Mr. Jim Pitts — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation

Page 1400 Seventh Street, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20590 Hazardous Materials Safety Pipeline and Administration Mr. Jim Pitts OCT 26 2006 3755 Bethel Church Road Ref. No.: 06-0204 Kevil, Kentucky 42053 Dear Mr. Pitts: This is in response to your September 7, 2006 letter requesting clarification of the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180). You ask two questions relative to the requirements for transporting Class 7 (radioactive) material. You also include sample data describing the contents and activity of material taken from a remediation site near Tonowanda, NY. Your questions are summarized and answered as Q1. Based on a determination made by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), radioactive material taken from the remediation site may be categorized as "alternative feed." May the same "alternative feed" material be considered "ore" to meet the "LSA-I" definition in § 173.403? A1. The answer is no. The definition of "LSA-I" in § 173.403 includes uranium and thorium ores, concentrates of uranium and thorium ores, and other ores containing radionuclides. The determination by the NRC that the material is "alternative feed" naturally occurring radionuclides which are intended to be processed for the use of these material does not, in itself, mean the material is considered an ore. The term ore is not pecifically defined in the HMR. However, a uranium or thorium ore that has bee an ore. You do not provide a sufficient history of the processing performed on the hysically or chemically processed for use of radionuclides may no longer be considere material to accurately determine if it is an ore. Q2. Despite the analytical data that indicates the presence of enriched and depleted contains natural uranium, is it permissible to use the RQ value for "uranium, natural," uranium in the soil samples from Tonowanda, NY, if it is known that the material only and the Az value for "U (nat)" in the table in § 173.435 to determine the proper listed in § 172.101, the exemption values for "U (nat)" listed in the table in § 173.436, classification of the material? A2. The answer is no. "Uranium - natural" is defined in § 173.403 as chemically (approximately 99.28% uranium-238 and 0.72% uranium-235 by mass). The analytical separated uranium containing the naturally occurring distribution of uranium isotopes data you provided indicates that the material may contain enriched or depleted uranium. It is not appropriate to use the RQ value, exemption values, and A2 values for "Uranium - 113.403 060204#

Page 2natural" to determine the proper classification of the material if analytical data suggests the material contains enriched or depleted uranium. contact this office. I hope this information is helpful. If you have further questions, please do not hesitate to Sincerely, Office of Hazardous Materials Standards#

Page 3Williams, James <HMSA> Sent: From: newclearson@comcast.net Cc: To: Thursday, September 07, 2006 8:55 Al Echenlaub Villiams, James <PHMSA Subject: William Lorenz §172101 Table 2 FW: The question § 173.403 Hazardous Subtances The question Linde_EA_F_EA_M_ 06-0204 Data.x/s (84 K... Jim, question from Linde personnel and adding some of my own. I want to sum up the questions concisely if I can: Here is the question and some data that I promised you I would send last week. I am forwarding the attached as ore in the USDOT using the LSA-I (i) definition in 403 as well as using the ore placarding exemption? There 1. The attached question from Tonawanda. I think what they mean by this is can the Linde material be shipped is a letter from the NRC to International Uranium (The Mill in Utah) that all of the linde radioactive contaminated materials was acceptable as "alternate feed" and thus "ore" to the mill back in 2000. My question with this one is this: Since all of the Linde material was deemed "alternate feed" (ore) by the NRC, then could this material still be "ore" even if shipping to another disposition outlet somewhere else in the country? levels of uranium (U-238, 234, 235) and daughters (Ra-226, Th-230) can the A2 for "natural uranium" be used 2. The attached xl file has some actual data from one of the digs. The question on this one is this: Given the status? Can the Table 436 exemption level for natural uranium (b) be used so that everything is consistent? which is unlimited? Can the RQ for natural uranium (**) be used when determining hazardous substance Notice that the last two data sets in the attached file have Th-230 with really high levels, however when the whole set is averaged Uranium 238 levels are the highest. An interesting point to take into consideration here when looking at these analytical numbers is this: We know hid compare you natural in late 23a this urani is hole erichen or takthe data for dazin he-23: his Uranium 1s "t as well. numbers are that far off and they can also be assumed to be off by 50% or more for the other nuclides in the list Jim Pitts Thank you, 270-210-7455 --- Forwarded Message: ---- From: "Lorenz, William" < William.Lorenz@shawgrp.com> To: <newclearson@comcast.net> Subject: The question Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2006 17:46:40 +0000 > Jim, > > > > Please have your contact provide an answer to this question: > 1#