EPA’SNESHAP Subpart W ActivitiesReid J. RosnickEnvironmental Protection AgencyRadiation Protection Division (6608J)Washington, DC 20460202-343-9563, rosnick.reid@epa.govJune 30, 20092OverviewGeneral requirements applicable to Subpart WEPA regulatory requirements for operatinguranium mill tailings (Subpart W)EPA’s Rulemaking ProcessStatus update on Subpart W activitiesSome Conclusions3General Requirements Applicable to Subpart W•Subpart W facilities are subject to the generalrequirements of 40 CFR 61.01 - .19•Application for construction and modification•Notification of startup•Compliance with monitoring/maintenance requirements•Subpart W facilities are subject to the design andground-water requirements of 40 CFR 192.32(a)•Ground-water protection standards and impoundmentdesign requirements similar to hazardous waste facilities•Permanent radon barrier at closure4EPA Regulatory Requirements forOperating Uranium Mill Tailings(Subpart W)5EPA Regulatory Requirements forOperating Uranium Mill Tailings (Clean Air Act)•40 CFR 61 Subpart W requirements apply to facilitieslicensed to manage uranium byproduct materials duringand following the processing of uranium ores•Preconstruction approval, 40 CFR 61.07•Impoundment construction and operation requirementsin 40 CFR 192 cross referenced in Subpart W•Limit on number/size of impoundments•Phased Disposal – lined impoundments no morethan 40 acres, no more than two in operation atany time•Continuous Disposal – tailings are dewatered andimmediately disposed, no more than 10 acresuncovered at any time6EPA Regulatory Requirements forUranium Operations (Clean Air Act)Subpart W Requirements (continued)•Radon emission standard of 20 pCi/m2/sec --annual reporting requirements, notification inadvance of testing•The radon emission standard is for existing sourcesonly (existing before 12/15/89)•All operators must comply with 40 CFR 192.32(a)Seehttp://www.epa.gov/radiation/neshaps/subpartw/index.htmlfor more information7EPA’s Rulemaking Process•Tiering•The lead office submits a request for a new action; theRegulatory Steering Committee (RSC) reviews it; theRegulatory Policy Officer (RPO) approves; the Office ofPolicy, Economics, and Innovation (OPEI) approves thetier•Tier 1: Top actions that demand the ongoing involvement ofthe Administrator – precedent setting and controversial•Tier 2: Include significant science, policy, economic and/orimplementation issues – decision may be based on a riskassessment - Subpart W review is Tier 2•Tier 3: Generally involves use of well-known and acceptedscience principles8EPA’s Rulemaking Process•Analytic Blueprint and Early Guidance•The workgroup creates a Preliminary Analytic Blueprint(ABP), management gives Early Guidance, and theworkgroup creates a Detailed ABP•Analysis and Consultation•The workgroup gathers scientific, economic, legal,stakeholder, enforcement, and compliance information.Also, the workgroup drafts regulatory options•Options Selection•Senior management selects options or narrows the list to aselect few that require further research9EPA’s Rulemaking Process•Drafting•The workgroup creates a draft of the action•Final Agency Review•This is the last point for EPA review. Senior managementfrom participating offices concur or non-concur with theaction as it is written•Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Review•If the action is significant, OPEIsubmits it to OMB for review•Signature•The EPA Administrator, an Assistant/Associate or RegionalAdministrator, or a delegate signs the action10EPA’s Rulemaking Process•Docketing•The lead office ensures that the action andappropriate supporting documents are depositedin the official docket•Federal Register Publishing•The action is published in the Federal Register•Public Comments•The action is open for a formal comment period,during which the public may submit comments andrequest public hearings11EPA’s Rulemaking Process•Final Action•After the proposed action's public comment periodcloses, the workgroup reviews all comments andusually starts preparing a final rule•The process begins again, usually with a newAnalytic Blueprint•Final actions are often subject to theCongressional Review Act and Courtesy CopyPolicy12•Status Update on Subpart W Activities13Status of Subpart W Review Activities•Per Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, EPA isobligated to review Subpart W•A workgroup has been established•Members from across the Agency•Represent ORIA, OGC, ORD, OSWER, OECA,OPEI, OW, Regions 6, 7, 8 and 10•Workplan, Communications Plan, AnalyticBlueprint have been completed, basically, howare we going to approach the task14Status of Subpart W Review Activities•We are conducting historical research on the riskassessment work originally done in support of the1989 standard•We have begun a survey of existing technologies•Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurancehas sent information request letters to numerousuranium recovery facilities•Answers better inform the workgroup of theuniverse of facilities, and the types of uraniumrecovery processes that exist•We have also requested that ISL facilities provideradon flux data from their evaporation ponds15Status of Subpart W Review Activities•We are researching if Method 115 continues to becurrent, or whether other methods could beemployed for monitoring and analysis of radon flux•We are planning to work with all stakeholders inreviewing/revising the standards•The Agency continues to believe that conventionaltailings piles, certain evaporation ponds from ISLoperations, and heap leach piles, are subject to therequirements of Subpart W•We base our decision on a review of existingregulatory language16Applicability of Subpart W (Clean Air Act)•40 CFR 61.250 –“The provisions of this subpart apply to owners andoperators of facilities licensed to manage uraniumbyproduct materials during and following theprocessing of uranium ores, commonly referred to asuranium mills and their associated tailings. Thissubpart does not apply to the disposal of tailings.”17Subpart W Definition of UraniumByproduct Material•40 CFR 61.251 (g) –“Uranium byproduct material or tailingsmeans thewaste produced by the extraction or concentrationof uranium from any ore processed primarily for itssource material content. Ore bodies depleted byuranium solution extraction and which remainunderground do not constitute byproduct materialfor the purposes of this subpart.”18EPA Regulatory Requirements forUranium Operations (Clean Air Act)•What is an impoundment (per 40 CFR 192.32, whichcross references 40 CFR 260.10)?•“...a facility or part of a facility which is a naturaltopographic depression, man-made excavation ordiked area formed primarily of earthen materials(although it may be lined with man-made materials)which is designed to hold an accumulation of liquidwastes, or wastes containing free liquids, and whichis not an injection well. Examples of impoundmentsare holding, storage, settling, and aeration pits,ponds and lagoons.”19Some Conclusions•We are in the process of reviewing and possiblyrevising Subpart W, decision in late 2010•Owners/operators of ISL facilities that utilizeevaporation ponds containing byproduct materialproduced by the extraction or concentration ofuranium should assume you are subject to therequirements of Subpart W•We appreciate the assistance of all stakeholders toinform and enable us to craft a protective andenforceable rule.20Questions?