DRC-1994-001041 - 0901a06880ef6a08

REGULATORY INFORMATION DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM (RIDS)
ACCESSION NBR:9412220237 DOC.DATE: 94/12/14 NOTARIZED: NO
FACIL: 4'0-8681 UMETCO Minerals Corp., Blanding, UT,
AUTH.NAME AUTHOR AFFILIATION
BERNERO,R.M. Office of Nuclear Material Safety & Safeguards
RECIP.NAME RECIPIENT AFFILIATION
SUBJECT: Notice of Issuance of Director Decision,per 10CFR2.206.
DOCKET#
04008681
DISTRIBUTION CODE: NL17D COPIES RECEIVED:LTR l ENCL j_ SIZE:...-lf ___ _
TITLE: Part 40 & 70, NMSS/LLDR Correspondence: Outgoing Documents
NOTES:
RECIPIENT
ID CODE/NAME
INTERNAL: ACNW
RGN ...
EXTERNAL: NRC PDR
r--:OTE TO ALL "RIDS" RECIPIENTS:
COPIES
LTTR ENCL
1
1
1
1
1
1
RECIPIENT
ID CODE/NAME
' FILE CENTER 0·1
PLEASE HELP llS TO REDL1CE WASTE' CO1\'.T:\CTTHE DOCL\!E\:TCO.'\:TROL
DESK, ROOt\1 Pl-37 (EXT 504-2083) TO ELl\11'\."ATE YOL'R '\."A\1E FRO\!
DISTRIBL'TIO!\: LISTS FOR DOCl \1E'\."TS Ym· DO\:'T \:EED1
TOTAL NUMBER OF COPIES REQUIRED: LTTR 4 ENCL 4
COPIES
LTTR ENCL
1 1
p
R
0
R
T
y
1
D
0
C
u
M
E
N
T
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
Docket No. 40-8681
(License No. 1358)
ENERGY FUELS NUCLEAR, INC.
[7590-01]
ISSUANCE OF DIRECTOR'S DECISION UNDER 10 C.F.R. § 2.206
Notice is hereby give that the Director, Office of Nuclear
Material Safety and Safeguards (Director), has issued a decision
concerning a Petition dated May 2, 1994, submitted by the Honorable
Michael o. Leavitt, Governor of the State of Utah, and the Utah
State Legislature pursuant to 10 C.F.R. § 2.206.
The Petition requested that the U.S. Nucle~r Regulatory
Commission modify Source Material License No. SUA-1358 to limit
authority of the Licensee, currently Energy Fuels Nuclear, Inc.
(Umetco Minerals Corporation when the Petition was submitted), to
dispose of 5ection 11.e. (2) material at the White Mesa,,Uranium Mill
facility to 5,000 cubic yards per single source. The Petition also
requested that the NRC confer with the State of Utah and provide
opportunity for comment prior to the issuance of license amendments
involving uranium mill tailings disposal in Utah. Finally,
Petitioners requested that the NRC obtain the concurrence of the
Governor and Legislature of the State of Utah before issuing
license amendments involving disposal of uranium mill tailings in
Utah.
9412220237 941214 PDR ADOCK 04008681 __ ____c_ ----------_p_ru:;:___~-
After review of the Petition, the Director has determined to
grant Petitioners' request to modify Source Material License No.
SUA-1358. Petitioners' request to confer with the State of Utah
was granted insofar as the NRC shall provide to the state of Utah
direct and Federal Register notice of significant materials license
applications concerning NRC-licensed activity in the State of Utah,
and thereby provide an opportunity to comment. Petitioners'
request that the NRC obtain the concurrence of the State of Utah
befo~e taking licensing actions involving mill tailing disposal in
the State of Utah was denied. The reasons for this Decision are
explained in a "Director's Decision Under 10 C.F.R. § 2.206'' (DD-
94-xx), which is available for public inspection in the
Commission's Public Document Room located at 2120 L Street, N.W.,
Washingt0n, D.C. 20555.
A _copy of this Decision will be filed with the Secretary for
the Commission's review in accordance with 10 C.F.R. § 2.206. As
provided by this regulation, the Lecision will constitute the final
action of the Commission 25 days after the date of issuance of the
Decision unless the Commission on its own motion institutes a
review of the Decision within that time.
F~N
Robert M. Bernero, Director
Office of Nuclear Material Safety
and Safeguards
Dated at Rockville, Maryland
this ~ day of December, 1994
OFC
NAME
DATE
OFC
NAME
DATE
David L. Meyers, Chief • Rules Review and Directives Branch
Division of Freedom of Information
and PubUcation Services
Office of Administration, P-223
December 14, 1994
SUBJECT: PUBLISHING IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER
One signed original of the fJSl.l[II Register Notice Identified below Is enclosed for your transmittal to the Office
of the Federal Register for publication. Additional conformed copies 141 of the Notice are enclosed for your
use.
r---1
L___J
r---1
L___J
r---1
L___J
r---1
L___J
r---1
L___J
r---1
L___J
r---1
L___J
r---1
L___J
sX
Notice of Finding of No Significant Impact. ________________ _
Notice of Availability of Environmental Report _______________ _
Notice of Opportunity for Hearing ___________________ _
Notice of Availability of Draft EIS for: _________________ _
Notice of AvallabUlty of Final EIS for: _________________ _
Notice of AvallabiUty of Final EIS for: _________________ _
Notice of Issuance of Facility Operating Ucense or Amendment~---------
Environmental Assessment. _____________________ _
Other Issuance of Director's Decision Under 1 o CFR 2.206
Docket No.: 40-8681
Enclosure: As stated
Contact: S. Wastler
Phone: [phone]
E
/94 M 1 'l/94 M
r\s w\DD_FRN.UTH
Robert M. Bernero, Director
Office of Nuclear Material Safety
and Safeguard
OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
r ~~r~ ~~~{ :'7'N "'<; •[:.t, ',, ,.,
~ .;;, ,, "
o'i stri but ion:
EDO Ticket 100025
PUBLIC
HLUR r/f •
DWM r/f
Directors r/f
MKnapp
JGreeves
JHolonich
JAustin
MBell
DGil l en
SWastler
JGoldberg
KDittilo
CPoland
DWM t/f
Central File
•
OFC
NAME
DATE
OFC
NAME
DATE
December 14 1994
The Honorable Michael 0. Leavitt
Governor of Utah
Salt'Lake City, Utah 84114-0601
SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO THE STATE OF UTAH'S 2.206 PETITION
Dear Governor Leavitt:
By letter dated May 2, 1994, you and the Utah Legislature filed a petition
pursuant to 10 CFR § 2.206, in regard to the Amendment 33 to Umetco Minerals
Corporation's (Umetco) Source Material license authorizing disposal of up to
10,000 cubic yards (cy) of lle.(2) byproduct material per in situ leach
facility per year at the White Mesa Mill facility. This petition specifically
requested that " ... NRC reconsider the license amendment issued to Umetco and
modify the amendment to reflect the original request of 5,000 cubic yards
[cy]." Petitioners also request that the NRC confer with the State of Utah
prior to action on future license amendments and that the NRC obtain
concurrence of the Utah Governor and Legislature approving mill tailing
disposal in Utah. On May 13, 1994, the State of Utah was notified by NRC that
the 2.206 petition was under review and a response to the issues raised would
be provided in a timely manner. The Chairman, by letter dated July 7, 1994,
also reiterated that your request had been forwarded to my office for action.
The NRC has completed its review of your petition. By Director's Decision
DD-94-10, dated December 14, 1994, your petition has been granted in part and
denied in part. A copy of the Director's Decision is enclosed. As provided
by 10 CFR 2.206(c), a copy of this decision will be filed with the Secretary
for the Commission's review.
Enclosure: As stated (1)
Sincerely,
Robert M. Bernero, Director
Office of Nuclear Material Safety
and Safeguards
cc w/encl: Arnold Christensen, President
of the Senate
HLUR*
SWastler
10/28/94
NMSS
GArlotto
12/ /94
Rob W. Bishop, Speaker
of the House
W. Sinclair
*SEE PREVIOUS CONCURRENCE
HLUR X HLUR* OGC*
DGi 11 en X JHolonich JGoldberg
REMOVED ~ 10/28/94 12/01/94
NMSS //; ''v
RBerneJ&,-t'..,.
11,.J rl!(9 4
DWM*
JGreeves
10/31/94
S:\DWM\HLUR\SLW\2206-GNT.LTR OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
9412220167 941214 PDR ADDCK 04008681
PDR
r-J. ·: _ .... , --· .. ~
l; ;;,i
... •_;:,,
OFC
NAME
DATE
OFC
NAME
DATE
November , 1994
The Honorable Michael 0. Leavitt
Governor of Utah
Salt Lake City, Utah 84114-0601
SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO THE STATE OF UTAH'S 2.206 PETITION
Dear Governor Leavitt:
By letter dated May 2, 1994, you and the Utah Legisl ure filed a petition
pursuant to 10 CFR § 2.206, in regard to the Amend nt 33 to Umetco Minerals
Corporation's (Umetco) Source Material license au orizing disposal of up to
10,000 cubic yards (cy) of lle.(2) byproduct ma rial per in situ leach
facility per year at the White Mesa Mill facil · y. This petition specifically
requested that 11 ••• NRC reconsider the licens amendment issued to Umetco and
modify the amendment to reflect the origina request of 5,000 cubic yards
[cy].11 Petitioners also request that the C confer with the State of Utah
prior to action on future license amendm ts and that the NRC obtain
concurrence of the Utah Governor and Le 1slature approving mill tailing
disposal in Utah. On May 13, 1994, t State of Utah was notified by NRC that
the 2.206 petition was under review d a response to the issues raised would
be provided in a timely manner. T Chairman, by letter dated July 7, 1994,
also reiterated that your request ad been forwarded to my office for action.
The NRC has completed its revi of your petition. By Director's Decision
DD-94-, dated November , 94, your petition has been granted in part and
denied in part. A copy oft e Director's Decision is enclosed. As provided
by 10 CFR 2.206(c), a copy f this decision will be filed with the Secretary
for the Commission's revi
Enclosure:
-......
Arnold Christensen, President
of the Senate
Rob W. Bishop, Speaker
of the House
W. Sinclair
Sincerely,
Robert M. Bernero, Director
Office of Nuclear Material Safety
and Safeguards
*SEE PREVIOUS CONCURRENCE I\ ~
HLUR* o1 ~ () ~c~'~ HLUR X HLUR* t \ (._ I I DWM*
v?' SWastlE\n 1 q~ DGi 11 en X JHolonich C ,, ... l-, s u.~,p,,,,. -u ;r, ,....JGo 1 dbe~q ncdf~ 'I JGreeves
I ~/\j4 (l
10/28/94 REMOVED 10/28/94 10/31/94
NMSSk NMSS I
GArlotto RBernero
11/ I /94 11/ /94
S:\DWM\HLUR\SLW\2206-GNT.LTR OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
OFC
NAME
DATE
OFC
NAME
DATE
November , 1994
• The Ronorable Michael 0. Leavitt
Governor of Utah
Sal~ Lake City, Utah 84114-0601
· SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO THE STATE OF UTAH'S 2.206 PETIT
Dear Governor Leavitt:
By letter dated May 2, 1994, you and the Utah Le slature filed a petition
pursuant to 10 CFR § 2.206, in regard to the Am dment 33 to Umetco Minerals
Corporation's (Umetco) Source Material license authorizing disposal of up to
10,000 cubic yards (cy) of lle.(2) byproduct aterial per in situ leach
facility per year at the White Mesa Mill fac· ity. This petition specifically
requested that " ... NRC reconsider the licen e amendment issued to Umetco and
modify the amendment to reflect the origin l request of 5,000 cubic yards
[cy]." Petitioners also request that the NRC confer with the State of Utah
prior to action on future license amend nts and that the NRC obtain
concurrence of the Utah Governor and L islature approving mill tailing
disposal in Utah. On May 13, 1994, t State of Utah was notified by NRC that
the 2.206 petition was under review d a response to the issues raised would
be provided in a timely manner. Th Chairman, by letter dated July 7, 1994,
also reiterated that your request d been forwarded to my office for action.
The NRC has completed its review of your petition. By Director's Decision
DD-94-, dated November , 19 ~, your petition has been granted in part and
denied in part. A copy of the irector's Decision is enclosed. As provided
by 10 CFR 2.206(c), a copy of his decision will be filed with the Secretary
for the Commission's review.
Enclosure: ( 1)
Sincerely,
Robert M. Bernero, Director
Office of Nuclear Material Safety
and Safeguards
cc w/encl: Arnol Christensen, President
of he Senate
HLUR*
SWastler
10/28/94
NMSj /) i?.
GAJl ~ft'(}
I
111 I /94
Rob . Bishop, Speaker
the House
W Sinclair
*SEE PREVIOUS CONCURRENCE
HLUR X HLUR* OGC
DGil l en X JHolonich JGoldberq
REMOVED 10/28/94 10/ 94
NMSS
RBernero
11/ /94
DWM*
JGreeves
10/31/94
S: DWM HLUR.SLW 2206-GNT.LTR \ \ \ \ OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
OFC
November , 1994
The Honorable Michael 0. Leavitt
Governor of Utah
Salt· Lake City, Utah 84114-0601
SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO THE STATE OF UTAH'S 2.206 PETITION
Dear Governor Leavitt:
By letter dated May 2, 1994, you and the Utah Legislature filed a petition
pursuant to 10 CFR § 2.206, in regard to the Amendment 33 to Umetco Minerals
Corporation's (Umetco) Source Material license authorizing disposal of up to
10,000 cubic yards (cy) of lle.(2) byproduct material per in situ leach
facility per year at the White Mesa Mill facility. This petition specifically
requested that 11 ••• NRC reconsider the license amendment issued to Umetco and
modify the amendment to reflect the original request of 5,000 cubic yards
[cy].11 Petitioners also request that the NRC confer with the State of Utah
prior to action on future license amendments and that the NRC obtain
concurrence of the Utah Governor and Legislature approving mill tailing
disposal in Utah. On May 13, 1994, the State of Utah was notified by NRC that
the 2.206 petition was under review and a response to the issues raised would
be provided in a timely manner. The Chairman, by letter dated July 7, 1994,
also reiterated that your request had been forwarded to my office for action.
The NRC has completed its review of your petition. By Director's Decision
DD-94-, dated October , 1994, your petition has been granted in part and
denied in part. A copy of the Director's Decision is enclosed. As provided
by 10 CFR 2.206 (c), a copy of this decision will be filed with the Secretary
for the Commission's review.
Enclosure: As stated (1)
cc w/ encl: Arnold Christensen, President
of the Senate
HLUR*
Rob W. Bishop, Speaker
of the House
W. Sinclair
*SEE PREVIOUS C
HLUR X
Sincerely,
Robert Mr' Bernero, Di rector
Office dF Nuclear Material Safety
and ~ifeguards
!
/
OGC
NAME SWastler DGillen X JGoldber
DATE 10/28/94 REMOVED 10/ 94
OFC NMSS NMS
OFC
NAME
DATE
November , 1994
The Honorable Michael 0. Leavitt
Governor of Utah
Salt Lake City, Utah 84114-0601
SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO THE STATE OF UTAH'S 2.206 PETITION
Dear Governor Leavitt:
By letter dated May 2, 1994, you and the Utah Legislature filed a petition
pursuant to 10 CFR § 2.206, in regard to the Amendment 33 to Umetco Minerals
Corporation's (Umetco) Source Material license authorizing disposal of up to
10,000 cubic yards (cy) of lle.(2) byproduct material per in situ leach
facility at the White Mesa Mill facility. This petition specifically
requested that " ... NRC reconsider the license amendment issued to Umetco and
modify the amendment to reflect the original request of 5,000 cubic yards
(cy]." Petitioners also request that the NRC confer with the State of Utah
prior to action on future license amendments and that the NRC obtain
concurrence of the Utah Governor and Legislature approving mill tailing
disposal in Utah. On May 13, 1994, the State of Utah was notified by NRC that
the 2.206 petition was under review and a response to the issues raised would
be provided in a timely manner. The Chairman, by letter dated July 7, 1994,
also reiterated that your request had been forwarded to my office for action.
The NRC has completed its review of your petition. By Director's Decision
DD-94-, dated October , 1994, your petition has been granted. A copy of
the Director's Decision is enclosed. As provided by 10 CFR 2.206 (c), a copy
of this decision will be filed with the Secretary for the Commission's review.
Sincerely,
Robert M. Bernero, Director
Office of Nuclear Material Safety
Enclosure: As stated (1)
cc w/ Encl.:
Arnold Christensen, President of the Senate
Rob W. Bishop, Speaker of the House
W. Sinclair
and Safeguards
OGC DWM
JGoldber JGreeves
10/ 94 10/ /94
OFC DWM NMSS NMSS
NAME MKna GArlotto RBernero
DATE 10/ /94 10/ /94 10/ /94
S:\DWM\HLUR\SLW\2206-GNT.LTR OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
Distribution:
EDO Ticket 10025
Central File
PUBLIC
Docket File 40-8681
DWM r/f
DWM t/f
HLUR r/f
Dir r/f
JTaylor
HThompson
DMorris
RBangart,OSP
LCallen,RIV
MKnapp
JGreeves
MBel l
JHolonich
JAustin
DGil l en
SWastler
RFonner
STurk, OGC
JGoldberg, OGC
Glongo, OGC
CPoland t/f
KDattilo
TCombs, OCA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY AND SAFEGUARDS
Robert M. Bernero, Director
In the Matter of
ENERGY FUELS NUCLEAR, INC.
) Docket No. 40-8681
) License No. SUA-1358
)
) (10 C.F.R. § 2.206)
DIRECTOR'S DECISION UNDER 10 C.F.R. § 2.206
I. INTRODUCTION
DD-94-10
The Honorable Michael 0. Leavitt, Governor of the State of U1ah, and the
Utah Legislature (Petitioners) submitted a letter dated May 2, 1994, and a
copy of Utah Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 11, "RESOLUTION REGARDING NRC
ACTION REGARDING DISPOSAL OF URANIUM BY-PRODUCT 1994 GENERAL SESSION"
(Petition) pursuant to 10 C.F.R. § 2.206, in regard to Amendment No. 33 to
Umetco Minerals Corporation (Umetco) Source Material License No. SUA-1348,
which authorized disposal of up to 10,000 cubic yards (cy) of lle.(2)
byproduct material per in situ leach (ISL) facility per year at the White Mesa
Uranium Mill facility. Petitioners request that the " ... NRC reconsider the
license amendment issued to Umetco and modify the amendment to reflect the
original request of 5,000 cubic yards [cy] [per in situ facility]."
Petitioners assert as the basis for this request that the NRC in effect
created the equivalent of a commercial waste disposal facility for in situ
mining waste unlicensed by Utah, while ignoring Utah's waste policy and laws.
Petitioners also urge the NRC to confer with the State of Utah and provide
opportunity for comment prior to the issuance of license amendments involving
uranium mill tailings disposal in Utah. Finally, Petitioners request that the
NRC obtain the concurrence of the Utah Governor and Legislature before issuing
9412220171 941214 PDR ADOCK 04008681 C ----~· _p'QR ____ ~ -~
2
,license amendments involving disposal of uranium mill tailings in Utah. By
letter dated May 13, 1994, the State of Utah was notified that the Petition
was under review and that a response would be provided in a timely manner.
The Petition has been reviewed on its merits, and as a result of this
review, for the reasons stated below, Petitioners' request to modify Source
Material License No. SUA-1358 is granted. Petitioners' request that the NRC
confer with Petitioners before taking action on future license amendments
involving disposal of uranium mill tailings in Utah is granted, insofar as the
NRC shall provide notice of significant materials licensing actions in the
State of Utah, such as for authorization to dispose of in situ leach facility
lle.(2) byproduct material or for approval of significant changes to an
approved reclamation plan, and thereby provide an opportunity to comment.
Petitioners' request that the NRC obtain the concurrence of the State of Utah
before issuing license amendments involving mill tailing disposal in the State
of Utah is denied.
II. BACKGROUND
On February 6, 1978, Energy Fuels Nuclear, Inc. (EFN) submitted an
application for a source material license for the proposed White Mesa Mill.
The NRC issued an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for White Mesa Mill in
May 1979. In August of 1979, NRC issued Source Material License SUA-1358 to
EFN. The White Mesa Mill operated on a continuous basis from August 1979
through February 1983 when operations were suspended. In January of 1984
Umetco purchased a controlling interest in the White Mesa Mill from EFN. The
3
. license was amended on December 5, 1984, to reflect the change in ownership
and Umetco's status as the licensee. Production resumed in October 1985 and
the White Mesa Mill has alternately operated and been on standby mode until
the present time. EFN recently repurchased the controlling interest in the
White Mesa Mill, and on May 25, 1994, the NRC staff issued License Amendment
No. 35, authorizing the transfer of ownership to EFN, the current licensee.
By letter dated May 20, 1993, Umetco submitted an application for a
license amendment to authorize the receipt and disposal of lle.(2) byproduct
material from NRC-licensed and Agreement State-licensed in situ leach
facilities. Byproduct material, under Section lle.(2) of the Atomic Energy
Act of 1954, as amended, is defined 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." Specifically, Umetco requested
that Source Material License No. SUA-1358 be amended to authorize:
disposal of not more than 5,000 cubic yards of lle.(2) byproduct
material per generating [in situ] licensee. If Umetco received a
request to dispose of more than 5,000 cubic yards of lle.(2)
byproduct material, Umetco would notify URFO [NRC's Uranium
Recovery Field Office1] in writirJ so that the appropriat·~ review
and approval could be received from the URFO staff prior to
executing a contact [contract].
The NRC staff reviewed Umetco's license amendment application and issued
1 The Uranium Recovery Field Office closed on August 3, 1994 and the
responsibility for uranium recovery licensing was transfered to the NRC's
Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, Division of Waste
Management.
4
• License Amendment 33 on August 2, 19932 • License Amendment 33 authorized,
through License Condition 55, the disposal of:
byproduct material generated at licensed in situ leach facilities,
subject to the following condition that:
A. Disposal of waste [lle.(2) byproduct material] in excess of
10,000 cubic yards per year from single sources shall require
specific approval from NRC.
The NRC staff concluded that License Condition 55 would not result in
significant impacts to the environment or to public health and safety.
Further, the ~taff concluded that License Condition 55 was consistent with 10
CFR Part 40, Appendix A, Section I, Criterion 2, which is intended to avoid
the proliferation of small waste disposal sites, which would result if
disposal in large tailings systems were not authorized.
III. DISCUSSION
A. License Condition 55
Petitioners contend that License Condition 55, which allows Umetco to
dispose of up to 10,000 cy of in situ llach lle.(2) byproduct ma~erial per
year at the White Mesa facility annually from any source, in effect creates
the equivalent of a commercial disposal facility for in situ leach lle.(2)
byproduct material in Utah. Petitioners, therefore, requested that License
Condition 55 be modified " ... to reflect the original request of 5,000 cubic
yards [per in situ facility]."
2 Envirocare of Utah, Inc. requested a hearing on License Amendment 33
which was denied on the grounds of timeliness. Umetco Minerals Corporation,
Memorandum and Order, ASLBP No. 94-688-01-MLA-2 (March 4, 1994)
..
5
The NRC Staff agrees with the Petitioners that the Licensee's
authorization to dispose of 11 e.(2} byproduct material should be limited to
the 5,000 cy per in situ leach facility requested by the Licensee. By way of
background, however, it should be noted that License Amendment No. 33
authorized disposal of 11 e.(2} byproduct material consistent with NRC
regulations, which require that 11 e.(2} byproduct material from in situ leach
mines be disposed of at uranium mill tailings facilities. 10 C.F.R. Part 40,
Appendix A, Section I, Criterion 2. Also, the byproduct material authorized
for disposal at the White Mesa Mill represents only a subset of radioactive
waste materials. Specifically, White Mesa Mill is authorized to dispose of
only 11 e.(2} byproduct material (mill tailings}, and 11 e.(2} byproduct
material only from in situ leach facilities. Before EFN could dispose of
lle.(2} byproduct material other than that from its own operations or from in
situ leach facilities, EFN would be required to seek licensing authority to do
so. In addition, the 10,000 cubic yards per in situ leach facility per year
authorized for disposal by License Amendment 33 at White Mesa Mill was
insubstantial in comparison to the 2000 tons [1481 cy] per day for 15 years
contemplated in the original licensift~ of White Mesa Mill. "Final
Environmental Statement Related to Operation of White Mesa Uranium Project"
(May 1979} NUREG 0556, p. iii.
Although License Amendment No. 33 would not have resulted in the
disposal of byproduct waste material in amounts approaching that contemplated
at the time of the original license grant for the White Mesa Mill facility,
License Condition 55 did authorize disposal of more 11 e.(2} byproduct
material than was requested by the Licensee. The NRC practice is, generally,
•
6
• to grant only the disposal authority requested by the license amendment
application, and no more. During an October 20, 1994 discussion with the NRC
staff, the Licensee agreed to issuance of an order to modify the License to
reflect the application for authority to dispose of 5,000 cy of 11 e.(2)
byproduct material per in situ facility. Accordingly, for the reasons stated
above, the License will be so modified by a "Confirmatory Order Modifying
License Condition 55" to be issued concurrently with this Decision.
B. Requests to Confer with and to Obtain Concurrence of Petitioners
Petitioners request that the NRC confer with the State of Utah and
provide opportunity to comment prior to the issuance of license amendments
involving uranium mill tailings disposal in Utah. The same request was made
previously by Mr. William J. Sinclair, Director of the Division Radiation
Control, Utah Department of Environmental Quality, in his January 27, 1994,
letter. In a February 25, 1994, response to Mr. Sinclair, the Director,
Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, made several commitments
designed to foster better communication with the State of Utah concerning NRC
regulation of uranium tail processing mills in Utah. Specif~cally, the NRC
committed to notify the State directly, in addition to the issuance of a
Federal Register Notice (FRN), upon the receipt of, and also upon the final
resolution of license amendment applications for significant materials
licensing actions in the State of Utah, such as for authorization to dispose
of in situ leach facility lle.(2) byproduct material or for approval of
significant changes to an approved reclamation plan3 • An FRN issued upon
3 Although the NRC is not legally required to provide such notice, City
of West Chicago v. NRC, 701 F.2d 632 (7th Cir. 1983), such notice would
enhance communication with the State of Utah and material licensing decisions.
7
.receipt of a significant license amendment application serves notice, under
10 C.F.R. § 2.1205(c)(l), that interested parties have 30 days to file a
petition for hearing, and thus provides interested parties, such as the State
of Utah, an opportunity to comment upon the license amendment application.
The FRN issued at the final resolution of the license amendment is
informational. In addition, where the license amendment application raises
significant or controversial issues, NRC would be willing to attend public
meetings, as appropriate. Accordingly, Petitioners' request for an
opportunity to confer with the NRC and to comment before issuance of license
amendments involving uranium mill tailings disposal in Utah is granted, to the
extent indicated above.
As explained above, the NRC will make every effort to obtain the views
and comments of the State of Utah before taking action upon license
applications for authority to dispose of uranium ill tailings in Utah.
Although the NRC welcomes and will closely consider the State of Utah's
comments, it would be inconsistent with Sections 63, 81 and 84 of the Atomic
Energy Act of 1954, as amended, to grant Petitioners' request that the NRC
obtain the concurrence of the Governor and the Legislature of the State of
Utah before issuing license amendments authorizing disposal of uranium mill
tailings in Utah.4 Accordingly, this request is denied.
4 Petitioners, nonetheless, may acquire authority to regulate Section
lle.(2) byproduct material, and thus to regulate the disposal of uranium mill
tailings in Utah, through the agreement process pursuant to Section 274 of the
Atomic Energy Act, as amended.
8
IV. CONCLUSION
For the reasons discussed above, Petitioners' request to modify Source
Material License No. SUA-1358 is granted, and will be effected by a
"Confirmatory Order Modifying License Condition 55" to be issued concurrently
with this Decision. Petitioners' request that the NRC confer with the State
of Utah before issuing license amendments involving mill tailing disposal in
Utah is granted to the extent that both direct and Federal Register notice of
all applications for significant materials licensing actions in Utah will be
given to the State of Utah, thus providing the State of Utah with an
opportunity to comment. Petitioners' request that the NRC obtain the State of
Utah's concurrence before issuing license amendments concerning uranium mill
tailing disposal in Utah is denied for the reasons discussed above.
A copy of this Decision will be filed with the Secretary for the
Commission to review as provided in 10 C.F.R. § 2.206(c). This Decision will
become the final action of the Commission 25 days after issuance unless the
Commission on its own motion, institutes review of the Decision in that time.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland
this 14day of December, 1994.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATO~MISSION
~~~
Robert M. Bernero, Director
Office of Nuclear Material Safety
and Safeguards
t.
UNITED STATES
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001
Mr. D. Sparling, Site Manager
Energy Fuels Nuclear, Inc.
6425 S. Highway 191
P.O. Box 789
Blanding, Utah 84511
December14, 1994
SUBJECT: CONFIRMATORY ORDER MODIFYING LICENSE CONDITION 55
Dear Mr. Sparling:
On May 2, 1994, the Honorable Michael 0. Leavitt, Governor of the State of
Utah, and the Utah Legislature filed a Petition pursuant to 10 CFR § 2.206, in
regard to License Amendment 33 to Energy Fuels Nuclear, Inc (EFN) Source
Material License No. SUA-1358. License Amendment had 33 added License
Condition 55 which authorized disposal of up to 10,000 cubic yards (cy) of
lle.(2) byproduct material per in situ leach facility per year at the White
Mesa Mill facility. The Petition requested that NRC reconsider the license
amendment and modify it to reflect the original request for authority to
dispose of 5,000 cubic yards per in situ leach facility at the White Mesa
Uranium Mill. On December 14, 1994, Director's Decision DD-94-lOwas issued
granting the State's request (Enclosure 1).
Therefore, please find enclosed a "Confirmatory Order Modifying License
Condition 55" (Enclosure 2). This Order modifies Source Mat~ri~1 License No.
SUA-1358 to restrict receipt of lle.(2) byproduct material for disposal, from
each in situ facility, to a total of 5,000 cubic yards, in accordance with the
original License Amendment request dated May 20, 1993. This order is
implemented by License Amendment 35 to Source Material License SUA-1358
(Enclosure 3).
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the NRC's "Rules of Practice," a copy of
this letter and its enclosures will be placed in the Public Document Room.
9412230185 941214 PDR ADOCK 04008681 C POR
OFC
NAME
DATE
OFC
NAME
DATE
. D. Sparling
Questions regarding this Order may be directed to me or Joseph J. Holonich,
Chief, High-Level Waste and Uranium Recovery Projects Branch. I can be
reached at [phone]. Mr. Holonich can be reached at [phone].
Sincerely,
Robe~; l. Bernero, Di rector
Office of Nuclear Material Safety
and Safeguards
Docket No. 40-8681
License No. SUA-1358
Enclosures: As stated (3)
cc w/encl: Arnold Christensen, President
of the Senate
HLUR*
SWastler
10/28/94
NMSS
GArlotto
12/ /94
Rob W. Bishop, Speaker
of the House
W. Sinclair
*SEE PREVIOUS CONCURRENCE
HLUR X HLUR*
DGi 11 en JHolonich
REMOVED 10/28/94
NMSS £1 D NMSS
RBerne~1---
12/) --//94
OGC*
JGoldberq
12/01/94
DWM*
JGreeves
10/31/94
S:\dwm\hlur\slw\ORDER.LTR OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
OFC
NAME
DATE
OFC
NAME
DATE
D. Sparling 3
Questions regarding this Order may be directed to me or Joseph J. Holonich,
Chief, High-Level Waste and Uranium Recovery Projects Branch. I can be
reached at [phone]. Mr. Holonich can be reached at (301 415-6643.
Docket No. 40-8681
License No. SUA-1358
Enclosures: As stated (3)
cc w/encl: Arnold Christensen,
of the Senate
Rob W. Bishop, Speaker
of the House
W. Sinclair
Sincerely,
Robert M. Bernero Director
Office of Nucle Material Safety
and Safeguar, s
*SEE PREVIOUS CONCURRENCE
HLUR* (\ ' HLUR X HLUR* I OGC.,~~ DWM*
SWastJ.e M DGil l en JHolonich ' u <~oldberg JGreeves
10/28)"9/'Vl REMOVED 10/28/94 I ~¼4 10/31/94
NMSS NMSS NMSS I
GArlotto RBernero
11/ /94 11/ /94 I
S:\dwm\hlur\slw\ORDER.LTR OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
OFC
NAME
DATE
OFC
NAME
DATE
Mr. D. Sparling, Sit~anager
Energy Fuels NucleayWnc.
6425 S. Highway 191
P.O. Box 789
Blanding, Utah 84511
SUBJECT: CONFIRMATORY ORDER TO ENERGY FUELS NUCLEAR,
Dear Mr. Sparling:
On May 2, 1994, the Honorable Michael 0. Leavitt, G vernor of the State of
Utah, and the Utah Legislature filed a petition pu suant to 10 CFR § 2.206, in
regard to the Amendment 33 to Energy Fuels Nuclea, Inc (EFN) Source Material
license. Amendment 33 added License Condition 5 which authorized disposal of
up to 10,000 cubic yards (cy) of lle.(2) byprod t material per in situ leach
facility per year at the White Mesa Mill facil · y. The State's petition
requested that NRC reconsider the license ame ment and modify it to reflect
the original request of 5,000 cubic yards. November , 1994, Director's
Decision DD-94-was issued granting the St e's request (Enclosure 1).
Therefore, please find enclosed the Confi atory Order for the modification of
License Condition 55 to Source Material cense SUA-1358 (Enclosure 2). This
Order confirms the modification of Lice se Condition 55 to restrict receipt of
lle.(2) byproduct material for disposa, from each in situ facilities, to a
total of 5,000 cubic yards, in accord nee with the original amendment request
dated May 20, 1993. This order is i plemented by Amendment 35 to Source
Material License SUA-1358 (Enclosur 3).
Questions regarding this Order m be directed to me or Joseph J. Holonich,
Chief, High-Level Waste and Ura um Recovery Projects Branch. I can be
reached at [phone]. Mr. Holonich can be reached at [phone].
Docket No. 40-8681
License No. SUA-1358
Enclosures: As state (3)
Sincerely,
Robert M. Bernero, Director
Office of Nuclear Material Safety
and Safeguards
cc w/encl: Arnold C ristensen, President
HLUR*
SWastler
10/28/94
N~4s ll ,,
rJ ~/t6flo
11/ / /94
of th Senate
Rob W. Bishop, Speaker
of the House
W. Sinclair *SEE PREVIOUS CONCURRENCE
HLUR X HLUR* OGC
DGil l en JHolonich JGoldberg
REMOVED 10/28/94 10/ 94
NMSS NMSS
RBernero
11/ /94
DWM*
JGreeves
10/31/94
S: dwm hlur .slw ORDER.LTR \ \ \ \ OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
. Mr. D. Sparling, Sit.nager
Energy Fuels Nuclear, c.
~-' 6425 S. Highway 191
OFC
NAME
DATE
OFC
NAME
DATE
P.O. Box 789
Blanding, Utah 84511
SUBJECT: CONFIRMATORY ORDER TO ENERGY FUELS NUCLEAR, INC.
Dear Mr. Sparling:
On May 2, 1994, the Honorable Michael 0. Leavitt, Governor of the State of
Utah, and the Utah Legislature filed a petition pursuant to 10 CFR § 2.206, in
regard to the Amendment 33 to Energy Fuels Nuclear, Inc (EFN) Source Material
license. Amendment 33 added License Condition 55 which authorized disposal of
up to 10,000 cubic yards (cy) of lle.(2) byproduct materia~ per in situ leach
facility per year at the White Mesa Mill facility. The State's petition
requested that NRC reconsider the license amendment and modify it to reflect
the original request of 5,000 cubic yards. On October , 1994, Director's
Decision DD-94-was issued granting the State's request (Enclosure 1).
Therefore, please find enclosed the Confirmatory Order for the modification of
License Condition 55 to Source Material License ~UA-1358 (Enclosure 2). This
Order confirms the modification of License Con<Mtion 55 to restrict receipt of
lle.(2) byproduct material for disposal, from,~ach in situ facilities, to a
total of 5,000 cubic yards, in accordance with the original amendment request
dated May 20, 1993. This order is implemented by Amendment 35 to Source
Material License SUA-1358 (Enclosure 3). 1
/ I
Questions regarding this Order may be dir,kcted to me or Joseph J. Holonich,
Chief, High-Level Waste and Uranium Reco*ery Projects Branch. I can be
reached at [phone]. Mr. Holonic~ can be reached at [phone]. I
Docket No. 40-8681
License No. SUA-1358
Enclosures: As stated (3)
Si~cerely,
·,
Rpbert M. Bernero, Director
Office of Nuclear Material Safety
and Safeguards
cc w/encl: Arnold Christensen, President
of the Senate
HLUR* /I \
SWastleffi
~
10/28/94
DW~ /
MKnatili'.
101/ 1~
Rob W. Bishop, Speaker
of the House
W Sinclair *SEE PREVIOUS CONCURRENCE .
HLUR X HLUR* I OGC
~ DGil l en JHolonich JGoldberg
REMOVED 10/28./94 I 10/ 94
NMSS NMSS I
GArlotto RBernero
10/ /94 10/ /94 I
,,.,--
D~ !/
J1 I( y
reeves
V
1011, /94
S:\dwm\hlur\slw\ORDER.LTR OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
OFC
NAME
Mr. D. Sparling, Site Manager
Energy Fuels Nuclear, Inc.
6425 S. Highway 191
P.O. Box 789
Blanding, Utah 84511
•
SUBJECT: CONFIRMATORY ORDER TO ENERGY FUELS NUCLEAR, INC.
Dear Mr. Sparling:
On May 2, 1994, the Honorable Michael 0. Leavitt, Governor of the State of
Utah, and the Utah Legislature filed a petition pursuant to 10 CFR § 2.206, in
regard to the Amendment 33 to Energy Fuels Nuclear, Inc (EFN) Source Material
license. Amendment 33 added License Condition 55 which authorized disposal of
up to 10,000 cubic yards (cy) of lle.(2) byproduct material per in situ leach
facility at the White Mesa Mill facility. The State's petition requested that
NRC reconsider the license amendment and modify it to reflect the original
request of 5,000 cubic yards. On October , 1994, Director's Decision DD-94-
was issued granting the State's request (Enclosure 1).
Therefore, please find enclosed the Confirmatory Order for the modification of
License Condition 55 to Source Material License SUA-1358 (Enclosure 2). This
Order confirms the modification of License Condition 55 to restrict receipt of
lle.(2) byproduct material for disposal, from each in situ facilities, to a
total of 5,000 cubic yards, in accordance with the original amendment request
dated May 20, 1993. This order is implemented by Amendment 35 to Source
Material License SUA-1358 (Enclosure 3).
Questions regarding this Order may be directed to me or Joseph J. Holonich,
Chief, High-Level Waste and Uranium Recovery Projects Branch. I can be
reached at [phone]. Mr. Holonich can be reached at [phone].
Sincerely,
Robert M. Bernero, Director
Office of Nuclear Material Safety
and Safe uards
OGC DWM
JGoldber JGreeves
DATE 10 10 94 10 /94
OFC DWM NMSS NMSS
NAME MKna GArlotto RBernero
DATE 10 94 10/ 94 10 94
S:\dwm\hlur\slw\ORDER.LTR OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
Distribution:
EDO Ticket 10025
Central File
PUBLIC
Docket File 40-8681
DWM r/f
DWM t/f
HLUR r/f
Dir r/f
JTaylor
HThompson
DMorris
RBangart,0SP
LCallen,RIV
MKnapp
JGreeves
MBell
JHolonich
JAustin
DGil l en
SWastler
RFonner
STurk, 0GC
JGoldberg, 0GC
Glongo, 0GC
CPoland t/f
KDattilo
TCombs, OCA
•
9412230189 941214
PDR ADOCK 04008681
C POR
ENCLOSURE 1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY AND SAFEGUARDS
Robert M. Bernero, Director
In the Matter of
ENERGY FUELS NUCLEAR, INC.
) Docket No. 40-8681
) License No. SUA-1358
)
) (10 C.F.R. § 2.206)
DIRECTOR'S DECISION UNDER 10 C.F.R. § 2.206
I. INTRODUCTION
DD-94-10
The Honorable Michael 0. Leavitt, Governor of the State of Utah, and the
Utah Legislature (Petitioners) submitted a letter dated May 2, 1994, and a
copy of Utah Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 11, "RESOLUTION REGARDING NRC
ACTION REGARDING DISPOSAL OF URANIUM BY-PRODUCT 1994 GENERAL SESSION"
(Petition) pursuant to 10 C.F.R. § 2.206, in regard to Amendment No. 33 to
Umetco Minerals Corporation (Umetco) Source Material License No. SUA-1348,
which authorized disposal of up to 10,000 cubic yards (cy) of lle.(2)
byproduct material per in situ leach (ISL) facility per year at the White Mesa
Uranium Mill facility. Petitioners request that the " ... NRC reconsider the
license amendment issued to Umetco and modify the amendment to reflect the
original request of 5,000 cubic yards [cy] [per in situ facility]."
Petitioners assert as the basis for this request that the NRC in effect
created the equivalent of a commercial waste disposal facility for in situ
mining waste unlicensed by Utah, while ignoring Utah's waste policy and laws.
Petitioners also urge the NRC to confer with the State of Utah and provide
opportunity for comment prior to the issuance of license amendments involving
uranium mill tailings disposal in Utah. Finally, Petitioners request that the
NRC obtain the concurrence of the Utah Governor and Legislature before issuing
2
license amendments involving disposal of uranium mill tailings in Utah. By
letter dated May 13, 1994, the State of Utah was notified that the Petition
was under review and that a response would be provided in a timely manner ..
The Petition has been reviewed on its merits, and as a result of this
review, for the reasons stated below, Petitioners' request to modify Source
Material License No. SUA-1358 is granted. Petitioners' request that the NRC
confer with Petitioners before taking action on future license amendments
involving disposal of uranium mill tailings in Utah is granted, insofar as the
NRC shall provide notice of significant materials licensing actions in the
State of Utah, such as for authorization to dispose of in situ leach facility
lle.(2) byproduct material or for approval of significant changes to an
approved rec1amation plan, and thereby provide an opportunity to comment.
Petitioners' request that the NRC obtain the concurrence of the State of Utah
before issuing license amendments involving mill tailing disposal in the State
of Utah is denied.
II. BACKGROUND
On February 6, 1978, Energy Fuels Nuclear, Inc. (EFN) submitted an
application for a source material license for the proposed White Mesa Mill.
The NRC issued an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for White Mesa Mill in
May 1979. In August of 1979, NRC issued Source Material License SUA-1358 to
EFN. The White Mesa Mill operated on a continuous basis from August 1979
through February 1983 when operations were suspended. In January of 1984
Umetco purchased a controlling interest in the White Mesa Mill from EFN. The
• •
3
license was amended on December 5, 1984, to reflect the change in ownership
and Umetco's status as the licensee. Production resumed in October 1985 and
the White Mesa Mill has alternately operated and been on standby mode until
the present time. EFN recently repurchased the controlling interest in the
White Mesa Mill, and on May 25, 1994, the NRC staff issued License Amendment
No. 35, authorizing the transfer of ownership to EFN, the current licensee.
By letter dated May 20, 1993, Umetco submitted an application for a
license amendment to authorize the receipt and disposal of lle.(2) byproduct
material from NRC-licensed and Agreement State-licensed in situ leach
facilities. Byproduct material, under Section lle.(2) of the Atomic Energy
Act of 1954, as amended, is defined 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." Specifically, Umetco requested
that Source Material License No. SUA-1358 be amended to authorize:
disposal of not more than 5,000 cubic yards of lle.(2) byproduct
material per generating [in situ] licensee. If Umetco received a
request to dispose of more than 5,000 cubic yards of lle.(2)
byproduct material, Umetco would notify URFO [NRC's Uranium
Recovery Field Office1] in writing so that the appropriate review
and approval could be received from the URFO staff prior to
executing a contact [contract].
The NRC staff reviewed Umetco's license amendment application and issued
1 The Uranium Recovery Field Office closed on August 3, 1994 and the
responsibility for uranium recovery licensing was transfered to the NRC's
Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, Division of Waste
Management.
•
4
License Amendment 33 on August 2, 19932• License Amendment 33 authorized,
through License Condition 55, the disposal of:
byproduct material generated at licensed in situ leach facilities,
subject to the following condition that:
A. Disposal of waste [lle.(2) byproduct material] in excess of
10,000 cubic yards per year from single sources shall require
specific approval from NRC.
The NRC staff concluded that License Condition 55 would not result in
significant impacts to the environment or to public health and safety.
Further, the staff concluded that License Condition 55 was consistent with 10
CFR Part 40, Appendix A, Section I, Criterion 2, which is intended to avoid
the proliferation of small waste disposal sites, which would result if
disposal in large tailings systems were not authorized.
III. DISCUSSION
A. License Condition 55
Petitioners contend that License ~ondition 55, which allows Umetco to
dispose of up to 10,000 cy of in situ leach lle.(2) byproduct material per
year at the White Mesa facility annually from any source, in effect creates
the equivalent of a commercial disposal facility for in situ leach lle.(2)
byproduct material in Utah. Petitioners, therefore, requested that License
Condition 55 be modified " ... to reflect the original request of 5,000 cubic
yards [per in situ facility]."
2 Envirocare of Utah, Inc. requested a hearing on License Amendment 33
which was denied on the grounds of timeliness. Umetco Minerals Corporation,
Memorandum and Order, ASLBP No. 94-688-01-MLA-2 (March 4, 1994)
• •
5
The NRC Staff agrees with the Petitioners that the Licensee's
authorization to dispose of 11 e.(2) byproduct material should be limited to
the 5,000 cy per in situ leach facility requested by the Licensee. By way of
background, however, it should be noted that License Amendment No. 33
authorized disposal of 11 e.(2) byproduct material consistent with NRC
regulations, which require that 11 e.(2) byproduct material from in situ leach
mines be disposed of at uranium mill tailings facilities. 10 C.F.R. Part 40,
Appendix A, Section I, Criterion 2. Also, the byproduct mater~:l authorized
for disposal at the White Mesa Mill represents only a subset of radioactive
waste materials. Specifically, White Mesa Mill is authorized to dispose of
only 11 e.(2) byproduct material (mill tailings), and 11 e.(2) byproduct
material only from in situ leach facilities. Before EFN could dispose of
lle.(2) byproduct material other than that from its own operations or from in
situ leach facilities, EFN would be required to seek licensing authority to do
so. In addition, the 10,000 cubic yards per in situ leach facility per year
authorized for disposal by License Amendment 33 at White Mesa Mill was
insubstantial in comparison to the 2000 tons [1481 cy] per day for 15 years
contemplate1 in the original licensing of White Mesa Mill. "Final
Environmental Statement Related to Operation of White Mesa Uranium Project"
(May 1979) NUREG 0556, p. iii.
Although License Amendment No. 33 would not have resulted in the
disposal of byproduct waste material in amounts approaching that contemplated
at the time of the original license grant for the White Mesa Mill facility,
License Condition 55 did authorize disposal of more 11 e.(2) byproduct
material than was requested by the Licensee. The NRC practice is, generally,
• •
6
to grant only the disposal authority requested by the license amendment
application, and no more. During an October 20, 1994 discussion with the NRC
staff, the Licensee agreed to issuance of an order to modify the License to
reflect the application for authority to dispose of 5,000 cy of 11 e.(2)
byproduct material per in situ facility. Accordingly, for the reasons stated
above, the License will be so modified by a "Confirmatory Order Modifying
License Condition 55" to be issued concurrently with this Decision.
B. Requests to Confer with and to Obtain Concurrence of Petitioners
Petitioners request that the NRC confer with the State of Utah and
provide opportunity to comment prior to the issuance of license amendments
involving uranium mill tailings disposal in Utah. The same request was made
previous1y by Mr. William J. Sinclair. Director of the Division Radiation
Control, Utah Department of Environmental Quality, in his January 27, 1994,
letter. In a February 25, 1994, response to Mr. Sinclair, the Director,
Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, made several commitments
designed to foster better communication with the State of Utah concerning NRC
regulation of uranium tail processing mills in Utah. Specifically, the NRC
committed to notify the State directly, in addition to the issuance of a
Federal Register Notice (FRN), upon the receipt of, and also upon the final
resolution of license amendment applications for significant materials
licensing actions in the State of Utah, such as for authorization to dispose
of in situ leach facility lle.(2) byproduct material or for approval of
significant changes to an approved reclamation plan3• An FRN issued upon
3 Although the NRC is not legally required to provide such notice, c;ty
of West Chjcago v. NRC, 701 F.2d 632 (7th Cir. 1983), such notice would
enhance communication with the State of Utah and material licensing decisions.
• •
7
receipt of a significant license amendment application serves notice, under
10 C.F.R. § 2.1205(c)(l), that interested parties have 30 days to file a
petition for hearing, and thus provides interested parties, such as the State
of Utah, an opportunity to comment upon the license amendment application.
The FRN issued at the final resolution of the license amendment is
informational. In addition, where the license amendment application raises
significant or controversial issues, NRC would be willing to attend public
meetings, as ~ppropriate. Accordingly, Petitioners' request for ar.
opportunity to confer with the NRC and to comment before issuance of license
amendments involving uranium mill tailings disposal in Utah is granted, to the
extent indicated above.
As explained above, the NRC wil1 ffidke every effort to obtain the views
and comments of the State of Utah before taking action upon license
applications for authority to dispose of uranium ill tailings in Utah.
Although the NRC welcomes and will closely consider the State of Utah's
comments, it would be inconsistent with Sections 63, 81 and 84 of the Atomic
Energy Act of 1954, as amended, to grant Petitioners' request that the NRC
obtain the concurrence of the Governor and the Legislature of the State of
Utah before issuing license amendments authorizing disposal of uranium mill
tailings in Utah.4 Accordingly, this request is denied.
4 Petitioners, nonetheless, may acquire authority to regulate Section
lle.(2) byproduct material, and thus to regulate the disposal of uranium mill
tailings in Utah, through the agreement process pursuant to Section 274 of the
Atomic Energy Act, as amended.
•
8
IV. CONCLUSION
For the reasons discussed above, Petitioners' request to modify Source
Material License No. SUA-1358 is granted, and will be effected by a
"Confirmatory Order Modifying License Condition 55" to be issued concurrently
with this Decision. Petitioners' request that the NRC confer with the State
of Utah before issuing license amendments involving mill tailing disposal in
Utah is granted to the extent that both direct and Federal Register notice of
all applications for significant materials licensing actions in Utah will be
given to the State of Utah, thus providing the State of Utah with an
opportunity to comment. Petitioners' request that the NRC obtain the State of
Utah's concurrence before issuing license amendments concerning uranium mill
tailing dis~osal in Utah is denied for t~e reasons discussed a~ove.
A copy of this Decision will be filed with the Secretary for the
Commission to review as provided in 10 C.F.R. § 2.206(c). This Decision will
become the final action of the Commission 25 days after issuance unless the
Commission on its own motion, institutes review of the Decision in that time.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland
this 14 day of December, 1994.
FO~~~
Robert M. Bernero, Director
Office of Nuclear Material Safety
and Safeguards
9412230196 941214
PDR ADOCK 04008681 C PDR
ENCLOSURE 2
I' •
In the Matter of
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
) Docket No. 40-8681
)
ENERGY FUELS NUCLEAR, INC. ) License No. SUA-1358
CONFIRMATORY ORDER MODIFYING LICENSE CONDITION 55
I.
Energy Fuels Nuclear, Inc. (EFN or the Licensee) holds NRC Source
Material License No. SUA-1358 (License) issued by the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC or Commission) pursuant to 10 CFR Part 40. The License
authorizes the Licensee to receive, acquire, possess, and transfer byproduct
and source at the White Mesa Uranium Mill facility. The License was issued to
EFN in August 1979, and is currently in timely license renewal. In January
1984 the Umetco Minerals Corporation (Umetco) purchased a controlling interest
in the White MPsal Mill, and the License was amended on December 5, 1984, to
reflect the change in ownership and Umetco's status as the new Licensee. EFN
recently repurchased the controlling interest in the White Mesa Mill, and the
License was amended on May 25, 1994, to reflect the change in ownership of the
facility to EFN, the current Licensee.
I I.
The Honorable Michael 0. Leavitt, Governor of the State of Utah, and the
2
Utah Legislature (Petitioners), submitted a letter dated May 2, 1994, and a
copy of Utah Senate Concurrent Resolution NO. 11, "RESOLUTION REGARDING NRC
ACTION REGARDING DISPOSAL OF URANIUM BY-PRODUCT 1994 GENERAL SESSION"
(Petition) pursuant to 10 C.F.R. § 2.206, in regard to Amendment No. 33 to
Source Material License No. SUA-1358, which authorized disposal of up to
10,000 cubic yards (cy) of lle.(2) byproduct material per in situ leach
facility per year at the White Mesa Mill facility. Petitioners requested that
the 11 ••• NRC reconsider the license amendment issued to Umetco [now EFN] and
modify the amendment to reflect the original request of 5,000 cubic yards [cy]
[per in situ facility]." Petitioners asserted as the basis for this request
that the NRC in effect created the equivalent of a commercial waste disposal
facility for in situ mining waste unlicensed by Utah, while ignoring Utah's
waste policy and laws.
Petitioners' request for modification of Source Material License was
granted by Energy Fuels Nuclear, Inc., DD-94-IO(Decision), issued concurrently
with this Order. That Decision concluded, as explained below, that License
Condition 55 should be modified to lim L the disposal authority of EFN to
5,000 cubic yards per in situ leach facility, as originally requested.
I I I.
By letter dated May 20, 1993, Umetco submitted an application for a
license amendment to authorize the receipt and disposal of lle.(2) byproduct
material from NRC-licensed and Agreement State-licensed in situ leach (ISL)
facilities. Specifically, Umetco requested that Source Material License No.
• •
3
SUA-1358 be amended to authorize:
disposal of not more than 5,000 cubic yards of lle.(2) byproduct
material per generating [in situ] licensee. If Umetco received a
request to dispose of more than 5,000 cubic yards of lle.(2)
byproduct material, Umetco would notify URFO [Uranium Recovery
Field Office1] in writing so that the appropriate review and
approval could be received from the URFO staff prior to executing
a contact [contract].
The NRC staff reviewed Umetco's license amendment application and issued
License Amendment 33 on August 2, 1993. License Amendment 33 authorized,
through License Condition 55, the disposal of:
byproduct material generated at licensed in situ leach facilities,
subject to the following condition that:
A. Disposal of waste [lle.(2) byproduct material] in excess of
10,000 cubic yards per year from single sources shall require
specific approval from NRC.
Before issuance of License Amendment 33, the NRC staff concluded that
License Condition 55 would not result in significant impacts to the
environment or to public health and safety. Further, the staff concluded that
License Condition 55 was consistent with 10 CFR Part 40, Appendix A, Section
I, Criterion 2, which is intended to avoid the proliferation of small waste
disposal sites, which would result if disposal in large tailings systems were
not authorized.
The NRC Staff concluded in DD-94-10 that the Licensee's authorization to
dispose of 11 e.(2) byproduct material should be limited to the 5,000 cy per
1 The Uranium Recovery Field Office closed on August 3, 1994 and the
responsibility for uranium recovery licensing was transferred the the NRC's
Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, Division of Waste
Management.
4
in situ leach facility, as requested by the Licensee. By way of background,
however, it should be noted that License Amendment No. 33 authorized disposal
of lle.(2) byproduct material consistent with NRC regulations, which require
that 11 e.(2) byproduct material from in situ leach mines be disposed of at
uranium mill tailings facilities. 10 C.F.R. Part 40, Appendix A, Section I,
Criterion 2. Also, the byproduct material authorized for disposal at the
White Mesa Mill represents only a subset of radioactive waste materials.
Specifically, White Mesa Mill is authorized to dispose of only 11 e.(2)
byproduct material (mill tailings), and 11 e.(2) byproduct material only from
in situ leach facilities. Before EFN could dispose of 11 e.(2) byproduct
material other than that from its own operations or from in situ leach
facilities, EFN would be required to seek licensing authority to do so. In
addition, the 10,000 cubic yards per in situ leach facility per year
authorized for disposal by License Amendment 33 at White Mesa Mill was
insubstantial in comparison to the 2000 tons [1481 cy] per day for 15 years
contemplated in the original licensing of White Mesa Mill. "Final
Environmental Statement Related to Operation of White Mesa Uranium Project"
(May 1979) NUREG 0556, p. iii.
Although License Amendment No. 33 would not have resulted in the
disposal of byproduct waste material in amounts approaching that contemplated
at the time of the original license grant for the White Mesa Mill facility,
License Condition 55 did authorize disposal of more 11 e.(2) byproduct
material than was requested by the Licensee. The NRC practice is, generally,
to grant only the disposal authority requested by the license amendment
application, and no more. In this case, however, the NRC staff authorized the
5
Licensee to dispose of 10,000 cy of 11 e.(2) byproduct material per year from
a single in situ source, rather than the Licensee's actual request for
authorization to dispose of 5,000 cubic yards per generating in situ licensee.
During an October 20, 1994 discussion with the NRC staff, the Licensee agreed
to issuance of an order to modify the License to reflect the application for
authority to dispose of 5,000 cy of 11 e.(2) byproduct material per in situ
facility. Accordingly, for the reasons stated above, the staff granted the
Petitioners' request to modify Source Material License No. SUA-1358.
IV.
The Licensee agreed to modification of License Condition 55 to limit
disposal of lle.(2) byproduct material at the White Mesa Mill facility to
5,000 cy per generating in situ licensee on October 20, 1994, in a telephone
call between Sandra L. Wastler, Senior Project Manager of the Office of
Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, and Ricard A. Van Horn, General
Manager of Energy Fuels Nuclear, Inc. I find that the Licensee's agreement to
limit lle.(2) byproduct material at White Mesa Mill to 5,000 cy per single
source is appropriate since the license amendment application requested
authority for 5,000 cy per single source. In view of the foregoing, I have
determined that the Licensee's agreement should be confirmed by this Order.
V.
Accordingly, pursuant to Sections 63, 81, 84, 161b, 16li, 1610, and 182 of the
Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended and the Commission's regulations in 10
•
6
C.F.R. § 2.202 and 10 CFR Part 40, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT CONDITION SSA OF
SOURCE MATERIAL LICENSE NO. SUA-1358 IS MODIFIED AS FOLLOWS:
55. In 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 5,000 cubic yards from a
single source.
VI.
Any person adversely affected by this Confirmatory Order, other than
EFN, may request a hearing within 20 days of its issuance. Any request for a
hearing shall be submitted to the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, ATTN: Chief, Docketing and Service Section, Washington, D.C.
20555. Copies also shall be3n! the Director, Office of Nuclear Material
Safety and Safeguards,,v.s. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C.
20555, to the Assi~tant General Counsel for Hearings and Enforcement at the
same address, to the Regional Administrator, NRC Region IV, 611 Ryan Plaza
Drive, Suite 400, Arlington, TX 76011-8064, and to the Licensee. If such a
person requests a hearing, that person shall set forth with particularity the
manner in which his interest is adversely affected by this Order and shall
address the criteria set forth in 10 CFR 2.714(d).
•
7
If a hearing is requested by a person whose interest is adversely
affected, the Convnission will issue an Order designating the time and place of
any hearing. If a hearing is held, the issue to be considered at such hearing
shall be whether this Confirmatory Order should be sustained.
In the absence of any request for hearing, the requirements specified in
Section V above shall be final 20 days from the date of this Order without
further order or proceedings.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
~~---
Dated at Rockville, Maryland
this lt.l-day of December, 1994.
Robert M. Bernero, Director
Office of Nuclear Material Safety
and Safe~uards
).
ENCLOSURE 3
I NRC FORM 374
(10-89)' U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION PAGE __ ! _OF 12 PAGES
. I
MATERIALS LICENSE
Pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-438), and Title 10,
Code of Federal Regulations, Chapter I, Parts 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 39, 40 and 70, and in reliance on statements and representations heretofore
made by the licensee, a license 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 accordance with the regulations of the applicable Part(s). This license shall be deemed to 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 conditions specified below .
1.
2.
Licensee
Energy Fuels Nuclear, Inc. 3. License number
SUA-1358, Amendment No. 37 6425 S. Highway 191
4. Expiration date September 23, 1991 P.O. Box 789
Blanding, Utah 84511
[Applicable Amendments: lOA, 35] 5. Docket or 40-8681 Reference No. ~ --------------------------'-----------------------~ 6. Byproduct, source, and/or 7. Chemical and/or physical 8. Maximum amount that licensee
special nuclear material form may possess at any one time !
under this license ~
Natural Uranium Any Unlimited
9. Authorized place of use: The licensee's uranium milling facilities located in
San Juan County, Utah.
10. The licensee is hereby authorized to possess byproduct material in the form of
uranium waste tailings and other uranium byproduct waste generated by the
l icensee' s milling operations authorized by this 1 icense.
11. For use in accordance with statements, representations, and conditions contained
in Sections 3.6.6, 5.1, 5.3, 5.4, 6.2, and 6.3, and Appendix E, Section 5, of the
license renewal application dated January 1985, as revised May 1985, September 2,
1992, for the standby orrganizational structure, and May 10, 1994, for the _Sta-R{J.by
Trust Agreement. The 1 itens~e shall conduct operations, and statements --
referenced above, except where superseded by license conditions below.
Whenever the Word nwill• is used in the above referenced sections, it shall
denote a requirement.
[Applicable Amendments: 28, 31, 35]
12. The mill production per calendar year shall not exceed 4,380 tons of U308 •
13. Any changes in the mill circuit as illustrated and described in Plate 3.1-3 of
the renewal application shall require approval by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission in the form of a license amendment.
NRC Form 374A
(5-84)'
U.S. EAR REGULATORY COMMISSION PAGE
License number
2 OF 12 PAGES
MATERIALS LICENSE
SUPPLEMENTARY SHEET
SUA-1358, Amendment No. 37
Docket or Reference number
40-8681
14. Release of equipment or packages from the restricted area shall be in accordance
with the attachment to SUA-1358 entitled, "Guidelines for Decontamination of
Facilities and Equipment Prior to Release for Unrestricted Use or Termination of
Licenses for Byproduct or Source Materials," dated September, 1984.
15. The licensee shall avoid by project design, where feasible, the archeological
sites designated "contributing" in the attachment to SUA-1358 entitled,
"Archeological Sites Related to the White Mesa Project," submitted by letter
dated July 28, 1988. When it is not feasible to avoid a site designated
"contributing" in the attachment, the licensee shall institute a data recovery
program for that site based on the research design submitted by letter from
16.
C. E. Baker of Energy Fuels Nuclear to Mr. Melvin T. Smith, Utah State Historic
Preservation Officer, dated April 13, 1981.
The licensee shall recover through archeological excavation all "contributing"
sites listed in the attachment which art 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
criteria 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 condl•ct such testing as is required to enable
the Commission to determine if those_ sites designated as "Undetermined" in the
attachment and located w_ithi n 100 feet of present or known future construction
areas are of such significance towaY"rant their redesignation as "contributing."
In all cases, such testing saall be COl'Jlpleted before any aspect of the
undertaking affects a site. [Applicable Amendments: 15]
Archeological contractors shall be approved in writing by the Commission. The
Commission will consult with the SHPO regarding the qµalifications of all
archeological contractors and the quality of the laboratory facilities they will
use. The Commission -wHJ...-appn>ve ;rn ~rchetlog1tal contractor ,,ho meets thg ·:-:..,,
minimum standards for a principal invf~tigator set forth in 36 CFR Part 66,
Appendix C, and whose qualifications are found acceptable by the SHPO.
17. The licensee shall conduct an annual survey of land use (private residences,
grazing areas, private and public potable water and agricultural wells, and
non-residential structures and uses) in the area within five miles (8 km) of any
portion of the restricted area boundary and submit a report of this survey to the
NRC, Uranium Recovery Field Office. This report shall indicate any differences
in land use from that described in the last report.
18. The results of all effluent and environmental monitoring required by this license
shall be reported in accordance with 10 CFR 40, Section 40.65 with copies of the
report sent to the NRC, Uranium Recovery Field Office. Monitoring data shall be
reported in the format shown in the attachment to SUA-1358, entitled "Sample
Format for Reporting Monitoring Data Regulatory Guide 4.14."
NRC'Form 374A
(5-84)'
U.S. EAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
License number
PAGE 3 OF 12 PAGES
SUA-1358. Amendment No. 37 MATERIALS LICENSE
SUPPLEMENTARY SHEET
Docket or Reference number
40-8681
19. Before engaging in any activity not previously assessed by the NRC, the licensee
shall prepare and record an environmental evaluation of such activity. When the
evaluation indicates that such activity may result in a significant adverse
environmental impact that was not previously assessed or that is greater than
that previously assessed, the licensee shall provide a written evaluation of such
activities and obtain prior approval of the NRC in the form of a license
amendment.
20. 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 ~ya third party, for decommissioning and
decontamination of the mill and mtll site, for reclamation of any tailings or
waste disposal areas, ground-water restoration as warranted and the long-term
surveillance fee. Within three months of NRC approval of a revised
reclamation/decommissioning plan, the licensee shall s~bmit, for NRC review and
approval, a proposed revision to the financial surety arrangeiT.ent -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.
Annual updates to the surety attount, 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 destgnated as June 4, of each year. If the NRC has not
approved a proposed revision to the surety coverage 30 days prior to the
expiration date of the e~isting surety arrangement, the licensee shall extend the
existing surety .arrangemeat for one yeir. Along with each proposed revision or
annual update, the. licensee shall submit support i.Ag documeptat ion showing a
breakdown of the costs and the basis for the cost estimates with adjustments for
inflation, maintenanc.e 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 previ ')Usly provided guidadce ent it-, ed "RecllM!ended Outline ~or Site 5-peci fie
Reclamation and Stabilization Cost Est'imab,·s," 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.
UMETCO's currently approved surety instrument, Irrevocable Letter of Credit No.
S00017012, issued by The Bank of New York in favor of the NRC, as amended, May
10, 1994, to include a Standby Trust Agreement, shall be continuously maintained
in an amount not less than $5,788,915 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: 12, 21, 26, 29, 32, 35, 36]
21. Prior to termination of this license, the licensee shall provide for transfer of
title to byproduct material and land, including any interests therein (other than
llll'("Tl'IIT~Tl'll'l"Trt1' ,,,,,.
, NRC Form 374A
! ·'-(5-84) ,
U.S. N A;•REGU~~TORY COMMISSION • PAGE 4 OF 12 PAGES 1--,------,---:==--~=-----'='-'----'-'--===-License number
MATERIALS LICENSE
SUPPLEMENTARY SHEET
SUA-135.R. AmPnnmont Nn 'H
Docket or Reference number
40-8681
land owned by the United States or the State of Utah), which is used for the
disposal of such byproduct material or is essential to ensure the long term ,
stability of such disposal site to the United States or the State of Utah, at the
State's option.
22. The licensee shall not make any changes to the present tailings retention system
without specific prior approval of the NRC, Uranium Recovery Field Office, in the ~
form of a license amendment.
23. The licensee shall implement the interim stabilization program submitted to the
NRC by letter dated December 18, 1985, for all tailings not covered by standing
water. This program shall include written operating procedures and shall
minimize dispersal of blowing tailings. The effectiveness of the control method
used shall be evaluated weekly by means of a documented tailings area inspection. ~
[Applicable Amendments: 1, 3]
24. The licensee shall implement the effluent and environmental monitoring program
specified in Section 5.5 of ;the renewal applicaUon as revised with the following
modifications or additions:
A. Stack samp1'ing shall im;lude a determination of flow rate.
B. TLD chips used for radon IIP»itoring shal} be exchanged afld read quarterly.
C. Surface water sampl'tJ shall also be; analyzed sem1annuaHy for total and
dissolved U.-nat, Ra"'.'.216, and ·Th,..ilOt1ittl the exception. of the Westwater
Creek, which shall be supl&a ~JJ~Hy fQr 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.
D. Ground-water sample$ from Monitoring wells 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 11, 12, 14, 15,
and the culinary water well, shall be analyzed quarterly for pH, specific
condu-:tance, chlorides, ialfates, JDS, an<fU-nat. Quarterly water level
measurements shall also be made. :,;GroOnd-water samples shall be an~alyzed
semiannually for arsenic, selenium, sodium, Ra-226, Th-230, and Pb~210.
E. Data for the quarterly ground-water parameters shall be maintained in
graphical form and copies of the graphs included with the environmental
monitoring reports submitted in accordance with 10 CFR 40.65.
F. The licensee shall utilize lower limits of detection in accordance with
Section 5 of Regulatory Guide 4.14, Revision 1, dated April 1980, for
analysis of effluent and environmental samples.
G. The inspections performed semiannually of the critical orifice assembly
committed to in the submittal dated March 15, 1986, shall be documented.
~ ' NRC t='orm 374A
..,._ (5-84) '
U.S. N AR REGULATORY COMMISSION
MATERIALS LICENSE
SUPPLEMENTARY SHEET
PAGE 5 OF 12 PAGES
License number
SUA-1358. Amendment No 37
Docket or Reference number
40-8681
___________________ _.__ ______________ ~
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 Amendments: 2, 15, 28, 31]
25. The licensee shall submit to the NRC, Uranium Recovery Field Office, by March 15,
1986 for review and approval in the form of a license amendment a detailed
reclamation plan for the authorized tailings disposal area which includes the
following:
A. A post operations interim stabilization plan which details methods to
prevent wind and water erosion and recharge of the tailings area.
B. A plan to determine the best methodology to dewater and/or consolidate the
tailings cells prior to placement of the final reclamation cover.
C. Plan and cross-sectional views of a final reclamation cover which details
the location and elevati~n of tailings. The plan shall include details on
cover thickness, physical characteristics of cover materials, proposed
testing of cover materhls (specifications and QA), the estimated volumes of
cover materi a 1 s and their avail abi 1 ity and location.
D. Detailed plans for placement of rock or vegetative cover on the final
reclaimed tailings pile and mill site area.
E. A proposed 1mplementat ♦4n scnedule for items A through D above which defines
the sequence of events and expected time ranges.
F. An analysis to show that the pro.posed type and thickness of soil cover is
adequate to provide attenuation of radon and is adequate to assure long term
stability as well as an analysis and proposal on methodology and time
required to restore grouftd water in qinfonllance to reg:.:latory requirements.
G. The licensee shall include a detailed cost analysis of each phase of the
reclamation plan to include contractor costs, projected costs of inflation
based upon the schedule proposed in item E, a proposed contingency cost, and
~
the costs of long term maintenance and monitoring. ~
26. The licensee shall conduct a tailings retention system and liner inspection
program in accordance with Section 5.5.7 and Appendix 0, Section 3.0, of the
renewal application. Notwithstanding any statements to the contrary, changes in
inspection frequency shall require the approval of the NRC in the form of a
license amendment. Further, copies of the report documenting the annual
technical evaluation shall be submitted to the Uranium Recovery Field Office,
NRC, within 1 month of the completion of the report.
During standby operations, when no effluent is being produced, appropriately
trained shift foremen are authorized to conduct the daily tailings retention
system and liner inspections. Training shall be properly documented. However,
the Environmental Coordinator shall continue to conduct weekly, monthly and
....
• NRC F•orm 374A
._ (5-84) •
U.S. N AR REGULATORY COMMISSION
MATERIALS LICENSE
SUPPLEMENTARY SHEET
PAGE 6 OF 12 PAGES
License number
SUA-1358. Amendment No. 37
Docket or Reference number
40-8681
---------------------'----------------~
quarterly routine inspections during standby periods.
[Applicable Amendments: 28]
27. The licensee is hereby exempted from the requirements of Section 20.203(e)(2) of
10 CFR 20 for areas within the mill, provided that all entrances to the mill are
conspicuously posted in accordance with Section 20.203(e)(2) and with the words,
"Any area within this mill may contain radioactive material."
28. 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 tb1s 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.
29. Standard operating procedures (SOPs) shall be established for all operational
process activities involving radioactive materials that are handled, processed,
or stored. Standard operat.ihg procedures for operational activities shall
enumerate pertinent radiation safety practices to be followed. Additionally,
written procedures shall be established for nonoperational activities to include
in-plant and env1ronmental 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 operational and no~operational activities shall
be reviewed and approved in writing by .cU\e RPO be.fore implementation and whenever
a change in procedUre is proposed to ensure t~at proper radiation protection
principles are being applied. In addition, the RPO shall perform a documented
review of all existing operating procedures at least annually.
During extended periods of mill standby, eight-hour annual sampling for U-nat,
Ra-226, Th-230 and Pb-210 ma-y.l'be elim}r;iate4 if'.t'outine airborne sampling show
levels below 10 percent of the MPC. Arther, during periods of standby, sampling
frequencies for area airborne uranium sampling within the mill may be reduced to
quarterly, provided measured levels remain below 10 percent of the maximum
permissible concentration (MPC). If these levels exceed 10 percent of the MPC,
the sampling frequency should follow Regulatory Guide 8.30 recommendations.
[Applicable Amendments: 28]
30. The Radiation Protection Officer (RPO) shall have the following education,
training and experience:
A. Education: A bachelor's degree in the physical sciences, industrial
hygiene, or engineering from an accredited college or university or an
equivalent combination of training and relevant experience in uranium mill
radiation protection. Two (2) years of relevant experience are generally
considered equivalent to one (1) year of academic study.
~
~
l'Bl 'l11l"f"lDlf"'l"l'IIT~TI"IT'l"M'I' 'Yffl'I" ''1'111'1""--rll'r"l'"TfflT1"ll'l"r"'TIITPl'TTlll'l'--y'l!IT'1'1
• NRC f'orm 374A
._ (5-84) •
U.S. N AR REGULATORY COMMISSION PAGE
License number
7 OF 12 PAGES
~
j
j
~ !
MATERIALS LICENSE
SUPPLEMENTARY SHEET
SUA-1358. Amendment No 37
Docket or Reference number
40-8681
B. Health physics experience: At least 1 year of work experience relevant to
uranium mill operation in applied health physics, radiation protection,
industrial hygiene, or similar work. This experience should involve
actually working with radiation detection and measurement equipment, not
strictly administrative or "desk" work.
C. Specialized training: At least 4 weeks of specialized classroom training in
health physics specifically applicable to uranium milling. In addition, the
RSO should attend refresher training on uranium mill health physics every
two {2) years.
D. Specialized knowledge: A thorough knowledge of the proper application and
use of all health physics equipment used in the mill, the chemical and
analytical procedures used for radiological sampling and monitoring,
methodologies used to calculate personnel exposure to uranium and its
daughters, and a thorough understanding of the uranium milling process and
equipment used in the mill and how the hazards are generated and controlled
during the mi 11 i ng proc.ess.
31. The license shall be required to use a Radiation Work Permit {RWP) for all work
or nonroutine maintenance jobs where the potential for significant exposure to
radioactive material exists and for which no standard written operating procedure
already exists. The RWP shall be issued by the RPO or his designate, qualified
by way of specialized radiation protecti-011 training, and shall at least describe
the following:
A. The scope of the work to be performed.
B. Any precautions necessary to reduce exposure to uranium and its daughters.
C. The supplemental radiological monitoring and sampling necessary prior to,
during, and following completion of the work.
-::-··~· In addition, the RPO's review of all non-routine activities, committed to·in
Section 5.3.1 of the renewal application, shall be documented.
32. The RPO and mill foreman, or qualified designees, shall perform weekly
inspections of all mill areas to observe general radiation control practices.
However, the RPO shall conduct a minimum of one weekly inspection per month
during mill standby and two weekly inspections per month during production. A
member of the radiation protection staff shall perform a daily walkthrough
inspection during weekdays, with qualified supervisory personnel performing the
inspection on weekends. In addition, the RPO shall prepare a monthly report
which includes a review of daily and weekly inspections, and a summary of all
monitoring and exposure data for the month. A copy of the monthly report shall
be submitted to the Operations Manager. [Applicable Amendments: 28]
33.
·---
A copy of the annual ALARA report described in Section 5.3.2.2, of the renewal
application as modified by letter dated January 20, 1987, shall be submitted to
the NRC, Uranium Recovery Field Office, by April 1, 1987, and every year
thereafter. [Applicable Amendments: 5]
"fllffJl'!lf"'l"lll"l"""Til['fTl'l'l"l'"nrrrl'Jl[(Tl"ITJJ!n:"'JJll'f
~
! ~
ll
NRC·l=orm 374A
(5-84)t
EAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
MATERIALS LICENSE
SUPPLEMENTARY SHEET
OF
40-6
34. The licensee shall maintain effluent control systems as specified in Table 4.1-1
of the licensee's renewal application with the following additions:
A. Operations shall be immediately suspended in the affected area of the mill
if any of the emission control equipment for the yellowcake drying or
packaging areas is not operating within specifications for design
performance.
B. The licensee shall, during all period of yellowcake drying operations,
assure that the scrubber is operating within the manufacturer's recommended
ranges for water flow and air pressure differential necessary to achieve
design performance. This shall be accomplished by either (1) performing and
documenting checks of water flow and air pressure differential approximately
every four hours during operation or (2) installing instrumentation which
will signal an audible alarm if either water flow or air pressure
differential fall below the manJfacturer's recommended level~. If any
audible alarm is used, its operation shall be checked and documented daily.
C. Air pressure differential gauges for other emission control equipment shall
be read and the readings documented once per shift during operations.
35. Sample volume and analysis for all in-plant air monitoring shall be adequate to
achieve an LLD of 10% of the MP.C listed in Tab.le 1, Appendix B of 10 CFR 20.
36. The licensee shall utilt2e the results of lapel sampling in calculating employee
exposures when the lapel stmplers are us.ed.
37. Occupational exposure calculations shall be performed and documented within one
week of the end of each regulatory compliance period as specified in
10 CFR 20.103{a){2) and 10 CFR 20.103(b}(2). Routine airborne ore dust and
yellowcake samples shall be analyzed in a timely manner to allow exposure
calculations to be performed i.n accordance with.this condition. Non-routine ore
dust and yellowcake s_amp.l.e_!.s shall be aitalyzed aftd the results reviewed by the RSO
within two working days -after sample collection.
38. The licensee shall conduct a bioassay program in accordance with Section 5.4.2.4
of the renewal application with the following addition:
A. A urinalysis program shall be conducted for mill personnel as specified in
Section 1.4.1 of the "Radiation Protection Procedures Manual" as revised
June, 1985.
B. Laboratory surfaces used for bioassay analyses shall be decontaminated to
less than 25 dpm alpha-{removable)/100 cm2 prior to analysis of samples.
C. Anytime an action level of 15 ug/1 uranium for urinalysis or 9 nCi of
natural uranium for in vivo measurement is reached or exceeded, the licensee
shall document the corrective actions which have been performed in
accordance with Revision l of Regulatory Guide 8.22, dated January 1987.
This documentation shall be submitted to the NRC, Uranium Recovery Field
Office, as part of the semiannual report required by 10 CFR 40.65.
• NRC i=°orm 374A ~ i."' (5-84) '
U.S. N AR REGULATORY COMMISSION PAGE 9 OF 12 PAGES 1------......!C..£.=---=-------''-'-===--License number
~
D.
MATERIALS LICENSE
SUPPLEMENTARY SHEET
SUA-1358. Amendment No. 37 ~ 1--D-oc_k_et-or_R_e_fer-en-=-c::..:.e n-'--u--=m,.=--be..c....r "'-'--'-=~=~~~~-~
40-8681
Anytime an action level of 35 ug/1 for two consecutive specimens ~r l~O ug/1
uranium for one specimen for urinalysis or 16 nCi uranium for an 1n vivo
measurement is reached or exceeded, the licensee shall document the
corrective actions which have been performed in accordance with Revision 1
of Regulatory Guide 8.22. This documentation shall be submitted to the NRC,
Uranium Recovery Field Office, within thirty (30} days of exceeding the
action level.
E. The licensee is released from the commitment in their license application
dated January 29, 1985, for performing routine in vivo measurements of mill
personnel. These measurements sball be performed in accordance with the
recommendations contained in Revision 1 of Regulatory Guide 8.22.
[Applicable Amendments: 9, lOA]
39. Surveys for fixed and removable alpha contamination shall be conducted in
accordance with Section 2.3.2.2 of the "Radiation Protection Procedures Manual"
as revised June, 1985. Actton levels shall be as specified in Section 2.3.4 of
the procedures manual.
40. Calibration of ifl-plant air and radiation monitoring equipment shall be as
specified in Section 3.0 of the "Radiation Protection Procedures Manual" as &
revised June, 1985, with the exception that in-plant air sampling equipment shall
be calibrated at least 1uarterly and the Kurt meter will be calibrated at least
annually. Air sampling equipment shall be checked prior to each use, and the
checks documented. [Applicable Ailiendments: 28] ~
41. The licensee shall submit a detailed decommissioning plan to the NRC at least
twelve (12} months prior to planned final shutdown of mill operations.
42. The licensee shall follow the proposal for the disposal of contaminated material
and equipment generated at the mill site as described in their letter dated
December 18, ~985, with the provhion that any other mill equipment, not . --:::.,..
specifically addressed in~the letter, which the licensee proposes to dispose of
into the tailings impoundment shall require written approval by the NRC.
[Applicable Amendments: 1, 3, lOA]
43. Mill tailings other than samples for research 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 all transfers made
under the provisions of this condition.
44. 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.
45. A decontamination and survey program for barrels containing yellowcake shall be
conducted in accordance with Section 1.8 of Regulatory Guide 8.30, "Health
Physics Programs in Uranium Mills," prior to shipment.
1ml. rm'{ Tl"IT I.I.II.\ ....
NRC 'Form 374A
(5,84),
U.S. EAR REGULATORY COMMISSION PAGE l(J
License number
OF 12 PAGES
MATERIALS LICENSE
SUPPLEMENTARY SHEET
SUA-1358. Amendment No. 37
Docket or Reference number
40-8681
1---------------------'---------------~
46. The licensee shall implement the program to minimize dispersal of dust from the ~
ore stockpile area(s) as described in their letter dated December 18, 1985. This
program shall include written operating procedures. The effectiveness of the
control method used shall be evaluated weekly by means of a documented
inspection. [Applicable Amendments: 1, 4]
47. The licensee shall implement, by December 31, 1986, the program proposed in their
letter dated October 31, 1986, for the prevention of the release of material due
to an S-X line rupture. Thirty days prior to the final placement of the interim
soil cover on Cell 2 the licensee shall propose a rupture detection program
specific for Cell 3. [Applicable Amendments: 1, 3]
48. The licensee shall implement a ground-water detection monitoring program to
ensure compliance to 10 CFR Part 40, Appendix A. The detection monitoring
program shall be in accordance with the licensee's August 1, 1989 submittal and
include the following:
A. The leak detection sy$tem for all ponds will be checked weekly. If liquid
is present, ';t shall be analyzed for chloride, sulfate, selenium and pH.
The samples will be statistically analyzed to determine if significant
linear trends exist and the results will be submitted to the NRC, Uranium
Recovery Field Office for review.
B. If a significant trend is indicated, the licensee will submit a proposed
corrective action for review and approval to the NRC, Uranium Recovery Field
Office. The corrective action shall include a discussion on delineation of
the area 1 extent and concentration -0f hazardous constituents.
C. To determine whether increases in the Pond 2 leak detection system are from
tailings seepage or from sedimentation pond seepage, the licensee shall by
April 1, 1991 implement the changes proposed iA their submittal of April 3,
1990. In addition, the licensee shall collect a minimum of six samples
characterizing the-sedi.-ntation pond material prior to c.cnstruction <!nd--,,
analyze for U-nat and Ra-226. A 'Copy of the analysis shall be submitted to
URFO by February 15, 1991.
D. The licensee shall sample monitoring wells 5, 11, 12, 14, and 15 for
potential hazardous constituents and submit this data to the NRC, Uranium
Recovery Field Office, so that background can be established and
ground-water protection standards set.
[Applicable Amendments: 6, 8, 10, 16, 22]
49. The licensee is authorized to receive, process, and dispose of byproduct material
from Mobil's Crownpoint in-situ uranium recovery facility in accordance with
letters from Landmark Reclamation dated June 9, 1987, April 25 and April 28,
1988. [Applicable Amendments: 7, 13]
50. A. The operation of the ion-exchange column at the Velvet Mine shall be in
accordance with statements, representations and conditions contained in the
licensee's submittal dated November 28, 1988.
,m Jill'! Jr.It J'lll.l JI!lt J.IIU Jrlt ,._..........,.. ,-,
NRC Form 374A
(5'084)1
U.S. EAR REGULATORY COMMISSION PAGE 11 OF 12 PAGES
1-:,L...,..ic-en_se_n-um--:be-r---"-"=----"'-'----'--'-==-
MATERIALS LICENSE
SUPPLEMENT ARY SHEET
SUA-1358, Amendment No. 37
Docket or Reference number
40-8681
-----------------------'----------------~
B. The licensee is authorized to transport eluate from the Velvet Mine to the
White Mesa uranium mill in accordance with the submittal dated November 28,
1988, and Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 71.
[Applicable Amendments: 14]
51. The licensee is authorized to construct Cell 4A in accordance with the plans and
specifications contained in the licensee's February 8, 1989, submittal as revised
by the January 10, 1990, submittal. Additionally, the following conditions will
also apply.
A. Effective with issuance of Amendment No. 20 and until April 30, 1990, the
maximum operating elevation in Cell No. 1-1 shall not exceed 5616.1 feet.
Beginning on May 1, 1990, the maximum operating elevation in Cell No. 1-1
shall not exceed 5615.4 feet, which will provide 2.8 feet of freeboard.
B. Effective with issuance of Amendment No. 20 and until April 30, 1990, the
maximum operating elevation in Cell No. 3 shall not exceed 5605.4 feet.
Beginning on May 1, 1990, the maximum operating elevation in Cell No. 3
shall not exceed 5603.0 feet which will provide 5.0 feet of freeboard. When
the volume .of tailings approaches 600,000 tons, considering all tailings
placed since October 23, 1989, the licensee shall revise the maximum ~
operating elevation for Cell No. 3 in .c~ordance with the procedures
specifieJ in their January 10, 1990, submittal. The revised elevation shall
be submitted for NRC review and approval in the form of a license amendment
request. Tne amendm.ent request shall be submitted to NRC by the ti me the
total tonnage <>f dry .tailings reaches Ute 600,000 ton limit.
C. The maximum operating elevation for Cell 4A shall not exceed 5596.4 feet,
which will pro vi de I. 6 feet of freeboard.
D. DELETED by Amendment No. 24.
E. DELETED by Amendment No. 24.
F. DELETED by Amendment No. 25.
[Applicable Amendments: 17, 18, 19, 20, 24, 25]
52. The licensee is authorized to construct a spillway between Cell 2 and Cell 3 in
accordance with the plans contained in the licensee's October 9, 1990, submittal. ~
Once the spillway has been constructed, storage of liquids and tailings will be
permitted in Cell No. 2. [Applicable Amendments: 25]
53. The licensee is authorized to place interim cover over exposed tailings in the
disposal cells. If the placement of material will impact flood routing for the
disposal area, a request to modify the freeboard requirements must be submitted
in the form of a license amendment. [Applicable Amendments: 27] ~
54. The licensee is authorized to conduct plant testing of source materials from the
Teledyne Wah Chang Albany facility in accordance with the amendment request dated
NRC<Form 374A
(5,J14J•
U.S. EAR REGULATORY COMMISSION PAGE 12 OF 12
MATERIALS LICENSE
SUPPLEMENTARY SHEET
January 18, 1989.
License number
PAGES
55. In 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 5,000 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
containing 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 activitie~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 disp-,sed of from off-site generator-s shall be sent to the NRC.
[Applicable Amendments: 33, '111
56. The licensee is authorize<! to r-eceiNj.aJ\d;process source materials from the
Allied Signal Corporation1 5'MetropoH~, .,Uli:nois, facility in accordance with the
amendment request dated June 15, 1999. · {Appl1ca.b:le Amendments: 34]
FOR THE NUClEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
="'..J;✓._/ ,4/,!d
Josiph J. Holonich, Chief
High-Level Waste and Uranium
Recovery Projects Section
Division of Waste Management
Office of Nuclear Material Safety
and Safeguard