CINTICHEM, INC.P.O. BOX 81BTUXEDO, NEW YORK 10987 [914] 351-2131

September 27, 1991

Dr. B. K. KothariNew York State Department of LaborOne Main StreetBrooklyn, NY 11201

Dear Dr. Kothari:

SUBJECT: NYSDOL Radioactive Material License 0729-0322 forCintichemr, Inc. and Dr. Kothari's Inspection ofLicense. on August 28, 1991

This letter is -in response to your September 9, 1991 inspectionreport (attached) of your visit to Cintichem, Inc. on August 28,1991. Your inspection concerned the spill of "T-l" water onAugust 23, 1991. You received procedure XDWP-008 forDimineralization of T-1 Water, a 2:00 PM August 28 S-4 watersample, cut sheet for valve V2, data sheets for water assays ofT-l, S-4 and various monitoring wells, "chronology" NSCsubmittal, and "synopsis" NSC -submittal. The last threedocuments were also sent to Dr. Bores of the NRC.

Yo~ur cited violation of 12 NYCRR 38..9 does not appearappropriate. Cintichem did "transfer, receive, possess or useany licensed radioactive material"... ."in accordance with theterms of the license". Procedures were followed. The probleminvolved stopping a procedure when it was partially completed andnot having sufficient backup systems for water flow in case theValves malfunctioned. Yes, a test with uncontaminated waterwould have been prudent. But this is a recommendation, not alicensed condition.

Corrective actions have been that the procedure was stopped andinvestigated and the piping was connected as before the procedurestarted. The preliminary recommendations from the NSC meeting ofAugust 27, 1991 are as follows:

G. Lessons Learned/Preliminary Recommendations:

1. Engineering should have obtained more operating informationand limitations on remote operated valves. NSC guidelinesfor safety reviews will be reviewed and where appropriate,supplemented. (e.g. Future safety evaluations will includea more detailed failure modes analyses. Such an analysiswould have prescribed the provision of plugs for theoutlets of Vl and V2 in this case.) .

EJT/66.91B9111010197 910927 Z. b1L,L~~PDR ADOCK 050000542

0 ~ .PDR . ¼•6 irIL

NYSDOL Radioactive Material License 0729-0322 etc..'September 27, 1991Page 2

2. The PE and the Waste Supervisor should have coordinated ontime to start transfer of water so that the pipeconnections could have been monitored as the ProjectEngineer intended. A lock-out and sign-off procedure willbe required to assure that inspection and leak testing willoccur.

3. Evaporator room sump. should have been covered to preventcontaminating the sump. A cover will be installed whenrisk of contamination exists.

4. Any deviation from the plan of the day, will require a newmeeting with the stand-up group.

This item is still open and the new piping procedure has notcontinued. The task will proceed following NSC review of therevised procedure.

The attached correspondence clearly describes the role of NRC andDOL with regard to material that has SNM as does this "T-1"water. Mr. Rouse's (NRC) May 1982 document (attached), of whichDr..Bradley was copied, states on the second paragraph of page 3:

"At the point where the byproduct material is essentiallycompletely separated from special nuclear material, processing itshould continue under the regulatory control of the AgreementState. Other byproduct material, not as well separated, whichcontinues in process or storage co-mingled with licensed specialnuclear material will be considered to be subject to NRC _

regulatory authority on the grounds that safety of handling ofthe special nuclear material requires NRC control of the co-mingled byproduct material at these phases of the process.However,-NRC will closely coordinate its activities with those ofthe State."

The water that was involved in this spill was primarily 'washwater from the hot cells and it contained. U-235 in addition tothe byproduct material. Considering the above referenced opinionby the NRC that was' endorsed by NYSDOL, we Viewed this incidentto be under the sole jurisdiction of the NRC.

In addition, if this were an.area of dual responsibility, on page2, C(3) of the attached May 1989 agreement signed by the NRC,NYSDEC and Dr. Bradley of the NYSDOL, states:

(3) The three agencies will coordinate enforcement actions on acase-by-case basis in order to minimize duplication orinconsistent inspection findings, citations, orders, civilpenalties, etc., in areas of dual responsibility. Each ofthe three agencies reserves the right to pursue furtherenforcement action if it is required by law or otherwisedeemed necessary;

EJT/66.91B

NYSDOL Radioactive Material License 0729-0322 etc.September 27, 1991Page 3

Mr. M. Austin of the NRC in his. exit interview of September 6,1991, for an inspection of the same spill, stated that:

1. The spill was not caused by poor management control but to an

unforeseen action of a valve.

2. Management response was'swift and thorough.

3. Interim action was appropriate.

Even though we have not received official NRC correspondence onthis issue, we feel that your correspondence is inconsistent withthese preliminary NRC findings. This inconsistency is contraryto the above referenced agreement.

We therefore request that this violation be deleted. Please notethat the reporting of the spill was not required, because, as yousaid: data showed that no. effluent was greater than MPC and noradioactivity was observed off site.

If there are any further questions,. please call us at 914-351-2131.

Very truly yours,

Edward J. TruskowskiManager, Health, Safety andEnvironmental Affairs

EJT/bjc

Attachments

cc: Dr. R. BoresU. S. Nuclear Regulatory CommissionRegion 1 Office475 Allendale RoadKing of Prussia, PA 19406

Dr. F. BradleyNew York State Department of LaborRadiological Health UnitOne Main Street, Room 813Brooklyn, NY 11201

Mr. J. J. McGovern, CintichemMr. L. Thelin, Cintichem

EJT/66.91B

E OF NEW YORK - DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

VISION OF SAFETY AND HEALTHRadiological Health Unit

ONE MAIN STREET

BROOKLYN.N.Y. 11201

NOTICE OF INSPECTION FINDINGS

2 DATE OF VISIT

3. REGISTRATION NUMBER

4. LICENSE NUMBER (S)

-72-7 o3221. NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE NO. OF ESTABLISHMENT S. INDUSTRIAL CLASSIFICATION

P-/ J- v,CI ~ ~I6. TYPE OF VISIT

~ J(~Yt~f CREGULARC SPECIAL

,P.& I3" / Cl OTHER

,- -'-, i 7- 7. RADIATION SAFETY OFFICER.

* pp~ t~..c .5j 3 3s-2/3 (k~~kL NAME AND TITLE OF PERSON INTERVIEWED 9. EMPLOYEES EXPOSED TO RADIATION

." ""T'- u-, j Q---- .. MALE FEMALE

' 4-. '-F _GovL, _; t e- _0V••r)-__-

10. FINDINGS AN INSPECTION WAS MADE OF YOUR PREMISES ON THE ABOVE DATE SHOWN, OUR INSPECTION SHOWS THE FOLLOWING:

fl a. No violation found.

I1• b. The following sections of Code Rule were found to be violated. You will be notified if additionalviolations are found based. on completion of laboratory tests of samples taken, at time of inspection.

CODE RULE EXPLANATION

______ c•.kiL•, Tht l• " ~

RE

11. REMARKS

2. The above violations should be removed by Ic -/A.-.1 . Please respond in writing by that datedocumenting corrective and preventative action taken on each violation cited. NOTE: For any violations listed above thatrequire licensing actionsend a separate written request.(in triplicate) detailing the action requested. Send original and onecopy Attn: Licensing Section, and one copy Attn: the radiophysicist who conducted the inspection.

3. This is Notice . of * issued. ( 6 -1< - K0 -r 4*h-g 0-14. By

RADIOPHYSICISTFOR THE COMISSIONER OF LABOR

XC0SH.2

4 6.9 (6-87)

-IJNi ii l) I; A IA ý."CL\H R (MY CEGULA ()CY(OMMISSION

V: _S.-:. I- I.. . I'.G N ) .)0 Y

bOCe t No. 7U-fJ',7Licefisu No. SI.H,1-6;39

Union Carbide CorporationATTN" ',1r. Harcus Voth, Hianager

Nuclear. Operati ons,

P. 0. Box 234Tuxedo, NY 10987

Gentl een:

This letter is in reference to issues raised by Union Carbide on therelationship between Union Carbide Corporation (UCC) as the 1 icensee, theNRC and New York State wi.th respect to the research reactor and irradiatedmaterial licensed by the NPRC and New York State at the Tuxedo. site. Thematter was discussed during a visit to your site by NRC staff members inOc.tober 1981. Or. Cl ark of my staff indicated tthat we would proYvidefurther i nfornation regarding our pos ti on on this matter.

Three licenses presently exist for the UCC facility: License No. R-81 byNRC' s Office of Huclear Reactor Regul ation ( NRR) for your operati~ng researchreactor pursuant to 10 CFR Part 50; License No. SN1,i-639 by NRC'S Office ofNuclear Material Safety and Safeguards (NMSS) for the possession 'and use ofspecial nuclear material outside of the reactor pursuant tot10 CFR Part 70;and the Radioactive Materials License issued by New York State for possessionand use Of other radioactive material -including byproduct material. outside-of the reactor. These three licenses present a situation which we .refer. toas a' "mixed bucket." case,, in which irradiated material contains bothspecial nuclear material licensed by NRC and byproduct material licensed byNew York State.

The purpose of this letter is to clarify the licensee-authority relationshipbetween Union Carbide, Nlew York State and the NRC with respect to possessionand use of byproduct and special nuclear material by Union Carbide andits relationship to the l.icensed research reactor. In the following paragraphswe discuss this relationship.

(1) Description of licensing responsibilities:

It is clear under the. Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, andthe Agreement State program that the NRC licenses the reactor andall special nuclear material since it is possessed and used in quantitiessufficient to form a critical mass. (Under License N-o. SNM-6392Union Carbide is' authorized to possess and use up to 13 kg of U 35 o.fwhich not more than 5 kg can be in the form of uni rradiated materialSee 10 CFR 150.10 and 150.11. ' The State, on the other hand, issueslicenses For all byproduct and source material outside of the reactor

abeingprocessel medical or consuier .uses.

•U iiiOl (Carbide Corp)oration - -

(2) The scope of NOC safcty and healtt reviews:

Al tnough N}RC reuul a ti on is limited tu the reactor arid the special.nuclear material, the scope of the heal th and safety review inthe process of licensing is not so tightly bounded. For exahple,10 CFR 20.1(b) clearly implies that contribution to dose fromunl icensed or non-NRC l icensed radioactive materials must be

.considered in assuring compliance with 10 CFR.Part 20 exposurelimitations for both occupational and public health and safety.The requirements of 10 CFR 20.101, 102, 103, 104, 105, and 106 clearlyinclude all sources of radiation in calculation of concentrations of.material and consequent exposures of individuals and public.

Likewise, all radioactive-materials are- included in the surveysand other precautionary measures required by 10 CFR.20.201, 20.202,and 20.203. Particularly pertinent are the definitions of 'radiationarea" and "high radiation area" in V 20.202(b) for personnel monitoring.The definitions of these terms include the. "mixed bucket" concept andthe regulation, require the consideration of all sources of radiation("whole bucket") for compliance, not just the NRC portion.

Thus, the scope of licensing revie,, under 10 CFR Part 70 will legitimatelyinclude, the heal th and safety effects of the whole "bucket. inparticular, 10 CFR 70..23(a)(3) requi res a finding that the applicant"s* proposed equipment and facilitiesv.are adequate to protect heal th and.mi4aimize danger to life and property. When this requirement is takentogether with the requirements in Part 20, it should be evident thatthe.NRC review.for issuance of the special nuclear material.license-will include evaluation of the additive-effects of the associatedbyproduct material, even though the latter is not licensed by NRC. InperTorming the. NRC review, due account will be taken of the Statelicensing reviews and the NRC licensing action.0iill be coordinatedwith the. State's to insure that all health and safety- considerationsare evaluated by the NRC or the State, and to oinimize dupl ication ofeffort.

(3) The scope of Environmental Reviews:

The scope of environmental reviews includes all environmental effectsresulting from the activities. undertaken as a result of issuance of theNRC license. 7hese. effects include both radiological and nonradiologicalenvironmental consequences. If the licensee's possession and use ofState-licensed byproduct material and its environmental effects are inany way dependent upon theNRC special nuclear material license thenthose effects will be included within the scope of the NRC environmentalreview. However, ,RC may not be able' to condition its licenses tomitigateall possible environmental effects. Forf example, NRC cannoti.mpose conditions that vary the terms of an R'PDES permit for the sameeffluent stream. See Sec. 51l(c)(2) of the Federal Water PollutionControl Act Amendments of 1972, 86 Stat. 893, (33 U.S.C. 1371(c)(2)).

U1) i.;)11 (1,11-1) ide (.,orpor,) tion -3j-

(4) Cond'itions affecting byproduct material in NRC licenses:

The-fact, that NRC i:iiy include within the scope of its safety andenvironmental reviews.theeffects and.consequences of related Statelicensed activities does not generally mean that the I"RC license -mustbe conditioned to protec't the public health, safety, -and the environailentfrom the consequences of the State licensed-activities. To -the contrary;the Agreement State program authorized by Section 274 of the AtomiicEnergy Act of 1954, as amended, clearly requires an. independent statelicensing and regulatory structure responsible for protecting publichealth and safety with respect to source, byproduct, and subcriticalquantities of special nuclear material within the'State. Tothe-extentpossiblIe, it is the intent to draw clear lines between matters of Stateregulatory responsibilityand NRC regulatory responsibilityt.

In "mixed bucket'" cases, however, the facts may warrant a largerNRCrole in certain instances. In such cases special nuclear material(SNM) and byproduct mater.ial (products of the fissioning of the specialnuclear 'material) are, at tines, co-mi~ngled for the purposes of processingor storage. At the point where the byproduct material is essentiallycompletely separated froni special nuclear material, processing itshould continue under the regulatory control of the Agreement State.Other byproduct m aterial, not as well separated, whi.ch continues inprocess, or storage co-mingled -with licensed special nuclear materialwill -be considered to be subject to' NRC regulatory authority on. thegrounds that safety of handling of the special nuclear material requiresNRC control of the co-mingled byproduct material at these pha-ses of theprocess. However, NRC will closely coordinate its activities withthose of the State.

The activity which seems to create the most difficult problem isthat of effluent treatment. Very little, special nuclear materialmay be released as an effluent by the various process activities,but the process involving special nuclear material may cause therelease of byproduct material to all effluent treatment system.Additional byproduct iaterial from, separately licensed activitiesmay combine with the effluents to form,'a mixture attributable toboth activities. We consider that the effluent byproduct material is"cleanly" separated. Since its regulation by a state agency would notaffect the safe handlling of the special nuclear material,' it is consideredfor purpose of NRC evaluation primarily state regulated material.The review procedure for the special' nUclear material may suggest theappropriate controls to be applied for these relea.ses.TThis would alsoapply to operation of the research reactor.

Otion C f ~1rt)ri (I Co rioruj t. io n

(5) Reactor related:

Byproduct material ul timately licensed by the Steip is created i.nthe NRC- licensed reactor, either by fission in UL targets' oractivation of elements in targets composed of .non-regulated materialThe irradiated targets are moved to the hot cells for further processingand separation of isotopes either through a transfer canal and interlockor by removal from the reactor pool and transfer to the hot cells in ashielded container. The canal is considered contiguous with thereactor pool, and canal water is continuously mixed with (or an intergralpart of) of the reactor cooling system.

C 2mistentwith paragraph 4 of this letter, the handling of irradiatedU. targets is covered in the appropr ate NRC license. Thebyproduct material in the irradiated U targets in the canal or inshielded containers prior to processing has not been cleanly separated.A further consideration is that the presence of the irradiated targetsin the canal., reactor pool , or in containers in the reactor buildingi s significant from the point of view of health and safety o.f personnelin reactor operations and potentially significant to reactor safetywhen in the canal or pool--areas clearly under NRC jurisdiction.

Targets composed of non-regul d material incl ude byproduct materialafter irradiation. As with U targets, the health and safety ofreactor operating personnel and reactor safety' may be affected by themanner of handling these targets with.in the reactor pool , canal , andcontainment. Accordingly, under Section 161(i)(3) of the Atomic EnergyAct, the NRC reactor operating license, can be~conditioned as necessaryto protect health and to minimize danger to life or property with•respect to operations in these areas. (For the same reasons theconditions of handling and storage of byprodu~ct and/or speci.al nucl.ear.material in waste te~mporarily stored within the reactor pool or canalcan also be included in the reactor operating or the special. nuclea.rmaterial license.)

New York State has reviewed the principles of this analysis of our regulatoryresponsibilities and has no objections. If you have any questions regardingthis matter, please contact Dr. A. T. Clark of my staff.

Sincerely,

Leland Cý Rouse, ChiefAdvanced Fuel and Spent-Fuel

Licensing BranchDivision of Fuel Cycle and

" iaterial Safety

cc: Attached List

S

cc: Dr. Fran k .J B rad I evRadialou ica I 1ealth UniLNew York S tate Departrmen H• o , -2 World Trade CenterNew York, NY 0O0-17-

Mr. ThouklasA . Cashnoan , ChiefToxic and Radiation Secti nnNew York State Department of Environ

mentali Conservation50 Wolf RoadAlbany, NY 12223.

Mir. Jay OunkelbergerDirectorBureau of Nuclear Operations.New York State Energy OfficeAgency Building 22 Rockefeller PlazaAlbany, NY 12223

I-

.EXHIBIT A

LrTTeP OF A ,REWENT

This is to" confirm the general, agreement reached during a September 231, 987meet ino between the US. Nuclear Regulatory Commissvion staff and two agenciesof the State of New York, the Department of Labor and the Department-of.Environmental Conservation, reogarding.jurisdiction over activities at,the Cintichem, Inc. facility in Tuxedo, New York and the impact of thatjurisdiction on inspection and enforcement activities conducted by the.respective agencies. As a resull of thatmeetinc ano previous discussions,the acenciees agreed that there-was a need to formalize the understanding ofNRC and State of New York jurisdiction at the Cirnichem site and to establisha procedure for the interaction and coordination between the respectiveagencies on inspection and enforcement activities.

A. With re0ard to statutory authority it is understood that:

(1) The NRC his exclusive iuri sdiction over theCintichem research

reactor pursuant to 10 CFR Part SO and NRC License No. R-81;

(2) The.possession and use of special nuclear material outside ofthe research reaclor.fis covered by NRC License No. 'SNM39 andis also Under tHEA C lusivE ju-iS&cficn of the NRC . Thisj.urisdiction enxends Qu any .area of the Cintichem si te whereS is possessEcd or sed.

(3) The State of. New Yo -, through an acreement between the NRCand the State pursuant to. Section 274 of the Atomic EnergyAct, has exclusive.jurisdiction over the possession and useof byproduct material anywhere on the Cintichem site,

exclusive of the reactor; and0

o4) Nothinc in this Letter of Acreement chances or. modifies Jinany way the statutory jurisdictico of the NRC and the Stateof New York.

8. Given týhe aforementioned jurisdictions, te foliowing has. beenagreed to-regardinginspection activities.

(1) Reactor operations authorized under ,RC License R-81 wi l.continue to be inspected exclusiveiy by NRC;

(2) The possession and use of byproduct material under New York -State License Number 729-0322, such as the production ofradiopharmaceuticels where the presence of SNM is not expected,

.will continue to be inspected exclusively by the State; and.

2

(3) The remaining areas of the Cintichem site, where the use ofbyproduct material under State l.icerse and special nuclear... material under NRC License SNM-.639 is not physicallyseparable, w.ill be subject to inspection by both the- NRCand the State. Each of tOe three acancies will enforcetheir respective reguatiorlns, as aEpp icable.:

C We further agree that, with respect to si uation B.(3) above,the followino procedures will govern the activities with regardto onsiLe inspectior, s.

(-) Each of t he three agencies will notify the others of theirintent tu conduct an inscectiorn a the Cintidhem facility;

t2 Ei~f on ah t' o- i"hmf~ 1

(2)- Each 6 the three agencies reserves the rightto. accompanythe agency conducting the inspection, on the inspection;.

(3) The three agencies will .coordinate enforcemeent actions ona c-:se-by-case basis in order to miroizeduplication or

inconsistent inspection finoi-ngs, ci Ltions, orders, civilIpenalties, etc., in are-s of dual .responsibiIity. Each of thetnr~e acenci es reserves tre rioht tcursue. furtr, enforcement2ction if it is recu ired by law or c - e risc -eeme. necessary;

(4) Cooies of licensee re s srses to E, To.ý- n ac= eo, as 'r, :reE gency cohductino-h E 1 n SP be ed to ea-chof the other acencies The thnree acc ies will make a coo<faith, best efforts a 2e ot to coce t o timely acreement asto the acceptability of the licens a's corrective actions.Hlowever, the agency conduct no t e rn ,spection will havefinal ressponsibility ot tne acceoaility of thecorrective

CaCtions.. E Ea ch agency reserves the rcht to obtain5 additionalinformation from the licensee as pe mitted by la, i-f requiredor otnerwise ceee, ed -c ssary by t agency.

FOR TE U. S. NUCLEAR .,REGULATORY CO M!SS 10N

MalcolM R. Knapp, "or/ ODivision of Radiaci: Safety and S.ecuards

3

FOR T*-:E NEW YOR;< STATE DEPARThENT OF LA3BOR

F a nfI 's /J BradIE'112P r 'z p a1. REd~ *i y.ci s

FO 0 RT' NEW YO0RK. STIATE DEPARThMENT 0OFEN! ~N~NTLCCON\SE:R',-:IA !ON

Date

IviCDivision or 1->:adous SubstancesRecul ation

0 ate