Proposed Alternative Soils Standards for the Uravan, Colorado Uranium Mill, 70170-70173 [2011-29129]

Download as PDF 70170 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 218 / Thursday, November 10, 2011 / Notices (FSEIS) by letter dated February 15, 2008 (ADAMS Accession No. ML080510469), pursuant to Part 51 of Title 10 of the Code of the Federal Regulations (10 CFR). On June 30, 1976, TVA submitted an application for an operating license for WBN Unit 2, pursuant to 10 CFR Part 50. An updated operating license application was submitted on March 4, 2009. The proposed action in response to the updated application is the issuance of an operating license that would authorize TVA to possess, use, and operate a second light-water nuclear reactor (the facility), WBN Unit 2, located on the applicant’s site in Rhea County, Tennessee. The WBN Unit 2 would operate at a steady-state power level of 3411 megawatts thermal. A notice of receipt and availability of the updated application, which included the FSEIS, was published in the Federal Register on May 1, 2009 (74 FR 20350). A notice of intent to prepare a supplement to the final environmental statement, which was prepared and published in 1978 and to conduct the scoping process was published in the Federal Register on September 11, 2009 (74 FR 46799). On October 6, 2009, the NRC held two scoping meetings in Sweetwater, Tennessee, to obtain public input on the scope of the environmental review. The NRC also solicited comments from Federal, State, Tribal, regional, and local agencies. informal discussions 1 hour before the start of each meeting session. No formal comments on the draft SFES will be accepted during the informal discussions. To be considered, comments must be provided either at the transcribed public meeting sessions or by any of the methods provided in the ADDRESSES section of this document. Persons may register to attend or present oral comments at the meeting by contacting Ms. Carmen Fells, by telephone at 1–(800) 368–5642, extension 6337, or by email at Carmen. Fells@nrc.gov no later than December 1, 2011. Ms. Fells will need to be contacted no later than November 28, 2011, if special equipment or accommodations are needed to attend or present information at the public meeting, so that the NRC staff can determine whether the request can be accommodated. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 2nd day of November 2011. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Stephen J. Campbell, Chief, Watts Bar Special Projects Branch, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. 2011–29130 Filed 11–9–11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590–01–P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES III. Purpose The purpose of this document is to inform the public that a draft SFES related to the review of the operating license application has been prepared in accordance with 10 CFR 51.92 and to provide the public an opportunity to comment. [NRC–2011–0258] IV. Submitting Comments at Public Meeting The NRC staff will hold a public meeting to present an overview of the draft SFES and to accept public comments on the document. The public meeting will be held at the Magnuson Hotel at 1421 Murrays Chapel Road in Sweetwater, Tennessee, on Thursday, December 8, 2011. The meeting will consist of two sessions, which will cover the same subjects. The sessions will convene at 2 p.m. and 6:30 p.m. and will continue until 4 p.m. and 8:30 p.m., as necessary. The meeting will be transcribed and will include: (1) A presentation of the contents of the draft SFES and (2) the opportunity for interested government agencies, organizations, and individuals to provide comments on the draft SFES. Additionally, the NRC staff will host SUMMARY: VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:38 Nov 09, 2011 Jkt 226001 Proposed Alternative Soils Standards for the Uravan, Colorado Uranium Mill Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Uranium milling alternative standards. AGENCY: By letter dated October 10, 2007, the Colorado Department of Public Health and the Environment (CDPHE)’s, Hazardous Materials and Waste Management Division (the Division) submitted a proposal for alternative standards for soil clean up in four areas of the Uravan Site in Montrose County, Colorado. The Division approved the proposed alternative standards and requested the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s (NRC or the Commission) concurrence. Colorado’s proposed alternative soil standards are to leave the remaining radioactive contamination in place in these four areas without any further remediation. The NRC staff has determined that Colorado’s proposal constitutes use of alternative standards. Under Section 274o of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the PO 00000 Frm 00064 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Act), the Commission must make a determination that such alternatives will achieve a level of stabilization and containment of the sites concerned, and a level of protection for public health, safety, and the environment from radiological and non-radiological hazards associated with such sites, after notice and opportunity for public hearing. Through this action, the Commission intends to fulfill both the notice and opportunity for public hearing provisions of Section 274o. DATES: Submit comments by December 12, 2011. Comments received after this date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but the Commission cannot assure consideration of comments received after this date. ADDRESSES: Please include Docket ID NRC–2011–0258 in the subject line of your comments. For additional instructions on submitting comments and instructions on accessing documents related to this action, see ‘‘Submitting Comments and Accessing Information’’ in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document. You may submit comments by any one of the following methods: • Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and search for documents filed under Docket ID NRC–2011–0258. Address questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher, telephone: (301) 492–3668; email: Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov. • Mail comments to: Cindy Bladey, Chief, Rules, Announcements, and Directives Branch (RADB), Office of Administration, Mail Stop: TWB–05– B01M, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555– 0001. • Fax comments to: RADB at (301) 492–3446. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dennis M. Sollenberger, Office of Federal and State Materials and Environmental Management Programs, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555–0001, telephone: (301) 415–2819; email: Dennis.Sollenberger@nrc.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Submitting Comments and Accessing Information Comments submitted in writing or in electronic form will be posted on the NRC Web site and on the Federal rulemaking Web site, https:// www.regulations.gov. Because your comments will not be edited to remove any identifying or contact information, the NRC cautions you against including any information in your submission that E:\FR\FM\10NON1.SGM 10NON1 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 218 / Thursday, November 10, 2011 / Notices jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES you do not want to be publicly disclosed. The NRC requests that any party soliciting or aggregating comments received from other persons for submission to the NRC inform those persons that the NRC will not edit their comments to remove any identifying or contact information, and therefore, they should not include any information in their comments that they do not want publicly disclosed. You can access publicly available documents including comments related to this proposed action using the following methods: • NRC’s Public Document Room (PDR): The public may examine and have copied, for a fee, publicly available documents at the NRC’s PDR, O1–F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. • NRC’s Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS): Publicly available documents created or received at the NRC are available online in the NRC Library at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/ adams.html. From this page, the public can gain entry into ADAMS, which provides text and image files of the NRC’s public documents. If you do not have access to ADAMS or if there are problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, contact the NRC’s PDR reference staff at 1–(800) 397–4209, (301) 415–4737, or by email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. • Federal Rulemaking Web Site: Public comments and supporting materials related to this proposed action can be found at https:// www.regulations.gov by searching on Docket ID NRC–2011–0258. Background Since Section 274 of the Act was added in 1959, the Commission has entered into Agreements with 37 States that relinquished Federal authority. Under these agreements, regulatory authority was assumed by each State under State law to regulate certain radioactive materials within the State. The NRC periodically reviews the performance of the Agreement States to assure compliance with the provisions of Section 274. In 1978, the Act was further amended by adding a new subsection, Section 274o, which required Agreement States to specifically amend their Agreements to regulate uranium mill tailings (11e.(2) byproduct material). Six Agreement States have this authority as part of their Agreements. Under Section 274o of the Act, an Agreement State may adopt sitespecific alternative standards with respect to sites at which ores are VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:38 Nov 09, 2011 Jkt 226001 processed primarily for their source material content or which are used for the disposal of Section 11e.(2) byproduct material. Before the State can adopt alternative standards, the Commission must make the determination that the alternative standards will achieve a level of stabilization and containment of the site concerned, and the alternative standards will provide an adequate level of protection for public health, safety, and the environment from radiological and non-radiological hazards associated with the site. In addition, before making that determination, the NRC must provide notice and an opportunity for public hearing prior to approving the site-specific alternative standards. The Commission is using the notice and opportunity for comment process through this Federal Register notice to fulfill both the notice and opportunity for public hearing provisions of the Act. This approach of allowing interested persons to provide comments before the Commission reaches a determination on the proposed alternative standards was approved by the Commission in the Staff Requirements Memorandum (SRM) for SECY–03–0025, ‘‘Utah Alternative Groundwater Protection Standards; Process for Implementation of the Alternative Standards Provision in Section 274o of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, As Amended,’’ dated April 21, 2003 (ADAMS Accession Nos. ML032901053 for the SRM, ML032901045 for the SECY paper). The NRC staff is following the same process and has evaluated the Colorado proposal and has made a preliminary determination that the proposed alternative standards for the Uravan site in Colorado are acceptable. Discussion The Uravan site began operations in 1912 as a radium mill and later expanded operations to include extraction of other metals including uranium. The Uravan site was a licensed and operating mill at the time of passage of the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978 (UMTRCA) (November 1978) making it subject to regulation under Title II of UMTRCA, even though some of the contamination was a result of practices going back to earlier operations. Specific mention of this situation and calls for active programs to address residual contamination during the operational phase are mentioned in NUREG–0706, Final Generic Environmental Impact Statement on Uranium Milling (ADAMS Accession Nos. ML032751663, ML032751667, ML032751669). This site is part of the UMTRCA Title II program PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 70171 administered by the CDPHE through its Section 274b Agreement with the NRC. The Uravan mill ceased operations in 1984 and began decommissioning planning and implementation. Under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), this site was listed on the National Priorities List (NPL) in 1986. The CDPHE is designated as the Lead Agency at this site under a Memorandum of Agreement signed with Region VIII of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in 1986. The site covers over 500 acres, most of which is in very steep, rugged terrain. The remainder of the site is dominated by the San Miguel River Valley. Remedial activities have concluded and the final cap is in place over the disposal areas. Portions of the site will be titled to the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) for Legacy Management. Other portions of the site will be transferred to other Federal agencies (e.g., Bureau of Land Management (BLM)) or to a land trust for institutional management. Montrose County Road Y–11 bisects the site. The CDPHE believes the licensee has remediated the site to the extent practical and has identified four discrete areas that are not in full compliance with the soil remediation standards. The licensee has proposed and CDPHE agrees that no further remediation is warranted for these areas. This is the first site specific alternative standards to be proposed by an Agreement State (generic alternative standards were proposed and approved for Utah). There is a provision for alternative standards in the introduction to Appendix A of 6 CCR (Code of Colorado Regulations) 1007–1, part 18 (equivalent to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), part 40, Appendix A) which allows for ‘‘alternates to the requirements with Commission approval.’’ This is based on language found in Section 274o of the Act. Section 274o states in part that, ‘‘* * * the State may adopt alternatives (including, where appropriate, site-specific alternatives) to the requirements adopted and enforced by the Commission for the same purpose if after notice and opportunity for public hearing, the Commission determines that such alternatives will achieve a level of stabilization and containment of the sites concerned, and a level of protection for public health, safety, and the environment from radiological and non-radiological hazards associated with such sites, which is equivalent to, to the extent practicable, or more stringent than the level which would be achieved by standards and requirements adopted and enforced by the Commission for the same purpose and any final standards promulgated by the Administrator of the EPA E:\FR\FM\10NON1.SGM 10NON1 70172 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 218 / Thursday, November 10, 2011 / Notices in accordance with Section 275. Such alternative State requirements may take into account local or regional conditions, including geology, typography, hydrology, and meteorology.’’ jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Similar language codifying this requirement can be found in 10 CFR 150.31(d). The NRC’s Office of Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards informed NRC’s Region IV in 1988, in a memorandum titled, ‘‘Use of Title I Supplemental Standards for Title II’’ (ADAMS Accession No. ML111670171), that, if a request for alternative standards was to be considered, the application of 40 CFR 192.21, Supplemental Standards, as guidance would be appropriate. The Uravan Consent Decree and Remedial Action Plan approved by the federal district court in 1987, included the possible use of Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements (ARARs). If alternative standards are agreed to by the NRC, the alternative standards could be used as part of the basis for the State of Colorado and the EPA to proceed with delisting the Uravan site from the NPL. Four discrete areas of the site (about 40 acres total) could not meet the standard for background level of radium-226 in soil, found in the Colorado Rules and Regulations Pertaining to Radiation Control, 6 CCR 1007–1, Part 18, Appendix A, Criterion 6. This standard is that the background level is not exceeded by more than 5 pCi/g (picocuries per gram) of radium226 averaged over the first 15 centimeters (cm) below the surface and 15 pCi/g of radium-226 averaged over 15 cm thick layers more than 15 cm below the surface. The four discrete areas are referred to as: the Mill Hillside Area; A– Plant North Area; River Ponds Area; and County Road Y–11. The areas were remediated as best as practical, and the specifics are described in the licensee’s report submitted to the CDPHE (ADAMS Accession No. ML081150505). The licensee proposed to the CDPHE that alternative standards be applied to these four areas of the Uravan site. The licensee’s proposal to the CDPHE was to leave the remaining materials in place and conduct no further remediation. The CDPHE has accepted the licensee’s report and believes the areas were remediated to levels that are ALARA, and are protective of public health. This conclusion is further supported by applying the criteria for supplemental standards in UMTRCA Title I standards in 40 CFR 192.21, and through dose calculations for reasonable future use given the status of the areas after the termination of the specific VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:38 Nov 09, 2011 Jkt 226001 license and long-term care of the site by DOE. The CDPHE recommended the application of the contemporary dose limit for restricted release found in the License Termination Rule (LTR), which in Colorado regulation is found at CCR (Code of Colorado Regulations) 1007– 04, Section 61.3. Since the federal LTR explicitly excludes uranium milling facilities already subject to Appendix A to 10 CFR part 40 and since the licensee’s proposed alternative standards were developed using the Title I supplemental standards that are specific to uranium milling facilities, the NRC staff does not recommend pursuing the use of the LTR standard for this uranium recovery facility. Challenges to worker safety prevented additional remediation along the cliff face that makes up a majority of the Mill Hillside Area under consideration for alternate standards. Remediation was performed as much as possible and was terminated when safety to workers became too much of a risk, costs continued show diminishing returns, and concern arose that additional removal could cause mass wasting of the cliff face which would cause environmental harm to the riparian area and the San Miguel River. Two other areas, the River Ponds Area and the A– Plant North Area, were cleaned as much as possible prior to annual spring flooding that has since buried the areas under up to 3 feet of sediment (the San Miguel River is a free-flowing river and does not have any dams to control flow). This riparian area now hosts fauna and wildlife that would not be best served if remediation were to continue. The final area, County Road Y–11, has contaminated materials present at depths greater than 3 feet, assuring that routine maintenance activities of the road can be conducted without creating worker exposure. County Road Y–11 will remain under institutional controls agreed to by the County, BLM, and DOE. The alternative standards will be protective even if institutional controls fail in the distant future. This is based on two limited assumptions: (1) The cliff face will not be developed for residential construction, and (2) the San Miguel River will not be relocated. Both of these assumptions are realistic. All four areas have been cleaned to levels that are considered ALARA, will be under permanent institutional control, and meet the EPA supplemental standards requirements in 40 CFR 192.21. Additional cleanup work in the areas would present safety or environmental challenges with little corresponding reduction in dose. Therefore, the NRC staff believes the PO 00000 Frm 00066 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 four areas are candidates for alternative standards. The NRC staff evaluated Colorado’s proposed alternate soil standards for the four discrete areas and the justification for the alternate soil standards for the Uravan Site in Montrose County, Colorado (CO RML 660–02). The individual areas are discussed in more detail in the NRC staff’s assessment (ADAMS Accession No. ML11220A308). Therefore, the NRC staff has made a preliminary determination that the State’s proposal to leave the materials in place provides levels of protection to public health and safety and protection of the environment from radiological and non-radiological hazards associated with each of the four areas, that are equivalent to, to the extent practicable, or more stringent than levels which would be achieved by the standards and requirements adopted and enforced by the Commission for the same purpose (specifically the soil cleanup standards for radium) contained in 10 CFR Part 40, Appendix A and the Colorado requirements in 6 CCR 1007–1, Part 18, Appendix A. Section 274o Hearing for Alternative Standards The Commission has approved the use of a hearing process similar to the provisions in Subpart H of 10 CFR part 2 for the ‘‘hearing’’ component required by the last paragraph of Section 274o of the Act. The proposed alternate standards have been reviewed and agreed to by the State of Colorado. A hearing process similar to the provisions in Subpart H is not intended to duplicate the State’s process; rather, it will be used to provide sufficient information for the Commission to make the determination required in Section 274o of the Act. Pursuant to the hearing process set forth in Subpart H of 10 CFR part 2, the Commission is requesting information from interested members of the public on the alternative standards proposed by the State of Colorado of leaving the remaining residual soil contamination in place in the four designated areas, in lieu of clean up to the 5/15 pCi/g standard in 10 CFR part 40, Appendix A, Criterion 6.6. The NRC staff will evaluate the information received and provide the information to the Commission for a final determination. The issue under consideration is: Do the Colorado proposed alterative soil standards for the four discrete areas of the Uravan site achieve a level of stabilization and containment of the sites concerned, and a level of protection for public health, safety and the environment from radiological and non-radiological hazards associated with E:\FR\FM\10NON1.SGM 10NON1 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 218 / Thursday, November 10, 2011 / Notices such sites, which is equivalent to, to the extent practicable, or more stringent than the level which would be achieved by standards and requirements adopted and enforced by the Commission for the same purpose and any final standards promulgated by the Administrator of the EPA in accordance with Section 275 of the Act? Environmental Analysis The environmental impact of a Commission determination that an Agreement State’s alternative standards have been found to provide a level of protection that is equivalent to, to the extent practicable, or more stringent than standards promulgated by the NRC or the Administrator of the EPA under Section 275 of the Act is within the generic impact analysis conducted by the NRC and the EPA in promulgating their standards and the requirements (NUREG–0706, ‘‘Final Generic Environmental Impact Statement on Uranium Milling,’’ (ADAMS Accession Nos. ML032751663, ML032751667, and ML032751669) and EPA 520/1–83–008, ‘‘Final Environmental Impact Statement for Standards for the Control of Byproduct Materials from Uranium Processing’’ (ADAMS Accession Nos. ML032751396 and ML032751400)). Any site-specific application of alternative standards in Agreement States will be evaluated under the State’s environmental assessment required of the State under Section 274o of the Act. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 3rd day of November, 2011. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Brian J. McDermott, Director, Division of Materials Safety and State Agreements, Office of Federal and State Materials and Environmental Management Programs. [FR Doc. 2011–29129 Filed 11–9–11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590–01–P POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket No. A2012–41; Order No. 948] Post Office Closing Postal Regulatory Commission. Notice. AGENCY: ACTION: This document informs the public that an appeal of the closing of the West Edmeston, New York post office has been filed. It identifies preliminary steps and provides a procedural schedule. Publication of this document will allow the Postal Service, petitioners, and others to take appropriate action. DATES: November 14, 2011: Administrative record due (from Postal Service); November 29, 2011, 4:30 p.m., jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES SUMMARY: VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:38 Nov 09, 2011 Jkt 226001 Eastern Time: Deadline for notices to intervene. See the Procedural Schedule in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for other dates of interest. ADDRESSES: Submit comments electronically by accessing the ‘‘Filing Online’’ link in the banner at the top of the Commission’s Web site (https:// www.prc.gov) or by directly accessing the Commission’s Filing Online system at https://www.prc.gov/prc-pages/filingonline/login.aspx. Commenters who cannot submit their views electronically should contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section as the source for case-related information for advice on alternatives to electronic filing. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephen L. Sharfman, General Counsel, at (202) 789–6820 (case-related information) or DocketAdmins@prc.gov (electronic filing assistance). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 404(d), on October 27, 2011, the Commission received a petition for review of the Postal Service’s determination to close the West Edmeston post office in West Edmeston, New York. The petition for review was filed by Jason Elias and the Concerned Citizens of West Edmeston (Petitioners) and is postmarked October 19, 2011. The Commission hereby institutes a proceeding under 39 U.S.C. 404(d)(5) and establishes Docket No. A2012–41 to consider Petitioners’ appeal. If Petitioners would like to further explain their position with supplemental information or facts, Petitioners may either file a Participant Statement on PRC Form 61 or file a brief with the Commission no later than December 1, 2011. Categories of issues apparently raised. Petitioners contend (1) Failure of the Postal Service to follow procedures required by law regarding the closures (see 39 U.S.C. 404(d)(5)(B)); and (2) that there are factual errors contained in the Final Determination. After the Postal Service files the administrative record and the Commission reviews it, the Commission may find that there are more legal issues than those set forth above, or that the Postal Service’s determination disposes of one or more of those issues. The deadline for the Postal Service to file the applicable administrative record with the Commission is November 14, 2011. See 39 CFR 3001.113. In addition, the due date for any responsive pleading by the Postal Service to this notice is November 14, 2011. Availability; Web site posting. The Commission has posted the appeal and PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 70173 supporting material on its Web site at https://www.prc.gov. Additional filings in this case and participant’s submissions also will be posted on the Web site, if provided in electronic format or amenable to conversion, and not subject to a valid protective order. Information on how to use the Commission’s Web site is available online or by contacting the Commission’s webmaster via telephone at (202) 789–6873 or via electronic mail at prc-webmaster@prc.gov. The appeal and all related documents are also available for public inspection in the Commission’s docket section. Docket section hours are 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Eastern Time, Monday through Friday, except on Federal government holidays. Docket section personnel may be contacted via electronic mail at prc-dockets@prc.gov or via telephone at (202) 789–6846. Filing of documents. All filings of documents in this case shall be made using the Internet (Filing Online) pursuant to Commission rules 9(a) and 10(a) at the Commission’s Web site, https://www.prc.gov, unless a waiver is obtained. See 39 CFR 3001.9(a) and 3001.10(a). Instructions for obtaining an account to file documents online may be found on the Commission’s Web site, https://www.prc.gov, or by contacting the Commission’s docket section at prcdockets@prc.gov or via telephone at (202) 789–6846. Commission reserves the right to redact personal information which may infringe on an individual’s privacy rights from documents filed in this proceeding. Intervention. Persons, other than the Petitioners and respondents, wishing to be heard in this matter are directed to file a notice of intervention. See 39 CFR 3001.111(b). Notices of intervention in this case are to be filed on or before November 29, 2011. A notice of intervention shall be filed using the Internet (Filing Online) at the Commission’s Web site, https:// www.prc.gov, unless a waiver is obtained for hardcopy filing. See 39 CFR 3001.9(a) and 3001.10(a). Further procedures. By statute, the Commission is required to issue its decision within 120 days from the date it receives the appeal. See 39 U.S.C. 404(d)(5). A procedural schedule has been developed to accommodate this statutory deadline. In the interest of expedition, in light of the 120-day decision schedule, the Commission may request the Postal Service or other participants to submit information or memoranda of law on any appropriate issue. As required by Commission rules, if any motions are filed, responses are E:\FR\FM\10NON1.SGM 10NON1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 218 (Thursday, November 10, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 70170-70173]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-29129]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[NRC-2011-0258]


Proposed Alternative Soils Standards for the Uravan, Colorado 
Uranium Mill

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Uranium milling alternative standards.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: By letter dated October 10, 2007, the Colorado Department of 
Public Health and the Environment (CDPHE)'s, Hazardous Materials and 
Waste Management Division (the Division) submitted a proposal for 
alternative standards for soil clean up in four areas of the Uravan 
Site in Montrose County, Colorado. The Division approved the proposed 
alternative standards and requested the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission's (NRC or the Commission) concurrence. Colorado's proposed 
alternative soil standards are to leave the remaining radioactive 
contamination in place in these four areas without any further 
remediation. The NRC staff has determined that Colorado's proposal 
constitutes use of alternative standards. Under Section 274o of the 
Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), the Commission must 
make a determination that such alternatives will achieve a level of 
stabilization and containment of the sites concerned, and a level of 
protection for public health, safety, and the environment from 
radiological and non-radiological hazards associated with such sites, 
after notice and opportunity for public hearing. Through this action, 
the Commission intends to fulfill both the notice and opportunity for 
public hearing provisions of Section 274o.

DATES: Submit comments by December 12, 2011. Comments received after 
this date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but the 
Commission cannot assure consideration of comments received after this 
date.

ADDRESSES: Please include Docket ID NRC-2011-0258 in the subject line 
of your comments. For additional instructions on submitting comments 
and instructions on accessing documents related to this action, see 
``Submitting Comments and Accessing Information'' in the SUPPLEMENTARY 
INFORMATION section of this document. You may submit comments by any 
one of the following methods:
     Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and search for documents filed under Docket ID NRC-
2011-0258. Address questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher, 
telephone: (301) 492-3668; email: Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov.
     Mail comments to: Cindy Bladey, Chief, Rules, 
Announcements, and Directives Branch (RADB), Office of Administration, 
Mail Stop: TWB-05-B01M, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, 
DC 20555-0001.
     Fax comments to: RADB at (301) 492-3446.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dennis M. Sollenberger, Office of 
Federal and State Materials and Environmental Management Programs, U.S. 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, telephone: 
(301) 415-2819; email: Dennis.Sollenberger@nrc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Submitting Comments and Accessing Information

    Comments submitted in writing or in electronic form will be posted 
on the NRC Web site and on the Federal rulemaking Web site, https://www.regulations.gov. Because your comments will not be edited to remove 
any identifying or contact information, the NRC cautions you against 
including any information in your submission that

[[Page 70171]]

you do not want to be publicly disclosed.
    The NRC requests that any party soliciting or aggregating comments 
received from other persons for submission to the NRC inform those 
persons that the NRC will not edit their comments to remove any 
identifying or contact information, and therefore, they should not 
include any information in their comments that they do not want 
publicly disclosed.
    You can access publicly available documents including comments 
related to this proposed action using the following methods:
     NRC's Public Document Room (PDR): The public may examine 
and have copied, for a fee, publicly available documents at the NRC's 
PDR, O1-F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, 
Maryland 20852.
     NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System 
(ADAMS): Publicly available documents created or received at the NRC 
are available online in the NRC Library at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. From this page, the public can gain entry into ADAMS, 
which provides text and image files of the NRC's public documents. If 
you do not have access to ADAMS or if there are problems in accessing 
the documents located in ADAMS, contact the NRC's PDR reference staff 
at 1-(800) 397-4209, (301) 415-4737, or by email to 
pdr.resource@nrc.gov.
     Federal Rulemaking Web Site: Public comments and 
supporting materials related to this proposed action can be found at 
https://www.regulations.gov by searching on Docket ID NRC-2011-0258.

Background

    Since Section 274 of the Act was added in 1959, the Commission has 
entered into Agreements with 37 States that relinquished Federal 
authority. Under these agreements, regulatory authority was assumed by 
each State under State law to regulate certain radioactive materials 
within the State. The NRC periodically reviews the performance of the 
Agreement States to assure compliance with the provisions of Section 
274. In 1978, the Act was further amended by adding a new subsection, 
Section 274o, which required Agreement States to specifically amend 
their Agreements to regulate uranium mill tailings (11e.(2) byproduct 
material). Six Agreement States have this authority as part of their 
Agreements. Under Section 274o of the Act, an Agreement State may adopt 
site-specific alternative standards with respect to sites at which ores 
are processed primarily for their source material content or which are 
used for the disposal of Section 11e.(2) byproduct material. Before the 
State can adopt alternative standards, the Commission must make the 
determination that the alternative standards will achieve a level of 
stabilization and containment of the site concerned, and the 
alternative standards will provide an adequate level of protection for 
public health, safety, and the environment from radiological and non-
radiological hazards associated with the site. In addition, before 
making that determination, the NRC must provide notice and an 
opportunity for public hearing prior to approving the site-specific 
alternative standards. The Commission is using the notice and 
opportunity for comment process through this Federal Register notice to 
fulfill both the notice and opportunity for public hearing provisions 
of the Act.
    This approach of allowing interested persons to provide comments 
before the Commission reaches a determination on the proposed 
alternative standards was approved by the Commission in the Staff 
Requirements Memorandum (SRM) for SECY-03-0025, ``Utah Alternative 
Groundwater Protection Standards; Process for Implementation of the 
Alternative Standards Provision in Section 274o of the Atomic Energy 
Act of 1954, As Amended,'' dated April 21, 2003 (ADAMS Accession Nos. 
ML032901053 for the SRM, ML032901045 for the SECY paper). The NRC staff 
is following the same process and has evaluated the Colorado proposal 
and has made a preliminary determination that the proposed alternative 
standards for the Uravan site in Colorado are acceptable.

Discussion

    The Uravan site began operations in 1912 as a radium mill and later 
expanded operations to include extraction of other metals including 
uranium. The Uravan site was a licensed and operating mill at the time 
of passage of the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978 
(UMTRCA) (November 1978) making it subject to regulation under Title II 
of UMTRCA, even though some of the contamination was a result of 
practices going back to earlier operations. Specific mention of this 
situation and calls for active programs to address residual 
contamination during the operational phase are mentioned in NUREG-0706, 
Final Generic Environmental Impact Statement on Uranium Milling (ADAMS 
Accession Nos. ML032751663, ML032751667, ML032751669). This site is 
part of the UMTRCA Title II program administered by the CDPHE through 
its Section 274b Agreement with the NRC. The Uravan mill ceased 
operations in 1984 and began decommissioning planning and 
implementation. Under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, 
Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), this site was listed on the 
National Priorities List (NPL) in 1986. The CDPHE is designated as the 
Lead Agency at this site under a Memorandum of Agreement signed with 
Region VIII of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in 1986.
    The site covers over 500 acres, most of which is in very steep, 
rugged terrain. The remainder of the site is dominated by the San 
Miguel River Valley. Remedial activities have concluded and the final 
cap is in place over the disposal areas.
    Portions of the site will be titled to the U.S. Department of 
Energy (DOE) for Legacy Management. Other portions of the site will be 
transferred to other Federal agencies (e.g., Bureau of Land Management 
(BLM)) or to a land trust for institutional management. Montrose County 
Road Y-11 bisects the site.
    The CDPHE believes the licensee has remediated the site to the 
extent practical and has identified four discrete areas that are not in 
full compliance with the soil remediation standards. The licensee has 
proposed and CDPHE agrees that no further remediation is warranted for 
these areas.
    This is the first site specific alternative standards to be 
proposed by an Agreement State (generic alternative standards were 
proposed and approved for Utah). There is a provision for alternative 
standards in the introduction to Appendix A of 6 CCR (Code of Colorado 
Regulations) 1007-1, part 18 (equivalent to Title 10 of the Code of 
Federal Regulations (CFR), part 40, Appendix A) which allows for 
``alternates to the requirements with Commission approval.'' This is 
based on language found in Section 274o of the Act. Section 274o states 
in part that,

    ``* * * the State may adopt alternatives (including, where 
appropriate, site-specific alternatives) to the requirements adopted 
and enforced by the Commission for the same purpose if after notice 
and opportunity for public hearing, the Commission determines that 
such alternatives will achieve a level of stabilization and 
containment of the sites concerned, and a level of protection for 
public health, safety, and the environment from radiological and 
non-radiological hazards associated with such sites, which is 
equivalent to, to the extent practicable, or more stringent than the 
level which would be achieved by standards and requirements adopted 
and enforced by the Commission for the same purpose and any final 
standards promulgated by the Administrator of the EPA

[[Page 70172]]

in accordance with Section 275. Such alternative State requirements 
may take into account local or regional conditions, including 
geology, typography, hydrology, and meteorology.''

Similar language codifying this requirement can be found in 10 CFR 
150.31(d).

    The NRC's Office of Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards 
informed NRC's Region IV in 1988, in a memorandum titled, ``Use of 
Title I Supplemental Standards for Title II'' (ADAMS Accession No. 
ML111670171), that, if a request for alternative standards was to be 
considered, the application of 40 CFR 192.21, Supplemental Standards, 
as guidance would be appropriate. The Uravan Consent Decree and 
Remedial Action Plan approved by the federal district court in 1987, 
included the possible use of Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate 
Requirements (ARARs). If alternative standards are agreed to by the 
NRC, the alternative standards could be used as part of the basis for 
the State of Colorado and the EPA to proceed with delisting the Uravan 
site from the NPL.
    Four discrete areas of the site (about 40 acres total) could not 
meet the standard for background level of radium-226 in soil, found in 
the Colorado Rules and Regulations Pertaining to Radiation Control, 6 
CCR 1007-1, Part 18, Appendix A, Criterion 6. This standard is that the 
background level is not exceeded by more than 5 pCi/g (picocuries per 
gram) of radium-226 averaged over the first 15 centimeters (cm) below 
the surface and 15 pCi/g of radium-226 averaged over 15 cm thick layers 
more than 15 cm below the surface. The four discrete areas are referred 
to as: the Mill Hillside Area; A-Plant North Area; River Ponds Area; 
and County Road Y-11. The areas were remediated as best as practical, 
and the specifics are described in the licensee's report submitted to 
the CDPHE (ADAMS Accession No. ML081150505). The licensee proposed to 
the CDPHE that alternative standards be applied to these four areas of 
the Uravan site. The licensee's proposal to the CDPHE was to leave the 
remaining materials in place and conduct no further remediation.
    The CDPHE has accepted the licensee's report and believes the areas 
were remediated to levels that are ALARA, and are protective of public 
health. This conclusion is further supported by applying the criteria 
for supplemental standards in UMTRCA Title I standards in 40 CFR 
192.21, and through dose calculations for reasonable future use given 
the status of the areas after the termination of the specific license 
and long-term care of the site by DOE. The CDPHE recommended the 
application of the contemporary dose limit for restricted release found 
in the License Termination Rule (LTR), which in Colorado regulation is 
found at CCR (Code of Colorado Regulations) 1007-04, Section 61.3. 
Since the federal LTR explicitly excludes uranium milling facilities 
already subject to Appendix A to 10 CFR part 40 and since the 
licensee's proposed alternative standards were developed using the 
Title I supplemental standards that are specific to uranium milling 
facilities, the NRC staff does not recommend pursuing the use of the 
LTR standard for this uranium recovery facility.
    Challenges to worker safety prevented additional remediation along 
the cliff face that makes up a majority of the Mill Hillside Area under 
consideration for alternate standards. Remediation was performed as 
much as possible and was terminated when safety to workers became too 
much of a risk, costs continued show diminishing returns, and concern 
arose that additional removal could cause mass wasting of the cliff 
face which would cause environmental harm to the riparian area and the 
San Miguel River. Two other areas, the River Ponds Area and the A-Plant 
North Area, were cleaned as much as possible prior to annual spring 
flooding that has since buried the areas under up to 3 feet of sediment 
(the San Miguel River is a free-flowing river and does not have any 
dams to control flow). This riparian area now hosts fauna and wildlife 
that would not be best served if remediation were to continue. The 
final area, County Road Y-11, has contaminated materials present at 
depths greater than 3 feet, assuring that routine maintenance 
activities of the road can be conducted without creating worker 
exposure. County Road Y-11 will remain under institutional controls 
agreed to by the County, BLM, and DOE.
    The alternative standards will be protective even if institutional 
controls fail in the distant future. This is based on two limited 
assumptions: (1) The cliff face will not be developed for residential 
construction, and (2) the San Miguel River will not be relocated. Both 
of these assumptions are realistic.
    All four areas have been cleaned to levels that are considered 
ALARA, will be under permanent institutional control, and meet the EPA 
supplemental standards requirements in 40 CFR 192.21. Additional 
cleanup work in the areas would present safety or environmental 
challenges with little corresponding reduction in dose. Therefore, the 
NRC staff believes the four areas are candidates for alternative 
standards.
    The NRC staff evaluated Colorado's proposed alternate soil 
standards for the four discrete areas and the justification for the 
alternate soil standards for the Uravan Site in Montrose County, 
Colorado (CO RML 660-02). The individual areas are discussed in more 
detail in the NRC staff's assessment (ADAMS Accession No. ML11220A308).
    Therefore, the NRC staff has made a preliminary determination that 
the State's proposal to leave the materials in place provides levels of 
protection to public health and safety and protection of the 
environment from radiological and non-radiological hazards associated 
with each of the four areas, that are equivalent to, to the extent 
practicable, or more stringent than levels which would be achieved by 
the standards and requirements adopted and enforced by the Commission 
for the same purpose (specifically the soil cleanup standards for 
radium) contained in 10 CFR Part 40, Appendix A and the Colorado 
requirements in 6 CCR 1007-1, Part 18, Appendix A.

Section 274o Hearing for Alternative Standards

    The Commission has approved the use of a hearing process similar to 
the provisions in Subpart H of 10 CFR part 2 for the ``hearing'' 
component required by the last paragraph of Section 274o of the Act. 
The proposed alternate standards have been reviewed and agreed to by 
the State of Colorado. A hearing process similar to the provisions in 
Subpart H is not intended to duplicate the State's process; rather, it 
will be used to provide sufficient information for the Commission to 
make the determination required in Section 274o of the Act.
    Pursuant to the hearing process set forth in Subpart H of 10 CFR 
part 2, the Commission is requesting information from interested 
members of the public on the alternative standards proposed by the 
State of Colorado of leaving the remaining residual soil contamination 
in place in the four designated areas, in lieu of clean up to the 5/15 
pCi/g standard in 10 CFR part 40, Appendix A, Criterion 6.6. The NRC 
staff will evaluate the information received and provide the 
information to the Commission for a final determination. The issue 
under consideration is:

    Do the Colorado proposed alterative soil standards for the four 
discrete areas of the Uravan site achieve a level of stabilization 
and containment of the sites concerned, and a level of protection 
for public health, safety and the environment from radiological and 
non-radiological hazards associated with

[[Page 70173]]

such sites, which is equivalent to, to the extent practicable, or 
more stringent than the level which would be achieved by standards 
and requirements adopted and enforced by the Commission for the same 
purpose and any final standards promulgated by the Administrator of 
the EPA in accordance with Section 275 of the Act?

Environmental Analysis

    The environmental impact of a Commission determination that an 
Agreement State's alternative standards have been found to provide a 
level of protection that is equivalent to, to the extent practicable, 
or more stringent than standards promulgated by the NRC or the 
Administrator of the EPA under Section 275 of the Act is within the 
generic impact analysis conducted by the NRC and the EPA in 
promulgating their standards and the requirements (NUREG-0706, ``Final 
Generic Environmental Impact Statement on Uranium Milling,'' (ADAMS 
Accession Nos. ML032751663, ML032751667, and ML032751669) and EPA 520/
1-83-008, ``Final Environmental Impact Statement for Standards for the 
Control of Byproduct Materials from Uranium Processing'' (ADAMS 
Accession Nos. ML032751396 and ML032751400)). Any site-specific 
application of alternative standards in Agreement States will be 
evaluated under the State's environmental assessment required of the 
State under Section 274o of the Act.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 3rd day of November, 2011.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Brian J. McDermott,
Director, Division of Materials Safety and State Agreements, Office of 
Federal and State Materials and Environmental Management Programs.
[FR Doc. 2011-29129 Filed 11-9-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.