The Radiation Program accepted stakeholder comments until January 7, 2014 on proposed revisions to 6 CCR 1007-1 Part 18, "Licensing Requirements for Uranium and Thorium Processing." Program staff and the Colorado Department of Law (Attorney General) evaluated revisions to the regulations and several issues connected to the enabling legislation, the Colorado Radiation Control Act (Title 25, Article 11). In part, this is driven by comments received from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in a letter dated October 24, 2011 addressing incompatability issues between the Radiation Contral Act and NRC requirements. In addition, issues surrounding the Energy Fuels project revealed discrepancies among the Radiation Control Act, Administrative Procedures Act and the radiation regulations. Some of these issues were created by legislative changes made in 2002, 2003 and 2010. Program staff identified changes that can be made to the radiation regulations without creating problems related to the Radiation Control Act. Several changes to defintions are necessary to align the regulations with NRC requirements. One such change will modify the specified discount rate for evaluation long-term care bonding. The most significant change will be to establish a clearly defined public process for license decisions that extends beyond the time period already specified in the Radiation Control Act.
Stakeholder comment meetings were held at the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment.
Draft Part 18 Revision October 2013
Uranium industry representatives: Cotter, Energy Fuels, PowerTech, Black Range Minerals, Colorado Mining Association, National Mining Association, consultants;
Government entities: Counties and cities near proposed or existing uranium processing facilities, Colorado Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, U.S. Department of Energy, Colorado Department of Law;
Environmental groups: General or issue-specific groups;
Community members; Montrose County, San Miguel County, Fremont County, Weld County, Mesa County; and
NRC letter to the Department dated June 28, 2012 in response to a Department email:
Department email to NRC dated April 19, 2012 requesting clarification:
NRC letter to the Department dated October 24, 2011 limiting review to program elements required for compatibility and/or health and safety:
NRC comments on review of regulatory package dated October 13, 2011:
NRC comments on review of regulatory package dated November 10, 2004
NRC comments on review of regulatory package dated March 28, 2002
Note that the letters from NRC are not limited to Part 18 (~10 CFR Part 40).