ML20245G384
| ML20245G384 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 11/14/1984 |
| From: | Martin R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | Yuhnke R COLORADO, STATE OF |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20245G297 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-89-242 NUDOCS 8908150388 | |
| Download: ML20245G384 (7) | |
Text
- - _.
l-gemrecy UNITED $1 ATEs g
[
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION l
,, 5. ' j.!
i itEGloN IV k\\M
[
511 RYAN PLAZA oRIVE. SUITE 1000
%,.'.N - /
ARLINGTON. TERAS 7s011 November 14, 1964 Robert E. Yuhnke Regional Counsel Environmental Defense Fund 1405 Arapahoe Avenue Boulder, Colorado 80302
Dear Mr. Yuhnke:
This refers to your letter of May 24, 1984, to Chairman Palladino regarding the regulation of uranium mills and mill tailings at the Uravan Mill by Colorado pursuant to its agreement with the NRC under Section 274b of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended.
You expressed concerns over radiation exposures to members of the public in Uravan, Colorado, and over other regulatory matters relating to the Uravan uranium mill.
Mr. G. Wayne Kerr, Director, Of fice of State Programs, in his letter t, jou of June 14, 1984, indicated that this mat;er would be factored into our routine review of the Colorado radiation control program and was not considered to be an emergcncy that would warrant a temporary suspension of Colorado's agreement with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).
In response to your leti.er, the NRC formed a special study group to provide an overview of radiation data and State regulatory activities relating to the mill and the town of Uravan, Colorado.
The report of this study group was sent to you on August 16, 1984.
Our evaluation of the matters raised in your letter of May 24, 1984 is enclosed.
We have compieted our total review of the Colorado ridiation control program for agreement materials.
Bai,ed on the study group findings and our review of the total radiation control program for agreement materials we believe that the l
State has a program that is adequate to protect health and safety and I
I compatible with the NRC's program.
We find, as a principal conclusion in our analysis of the Uravan matter, that the issuance, in the near future, of a renewal license for the facility will represent the culmination of the State's recent history of regulatory ef forts at Uravan.
A significant portion of these efforts has been directed towards the reduction of radiation exposures to members of the public within the i
Uravan area. The importance of this licensing action has caused us to delay l
our response to you so that our evaluation could include consideration of I
information gathered at the recent (August 22-23, 1984) public hearing on the Colorado Department of Health's, " Preliminary Executive Licensing Review Summary," (PELRS) for the Uravan uranium mill.
We found it significant that 1
information brought to light during the public hearing included the presentation of an agreement between the mill licensee (Umetco) and your
~~
8908150388 090809 PDR FOIA BOLDTINB9-242 PDR l
1
Robert E. Yuhnke organization concerning plans and measures to address the radiation exposure problems of Uravan. We expect that the final licensing document will include certain restrictions and schedules that will be applicable to an overall plan for the reduction of radiation exposures to members of the public in the Uravan area and, additionally, will be acceptable to both parties.
We have recommended to the State that it continue to pursue its regulatory process for the renewal of the Umetco license.
Also, the NRC study group report recommended that the State take action which will cause: (1) characterization of the waste areas in the unrestricted areas; (2) the licensee to proceed with emission reduction plans as proposed by letter dated November 30,1983; and (3) the conduct of an updated soil survey.
We plan to follow-up the requirements contained in the renewal I scense for the Uravan uranium mill and the timetable for planned steps to reduce radiation exposures to members of the public in the Uravan area.
If significant delays or regulatory violations occur which the State is unable to resolve in a satisfactory manner, assistance will be of fered to the State to address the proolem and discussions will be held with the State as to what further actions may be appropriate. A copy of our letter to Dr. Vernon regardina the results of the program review is enclosed.
If you have any questions or other concerns, please centact me at any time.
Thank you for your interest and efforts in this matter.
Sincerely,
[
h-s Q ?A..D k h Robert D. Martin Regional Administrator
Enclosures:
- 1. Evaluation I
- 2. Ltr. to Dr. Vernon cc:
w/ enclosure T. M. Vernon, Colorado Dept. of Health A. J. Hazle, Colorado Dept. of Health 1
l 1
Robert E. Yuhnke bec: w/ attachment R. D. Martin P. S. Check R. L. Bangart
)
W. L. Brown l
i C. V. Wisner I
G. F. Sanborn R. S. Heyer Colorado File l
W.._J. Dircks, ED0 J. G. Davis, NMSS G. H. Cunningham, ELD GT-14491 G. W. Kerr, SP SECY-84-0582 J. D. Smith, URF0 D. A. Nussbaumer, SP i
i e
i 1
---~--_1anu-
l p
j.-
s,
l i
e EVALUATION OF MATTERS CONTAINED IN AN l
ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND LETTER GF MM 24, 1984 L
. Introduction The Environmental Defense Fund (EDF), in a letter to the Chairman of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC):, expressed concerns over radiation l
l exposures to the public in Uravan, Colorado, and other regulatory matters relating to the Uravan uranium mill.
As part of a response to this letter, the NRC formed a special study group to provide an overview of radiation exposures and Colorado regulatory activities. relating to the mill and the town of Uravan, Colorado. The special study group completed a report, "Uravan, Colorado -
Radiation and Regulation," in August 1984.
The NRC study group report should be consulted for descriptions of the historical events surrounding the development of the Uravan area and the regulatory complexity existing at the site from radiation exposures and responsibilities due to past and present operations.
We believe the c'omments provided by the EDF can be categorized into three major areas of concern: (1) Radon levels in the town of Uravan; (2) 40 CFR 190 exceedence, and the time taken by the State in pursuing the licensee's compliance with 40 CFR 190; and (3) measures for obtaining reductions in the
. of f site radiation' levels.
Background Information on the Agreement State Program Section 274 of the' Atomic Energy Act clarifies the respective responsibilities of the States and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) under the Act and provides a mechanism by which the NRC can relinquish, and the States assume, a part.of the NRC's regulatory authority.
Under section 274, the HRC is permitted to relinquish to the States, on a state-by-state basis, certain of its authority to regulate the use of byproduct material, the source materials uranium and thorium, and small quantities of special nuclear materials.
These materials, collectively, are called agreement materials.
Before the NRC is permitted to relinquish regulatory authority to a State under the Act, the Governor of the State must certify that the State has a regulatory program adequate to protect the public health and safety, and the NRC has to find the State's program adequate from the health and safety standpoint and
. compatible'with the C's program for similar materials. The NRC works closely with each State to assare that the State's program for the regulation of agreement materials meets these requirements and the State is staffed with a sufficient number of technically qualified personnel to administer the regulatory program.
i i
Attachment
)
I 2
~
i Since the beginning of the Agreement State program, a system of post agreement relationships with the States has been developed to promote continuing compatibility and adequacy by periodically reviewing and evaluating the capabilities of the States to protect the-public health and safety.
These periodic reviews of State regulatory programs for the control of agreement materials-cover the principal administrative and technical aspects of a radiation control program.- An in-depth examination is made of tne program's funding' and personnel resources; the program's licensing, inspection, and enforcement' activities; the program's emergency response capabilities for agreement materials; and the status of the State's radiation control regu$ations.
Although individual regulatory actions (licensing, enforcement, investigation, etc.) are evaluated during thesr reviews, judgements with regard to adequacy and compatibility are made on the program as a whole.
These reviews use as a reference the NRC policy statement, " Evaluation of Agreement State Radiation Control Programs," published in the Federal Register
- 'his policy statement provides 30 indicators for on December 4, 1981.
evaluating Agreement State program areas.
Guidance as to their relative importance to an Agreement State program is provided by dividing the indicators-into two categories.
Category I indicators address program functions that directly relate to the State's ability to protect public health and safety.
' Category 11 indicators address functions which provide essential technical and administrative support.
Review of Colorado Radiation Control Program The current Colorado program review covered the period, January 28,1983 to June 8, 1984.
The scope of the review was expanded to take into account the various matters raised in EDF's letter of May 24, 1984. These matters a'e addressed in this paper and in the NRC study group report.
Certain recommendations, made to the State after the current review relate both to Uravan and to Colorado's uranium mill regulatory program in general.
The first was a recommendation that the Division develop and implement a procedure (similar to the Division's surety review procedure) for annual evaluations of the actual environmental data submitted by the licensee for the nearest resident at each of the operating mill facilities, for determination of compliance with 40 CFR 190.
In reviewing the Division's mill licensing files, it became obvious that the Division staff was concerned and aware of the 40 CFR 190 compliance status of the operating mills.
The reason for the recommendation was the Division did not have a written policy or procedure for documenting the necessary determination.
L s
3 1
The second was a recommendation that the State evaluate all possible means of j
increasing the number of permanent uranium mill regulatory staff members in the i
Radiation Control Division.
This recommendation resulted from a consideration of the current and near future staff workload for uranium mill projects, the State's need for and use of third party consultants, and the State's current mill program staffing factors.
From files reviewed and discussions with the Radiation Control Division (RCD) l
~
staf f, it a'ppears that the RCD has never of ficially granted a variance for 40 CFR 190; but, because of appeal procedures used by the licensee, the RCD is slowly and continually working through the appeals process to have the facility come into compliance with 40 CFR 190.
Based on a review of available RCD-i records, and a chronological listing of events from the NRC study group report, and time-schedules for reclamation and final action on clean up of the town of j
Uravan, it appears that the licensee and State are satisfying the intent of 40 CFR 190.11.
In retrospect, it may have been more expeditious for the RCD to have followed the procedures in 40 CFR 190.11'to af fect resolution of the regulatory aspects of 40 CFR 190, and we recommend that they do so in the future, Also see page 16, item 2 of the NRC study group report provided to you on August 16, 1984.
We noted one significant factor regarding delays in completing license amendments for the Uravan mill.
The licensee has appealed every license amendment that the State has issued (at least since 1980) pursuant to Section 24-4-104 of the Colorado Revised Statutes (CRS).
This section affords the licensee the right to submit written data, views and arguments and, except in cases of deliberate and willful violation, gives the licensee a reasonable opportunity to comply with all lawful requirements.
Hearings are provided for by Section 24-4-105 of the CRS.
The appeal anf hearing process both extends the time period to issue amendments and provides for full public discussion of uranium mill regulatory actions and decisions.
Radon Exposures, Regulatory Limits, and EPA's 40 CFR 190 Environmental Standard f or Uranium Fuel Cycle Operations The NRC study group report of August 16, 1984, provides discussions concerning the leve*a of radiation and radioactivity existing in the town of Uravan or in the vicinity of the mill ano the various sources that contribute to radiation exposure of individuals in unrestricted areas.
The report and the program review findings reveal that the State and licensee have been taking measures to mitigate the problem of offsite radon exposures, see page 16, iter 2 and page 39, section F of the August 16, 1984 report.
Our review noted that the RCD has viewed the offsite radiation situation at Uravan in a preventive health context rather than as one presenting imminent danger Such an approach is not inconsistent with the findings contained on Page 21, item E of the study group report and with the rationale used to develop the Surgeon General's Guidelines applicable to homes in Grand Junction, Colorado with concentrations of radon progeny.
_=
4
- Actions taken by the State of Colorado regarding Uraniu' Mill Regulation at Uravan A review of the study group report and many of the available State documents discloses _ a record which is replete with examples of regulatory actions taken by the State to address the radiation exposure problems and operational matters at'the Uravan uranium mill.
In particular, since the passage of UMTRCA:
(1) the State has issued at least six license amendments, one of which imposed the 40 CFR 190 limit at the Uravan mill on the same date that the EPA regulation became effective, December 1, 1980; (2) the State's uranium mill regulations became effective on October 1, 1981; (3) the State's amended agreement for continued regulatory responsibility for mills-became ef fective on April 20, 1981; (4)'the State published an evaluation of offsite radiation doses at the Uravan. facility on December 30, 1982; (5) the Stste received the licensee's radiation' dose commitment assessment for-the town of Uravan on November 30, 1983; (6) the State published its PELRS for Uravan on May 22, 1984, in preparation for a'public hearing during August 22-23, 1984; and (7) the State plans to issue a renewal license for the Uravan mill in the near future.
There have been many other' actions taken by the State with respect to Uravan, some of which are listed in a chronology of events contained in an appendix to the NRC study group report.
See page 6 iten 3, page 16 item 2, and page 39, item F of the' study group report.
i 1
I 1