| HOME WISE Uranium Project > Mining & Milling > Current Regulatory Issues - USA > |
(last updated 20 Nov 2020)
|
> see also:
| Federal |
> see more recent issues
(168k PDF)
"[...] NRC has approved 11 groundwater restorations at the 3 facilities. The data show that over 60 percent of the constituents were restored to their pre-operational concentrations. Although the remaining constituents were restored to concentrations that were above baseline levels, they were all restored to levels that NRC staff found to be protective of public health and the environment."
"[...] The data show over 60 events had occurred at the 3 facilities. For most of those events, the licensees were able to control and reverse them through pumping and extraction at nearby wells. Most excursions were shortlived, although a few of them continued for several years. None had resulted in environmental impacts."
"[...] The data indicates that a small percentage of the wells tested failed and they were replaced. One licensee also investigated the overlying aquifers and found no impacts for five of six MIT failures and mitigated the impact found from the remaining failure. The other two licensees did not specifically investigate the overlying aquifers; however, the aquifer above the production zone is continually monitored as part of the excursion monitoring program and data from that monitoring did not identify any impact attributable to well failure."
"[...] The data from those monitoring programs do not show impacts attributable to the ISR facility. The staff is unaware of any situation indicating that: (1) the quality of groundwater at a nearby water supply well has been degraded; (2) the use of a water supply well has been discontinued; or (3) a well has been relocated because of impacts attributed to an ISR facility."
> Download Memorandum: Staff assessment of groundwater impacts from previously licensed in-situ uranium recovery facilities, July 10, 2009 (ADAMS Acc. No. ML091770187) · Enclosure: Data on groundwater impacts at the existing ISR facilities (ADAMS Acc. No. ML091770385)
> View: Staff Requirements Memorandum M081211 - Briefing on Uranium Recovery, Jan. 8, 2009
> View Superfund Financial Responsibility (EPA)
> Download: Identification of Priority Classes of Facilities for Development of CERCLA Section 108(b) Financial Responsibility Requirements, July 10, 2009 (119k PDF)
Federal Register: July 28, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 143) p. 37213-37219 (download full text )
> View Further information under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-SFUND-2009-0265
Process for Transition of Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act Title II Disposal Sites to the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Legacy Management for Long-Term Surveillance and Maintenance, June 2009, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Legacy Management
A revised edition of the document was released on March 29, 2012:
> Download Process for Transition of Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act Title II Disposal Sites to the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Legacy Management for Long-Term Surveillance and Maintenance , U.S. DOE Legacy Management, LMS/S05096, March 2012 (9.2M PDF)
, EPA-SAB-12-005, Feb. 17, 2012
EPA to hold teleconference and public meeting on draft report "Considerations Related to Post-Closure Monitoring of Uranium In-Situ Leach/In-Situ Recovery (ISL/ISR) Sites":
The EPA Science Advisory Board (SAB) Staff Office announces a public meeting (July 18-19, 2011) and teleconference (July 12, 2011) of the Radiation Advisory Committee (RAC) augmented for an advisory review of EPA's draft report "Considerations Related to Post-Closure Monitoring of Uranium In-Situ Leach/In-Situ Recovery (ISL/ISR) Sites."
Written statements should be supplied by noon July 5, 2011 for the teleconference, and by noon on July 14, 2011.
> Federal Register: June 23, 2011 (Volume 76, Number 121) p. 36918-36919 (download full text )
The EPA Science Advisory Board (SAB) Staff Office announces
two teleconferences of the SAB Augmented Radiation Advisory Committee
(RAC) to discuss the draft advisory report related to uranium and
thorium in-situ leach recovery and post-closure stability monitoring.
The public teleconferences will be conducted on Tuesday,
September 6, 2011 and Wednesday, October 5, 2011, from 1 p.m. to 4 p.m.
(Eastern Daylight Time).
> Federal Register: August 16, 2011 (Volume 76, Number 158) p. 50728-50729 (download full text )
> Access review materials (EPA SAB)
> Download Draft Technical Report: Considerations Related to Post-Closure Monitoring Of Uranium In-Situ Leach/In-Situ Recovery (ISL/ISR) Sites, June 2011
Request for Nominations of Experts for Review of EPA's Draft Technical Report Pertaining to Uranium and Thorium In-Situ Leach Recovery and Post-Closure Stability
Monitoring:
The EPA Science Advisory Board (SAB) Staff Office is requesting public nominations for technical experts to augment the SAB's Radiation Advisory Committee (RAC) to review and provide advice on EPA's draft scientific and technical report on Health and Environmental Protection Standards for Uranium and Thorium Mill Tailings.
Nominations should be submitted by December 15, 2010.
Federal Register: November 24, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 226) p. 71702-71703 (download full text )
> Download EPA announcement June 30, 2009 (PDF)
> View background information
> View EPA Rulemaking Gateway
> View EPA Discussion Forum
) (110kB PDF)
)) (305k PDF) (PDF) (2.2MB PDF)
, November 10, 2011 (2MB PDF)
, representing concerned residents living near the Cotter mill in Cañon City, and WildEarth Guardians filed the suit in 2008, according to a news release from the Cañon City group.
The lawsuit and settlement were reached with the help of the Energy Minerals Law Center, a Durango-based nonprofit.
Travis Stills, an attorney with the law center, said in a phone interview Sunday that the settlement compels the EPA to revisit its limits on the radioactive gas, which haven't been reviewed or changed in 20 years.
It also requires the agency to take various strides to ensure the public is included in the drafting of the new rules.
(Durango Herald Sep. 7, 2009)
Written comments on the proposed settlement agreement must be received by October 5, 2009.
Federal Register: September 4, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 171) p. 45851-45852 (download full text )
> Docket Docket ID EPA-HQ-OGC-2009-0679
, in conjunction with the Colorado Citizens Against Toxic Waste (CCAT) and Rocky Mountain Clean Air Action, will hold a public meeting in Cañon City, Colorado, on June 30, 2009. The purpose of the meeting is to discuss EPA's review and possible revision of 40 CFR 61 Subpart W.
> View CDPHE notice June 23, 2009
> View Uranium Watch notice June 26, 2009 . Excerpt:
"Over twenty years ago, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission recommended that the limit or standard be set at 2 pico Curies per square-meter per second (pCi/m2-sec). Instead, the EPA set the limit at 20 pCi/m2sec. The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 required EPA to review this standard and, if appropriate, revise it within ten years. EPA failed to perform this non-discretionary duty by 2001."> Download EPA 40 CFR 61 Subpart W - National Emission Standards for Radon Emissions From Operating Mill Tailings
(PDF)
> View EPA 40 CFR 61 Subpart W Rulemaking Activity
Federal Register: June 23, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 119) p. 29614-29630 (download full text )
[...] The staff recognizes that NUREG-1569, "Standard Review Plan for In Situ Leach Uranium Extraction License Applications,"Regulatory Issue Summary 2009-05 (April 29, 2009)As indicated above, the staff is now working with the EPA to resolve groundwater protection issues at ISR facilities and to revise Appendix A of 10 CFR Part 40 accordingly.
(ADAMS Acc. No. ML083510622)
> View NRC release Apr. 27, 2009
> Download Staff Notation Vote, SECY-08-0197, Dec. 18, 2008 (PDF)
> Download Staff Requirements Memorandum, SRM-08-0197, April 2, 2009 (PDF)
> See also: Options to Revise Radiation Protection Regulations and Guidance (NRC)
Federal Register: March 27, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 58) p. 13483-13485 (download full text )
> See also: ADAMS Acc. No. ML083470668
On May 13, 2009, NRC announced the reopening of the public comment
period until May 15, 2009 (!).
Federal Register: May 13, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 91) p. 22599-22600 (download full text )
On Sep. 23, 2009, NRC issued the final NRC Regulatory Issue Summary 2009-12: Uranium recovery policy regarding site preparation activities at proposed, unlicensed uranium recovery facilities (ADAMS Acc. No. ML092090353 )
> Download NRC staff's evaluation of the comments received: ADAMS Acc. No. ML092100004
Federal Register: December 5, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 235) p. 74039-74047 (download full text )
> See also: Uranium exploration at the Grand Canyon
(52k PDF)
Federal Register: May 30, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 105) p. 31152-31153 (download full text )
> Download Draft Regulatory Guide DG-3024
(Proposed Revision 2 of Regulatory Guide 3.5)
> Download Regulatory Guide 3.5 (Rev. 1, Nov. 1977)
Upon further consideration the NRC has decided not to revise RG 3.5 at this time. For this reason, DG-3024 will be withdrawn.
Federal Register: September 23, 2011 (Volume 76, Number 185) p. 59173-59174 (download full text )
> View NRC release March 18, 2008
> Download Final Report of the Independent External Review Panel to Identify Vulnerabilities In the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Materials Licensing Program, March 11, 2008
Federal Register: March 18, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 53) p. 14501-14502 (download full text )
> Download Draft Regulatory Guide (DG)-3032, Design, Construction, and Inspection of Embankment Retention Systems at Uranium Recovery Facilities, Feb. 2008
> Download Regulatory Guide 3.11, Design, Construction, and Inspection of Embankment Retention Systems for Uranium Mills, Rev. 2, Dec. 1977
> Download Regulatory Guide 3.11.1, Operational Inspection and Surveillance of Embankment Retention Systems for Uranium Mill Tailings, Rev. 1, Oct. 1980
The final Regulatory Guide was issued on Nov. 4, 2008.
> Download Regulatory Guide 3.11 Rev. 3, Design, Construction, and Inspection of Embankment Retention Systems at Uranium Recovery Facilities, Nov. 2008
Federal Register: November 10, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 218) p. 66686 (download full text )
) (3.7M PDF) (4.6M PDF)DOE will issue a finding of "no significant impact" on the sale of portions of its excess uranium inventory in domestic uranium markets, DOE's William Szymanski told officials at NRC's annual fuel cycle conference June 24. The finding results from an environmental impact statement DOE began work on last year as the department surveyed how best to manage 59,000 metric tons of DOE-owned uranium now stored in cylinders. (Platts June 24, 2009)
(324k PDF)
> See also: DOE presents downblending options for its unallocated HEU
> See also: DOE presents re-enrichment options for its higher assay depleted uranium tails
(166k PDF)
> Federal Register: March 20, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 55) p. 14946
(download full text )
> View NRC release Jan. 22, 2008
> Federal Register: January 22, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 14) p. 3811-3846
(download full text )
> View docket NRC-2008-0030 (regulations.gov)
> See also: NRC issues Rule on Decommissioning Planning
)
> View NRC release July 23, 2007
> View Notice of Intent to Prepare a Generic Environmental Impact Statement for Uranium Milling Facilities, Federal Register: July 24, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 141) p. 40344-40346 (download full text - this is an "emergency publication" [!], as requested by NRC from the Office of Federal Register on July 20, 2007)
> View Revised Notice of Intent To Prepare a Generic Environmental
Impact Statement for Uranium Milling Facilities, Federal Register: August 31, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 169) p. 50414-50416 (download full text )
> View Revised Notice of Intent To Prepare a Generic Environmental Impact Statement for Uranium Milling Facilities, Federal Register: September 27, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 187) p. 54947-54949 (download full text )
> View Revised Notice of Intent To Prepare a Generic Environmental Impact Statement for Uranium Milling Facilities, Federal Register: November 1, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 211) p. 61912-61913 (download full text )
In a statement released Aug. 1, 2007, New Mexico Governor (and former Energy Secretary) Bill Richardson blasted NRC's efforts to create a Generic Environmental Impact Statement for Uranium Milling Facilities: "There is nothing generic about the concerns that many New Mexicans have with proposals to reopen or start new uranium mining and milling operations in their communities," said Governor Richardson. "I believe that this proposal will negatively impact the ability of New Mexico's citizens to participate in the NRC licensing process for individual facilities."
On Dec. 3, 2007, Richardson announced that he had called on the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to abandon the Generic Environmental Impact Statement (GEIS) process for new uranium mining activities in New Mexico and across the West, citing concerns about the lack of site-specific environmental review and public participation. "The west is a diverse, unique, and vast area where one size does not fit all. As such, the State of New Mexico does not support the scope and approach of the proposed process", Richardson said.
The New Mexico Environmental Law Center issued an Action Alert against the GEIS.
On July 2, 2008, NRC released the Scoping Summary Report, Generic Environmental Impact Statement for In-Situ Leach Uranium Milling Facilities, June 2008 (ADAMS Acc. No. ML081560476 ).
On July 21, 2008, NRC released the NUREG-1910 Draft Report for Comment: Generic Environmental Impact Statement for In-Situ Leach Uranium Milling Facilities: Vol. 1 (Cover - Chpt 3) ·
Vol. 1 (Chpt 4) ·
Vol. 2 (Chpt 5 - 12 and Append. A - F) ·
Vol. 2 (Errata)
Submit comments by November 7, 2008 (Comment period extended).
> View NRC release July 28, 2008
Federal Register: July 28, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 145) p. 43795-43798 (download full text )
Correction:
Federal Register: September 19, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 183) p. 54435-54436
(download full text )
Federal Register: October 3, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 193) p. 57687-57688
(download full text )
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has published its final Generic Environmental Impact Statement (GEIS) for in situ leach uranium recovery (ISR) operations in the Western United States, and is announcing a change in the agency’s approach for environmental reviews of new ISR facilities.
The agency has decided to issue full Supplemental Environmental Impact Statements (SEIS) for new recovery operations, instead of Environmental Assessments as originally planned. Under the National Environmental Policy Act, an Environmental Impact Statement is the most thorough review of potential impacts of a proposed licensing action on the environment. It involves extensive opportunities for public participation, with a draft report issued for public comment before a final report is prepared.
> View NRC release June 4, 2009
> Federal Register: June 5, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 107) p. 27052-27054 (download full text )
> Download NUREG-1910 Generic Environmental Impact Statement for In-Situ Leach Uranium Milling Facilities, Final Report, May 2009:
from NRC website ·
Alternate source for final report (ADAMS Acc. No. ML091530075)
In its comment on the final EIS, EPA continues to have environmental concerns about the lack of analysis of impacts of other leaching solutions that are proposed for use including acid lixiviants.
Federal Register: August 28, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 166) p. 44359 (download full text )
Federal Register: December 13, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 239) p. 74847-74848 (download full text )
Modifying EPA Radiation Risk Models Based on BEIR VII, Draft White Paper , U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, August 1, 2006
> See also: BEIR VII: Health Risks From Exposure To Low Levels Of Ionizing Radiation
, Colorado Environmental Coalition , Information Network for Responsible Mining , and Center for Native Ecosystems .
, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Inspector General (295k PDF)
(PDF)
> Download DOE-LM News Release July 6, 2007 (PDF)
> Download Uranium Leasing Program - Final Programmatic
Environmental Assessment, July 2007, DOE/EA 1535 (2.7M PDF)
> Download Finding of No Significant Impact (PDF)
> View Uranium Leasing Program details
> View DOE-LM announcement
> Download DOE News Release July 11, 2006 (PDF)
> Download Uranium Leasing Program, Draft Programmatic Environmental Assessment, DOE/EA-1535D, July 2006 (2.7M PDF)
> Download DOE Uranium Leasing Sites, Lease Tract Location Map, Mesa, Montrose, and San Miguel Counties, July 6, 2006 (1.1M PDF)
· COMSECY-07-0015 SRM (June 8, 2007)
- PDF ADAMS ML061440071).
> COMJSM-06-0001 - REGULATION OF GROUNDWATER PROTECTION AT IN SITU LEACH URANIUM EXTRACTION FACILITIES, January 17, 2006: HTML · PDF · PDF (ADAMS)
> STAFF REQUIREMENTS - COMJSM-06-0001 - REGULATION OF GROUNDWATER PROTECTION AT IN SITU LEACH URANIUM EXTRACTION FACILITIES (Revised), March 24, 2006: HTML · PDF · PDF (ADAMS)
Federal Register: August 22, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 161) p. 49013-49065
(download full text )
> For details, see Yucca Mountain Standards (EPA)
So far, uranium mill tailings had been the radioactive waste required to meet a radiation standard for the longest period of time (1000 years, 40 CFR 192). But, given the long half-lives of the radionuclides contained in the uranium mill tailings, it was also clear that the hazard would persist for much longer periods of time. The 1000-year standard was chosen for practical reasons, since it was believed that no engineered structure could be proven to remain protective for longer periods of time.
The proposal of a 1-million year standard for the high level waste now raises the question for a long-term standard also for uranium mill tailings - in particular, since the half-lives of the radionuclides contained in uranium mill tailings are much longer than those in high-level nuclear waste.
)
"The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is denying a petition
for rulemaking (PRM-20-26) submitted by James Salsman (petitioner). The
petitioner requested that NRC amend its regulations to modify exposure
and environmental limits for heavy metal radionuclides, in particular
uranium. NRC is denying the petition because current NRC regulations
provide adequate protection of public health and safety. The petitioner
has not presented sufficient peer-reviewed data, pertinent to the types
and levels of exposures associated with the concentration values used
in NRC's regulations, to provide a sufficient reason for NRC to
initiate a revision of its regulations. Thus, the NRC has decided not
to expend limited resources on initiating a rulemaking at this time."
Federal Register: July 25, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 144) p. 43381-43385 (download full text )
Draft Report for Comment: Documentation and Applications of the Reactive Geochemical Transport Model RATEQ, NUREG/CR-6871 · alternate source (2.69MB PDF, USGS)
RATEQ home page (USGS)
Federal Register: May 2, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 83) p. 22730-22731 (download full text )
Federal Register: June 21, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 118) p. 35743-35744 (download full text )
Federal Register: May 2, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 83) p. 22728-22729 (download full text )
Federal Register: June 21, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 118) p. 35744-35745 (download full text )
> Download SECY-04-0035 - RESULTS OF THE LICENSE TERMINATION RULE ANALYSIS OF THE USE OF INTENTIONAL MIXING OF CONTAMINATED SOIL (March 1, 2004) · Attachment 1 · Attachment 2 (PDF)
> Download Staff Requirements Memorandum (SRM), May 11, 2004 · Voting Record (VR), May 11, 2004 (PDF)
> Download Draft Report SC 87-5: Risk Management in Decommissioning of Radioactively Contaminated Sites (1M PDF - temporary link)
Individuals desiring to comment on the draft report should forward their comments to atwell@ncrp.com. Deadline for comments is February 27, 2004.
SECY-03-0186, Options and recommendations for NRC deferring active regulation of ground-water protection at in situ leach uranium extraction facilities, October 29, 2003
(download full text - PDF , also available through ADAMS )
Staff recommends that the Commission adopt Option 2, Approach 2(a): "Defer regulation of ground-water protection at ISLs to EPA-authorized non-Agreement States through development of MOUs".
- Option 1 - Reduce or eliminate duplicate ground-water protection reviews by placing greater reliance on technical reviews performed by non-Agreement States, to support NRC licensing actions.
- Option 2 - Defer active regulation of ground-water protection at ISLs to EPA-authorized non-Agreement States through: (a) the development of MOUs with individual affected States; or (b) rulemaking.
- Option 3 - Continue with the current licensing review program of staff performing independent technical reviews of license amendment requests, separate from the reviews conducted by the UIC-permitting States.
On November 19, 2003, the Commission approved staffs recommendation in Option 2a. (SRM-SECY-03-0186)
On Feb. 23, 2004, NRC issued Regulatory Issue Summary 2004-02 describing the adopted approach and containing a draft Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for non-Agreement States (the States concerned at present being Nebraska and Wyoming).
> Download NRC REGULATORY ISSUE SUMMARY 2004-02, DEFERRAL OF ACTIVE REGULATION OF GROUND-WATER PROTECTION AT IN SITU LEACH URANIUM EXTRACTION FACILITIES (PDF)
> Federal Register: March 12, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 49) p. 11899 (download full text )
On June 7, 2004, NRC issued Regulatory Issue Summary 2004-09, summarizing the
comments received from interested parties and superseding RIS 2004-02. The RIS summarizes the process that the NRC plans to use to assure that EPA-authorized States’ ground-water protection programs provide adequate protection of public health and safety, and the environment, equivalent to the NRC program.
> Download NRC REGULATORY ISSUE SUMMARY 2004-09, STATUS ON DEFERRAL OF ACTIVE REGULATION OF GROUND-WATER PROTECTION AT IN SITU LEACH URANIUM EXTRACTION FACILITIES
> Federal Register: June 24, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 121) p. 35397 (download full text )
> see also: NRC discusses In situ leaching regulations (1999)
)
> View NIRS/Public Citizen release: Government Bows to Nuclear Industry Pressure by Gutting Its Environmental Justice Policy (Aug. 24, 2004): NIRS · Public Citizen
> View NIRS Comments on NRC's Environmental Justice Policy (Feb. 4, 2004)
For the Draft Policy Statement, see:
> View NRC release Oct. 31, 2003
> Federal Register: November 5, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 214) p. 62642-62645 (download full text )
> Federal Register: December 12, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 239) p. 69428 (download full text )
> Executive Order 12898 (February 11, 1994), in: Federal Register February 16, 2003 (Vol. 59, No. 32) p. 7629: HTML version · PDF version
> See also NRC Ruleforum
> View related NIRS alert (Nov. 14, 2003)
EPA Issues Request for Comment on 'Low-Activity' Radioactive Waste
EPA release Nov. 18, 2003
for details, see: Low-Activity Radioactive Waste (U.S. EPA)
see also: Documents open for public comment (U.S. EPA), Docket ID: OAR-2003-0095
see also:
Federal Register: November 18, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 222) p. 65119-65151 (download full text )
Federal Register: March 12, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 49) p. 11826-11828 (download full text )
The Comment Period has been extended by two months until May 17, 2004.
> See also related NIRS Alert (Dec. 2003) · NIRS comment
)
)
Comments must be filed by June 13, 2003.
). The bill contains provisions for a US$10 million per year, three-year cost-shared research and development programme for the uranium mining industry:
"SEC. 14029. COOPERATIVE RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT AND SPECIAL DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS FOR THE URANIUM MINING INDUSTRY.(a) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS- There are authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary of Energy $10,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2004, 2005, and 2006 for--
(1) cooperative, cost-shared agreements between the Department of Energy and domestic uranium producers to identify, test, and develop improved in situ leaching mining technologies, including low-cost environmental restoration technologies that may be applied to sites after completion of in situ leaching operations; and
(2) funding for competitively selected demonstration projects with domestic uranium producers relating to--
(A) enhanced production with minimal environmental impacts;
(B) restoration of well fields; and
(C) decommissioning and decontamination activities.
(b) DOMESTIC URANIUM PRODUCER- For purposes of this section, the term `domestic uranium producer' has the meaning given that term in section 1018(4) of the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (42 U.S.C. 2296b-7(4)), except that the term shall not include any producer that has not produced uranium from domestic reserves on or after July 30, 1998, in Colorado, Nebraska, Texas, Utah, or Wyoming."
"The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff is developing a proposed regulation on the control of slightly radioactive solid materials originating at licensed nuclear facilities using an expanded participatory approach.The NRC staff will seek broad public participation and engage diverse viewpoints in the development of the regulation. It will consider a wide range of alternatives for the proposed rule, including the following:
(emphasis added)
- continued use of the current approach to control the release of slightly contaminated solid material on a case-by-case basis;
- recycling of slightly contaminated - but acceptably safe - solid materials, which could include recycle into consumer products;
- release of material restricted to only certain uses or destinations, such as industrial uses or landfills, where the potential for public exposure is small; and
- no release of such material for other uses, thus requiring permanent disposal."
> View NRC release Nov. 6, 2002
> View NRC Rulemaking: NRC Examination of its Approach for Control of Solid Materials at Licensed Facilities
> View related Release by Public Citizen (Nov. 8, 2002)
On Feb. 28, 2003, NRC issued a Request for comments on the scope of the proposed rulemaking and a notice of workshop.
Federal Register: February 28, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 40) p. 9595-9602 (download full text )
A workshop was held on May 21-22, 2003.
> View NRC release March 10, 2003
In August 2003, NRC released the final report (the complete report was only made available in Oct. 2004, however):
Radiological Assessments for Clearance of Materials from Nuclear Facilities , U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, NUREG-1640, June 2003:
"This report provides a complete description of calculations and their results estimating potential annual doses, normalized to a unit concentration, to an individual following the clearance of specific materials. These materials are scrap iron and steel, copper, aluminum, and concrete rubble from licensed nuclear facilities. Clearance means the removal of radiological controls by the licensing authority. [...]"
On March 4, 2004, NRC published a summary of the over 2,600 public comments received on the Feb. 28, 2003, Request for comments:
> Download Summary and Categorization of Public Comments on Controlling the Disposition of Solid Materials (NUREG/CR-6682, Supplement 1), March 2004
> View Public Comments (long list - 950k HTML)
> View/Download NIRS Public Comment June 30, 2003: MS Word · HTML · PDF (with complete list of assigners)
On March 31, 2005, NRC staff requested Commission approval for publication of a related Proposed Rule.
> Download Rulemaking Issue Notation Vote SECY-05-0054 (March 31, 2005) (6.7MB PDF)
On June 1, 2005, the NRC disapproved the staff request to publish the Proposed Rule and defered the rulemaking "based on the fact that the Agency is currently faced with several high priority and complex tasks, that the current approach to review specific cases on an individual basis is fully protective of public health and safety, and that the immediate need for this rule has changed due to the shift in timing for reactor decommissioning.".
> Download Staff Requirements Memorandum June 1, 2005 (PDF)
> See also:
> View Federal Register: October 7, 2002 (Volume 67, Number 194) p. 62403-62410 (download full text )
The comment period expires December 23, 2002.
> View NRC release September 27, 2002
> View related NRC Rulemaking Forum
> See also: NRC soliciting comments on Draft Standard Review Plan for Reclamation of Title II uranium tailings (1999)
> Download NUREG-1623 "Design of Erosion Protection for Long-Term Stabilization" (coming sooner or later) · alternate source: ADAMS (image scan only)
):
"[...] The purpose of an interaction profile is to evaluate data on the toxicology of the ''whole'' priority mixture (if available) and on the joint toxic action of the chemicals in the mixture in order to recommend approaches for the exposure-based assessment of the potential hazard to public health. [...]"
Comments must be received on or before November 30, 2002.
> Download Draft Interaction profile for cyanide, fluoride, nitrate, and uranium
):
"SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is proposing to amend its regulations to require NRC approval for transfers from licensees of low-concentrations of source material (less than 0.05 percent by weight) to persons exempt from licensing. The object of this proposed action is to ensure that the regulations regarding transfers of materials containing low concentrations of source material are adequate to protect public health and safety."Submit comments by November 12, 2002.
> View NRC Release August 26, 2002
> View NRC Rulemaking Forum
> See also: NRC issues Radiological Assessment of Exemptions for Source and Byproduct Materials
)
> Download Draft NUREG-1761
)
"The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has issued revisions to two guides in its Regulatory Guide Series. [...]Revision 1 of Regulatory Guide 8.30, ``Health Physics Surveys in Uranium Recovery Facilities,'' describes guidance acceptable to the NRC staff on health physics surveys at uranium recovery facilities. These health physics surveys are used in protecting workers at uranium recovery facilities from radiation and the chemical toxicity of uranium.
Revision 1 of Regulatory Guide 8.31, ``Information Relevant to Ensuring that Occupational Radiation Exposures at Uranium Recovery Facilities Will Be As Low As Is Reasonably Achievable,'' provides guidance on design criteria and administrative practices that are acceptable to the NRC staff for maintaining occupational exposures as low as is reasonably achievable (ALARA) in uranium recovery facilities."
> Download NRC Regulatory Guides - Occupational Health (Division 8)
> See also: NRC Releases Draft Regulatory Guides on Occupational Exposures in Uranium Recovery Facilities for Comment
Control and Release of Property with Residual Radioactive Material for use with DOE 5400.5, Radiation Protection of the Public and the Environment, DOE G 441.1-XX (Draft, 04/05/2002, EH)
[The Guide provides DOE's guidance for the control and release of property that may contain residual radioactive material.]
> View HTML (126k)
Comments on the Guide are due June 4, 2002.
> View full report online: The Disposition Dilemma: Controlling the Release of Solid Materials from Nuclear Regulatory Commission-Licensed Facilities (2002)
> View related Public Citizen release, March 21, 2002
> See also: NRC developing rule for Control of Solid Materials from Licensed Facilities
DRINKING WATER - Revisions to EPA's Cost Analysis for the Radon Rule Would Improve Its Credibility and Usefulness, GAO-02-333, February 2002
> Download GAO report (PDF)
> see also:
EPA proposes standard for Radon in drinking water
> See also: Uranium ingestion: current standards
> See also: U.S. EPA Radionuclide Preliminary Remediation Goals (PRGs) for Superfund Electronic Calculator
)
On November 15, 2002, NRC staff issued the finalized NUREG for Commission approval.
See: SECY-02-0204 (November 15, 2002) - UPDATE OF URANIUM RECOVERY GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS (2M PDF)
The Final Report was released in August 2003:
> Download NUREG-1620 Rev. 1 .
> See also Notice of Availability in
Federal Register: August 25, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 164)
p. 51040-51043 (download full text )
> See also: 2000 news
)
On November 15, 2002, NRC staff issued the finalized NUREG for Commission approval.
See: SECY-02-0204 (November 15, 2002) - UPDATE OF URANIUM RECOVERY GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS (2M PDF)
The Final plan was released in August 2003:
> Download NUREG-1569 Rev. 1
> See also Notice of Availability in
Federal Register: August 25, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 164)
p. 51034-51040 (download full text )
> See also: 1997 news
(116k PDF)
"SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is denying a petition for rulemaking (PRM-170-5) submitted by the National Mining Association (NMA). In its petition, NMA asked the NRC to conduct a rulemaking that would establish the basis for waiving all licensing and inspection fees and annual fees imposed on uranium recovery licensees, or alternatively, to waive the fees associated with a contemplated rulemaking that would develop requirements for licensing uranium and thorium recovery facilities. In support of its petition the NMA argues that because of adverse economic conditions, the requested fee relief is in the public interest since it would help ensure the continued viability of a domestic uranium recovery industry.
The NRC is denying the petition because the circumstances outlined by the petitioner do not qualify the uranium recovery industry for a ''public interest'' fee exemption. Further, with extremely limited exceptions, the NRC does not base its fees on the economic circumstances of particular licensees or classes of licensees. Moreover, the Commission does not envision instituting a rulemaking proceeding to establish a new regulation for licensing uranium and thorium recovery facilities."
> View Federal Register notice Nov. 2, 2001 (Vol. 66, No. 213) p. 55604-55607
> View text of the petition for rulemaking
> View related documents or provide comments: NRC Ruleforum
"The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC) Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research is preparing a research program plan on radionuclide transport in the environment and is seeking public comments on the plan. The radionuclide transport research program is intended to provide data and computational tools to assess the effect on public health and safety and the environment from nuclear materials that may enter the environment from NRC-licensed activities. The technical issues examined include source-term characterization; the effectiveness of engineered and natural containment systems surrounding the radioactive material; multi-phase flow of water, including episodic infiltration, into and through the environment; the transport of radioactive material through the geosphere; the transport of radioactive material through the biosphere; and estimating exposures of members of the public to radiation from these materials. Results from the radionuclide transport research program are intended to be generically applicable to NRC licensing activities including the decommissioning of facilities, disposal of uranium mill tailings, low- level radioactive waste disposal, and high-level radioactive waste disposal."The NRC will consider all written comments received before November 30, 2001.
"The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is announcing, for public comment, the availability of a draft document "Environmental Review Guidance for Licensing Actions Associated with NMSS Programs" (NUREG-1748). This document provides guidance for the planning and implementation of National Environmental Policy Act requirements for all non-reactor facilities, e.g., those which fabricate nuclear fuel, dispose high-level radioactive waste, fabricate sources, etc."Comments received by September 30, 2002, will be considered.
(Oct. 11, 2001)
"NRC staff participated with staff from other Federal agencies in developing a Multi-Agency Radiological Laboratory Analytical Protocols (MARLAP) manual. The Federal agencies that participated with the NRC in developing the MARLAP manual included: the Department of Defense, the Department of Energy, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Food and Drug Administration, the U.S. Geological Survey, and the National Institute for Standards and Technology. MARLAP provides guidance for the planning, implementation, and assessment phases of those projects requiring laboratory analysis of radionuclides. The public comment version of the MARLAP document recently was finalized, based on completion of an internal inter/intra-agency review of the document. [...] "
(NRC Weekly Information Report for the Week Ending August 17, 2001)
Federal Register notice Aug. 31, 2001 (Vol. 66, No. 170) p. 45972-45974
MARLAP website
):
"SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is announcing the availability of a final revision of the Office of State and Tribal Programs (STP) Procedure SA-900: ``Termination of Uranium Milling Licenses in Agreement States,'' and an analysis of comments: ``Responses to Comments on the Draft Revision of STP Procedure SA- 900.'' The procedure describes the NRC review process for making determinations that all applicable standards and requirements have been met prior to Agreement State uranium milling license termination."> Download Revised STP Procedure SA-900
(180k PDF)
):
"The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is announcing the availability of a draft revision of the Office of State and Tribal Programs (STP) Procedure SA-900: Termination of Uranium Milling Licenses in Agreement States for review and comment. The procedure describes the NRC review process for making determinations that all applicable standards and requirements have been met before Agreement State uranium milling license termination. Stakeholder's comments are requested on the draft revised procedure before NRC issues the final procedure."
> see also:
):
)
> for details, see: STP Web site - U Mill License Termination
"National Research Council Meeting on Potential Study on Harmonization of Chemical and Radioactive Hazards
On November 28, 2000, staff from the Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards (NMSS), the Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research, and the Deputy Executive Director for Materials, Research and State Programs (RES) participated in a Meeting of the National Research Council on a potential study of harmonization of technical concepts and practices for regulating radioactive and chemical hazards." [...]
"Some of the potential issues for such a study included: (1) the need to define "harmonization" (e.g., whether it includes risk assessment, risk management, risk communication, and/or regulation); (2) existing problems that result from a lack of harmony; (3) obstacles to achieving harmony; and (4) the benefits that might result from greater uniformity in regulation. The National Research Council will prepare a draft work scope for consideration by federal agencies and others, and for possible funding." (NRC Weekly Information Report for the Week Ending Dec. 1, 2000)
and the Snake River Alliance requesting that the NRC assert jurisdiction over the disposal of mill tailings from Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP ) sites.
> view Directors Decision DD-00-06
Note: since the greek mu (µ) character does not display in the text version when viewed in a browser, download of the PDF version is recommended, but some mu's are missing still):
"SUMMARY: Today, EPA is finalizing maximum contaminant level goals (MCLGs), maximum contaminant levels (MCLs), and monitoring, reporting, and public notification requirements for radionuclides. Today's rule is only applicable to community water systems. Today's rule includes requirements for uranium, which is not currently regulated, and revisions to the monitoring requirements for combined radium-226 and radium-228, gross alpha particle radioactivity, and beta particle and photon radioactivity. Based on an improved understanding of the risks associated with radionuclides in drinking water, the current MCL for combined radium-226/-228 and the current MCL for gross alpha particle radioactivity will be retained. Based on the need for further evaluation of the various risk management issues associated with the MCL for beta particle and photon radioactivity and the flexibility to review and modify standards under the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), the current MCL for beta particle and photon radioactivity will be retained in this final rule, but will be further reviewed in the near future." [...]"With today's rule, EPA is promulgating a uranium MCL of 30 µg/L. The SDWA generally requires that EPA set the MCL for each contaminant as close as feasible to the MCLG, based on available technology and taking costs to large systems into account. The 1996 amendments to the SDWA added the requirement that the Administrator determine whether or not the quantifiable and non-quantifiable benefits of an MCL justify the quantifiable and non-quantifiable costs based on the Health Risk Reduction and Cost Analysis (HRRCA) required under section 1412(b)(3)(C). The 1996 SDWA amendments also provided new discretionary authority for the Administrator to set an MCL that is less stringent than the feasible level if the benefits of an MCL set at the feasible level would not justify the costs (section 1412(b)(6)). This final rule establishing an MCL for uranium of 30 µg/L is the first time EPA has invoked this new authority." [emphasis added]
Note: the proposed rule of 1991 had included an MCL for uranium of 20 µg/L, and the provisional guideline value established by the World Health Organization (WHO) in 1998 is 2 µg/L.
> See EPA announcement, rule text, and background documents (Dec. 7, 2000)
> See also:
EPA developing new rule for Radionuclides in Drinking Water
Uranium Toxicity
On January 18, 2001, EPA announced the availability of the Draft Implementation Guidance for Radionuclides (in drinking water), based on the new rule. Comments must be submitted on or before March 30, 2001.
(Federal Register: Jan. 18, 2001 (Vol. 66, No. 12) p. 4826 )
> Download Draft Implementation Guidance for Radionuclides, December 2000
"The US nuclear industry has taken legal action against plans to establish new standards for public drinking water, saying they could impose unwarranted restrictions on nuclear facilities – in particular, the planned Yucca Mountain final repository.
The industry has filed a petition with the US court of appeals for the
district of Columbia circuit, seeking review of the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) decision to establish maximum contaminant levels for radionuclides in drinking water. It argues that the EPA did not follow legally-required procedures and did not base the final rule on the best available scientific evidence, as required by law." (NucNews Jan. 22, 2001)
On February 26, 2003, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld EPA's rule setting limits on the permissible level of radionuclides in drinking water.
"PER CURIAM: The petitioners—the City of Waukesha and its water utility customer Bruce Zivney, trade associations Nuclear Energy Institute (‘‘NEI’’) and National Mining Association (‘‘NMA’’), and advocacy group Radiation, Science & Health (‘‘RSH’’)—seek review of regulations promulgated by the Environmental Protection Agency (‘‘EPA’’) pursuant to the Safe Drinking Water Act of 1970 (‘‘SDWA’’ or ‘‘Act’’), 42 U.S.C. §§ 300f et seq. The challenged regulations establish standards governing radionuclide levels in public water systems. Specifically, they set the maximum contaminant level goal (‘‘MCLG’’) and the maximum contaminant level (‘‘MCL’’) for radium-226 and radium-228, naturally occurring uranium, and various beta/photon emitters. Petitioners contend the regulations violate the SDWA and the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. §§ 551 et seq., (‘‘APA’’) because in setting the radionuclides standards EPA did not (1) properly conduct required cost-benefit analyses; (2) use the ‘‘best available science’’ to determine the appropriate MCLGs and MCLs; or (3) adequately respond to comments submitted during the rulemaking. For its part, EPA contests petitioners’ standing to challenge the regulations and defends the standards on the merits. We conclude that all petitioners except RSH have standing and that EPA complied with the requirements of the SDWA and the APA." (excerpt from Court Opinion)> View EPA release Feb. 26, 2003
(PDF)
(February 15, 2001) (41 pages, 2.8M PDF)
> Download "Proposal for a Pilot Program to Test Rulemaking Activities Under an Alliance Concept" , National Materials Working Group, March 8, 2001 (6 pages, 300k PDF)
During a public meeting with the NRC, the U.S. uranium mining industry requested a temporary exemption from licensing fees, due to the low uranium price.
> View transcript of Public Meeting on Rulemaking and Guidance Development for Uranium Recovery Industry (April 10, 2001)
(November 30, 2000):
> see also: DOE to prepare PEIS on disposition of scrap metal from enrichment plants and other sources
(208k PDF)
DG-8027 Information Relevant to Ensuring that Occupational Radiation Exposures at Uranium Recovery Facilities Will Be As Low As Is Reasonably Achievable.
(Proposed Revision 1 to Regulatory Guide 8.31)
Comments will be most helpful if received by December 15, 2000.
> View Federal Register Notice Oct 5, 2000
> Download DG-8027 (74k PDF)
> See also: NRC releases revised Regulatory Guides on Occupational Exposures in Uranium Recovery Facilities
NRC Risk Assessment homepage
> View Plan for Using Risk Information in the Materials and Waste Arenas: Case Studies (Federal Register Notice, Nov 7, 2000)
> View SECY-99-100 "Framework for Risk-informed Regulation in the Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards" March 31, 1999
):"SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has published the Final Standard Review Plan for Review of a Reclamation Plan for Mill Tailings Sites Under Title II of the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act (NUREG-1620). An NRC source and byproduct material license is required under the provisions of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, part 40 (10 CFR part 40), Domestic Licensing of Source Material, in conjunction with uranium or thorium milling, or with byproduct material at sites formerly associated with such milling. An applicant for a new reclamation plan, or for the renewal or amendment of an existing license, is required to provide detailed information on the facilities, and procedures to be used, and if appropriate, an environmental report that discusses the effect of proposed operations on public health and safety and on the environment. This information is used by Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff to determine whether the proposed activities will be protective of public health and safety and the environment. The standard review plan provides guidance to NRC staff for the review of reclamation plans while ensuring consistency and uniformity among the staff reviews. Each section in the review plan provides detailed review guidance on subject matter required in a standard reclamation plan. The review plan is intended to improve the understanding of the staff review process by interested members of the public and the uranium recovery industry. The final version includes updates based on public comment on the draft Standard Review Plan for the Review of a Reclamation Plan for Mill Tailings Sites Under Title II of the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act."
Standard Review Plan for the Review of a Reclamation Plan for Mill Tailings Sites
Under Title II of the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act, NUREG-1620, May 2000
> Download NUREG-1620 (446k PDF)
(see also 1999 news)
(July 26, 2000)
> View also 1999 news
(July 26, 2000)
> View also 1999 news
):
"SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is announcing the availability of, and requesting comments on, NUREG-1724, ''Standard Review Plan for the Review of DOE Plans for Achieving Regulatory Compliance at Sites with Contaminated Ground Water under Title I of the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act.''
The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is conducting ground-water corrective actions under the Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action Groundwater Project. This Standard Review Plan will provide guidance to NRC staff performing safety and environmental reviews of ground-water quality compliance activities conducted by the DOE under Title I of the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act.
The purpose of this Standard Review Plan is to ensure the quality and uniformity of NRC staff reviews of site-specific documents describing DOE plans for achieving regulatory compliance at sites with contaminated groundwater. The standard review plan is written to cover a variety of site conditions and plans. Each section provides a description of the areas of review, review procedures, acceptance criteria, and an evaluation of findings."
> View Abstract and Download SRP NUREG-1724
Federal Register: Sep 9, 2002 (Vol. 67, No. 174) p. 57159-57169 (download full text ):
"This action amends the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs), which regulate the air emissions of radionuclides other than radon-222 and radon-220 from facilities owned or operated by the Department of Energy (DOE) (Subpart H) and from Federal Facilities other than Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) licensees and not covered by Subpart H (Subpart I). [...]> See also: Federal Register: May 9, 2000 (Vol. 65, No. 90) p. 29933-29939 (download full text
Today's action amends 40 CFR Part 61, subparts H and I to require the use of ANSI/HPS N13.1-1999 for all applicable newly constructed or modified facilities. Today's action also imposes additional inspection requirements on existing facilities subject to subparts H and I of 40 CFR Part 61."
):
):
"SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed regulations to limit the amount of radionuclides found in drinking water on July 18, 1991. In general, the proposal revised current National Primary Drinking Water regulations (NPDWR); a NPDWR was proposed for uranium which is unregulated. Since that time, new information has become available which the Agency is considering in finalizing these proposed regulations. In addition, the 1996 Amendments to the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) contained provisions which directly affect the 1991 proposed rule.
This document presents additional information relevant to the Maximum Contaminant Level Goals (MCLGs), the Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs), and monitoring requirements contained in the 1991 proposal. EPA is seeking public review and comment on these new data. The Agency is also soliciting comments on several implementation options that are being evaluated for inclusion in the final regulations.
DATES: Written comments should be postmarked or delivered by hand by June 20, 2000."
> view background documents (EPA)
For uranium, which has not been regulated so far, an MCL of 20 µg/L had been proposed in 1991. Now, three options are being considered: 20, 40, and 80 µg/L.
The current standard for radium is an MCL of 5 pCi/L (0.185 Bq/L) for Ra-226 and Ra-228 combined. The 1991 proposal would have allowed for 20 pCi/L (0.74 Bq/L) for each of the two nuclides. The current proposal is to maintain the current MCL.
> see also:
EPA proposes standard for Radon in drinking water
Uranium Toxicity
has directed the staff to request the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) Board on Energy and Environmental Systems to conduct a 9-month study and provide recommendations on possible alternatives for the control of slightly contaminated radioactive materials originating at licensed nuclear facilities. In addition, the agency has scheduled public meetings at its headquarters in Rockville, Maryland, on May 3 and 9, 2000, to discuss this issue. (NRC News Release April 12, 2000 )
NRC Background information · NRC Rulemaking homepage
NUREG-1640, Vols. 1 & 2, Radiological Assessments for Clearance of Equipment and Materials from Nuclear Facilities (draft report for comment)
NUREG/CR-6682, Summary and Categorization of Public Comments on the Control of Solid Materials, September 2000
Federal Register: June 30, 1999 (Volume 64, Number 125) p. 35090-35100: Release of Solid Materials at Licensed Facilities: Issues Paper, Scoping Process for Environmental Issues, and Notice of Public Meetings (view full text )
> See also: NRC to develop proposed regulation on control of slightly radioactive solid materials
will meet on Tuesday, April 25 through Thursday, April 27, 2000. The meeting is open to the public.):
"During the meeting the RAC also intends to draft its advisory on Technologically Enhanced Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material (TENORM). The Agency is asking the RAC's advice on the adequacy of EPA's proposed approach for characterizing TENORM, and whether EPA is appropriately applying this approach in the technical report for uranium mining TENORM which is under development. The charge questions to be answered include, but are not limited to the following:
(a) Is EPA's general approach for characterizing TENORM in a given technical report adequate;
(b) Has the general approach been appropriately applied for uranium mining TENORM?; and
(c) Is the risk assessment approach, as outlined, adequate for evaluating risks from uranium mining TENORM? In particular, have the key exposure scenarios been considered?"
> See also EPA SAB project description:
Project 00-021 Review of Draft Uranium Mining TENORM Technical Report
):
"The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has issued draft NUREG-1717, ``Systematic Radiological Assessment of Exemptions for Source and Byproduct Materials.'' This report is an assessment of potential radiation doses associated with the current exemptions for byproduct and source material in Title 10, of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). Doses were estimated for the normal life cycle of a particular product or material, covering distribution and transport, intended or expected routine use, and disposal using dose assessment methods consistent with the current requirements in 10 CFR Part 20. In addition, assessments of potential doses due to accidents and misuse were estimated. Also presented is an assessment of potential radiological impacts associated with selected products containing byproduct material that currently may only be used under a general license and may be potential candidates for exemption from licensing requirements.> Download final report NUREG-1717 (2001)
Licensees, Agreement States and all other interested parties are encouraged to submit comments and relevant data on this report. Comments and suggestions on this NUREG should be submitted by June 30, 2000, to assist the staff in developing the final NUREG-1717." [...]
> see older issues
| Colorado |
> see more recent issues
Colorado agency approves new rules to protect groundwater during in-situ leach uranium mining:
State officials have approved new rules intended to protect Colorado's groundwater during a type of uranium mining that extracts the mineral by injecting a solution underground.
The requirements approved Thursday (Aug. 12) by the Mined Land Reclamation Board include detailed environmental protection plans for uranium mines and maintaining existing groundwater quality or at state standards.
Mine applications must include detailed information on the pre-mining water quality. Public input will be allowed.
The rules carry out three laws passed by the Legislature in 2008 out of concern about in-situ, or "in place," mining, which injects a solution underground to dissolve and extract the mineral.
An in-situ uranium mine has been proposed about 70 miles north of Denver.
(AP Aug. 12, 2010)
Among the key provisions of the new rules:
> Download Colorado DRMS release Aug. 12, 2010 (PDF)
Rulemaking scheduled: On Jan. 28, 2010, the Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Board scheduled the rulemaking:
(PDF)
Comments invited:
On Oct. 20, 2009, the Colorado Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety (DRMS) issued a redraft of the rules for HB08-1161.
Deadline for written comments is November 10, 2009.
A stakeholder meeting will be held on December 3, 2009.
> View Colorado DRMS Rulemaking
> Download Draft Set of Proposed New Rules and Revisions to Hard Rock Rules October 20, 2009 (511k PDF)
> View HB08-1161 details
gave initial approval to a bill by Fort Collins legislators that would strengthen the rules for in-situ leach mining, a process that injects substances underground that critics say could lead to the poisoning of groundwater and the landscape.
"This bill ensures uranium mining doesn't leave behind a toxic legacy. By encouraging responsible mining practices now, we'll protect our drinking water, our communities and our public health well into the future," said Rep. John Kefalas, D-Fort Collins.
The measure (House Bill 1161) would require mining companies to show they will reclaim and restore groundwater to pre-mining quality or to state standards. It also would require mine operators to notify all landowners within the vicinity about the proposed permit.
The bill was introduced after one mining company, Powertech, told the state it wants to begin in situ leach uranium mining in northern Colorado.
(The Coloradoan Mar. 28, 2008)
There was unanimous, bipartisan support on April 17, 2008, for a bill aimed at tightening uranium mining regulation in Colorado. HB 1161, sponsored by Fort Collins Democrat lawmakers Reps. John Kefalas and Randy Fischer and Republican Sen. Steve Johnson, passed the Senate Local Affairs Committee by a 7-0 vote. (The Coloradoan Apr. 17, 2008)
On Apr. 30, 2008, House Bill 1161 passed the Senate Second Reading with Amendments.
On May 2, 2008, House Bill 1161 passed Senate on Third Reading with a vote of 32-2. Because minor amendments were added to the legislation after it passed the House, the bill must go back to the House for approval before heading to Gov. Bill Ritter's desk for consideration. (The Coloradoan May 2, 2008)
On May 5, 2008, Senate amendments to HB 1161 were approved in the House by 49-15. (The Coloradoan May 5, 2008)
On May 20, 2008, Governor Ritter signed the bill into law. (Vail Daily May 20, 2008)
> Enacted Law, 2008 Session Law Chapter 252 - "An act concerning an increase in the regulatory authority of the mined land reclamation board over mining, and, in connection therewith, ensuring the protection of ground water and public health, and making an appropriation": View HTML · Download PDF
> View HB08-1161 regulations
> view older issues
| Navajo Nation |
> see more recent issues
> See also: Navajo Nation outlaws uranium mining
by a vote of 63-19.
The final language read: "No person shall engage in uranium mining and processing on any sites within Navajo Indian Country."
(Farmington Daily Times, Apr. 20, 2005, Arizona Republic, Apr. 30, 2005)
> Download Diné Natural Resources Protection Act of 2005 (282k PDF, SRIC)
> Download Navajo Nation President release, April 30, 2005 (PDF, SRIC)
The Karl Souder Water Protection Award of the New Mexico Environmental Law Center was awarded to three Navajos, including a youth and a tribal councilman, for their role in banning uranium mining on the Navajo Nation:
Navajo Tribal Council Delegate George Arthur, Navajo activist and SRIC Navajo Liaison Harris Arthur (posthumous), and the Eastern Navajo Dine Against Uranium Mining (ENDAUM) for their work to pass the Dine Natural Resources Protection Act, which bans uranium mining and processing in Navajo Indian Country.
(Indian Country Today, Sep. 5, 2005)
of the Navajo Nation Council reversed the Nation's policy about uranium mining. While the 1983 moratorium was affirmed for open-pit and underground mining, the in-situ leaching of uranium now is welcomed.
The full text of the Resources Committee resolution and background documents are available through ADAMS .
> view older issues
| New Mexico |
> see more recent issues
, which was opposed by environmental organizations, created a funding source linked to future uranium production.
It would have taken half the proceeds of an existing excise tax on uranium and diverted it to a cleanup fund. It also would have imposed a new surtax of 50 cents a pound on mined and milled uranium and directed it to the same fund.
) to pay for cleaning up contamination from abandoned uranium mines and mills.
The measure would earmark money from taxes on future uranium mining and processing for a cleanup fund administered by the Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources Department.
The legislation would establish a surtax on uranium mining and processing. A portion of revenues from an existing severance tax on mining also would go into the proposed cleanup fund.
The proposed cleanup program would apply to sites in which mining and milling took place before July 2008. The House passed the measure on a 54-11 vote and sent it to the Senate for consideration.
(Las Cruces Sun-News Feb. 8, 2008)
upheld a 2004 New Mexico Water Quality Control Commission decision to lower the human health standard for uranium in groundwater from 5 mg/L to 0.03 mg/L.
November 22, 2006 - New Mexico Mining Association and New Mexico Oil and Gas Association v. New Mexico Water Quality Control Commission, New Mexico Environment Department, and New Mexico Department of Health, Nos. 25,186 & 25,191
Case Summary: Commission's lowering of numeric human health standard for uranium in water from 5 mg/L to .03 mg/L was supported by scientific data and statutory authority and appellants' arguments that the standard is unattainable and economically infeasible can be dealt with in the future on a case by case basis when there are specific facts before the court, which there are not now; commission's selection of federal drinking water standard was supported by evidence that New Mexicans get their drinking water from places not regulated by the federal law.
> Download court's Slip Opinion
> view older issues
| North Dakota |
> see more recent issues
> view older issues
| South Dakota |
> see more recent issues
(PDF)
On April 3, 2008, the South Dakota Water Management Board approved new rules for injection wells for uranium mining operations proposed for the Black Hills region.
Now, the rules and a similar set before the state Board of Minerals and Environment must be reviewed by a legislative committee and checked by the Secretary of State, a process that could take two or three months.
(Rapid City Journal Apr. 4, 2008)
> See also: South Dakota adopts In Situ Leach Mine Regulations
> View: In situ leach mine regulations (South Dakota Department of Environment and Natural Resources)
> view older issues
| Texas |
> see more recent issues
Texas Register Volume 34, Number 45, November 6, 2009, Pages 7717-7924:
Proposed 16 TAC Chapter 11. SURFACE MINING AND RECLAMATION DIVISION, Subchapter C. SUBSTANTIVE RULES--URANIUM EXPLORATION AND SURFACE MINING
Request for Comments on Surface Mining and Reclamation Division Forms
, relating to Surface Mining and Reclamation Division, and proposes several new rules under newly titled Chapter 11, relating to Uranium Exploration and Surface Mining..
Railroad Commission of Texas Proposed Rules :
(155k PDF)
· MSRMaps
On Oct. 23, 2007, Valhi, Inc. reported that its wholly owned subsidiary, Waste Control Specialists LLC ("WCS"), received notification that the Executive Director of the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality ("TCEQ") has prepared a draft license and made a preliminary decision that this license meets all statutory and regulatory requirements for the disposal of byproduct material at WCS' site in Andrews County, Texas. Byproduct material includes uranium or thorium mill tailings as well as equipment, pipe and other materials used to handle and process the mill tailings.
Written public comments and requests for public meeting or a contested case hearing must be submitted within 30 days from Nov. 9, 2007.
> View Notice of Completion of Technical Review Proposed Radioactive Material License, Texas Register, November 9, 2007, Volume 32, Number 45, Pages 8061-8222, In Addition
> Download related documents (TCEQ)
> Download license application (WCS)
On May 21, 2008, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality approved the license in a 2-1 vote. The company still has about nine months of construction before it can begin burying about 3,700 canisters of the uranium byproduct waste. (AP May 21, 2008)
(TCEQ)
would put the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality in charge of regulating the storage, processing and disposal of uranium mining and radioactive waste. Those activities are now divided between the commission and the Texas Department of State Health Services.
> view older issues
| Utah |
> see more recent issues
> See also: Utah assumes State regulation of uranium mills and tailings
)
NRC has released its Staff Draft Assessment of the State of Utah's proposal to extend its Agreement State status with the U.S. NRC to the regulation of uranium mills and tailings.
NRC release Feb. 12, 2004
Federal Register: February 12, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 29) p. 7026-7029
(download full text )
Federal Register: February 19, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 33) p. 7803-7806 (download full text )
Federal Register: February 25, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 37) p. 8703-8706 (download full text )
Federal Register: March 4, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 43) p. 10269-10272 (download full text )
> Download NRC Staff Draft Assessment of the Utah Proposed 11e.(2) Amendment Application, Feb. 6, 2004 (ML040370585) (PDF)
> See also: Utah seeking State regulation of uranium mills and tailings (1999)
Federal Register: September 7, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 172) p. 54164-54165 (download full text )
On Oct. 24, 2003, NRC issued a further notice, announcing that the two documents referenced in the August notice, i.e., NUREG-0706, Final Generic Environmental Impact Statement on Uranium Milling (September 1980), and EPA 520/1-83-008, Final
Environmental Impact Statement for Standards for the Control of Byproduct Materials from Uranium Processing (September 1983), have been placed into NRC's document system (ADAMS).
The comment period had been extended through November 24, 2003.
Federal Register: October 24, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 206), p. 60885-60886 (download full text )
On Aug. 27, 2003, the U.S. NRC issued a Notice and opportunity for public hearing on Utah's proposal to use alternative groundwater protection standards for uranium mills and 11e.(2) byproduct material disposal facilities.
Federal Register: August 27, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 166) p. 51516-51518
(download full text )
> See also documents posted at Utah DEQ Division of Radiation Control - Uranium Mills
> See also NRC Ruleforum
> view older issues
| Virginia |
> see more recent issues · older issues
| Wyoming |
> see more recent issues
> for details, see Wyoming Dept. of Env. Quality - Current Events
> view older issues
| HOME WISE Uranium Project > Mining & Milling > Current Regulatory Issues - USA > |