DRC-2018-009731 - 0901a068808df078

DRC-2018-009731 195 North 1950 West • Salt Lake City, UT Mailing Address: P.O. Box 144880 • Salt Lake City, UT 84114-4880 Telephone [phone] • Fax [phone] • T.D.D. [phone] www.deq.utah.gov Printed on 100% recycled paper
State of Utah
GARY R. HERBERT Governor SPENCER J. COX
Lieutenant Governor
Department of
Environmental Quality
Alan Matheson Executive Director DIVISION OF WASTE MANAGEMENT AND RADIATION CONTROL Scott T. Anderson Director
October 3, 2018
David C. Frydenlund, Chief Financial Officer
General Counsel and Corporate Secretary Energy Fuels Resources (USA) Inc. 225 Union Blvd., Suite 600 Lakewood, CO 80228

RE: Request for Concurrence for Receiving Alternate Feed Material Associated with License Condition 10.7 Radioactive Material License Number UT 1900479
Dear Mr. Frydenlund:
On September 11, 2018, Energy Fuel Resources (USA) Inc. (EFRI) submitted a letter to the Utah Division of Waste Management and Radiation Control requesting concurrence for continued receipt of the KOH Alternate Feed Material (KOH AF) from Honeywell Inc. (formally Allied Signal). The KOH
AF material is currently approved under License Condition 10.7.
Applicable NRC Guidance In August 2004, the State of Utah became an NRC Agreement State for Uranium Recovery facilities. In
the January 2003 Final Agreement State Application, Utah committed to use the NRC guidance
document, Regulatory Information Summary (RIS) 2000-23, “Recent Changes to Uranium Recovery Policy” in determining the acceptability of an alternate feed. In this regard, the following criteria for alternate feed would be used:
1. Determination of whether the feed material is ore according to the following definition: “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.”
Page 2

2. Determination of whether the feed material contains hazardous waste.
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,
and toxic) would not be regulated as hazardous waste and could therefore be approved for recycling and extraction of source material. 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.
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 11e.(2) byproduct
materials, 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.

The RIS 200-23 document also states that the economic motives of an alternate feed are not a factor in determining the acceptability of an alternate feed. History of the Request
In 1996, Energy Fuels Nuclear Inc. (EFN) (former owners of the White Mesa Uranium Mill) sent a request to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to accept and process a potassium hydroxide/potassium fluoride uranium-bearing material for its uranium content. The NRC approved this request on November 20, 1996. In the NRC’s Technical Evaluation Report (TER), the NRC estimated
that the tonnage to be received and processed from this request would be “approximately 2,475 tons of
material.” In addition to the original request, the Grand Canyon Trust, in a response to a reported leaking shipment of KOH AF material in 2017, posed the following questions to the Division:
1. Can the White Mesa Uranium Mill continue to receive the KOH AF Material at a higher uranium concentration than the original estimate? 2. Has the Mill exceeded the NRC’s original estimate of 2,475 tons of KOH AF material? 3. How long is a license condition valid?
In a letter dated February 23, 2017, the Division provided the following response to the Grand Canyon Trust: 1. Even if the KOH AF material is at a higher uranium concentration than originally expected, the alternate feed can still be accepted; 2. There was no tonnage limit on the amount of material that could be received under License
Condition 10.7.
Page 3
3. There was no time limit for acceptance of the material under License Condition 10.7.

Current Request License Condition 10.7 does limit the amount of KOH AF material the White Mesa Uranium Mill can receive and process. However, EFRI is close to the tonnage received and processed that the NRC
originally estimated in its TER. EFRI is requesting concurrence to continue receiving and processing
the KOH AF material in excess of the tonnage estimated by the NRC based on the following: 1. The KOH AF material comes from an ongoing process. There is not a finite amount of material that may be available for processing.
2. The amendment to the NRC Source Material License did not limit the tonnage or amount of
KOH AF material that could be received and processed by the Mill. 3. The calculations done by the NRC were an estimate of the amount that would be received and processed and were listed in the TER as an “approximate” value. 4. EFN submitted the amendment request for the initial KOH AF receipts, but anticipated that it
could receive supplemental additional materials in the future.
5. Although EFRI believes it is likely NRC understood that the KOH AF material was from an ongoing process stream at the Honeywell facility, the fact that the KOH AF receipts at the Mill could also be ongoing was not specifically stated in the amendment request.
Division Response The Division has reviewed EFRI’s request, including the original alternate feed request and the NRC’s TER and concludes the following: 1. The NRC did estimate the volume of the request but did not recommend a volume limit on
receiving and processing the KOH AF material. 2. The original NRC License Condition did not have a volume limit or time limit on receiving and processing the KOH AF material. 3. The original application for the KOH AF material does not indicate that the process is an ongoing process. However, the Division does not view the length of the project to be a critical
factor in the evaluation of this alternate feed material. In its evaluation of EFRI’s request, the Division used the following three critical factors: 1. Does the material meet the definition of “ore” as defined by the NRC? The Division concurs
that the KOH AF material still meets the definition of ore because the White Mesa Mill extracts source material in the form of uranium. 2. Does the material contain hazardous waste? Based on process knowledge and the analytical information from the original application, the KOH AF material does not contain listed
hazardous waste. 3. Is the material being processed for its uranium content? The Division concurs that the KOH AF material is still being processed for its uranium content. The Mill annually analyzes its feed materials for uranium content. Based on the 2017 analysis, the KOH AF material is 61 percent
uranium.
Page 4

Therefore, based on the information provided in the September 11, 2018 letter and information gathered
during Division alternate feed inspections, I concur that the White Mesa Uranium Mill can continue to receive and process KOH AF material in accordance with License Condition 10.7. If you have any questions, please call Phil Goble at [phone] or Ryan Johnson at [phone].

Sincerely,
Scott T. Anderson, Director
Division of Waste Management and Radiation Control STA/RMJ/ka
c: Logan Shumway, Manger, White Mesa Uranium Mill
Kirk Benge, Health Officer, San Juan Public Health Department Rick Meyer, Environmental Health Director, San Juan Public Health Department Scott Hacking, P.E., DEQ District Engineer