna
$n6
t
!
B
hOr
o-c,t
oq
,aoo
c
6\o
C'
rA
(l
A
, h...i ,38t: T /Lr:t r'tt-|, tf a rafr-rr:Aa CiTlr-r t Hr.larnHf aall
$tttE-a-1, rl
Fr
.G(r-
J
I
E3B
Ea,l
YGet6<
tLt,s9A'
t
Jfritt6c
E
sEaoAo
x
..
3:i
ro
o
€.
5ie
:.1*!6{.p3
tdJ.It
'-t.r:
T
I
T
I
I
t
I
I
T
t
I
T
T
I
T
I
T
T
a:tUogrj'ijO6frrg{E
-lz z EElu)Is:gsIs5t_iEa EEg I ..f:;E !EREE 9--u, 1 6
Lf'
I lO a $'/vvsJv^':
;.f ; /;uui';;;;riin,,; ;,iF; ; ;
fil s Ir=:!;r:r!H::;3iI$s;rr 1;
*,
I
n-It
l
- i 3 i r : 3 : i r ; E ; E 3 : : ! . i E r ;
/
t
/-,sr;;$==,:;p
; aF ir;e BH ; n
/ : lgiliigngisiin$::iigrsEitllE la€ alsil$s $ $ 'll .6
I legl*'l$s S S
/*/s$ $ ;
B
I r l8El;r l$$ ;EE
.1".= 1"6 I 8=
0lLl-l!l-llr lEa 3 =F I I - 3€l I
= l- IEIE IHH E ,.flf=l$E g EEl I ";I IIl ll"= r n,. 1 lec 5 ?rl l:? ; q!l;=lil i i
d.
aar
g
g
.$3
agEEE>. e
Er 'EE .'Llu !OL.( E€<r{
>ob 6fN50:39-J
...4)
:rlo.
aiE
#
.t:i
!1,::
I
T
t
T
T
T
T
T
t
T
T
I
I
T
I
T
T
T
T .-'r_ r- i ,r- r_r ir' ,-r
tvrut llitq\./I
I-
,,rr-lraO:n,,
4)OOi /0LZ
i$iiigilislllElilii
iaEE;;;E[[;E;;;E*gH
;5;3p$H;Ii;r:I:! i:i
B=h33oiI3ilENs eN;;ii
E E f; ;; g t E: s E $ I : H I 5 E 8
otI
66
ooct 1A
--I
3EoA
irt I
a\t N
NNoo
6Eltq
C' 'D
Eq
N
rvo
8.
o
E6
Nc,
.EqI
€o
A,cr
6a>rt
(lC'
Eg
D
IS
l--l.
oo
AEG6{\o
l8sd
E
6
otO
a!
dI
I
AI
A,
aoI
C'
6rO
€Io
!O
$I€
4
..h'ri Rt|: T./':r--4 rll:frAa --Y r-rn I HlrndH- lar.r
E
E
I
gis
Darav
at
L3t3Lac
xxo3EIe<
x
rteoat,aa
Ea
TEoul
4.3are,-oao
t(
L
.!E
LI
aL3QO
c?
(,;r-
$t
I3
I
t
I
T
I
I
T
T
I
t
I
I
I
t
I
T
t..88IrlatrI
_t
ba,a.tr.EJL-OaEH{EdLa.BE4EU,6 B;ES>ELl.,;: . t
Cf Tll,l U 6 r.i:;s,x>()-a a9N r a C-{grJ a
T
T
T
OaJ,quarrrs^ Ao rgJUUojul:3
Fi;i;F;ilfaiE;a;;i
!:P58r!I:qIqqq{qaq
o'ddd.jr,:FGro;i;eN
55:;::;:3I:i::!l:!
:3n:;Ii333IEHi;;til
$F$$F$fiF$EEftSFilEfiH!5!J!.5!!IiItssiiiE
e E ! E E E i E E e E E I E ! T E E
GI
C'rtorO
BICIrtg.o
h6
9ro Ico
aro
l,r rO
aoG
aa,
E
a,
I
o
aottn
o
Eao
ts
E
R
o
aG
h
6aG'
q
3
o
no
Et
ot)
6o
NIG'
a0a
t9io
En
e
6
g
E
3
B
l\t
CD
Itq.
n
g
6€lr
,rl
5o
E
B
B
o@
6o
,iI
(l
30.
r{
No
G'6
m
o
I
6E
6CI
8
I
(
No
5o
lYo
ot?rt
o
6o
Go
E
o1A
€6C'oto
ul
rto
lrl,UT
IE
o
I
a
$
n\o
Ao
t€
&
.,ootCt
6t
{t
NIo
N
]n
ro
c
B6
A
6o
tro6
N
€tA
r h . ,' l-f, OE C. T JC|-t r'f r-rI tLl lLf,Tfi:n -'l q?T.:rl-l I HllrrErr-l -lft'lj f) :l1H-J
a
5
E
lb"OL\3rrrY
!
!3
La
It,rI4
II
!t
t
Oat
Oatalr
?,
sEtd
BIL'so
x
!t
co
-6at-
Do
o
{o
Vrr, Vt, arv L, . Y(
.E
fn
}Ia.aofr!I
B8EgIl|tr:C
I
T
t
t
I
T
I
I
I
T
T
I
T
T
T
T
I
LouaL
.EGGbJzooEP.CLO3l53
amc,!ou5S.lB x
L-O-a z
Ec $rU q ..L< EI PGd G o1, r> d,tG!ts8E3 Part&l J r
T
T
T
-
Gvwg, v4.--
i;[;;8f;f;f,
4qqi=8.eoc'do.i
n-t;gSg i;i
p;IiSFBsr
ggisisiEi
at
UooA
a6
,-\qI
e
N
o
T
B
trno
o
RhN
C'
a
otr
a
Eos
E
C)o
I
EI
ta
o
o
B
FN
6
6q,
r{
r\Jo
€F)o
rno
6e.EC'
oa
Ia
Iog€s
TE
I
N
a,
!ES. arllt y
Et
E,.,8
E&
!*
$gaalJ-
Lal
!LC
Ell!
OCC'<
Aflat uL.a, cr
1
G]JUlaCtE
x
EIa9
x
l.
aI
e
E9?a
I
-9tl-
.g
E
!!I3:u.);Fa6JL
E EE
Es;E;g . t
-CG ogu a ..- L<allfjg; -tIEei 0.8
I
T
T
T
T
I
I
I
T
T
I
T
T
I
T
I
I
T
T-
,l
I [;iiiE;i;iE;;;;iii
:5:;l;I$;::=i:;;;;
ts$I e;::BEiHr;::BE!3Fr;
5::FEIE$;i*3s$iEE;
illtigEr$iigEgEEE!
8
!O
o
(l
I
a
o
a(,0.
o
oI
Ga,
0v,
Ic'
c
6o
h
ro
c,€o-II
.D6
€t!io
I
N
c,
o(t
GIC)
oI
g
oa
IIe
s\o
t't
rO
I
€
h-
G
EIl\I
l)
6o
rcio
aoo.
tr
B
Bt
6o
I
soc)(,+6rO
n
c,
,4
naoIA
I
.ol\ti
E
Nnr-
I
T
6
eOrC'
Go
a
ooI-
$
I't
rO
o
?
6
c
BI
(,
De
g
66
nio
o
s-
6(>
o0
oc
cila
UA
NIe
NIT6
ar
I;N
6
aoq
rcno
E(t
Nc
ea
6E'
66
€lo
6*ta
u.l
r^
ao
l.t
io
g
I
=
I
!
ls
E&Ti--
t
hi.J JC
G.,tr-
aL^E3i
,tEd,
e
&
b
gIat
Itir.l<
aotl!L'e6
Ital!U|TO6t
!
E$ao
x
{
o
GL.l_
PEo
-oClx
!
g
L,EIUJE7-.8!Eolorata- S, lrlI. 8 {8',t&i! - rEa -t!U 6 ..etl9;g$5i F
I
T
t
t
t
T
T
I
T
t
I
I
t
T
I
I
I
I
T
tu^rttl:.ruLl td urti 0r3
i*p.Iir-r-gf;
;:rEgB,...Ir;ddili
r'Eiqq3.,erteddii
E$;EEgss
a
E
E
t b?rrL\rtrri
:lI
U(,'ac
tt
g
ae'F
c
rs$si$iE
o6oqno
I
(v
Nd
I
t{
Ia
I
to6
R
No
Etl
g
aI
EC'
I ov,
$3
9
g,UI
;vt
$flItr
$
$
6
o€
o
6
I
aA
,h..,t-.r llc|:: ri'-| rl-'-r, , t-'T , a-r?t-, r,!. - r-- I \fi-r I H rlr_rflH- lll I
!
I*
arfl
E{3ro.a:I
aa
L .aotaloo-e
l.rJ!
La
gt.L
r.a
EE
o.ftvLCaa
.I,
g
l, rUdoOGCIC
3.:gtI6,
x
L
6t
B
3LIaO
cc
6S
vif'lI}
ffigtr
kl'..d.,
T
I
T
t
t
I
t
t
t
I
T
I
T
T
T
T
T
I
I
:LoUIrlt-8riri FEEr:!52b;! - .Eo .l{lJ o ..L<o -!I.ss.iiE5: i-r,i4 o.
?rr:E5;o?
ta{rd
Eo(r
ili
//fI 13l@lr
IE-l;
t;
t;
ifliln
lsl!_]r
t*
Iils
IEl;'t:tiIElilr
ln
li
ln
/fl!lct>
E
fi
i,;igo
t'a6t
gI
e!
E6
e
=ECDitrtl
t--i.
JNJs-i,! Il.rll I
,u,l I
-" Ia[x -ooo .qq<<JI
E
@
otl
a
E?g
5et
doEE
Ea
\0o
INI
I
lils
i fJE,
I ElEt
L
!,
,-{
.H9
nBI d.a
BgozE
>€
se-(.r o(UO
.E
E
OJth
E
<D
tuI't
I l"Q
i+l\i\i
q
tt
$
j-l
il
I
S.
o
(Do
E(E
(A
0,c.Eho6og
o.
Eoo1
co
.E
=c
E;ui
la|l€lo
I
!'IIsl
I
!:r
s
I
I
Ebz
(!o
1
o
Eo).t-
3'
$
Elo.!c
JF!lql6
Eoor
U j,.'r:i5,r I:1!rl Uf : .l I
l
*'
^,I
^Io-. I\. Irul
t*,-\
(1g xo6) xpp1,1
ti
o
ui
I
ilal
lln
l"l
JrlrJ
"i(
IhIr\
I
1t^
)
\.,r\
Iui
d.l
1,
.$
t1
G1il
il
r!
I
.s.
\I.t
I
!$\
\4
\9
I!.s
I
c.l
I
\
I\r
A
li
^JNI
ievt
t$hlax
Fitl
.3
\,
Nt\
\Jl
T
T
t
I
T
I
rEl
fl
EI
EoI
t
Ef$
J;g
-r #f itl
I
T
t
ilii D5,ri99E EE: Jl T'f'fE5?loi r'rEL LAEDRAT:*L.'FAtl:I L:rlI
t
NEL LneoRAroRtES
Rsno ' Las Vegas
Phoenlx . Eurbank
42oB Arcsh.way. surte
^
. *S"Ji:T*DIH3;
C/oA E57.roro. rar: Foz) ast.rin. ,€88-368.3282
I
I
t
I
T
I
I
T
I
T
T
I
I
T
T
T
FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION
TO:
COMPANY:
PHONE:
FAX:
FROM:
DATE:
NO, OF PAGES:
(including covor pago)
C Hard copy will foltow lj, Hard copy will not foilow
-
fr.{) ,il$*
C
CorpOrale Oltico & Reno Dlvisinn..tol,,l rlrila., I ^-^ - n^-- .
I -.rg Lr -rr':EL LABOFATORTEIV783E5?10
q?1nlrtrialS
E!EH
qqEB
Cra6rJ
EEtt ri
8-!
$s6-5Gto
ad
E
I
EEC
(a i,t v
rrP{L.aEt0s3To2
NSNfliffg
Ia
^l
at
(ctAr
a
ItN
g
t
Ei6
98
,tuE8idsg
,r cla.TT1?ry????--?:
$q
gP
E6
}Iaart!
a
I!&
Tt
Ot
GE6<
AO
LCcEl
r
iri
-gaa6I
IoA9IJ!aoo
x
ai
tstL
{=
C!?.e
I
T
T
T
t
I
I
I
T
T
T
I
I
T
aa
E
-!!!E_!Ii EEIr:I-JlE:.-ru,at a ..!:;, !iEE! E
I
I
t
T
I
r iaL LABr:rE,rTrlFr ItrrLU Fl:if 'l.lilr:Ff 7I l !o o, o,
;ii;;;
q{qqi?
?FF?F
E'd'?q9q\-aFE.a.li
gqfYr\Lrofl;r;x,i$i
.Ic
It?OL\
-lllv
IiJ3
FFfiFf$!!!!!!!Ei!!E
66
Rg
E
tcg
(
FI
n
$i
ttt>
t\l
A,\ra
{
rc
cl
6o
arl
iIo
6
oo
Go
o53-
6r
B
A.as
6c,Ss.:!r-v jj-t:- :?7
c,oICIila
t
ls
r*olr:;
t8aa{tl
1'
art
ao
rI
rTG<
O-oa)-L'a,o
8t
oEztCIE
E1,4EEait!9
I
L
T
to
a
,ha6
5
-a
[Li,rrj!,rl,_1!E BE: .l:
L t ' -O
t
I
t,bzeuQ?f!
E,if
;: ] I
lrr(, a -!:;s !lEEl -e
t
t
I
T
T
I
T
t
I
T
I
T
T
I
I
T
I
Ff.l:f r:t:NEL LABOF:ATOF,IUV,0.:ru
tcarlGa\\\\\sHTEHTE
.a--G7traaaa.,taalvra{rOtal6N.t
.Fl,16.Cr-.FBU:g;
otillGlr!t38HsB
TTnN
{e6\{G-\ml,tnFnhNdatNd.rlStirrr-;,5tEsss5t535
I
I
I
I
a
I
I
ottO
<,
6Or
lcn-
ts
FI
AIC'
II
GC'
oo
g
6.,$
o
rA
Ga
.a
a
?
6o
rO
6
['n!
roqn
Nc,
E
B
3-
oU'
c)CI
36tO
c.t
N
N
at
.a
a
f
I
E
f,tl
,89
taac
b
E
aA
x
E
3{
caeIL!c6
!,
a3!lJao6E
I
iE69!
x
aI
T
GL
{o
Iu5'.
3i
5EUE
E&a, IOara<
,ttgx
OEataJ-
:4
*F3E&lu
s*
T.
T
T
I
I
I
T
I
I
T
T
t
I
I
T
I
.i
b,!rlA-Ca;EII:9I
Is:i;l .rEa .Llg a ..L.aO &
Is:i t
I
T
I
PA':if i']i--,r.jEL LABORATCTRTtv? _1:E57
qg{e.EEI-P
i4qRFblrsi
gHgs6ei
I ua,
t
Ell
gi$!
8E;!
D
ILaL
o6
N
6
oo.
ut
o
GtFI
g
,'rotI
E
A,
NC'
€
'io
a6
?t
g
e
eI
o,aar!L'A.O
Iaat8ot
I;Erl6U
x
I
Egt!
6ctqC ,i,i, Aii
d.d.
a
aa!IIt
-O-,.8t.GAard
4..IBrs.JEr-
5a
.l!a
5
=a
iil,tE5,rI39B BE:.1?
aa
E!ii-Ei!
E FEfr:!
:: ':- I
i:';! IJEEI i
..-6!rTFffi--fFdrA,
T
I
T
T
I
t
t
T
I
T
I
t
I
T
I
I
T
I
I
EE:.r? :rr'th5ilo NEL LABr:rRArtrRIFTu =Ti ,lr
/ ; /r; i;;;; F;; F F;; F;; F;; ELt I
El r f =ir:i*:;sr::rsFE;Er$I5_tttt I ..^ I*rlTtl i a :BB r5$: :; ; i E: N i=: r i
I E l.ElsE;E;I!;Ieifi plrl;ill
I i |;$EiiitiiiiiiiriiiiiB
l,s ls slrr lB sl,,lssI,;lSsl,rls$II3l r l-EI i II Eilllili=lEgfl I -
Il l: o
i[1 i i i
l:15,r I BgE
f
tr{,
rZ
i
IazozL.!
EEIr:E: r--t-t€'.ilEi;
'J:..rI
T
t
I
I
I
I
T
I
I
I
T
T
I
I
t
T
!
I
I
t
T
I
I
T
T
T
T
T
I
T
T
I
I
t
T
T
I
pv Molycorp,lnc.
Lanthanide Group
67750 Bailey Road. P.O. Box 124
Mountain Pass, CA 92366
Telephone (760) 85&2201
Facsimile (760) 85&2253
:s#r"Hgi{Htr I November 1999
Ms. Michelle Rehmann
International Uranium Corporation
Environmental Manager
Independence Plaz+ Suite 950
I050 Seventcentr Street
flerv€f,, CO E0265
Rc: Informetion Needcd for Filing en Amendment for Reception of Lced Sullidc Meterids
Dear Ms. Rehmann:
In response to your letter dated 14 October 1999 and our telephone discussion, the following is given in response to
you questions:
l. The estimated volume of the lead sulfrde pond residues'
The estimated wlume in the three ponds is 155,000 f onl including ry- prortmarcly i9,0t0 ll ofJlotation tailings
;i'; i;;i""rp niA "i"^pt to ,"piot"7rr^ the leart sulJide residues while acawtiag rte pond nateials.
Z. A process sketch or description of the lanthanide recovery Proccss lhat generated thc sfeams dischargcd to fte
threc ponds.
See atrachel diagranl
1. A description of other sources (if any) of streams discharged to 0rc three ponds.
Approximately 39,N0t' of naterial conuined in the ponds is nitl tailidgs fiom lhetlotation ancentration of-fitnosne miierols witch'became the feedstock that producd the led sulide residues. Molycorp will attemPt to
,"prror" this material from the led sulide residn* while ucavating the pond nn'teiials-
4. Confirmation or evidence that the non-radioactive metals in the threc ponds did not come from a RCRA listed
;;;;r;. lt woutd be most useful to receive a formal statemenl or o0rer confirmation that thc pond cont€nts are
Lxempt from RCRA under thc Bevill amendments'
None of the materials placed in the lead ulJide ponds are a l&ed hazardous waste-
5. Organic analysis ofthe three ponds, or confirmation that the pond sludges contain no organic constitu€nts.
No analysis is available at this time, Molycorp believes thal no significaat amannt of organiu, if aty, fr;is, in the
lead nlfide Pond residues-
6. Confirmation or evidcnce that organic compormds (if any) in the threc ponds did not come from RCRA listed
Processes.
The materials shipped to ,he White Mesa Milt, fitC, from the lad ponds will nol arntain any compourd, either
inorganic or organic, whose origin is a RCM-listed proess'
7 . Infcirmation on organic solvent usc (if any) at the site'
The lanthanide separations process uses kerosene in the SX ciranit. However, the lead sullide residues were
crealed, and removedfrom lhe process, uPs,ream ofthe SX ciranit'
If you have any further questions, please contact me by telephone at (760) 856:?US or fax at [phone].
Cordially Yours,
t
T
I
T
T
I
T
T
T
T
T
t
I
t
t
I
I
T
T
@
Ammonia, NH3
o
Sodium
Hydrosulftde
NaHS
lmpurity Containing
Leach Liquor
PbS Pond Residue Process Diagram
@
Flocculant
Clarified Leach Liquor
to Lkluid/liquid lon
Exchange Cirorits
1. Bastnasite conccntrate from the flotation plant is roasted to rcmove exsess carbonatcs prior to the
leaching process. The roastcd bastnasitc is leached in a hydrochloric acid solution- The insoluble
material becomes the ccrium feedstock and the leach liquor is sent for firr&er impurity removal and
lanthanide recovery using SX-Ion exchange.
2. Ammonia was added to the circuit to precipitatc iron. Incidental lanthanids precipiation also
occurred.
3. Sodium hydrosulfrde was added to the circuit to precipitate lead. The uranium followed the lead in
precipitation.
4. The slurry reports to the thickener for settling.
5. Flocculent is added to the slurry at the Orickener.
6. The thickener overflow liquor reports to the SX circuit.
7. The thickener underllow, PbS residue, reported to the PbS settling ponds.
ATTACHMENT 6
Memorandum from Independent Consultant
Regarding
No RCRA Listed Waste in Uranium Material
S :\IvlRRWolycorp\MolycorpAR.doc
REVIEW OF MOLYCORP INFORMATION
TO ASSESS THE POTENTIAL PRESENCE OF
RCRA LISTED HAZARDOUS WASTE
I have performed an independent evaluation of the information available to date on
Uranium Material from the Molycorp settling ponds to assess whether any RCRA Listed
Hazardous Waste is present.
IUSA has developed a "Protocol for Determining Whether Alternate Feed Materials are
Listed Hazardous Wastes" (the "Protocol") (November 22, 1999). This protocol has
been developed in conjunction with, and accepted by, the State of Utah Department of
Environmental Quality ("UDEQ") (Letter of December 7, 1999). The evaluation and
recommendations in this Attachment were developed in accordance with this Protocol.
1.0 Source InvestigationlBasis of This Evaluation
Sufficient site history and background information was available to perform the Source
Investigation required in Step 1 of the Protocol Decision Logic Diagram ("the Protocol
Diagram"). To perform my independent evaluation, I have reviewed the following
documents:
IUSAruDEQ Protocol for Determining Whether Altemate Feeds Are Listed
Hazardous Wastes (IUSA, November, 1999).
Process history and pond information from the Molycorp Lead Sulfide Ponds Closure
Plan (February,1997)
Molycorp letter of November l, 1999 in response to IUSA request for additional
process information.
Molycorp package of site and operational history information (April l4,2ooo)
Affrdavit Regarding No RCRA Listed Hazardous Waste, Provided by Molycorp to
IUSA
6. Radioactive Material Profile Record ("RMPR") prepared by Molycorp for IUSA
The information is suffrcient to conclude that the Uranium Material was generated from a
known process under the control of the generator.
1,
2.
J.
4.
5.
2.0 Determination That Material is Known Not to Contain RCRA Listed
Hazardous Waste
The Protocol Diagram states in Decision Diamond 2,that if a material "is known not to
be or contain any listed hazardous waste", then IUSA and UDEQ will consider the
material not to be listed hazardous waste. ltem 2 of the Protocol text states that to make
the determination in Decision Diamond 2,IUSA may,
"Determine whether specific information from the Source Investigation
exists about the generation and management of the material to support a
conclusion that the Material is not (and does not contain) any listed
hazardous waste. For example, if specific information exists that the
Material was not generated by a listed source and that the Material has not
been mixed with any listed wastes, the Material would not be a listed
hazardous waste."
Sufficient information does exist to support such a conclusion. Molycorp, based on site
history, analytical data, and generator's knowledge of their process, has indicated that the
Uranium Material contains no RCRA listed hazardous wastes. I have reviewed a copy of
The description of the ponds and the Process Diagram depicting how the pond contents
were generated, which state that the ponds contain thickened sludge from the clarifier
thickener step in the preparation of leach liquor from bastnasite ores for S)Uion
exchange.
I have also reviewed a copy of the Molycorp letter of November 1,7999, which states
that:
"None of the materials placed in the lead sulfide ponds are a listed
hazardous waste. . . The materials shipped to the white Mesa Mill, IUC,
from the lead ponds will not contain any compound, either inorganic or
organic, whose origin is a RCRA-listed process."
This information meets the requirement for specific Source Investigation information in
the Protocol Decision Diamond 2 and Step 2, and demonstrates that the Material neither
was generated by a listed waste source nor has been mixed with a listed waste.
Molycorp's statement is supported by the analytical data, which indicate that the
combination and levels of inorganic components are consistent with tailings from metal
extraction processing. That is, all the inorganics appear to come from extraction of rare
earth elements from natural ores.
Documentation to Support Determination of No RCRA Listed Hazardous
Waste
IUSA has obtained the following documentation to support the determination in Box 2
that the material is "known not to contain any listed hazardous waste".
3.0
o An affidavit from Molycorp confirming that the pond material is not and does not
contain RCRA listed hazardous waste associated with any of the four lists: F, P,
U, or K.
o A copy of the IUSA RMPR which contains a declaration that the pond material is
not and contains no RCRA listed hazardous waste.
I have reviewed both of these documents. These documents are consistent with the
document requirements in Protocol Diagram Box 3, for a determination based on site
history.
4.0 Conclusions
It is my professional judgement that:
1. The Molycorp Uranium material was generated by a known process under the control
ofthe generator.
2. The Molycorp Uranium material is not and does not contain RCRA listed hazardous
waste.
3. The information made available to me is consistent with the information requirements
set forth in the Protocol.
4. This determination of no RCRA listed hazardous waste is consistent with the decision
logic of the Protocol.
Jo Ann Tischler
Chemical Engineer
ATTACHMBNT 7
International Uranium (USA) Corporation
White Mesa Mill
Equipment Release/Radiological Survey Procedure
S :\M RR\lvlolycorp\MolycorpAR.doc
2.6 Equipment Release Surveys
2.6.1 Policy
Materials leaving a restricted area going to unrestricted areas for usage must meer
requirements of Annex C Guidelines for Decontamination of Facilities and Equipmenr
Prior to Release for Unrestricted Use (dated September. 1984).
All material originating within the restricted area will be considered contaminated until
checked by the radiation protection department. All managers who desire to ship or
release material from the facility will inform the Radiation Protection Officer of their
desires. The Radiation Protection Oflicer has the aurhority to deny release of materials
exceeding Annex C Guidelines. No equipment or materials will be released without
documented release by the Radiation Protection Ofticer.
2.6.2 Limits
The release limits are:
Alpha emissions:
Average 5,000 dpm/100 cm2
Maximum I5,OOO dpm/100 cm2
Removable 1,000 dpm/100 cm2
Beta-gamma emissions (measured at a distance of one centimeter):
Average 0.2 mr/hr or 5,000 dpm/100 cm2Maximum 1.0 mr/hr or 15,000 dpm/100 cm2
2.5.3 Equipmcnt
Equipment used for equipment surveys includes as examples (or equivalent):
l. Eberline PRM-7 gamma scintillator, or equivalent2. Ludlum Model 3 with 44-5 detecto( or equivalent
3. Ludlum Model 3 with 43-5 detector, or equivalent4. Ludlum Model 2200 with 43-17 detector, or equivalent5. Glass fiber wipe filters
2.6..1 Procedures
Upon notification thar materials are requested for release. the radiation protection
department shall inspect and survey the material. Surveys include fixed and removable
alpha surveys and beta-eamma surveys. A document inspection and release form is to be
prepared and signed bv the Radiation Protection Officer or his designee. Any material
released from the mill will be accompanied with the appropriate release form. If
contamination exceeds Annex C levels, then decontamination may proceed at the
direction of the Radiation Protection OfIicer. If the material cannot be decontaminated,
then it will not be released.
2.6.5 Records
Documented records ror each released item are filed in the radiation protection
department files.
2.6.6 Quality Assurancc
The policy and documented release forms are periodically reviewed by the Radiation
Protection Officer and the audit committee to ensure policy and regulatory compliance.