Home > Facility Info Finder > Sites Undergoing Decommissioning > Complex Materials > Shieldalloy Metallurgical Corporation (SMC)

Shieldalloy Metallurgical Corporation

1.0 Site Identification

2.0 Site Status Summary

The Shieldalloy Metallurgical Corporation (SMC) is a complex decommissioning site located in Newfield, New Jersey. Accumulated materials at the site consist of facility-generated slag and baghouse dust containing natural uranium and natural thorium. The site is on the National Priorities List under CERCLA, because of chromium contamination in groundwater resulting from the release of process wastewater to an unlined lagoon. In August 2001, SMC notified NRC that it had ceased production activities using source material. On August 27, 2001, the licensee provided notification and intent to decommission. The license is in timely renewal, and was amended on November 4, 2002, to authorize only decommissioning activities that were previously permitted. The licensee submitted a revised license renewal application on May 1, 2003. The licensee estimates the cost of decommissioning ranges from approximately 5 million dollars, if the accumulated material is left on site in a restricted use decommissioning, to 63 million dollars, if the accumulated material is transported to a licensed low-level radioactive waste facility.

The SMC facility manufactures or has manufactured specialty steel and super alloy additives, primary aluminum master alloys, metal carbides, powdered metals, and optical surfacing products. One of the raw materials that was used in its manufacturing processes from 1955 to 1998 is classified as source material under 10 CFR Part 40. This material, called pyrochlore, is a concentrated niobium ore containing greater than 0.05 percent natural uranium and natural thorium. SMC was licensed by the NRC to ship, receive, possess, use and store source material under SMB-743. During the manufacturing process, the facility generated slag, and baghouse dust. Currently, there is approximately 18,000 m3 (635,580 ft3) of slag and approximately 15,000 m3 (529,650 ft3) of baghouse dust containing natural uranium, thorium, and daughters stored on-site.

3.0 Major Technical or Regulatory Issues

The SMC Decommissioning Plan (DP) dated August 30, 2002 was received September 11, 2002 but was rejected by NRC staff, because of deficiencies. The staff met with Shieldalloy on April 16, 2003, to discuss the DP deficiencies and revising the DP using the staff's phased approach. For this site, the phased approach consisted of meetings to discuss and seek agreement on the licensee's approach to institutional controls and financial assurance before the licensee conducts the work needed to address the deficiencies identified by the staff and resubmit a revised decommissioning plan. In addition, NRC staff recognized a need to provide SMC with guidance regarding pertinent License Termination Rule issues such as the use of a possession only license for long term control (LTC) of the site and provided it to SMC in May 2004. A meeting between NRC and SMC was held on June 29, 2004 to ensure that SMC understood the guidance. SMC submitted a revised decommissioning plan in October 2005. NRC staff completed its acceptance review and rejected the DP in January 2006. The staff met with SMC in March 2006 to discuss the deficiencies in the DP and develop a path forward for submittal of an acceptable DP. The NRC staff and NJDEP staff also visited the site in April 2006 to discuss erosion control design. Pursuant to comments received at these interactions, SMC submitted a supplement to its DP in June 2006. After completing it acceptance review, in October 2006, the NRC staff determined that the licensee provided sufficient information to proceed with its detailed technical review. The NRC published a Federal Register Notice on November 17, 2006, announcing receipt of the DP. The NRC staff held a public information meeting in Newfield, NJ on December 5, 2006 to discuss NRC's process for reviewing SMC's DP,the opportunities for public comment on the DP, and the opportunity to request a hearing. As the licensee proposed a restricted use decommissioning, an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is required. Consequently, the staff held an EIS scoping meeting in Newfield, NJ on December 12, 2006. During both of the December 2006 meetings, local stakeholders and elected officials expressed their concern with the proposal to leave the accumulated material on site. As part of its detailed technical review of the DP, by letter dated March 19, 2007, the NRC staff transmitted its Request for Additional Information (RAI) regarding environmental issues to SMC. On April 26, 2007, NRC staff received SMC's response to its environmental RAIs and began reviewing them. In addition to providing some of the information needed for the staffs environmental review, SMCs response also provided part of the basis for the NRC staffs development of its safety-related RAIs that were transmitted to SMC by letter dated July 5, 2007. These RAIs also encompassed comments on the DP that were submitted to the NRC by the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, as appropriate. Although the staff typically requests responses to RAIs within 30 days, the staff recognized that response to some of the RAIs required environmental sampling and laboratory work that cannot be completed within 30 days. Therefore, the staff requested that SMC provide its response within 120 days. The staff also noted, in the July 5, 2007 letter, that its practice is to initiate only one round of RAIs. If the information that SMC provides is insufficient for the NRC staff to complete its Safety Evaluation Report and EIS, the staff may suspend or terminate its review of the SMC DP The staff held three telephone conferences with SMC to ensure that SMC has a clear understanding of the RAIs. NJDEP staff also participated in these conferences, as observers, and was afforded the opportunity to comment or ask questions. One telephone conference was held in August 2007 to discuss RAIs related to cover design, and telephone conferences were held in September 2007 and October 2007 to discuss RAIs related to leaching and dose assessment. On November 11, 2007, SMC submitted a partial response to the RAIs. A complete response will be made by May 16, 2008. The staff has reviewed the November 11th response. As a result of that review, the NRC conducted a series telephone conference calls with SMC in February and March 2008 to discuss various aspects of the November 11th submittal. The NJDEP also participated in these calls. On March 27, 2008, representatives from the staff and SMC visited the quarries in Pennsylvania and Maryland to assess the rock material which is under consideration as the material to be utilized for the engineered barrier. Barring factors that may necessitate revision in the NRC staffs schedule for completing its detailed technical review of the DP, the staff anticipates holding a public meeting in Newfield, NJ, on its draft EIS in October 2008. Notice of this public meeting will be provided in the Federal Register and the local media as the staff nears completion of its draft EIS. The November 17, 2006 Federal Register notice also provided the opportunity to request a hearing on the licensees DP. Seven petitioners requested a hearing, and the NRC established an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board panel to rule on the hearing requests. The board denied six of the hearing requests, but granted the request of one petitioner, the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP). In granting NJDEPs hearing request, the board admitted one of NJDEPs seventeen contentions pertaining to the licensees DP. However, the board deferred ruling on the NJDEPs other contentions and deferred all other proceedings pending completion of the NRC staffs environmental and safety reviews of the DP. The NJDEP petitioned the Commission for a hearing on the DP and for rulemeaking with respect to agency implementation of long-term control as a decommissioning option. The State of New Jersey als filed suit in the U.S. court of Appeals for the Third Circuit challenging NRC issuance of a revision to NUREG-1757, Consolidated Decommissioning Guidance, the guidance being followed by the licensee to prepare the DP. SMC has attempted to find a buyer for both the slag, which could be used as a fluidizer by steel manufacturers, and for the baghouse dust, which could be substituted for lime in the production of cement. This could have reduced the volume of accumulated material. Regardless of whether the sales occur, SMC has proposed to dispose of these materials on site in an engineered cell. Although the LTC approach is in the early stages of planning, State of New Jersey officials (e.g., New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP), Governor Corzine, Senators Lautenberg and Menendez, State Senator Madden, and Representative LoBiondo) have expressed concerns with the use of NRC's LTC license for the SMC site. Their concerns are: 1) the proposed approach would create an unlicensed low-level radioactive waste disposal facility; 2) that there has not been a meaningful opportunity for community discussion; and 3) the radioactive material should be disposed of and not left for future generations. The Commission responded that its regulations allow for the proposed restricted use decommissioning and that it will continue with its DP review process. SMC has less than adequate financial assurance for decommissioning.

4.0 Estimated Date For Closure

09/01/2012

Privacy Policy | Site Disclaimer
Monday, April 14, 2008