U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Western Ecology Division, Corvallis and Newport Facilities, OR: Issuance of Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact for License Amendment, 27521-27523 [E6-7163]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 91 / Thursday, May 11, 2006 / Notices
requirements of section 246 have been
met.
A significant number of workers at the
firm are age 50 or over and possess
skills that are not easily transferable.
Competitive conditions within the
industry are adverse.
Conclusion
After careful review of the additional
facts obtained on reconsideration, I
conclude that increased imports of
articles like or directly competitive with
those produced at Thomasville
Furniture Ind., Plant #5, Conover, North
Carolina, contributed importantly to the
declines in sales or production and to
the total or partial separation of workers
at the subject firm. In accordance with
the provisions of the Act, I make the
following certification:
All workers of Thomasville Furniture Ind.,
Plant #5, Conover, North Carolina, who
became totally or partially separated from
employment on or after February 1, 2005
through two years from the date of this
certification, are eligible to apply for
adjustment assistance under section 223 of
the Trade Act of 1974, and are eligible to
apply for alternative trade adjustment
assistance under section 246 of the Trade Act
of 1974.
Signed in Washington, DC, this 28th day of
April 2006.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade
Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 06–4417 Filed 5–10–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–30–P
NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
National Science Board; Workshop on
Fostering Transformative Research—
Views From Industry and Private
Foundations
Date: May 16, 2006.
Place: National Science Foundation,
Arlington, Virginia, Room 1235.
Contact Information: Please refer to
the National Science Board Web site
(https://www.nsf.gov/nsb) for updated
schedule. NSB Office: Ann Ferrante,
(703) 292–7000.
Status: This Workshop is open to the
public.
cchase on PROD1PC60 with NOTICES
Provisional Agenda
8 a.m.–8:30 a.m. Registration.
8:30 a.m.–8:50 a.m. Welcoming
Remarks. Dr. Nina Fedoroff, Chair, Task
Force on Transformative Research, NSB.
8:50 a.m.–9 a.m. Introduction and
Overview. Dr. Michael Crosby,
Executive Officer, NSB.
9 a.m.–11:15 a.m. Session I:
Foundation Perspectives.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:29 May 10, 2006
Jkt 208001
12:30 p.m.–2:45 p.m. Session II:
Industry Perspectives.
2:45 p.m.–3 p.m. Break.
3 p.m.–4:30 p.m. Session III: Other
Perspectives.
4:30 p.m.–4:45 p.m. Summaries of
Discussions and Next Steps for the Task
Force.
Michael P. Crosby,
Executive Officer and NSB Office Director.
[FR Doc. E6–7213 Filed 5–10–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket No. 030–05976]
U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency’s Western Ecology Division,
Corvallis and Newport Facilities, OR:
Issuance of Environmental
Assessment and Finding of No
Significant Impact for License
Amendment
Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Issuance of environmental
assessment and Finding of No
Significant Impact for license
amendment.
AGENCY:
D.
Blair Spitzberg, Ph.D., Chief, Fuel Cycle
and Decommissioning Branch, Division
of Nuclear Materials Safety, Region IV,
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 400,
Arlington, TX 76011. Telephone: (817)
860–8100; e-mail: dbs@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
I. Introduction
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(NRC) is considering issuance of an
amendment to Material License No. 36–
12343–02 issued to the United States
Environmental Protection Agency,
Western Ecology Division (EPA or the
licensee). This license pertains to the
following three EPA facilities located in
Oregon: (1) Corvallis Environmental
Research Laboratory; (2) Willamette
Research Station (also in Corvallis); and
(3) the Pacific Coastal Ecology Branch
facility in Newport. Granting the
amendment request would authorize the
release of these facilities for unrestricted
use, and would terminate the license as
requested. In accordance with
conditions in its license, the EPA was
authorized to use radioactive material at
its three facilities to conduct tracer
studies involving marine organisms and
plants (excluding animal studies);
perform sample analysis; conduct tests
PO 00000
Frm 00073
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
27521
for soil moisture; and for instrument
calibration.
On November 30, 2004 (as
supplemented by letter dated December
27, 2005), EPA requested that NRC
release the three facilities for
unrestricted use and to terminate the
license. The licensee conducted
radiological surveys of the subject
facilities and concluded that the license
termination criteria specified in subpart
E to 10 CFR part 20 for unrestricted
release have been met. The amendment
will be issued if NRC determines that
the request meets the standards
specified in 10 CFR part 20 and related
NRC guidance documents.
II. Environmental Assessment (EA)
Identification of Proposed Action: The
proposed action is to enable the licensee
to use its subject facilities in any
manner without NRC restriction. The
NRC proposes to accomplish this by
terminating NRC License No. 36–12343–
02 because the licensee has permanently
ceased all licensed activities and
transferred or disposed of all licensed
radioactive materials.
The Need for the Proposed Action:
The licensee has permanently ceased all
licensed activities at its subject
facilities. The EPA desires to release
these facilities for unrestricted use. The
facilities will continue to be used for
research with non-licensed materials.
When the licensing action is complete,
the licensee will be in compliance with
the requirements of 10 CFR 30.36,
‘‘Expiration and Termination of
Licenses and Decommissioning of Sites
and Separate Buildings or Outdoor
Areas.’’
Environmental Impact of the
Proposed Action: NRC Materials License
No. 36–12343–02 authorizes the EPA to
possess small quantities of radioactive
material, in both sealed and unsealed
form. Under its license, the EPA’s use of
licensed material included the
performance of tracer studies involving
marine organisms and plants (excluding
animal studies), use in gas
chromatographs for sample analysis, use
in Troxler Model 4300 Series gauges to
measure soil moisture, and use in a
liquid scintillation counter for
instrument calibration. By letter dated
November 30, 2004, EPA requested that
NRC release the subject facilities for
unrestricted use and terminate the
license.
A final status survey report (FSSR)
was completed by the licensee, and a
copy of the report was attached to the
November 30, 2004, letter. During the
November 2005 NRC inspection, EPA
identified additional previous locations
of use that had not been documented in
E:\FR\FM\11MYN1.SGM
11MYN1
cchase on PROD1PC60 with NOTICES
27522
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 91 / Thursday, May 11, 2006 / Notices
the November 2004 FSSR submittal. An
addendum to the FSSR was attached to
a letter from EPA dated December 27,
2005. As discussed below, the EPA
concluded that all three facilities were
sufficiently free of radioactive material
to permit unrestricted release of the
facilities.
As part of its amendment request, the
licensee conducted a historical review
of its three facilities and found that the
radionuclides of concern were carbon14, calcium-45, chromium-51,
hydrogen-3, phosphorus-32, sulfur-35,
nickel-63, americium-241, and barium133. Radioactive materials were used at
the two Corvallis facilities from 1977 to
2004. Radioactive materials were used
at the Newport facility from 1987–1995
under NRC License No. 36–23261–01.
(This license was terminated in July
1995 after NRC License No. 36–12343–
02 was amended to bring the Newport
facility within its scope). To
demonstrate compliance with the
radiological criteria for unrestricted
release as specified in 10 CFR 20.1402,
the licensee developed derived
concentration guideline levels (DCGLs).
The NRC compared the licensee’s
proposed DCGLs to the screening
criteria provided in NUREG–1757,
‘‘Consolidated NMSS Decommissioning
Guidance,’’ Volume 2. The NRC
concluded that the proposed DCGLs
were acceptable for use as release
criteria.
The EPA’s historical assessment
identified two incidents that may have
involved leaking sealed sources at the
Corvallis Environmental Research
Laboratory. One event occurred in
March 1979 involving a sealed source
containing a tritium-scandium foil. At
the time of the event, the laboratory was
cleaned and decontaminated.
Significant remodeling had taken place
since the laboratory had been cleaned
and decontaminated, so additional NRC
confirmatory surveys were not
performed in this area. A second event
occurred in June 1982 involving either
a leaking nickel-63 sealed source
detector or radiotracers injected into a
gas chromatograph. The licensee
believed that the detector did not leak
and that the contamination was tritium,
not nickel-63. The laboratory was
decontaminated and the event reported
to the NRC at the time.
The NRC staff reviewed the docket
file records and the FSSR to identify any
non-radiological hazards that may have
impacted the environment. No
additional hazards or impacts were
identified.
The licensee’s radiation safety
program allowed unrestricted release of
previous locations of use once the areas
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:29 May 10, 2006
Jkt 208001
were shown to be free from residual
contamination. Final status surveys of
the former locations of use were
conducted when the laboratories were
removed from service. Additional
limited final status surveys were
performed in 12 previous locations of
use within the three subject facilities
during November 2004, because the
historical survey records were not
adequate or complete to show that the
locations were free from residual
contamination. Final status surveys on
remaining locations of use that had not
been previously released were also
performed during June 2004, November
2004 and December 2005. These final
status surveys were conducted in
buildings and laboratories identified
during the historical assessment as
previous locations of use with licensed
radioactive materials.
The NRC conducted a confirmatory
survey of 26 separate locations in the
subject facilities during the NRC’s
November 2005 inspection. The NRC
focused these confirmatory surveys in
previous locations of use that were
identified in the licensee’s historical
assessment as locations that potentially
used licensed material in unsealed form.
The confirmatory survey included the
site at the Corvallis Environmental
Research Laboratory where a leak from
a sealed source may have occurred in
June 1982. These confirmatory surveys
also included the licensee-identified
previous locations of use that were not
in the original FSSR submittal dated
November 2004. The surveys included
ambient gamma exposure rate
measurements, as well as, fixed and
removable surface contamination
measurements. The removable surface
contamination measurements included
measurements for hydrogen-3 and
carbon-14. None of the confirmatory
sample results exceeded the proposed
DCGLs identified in the FSSR.
In its FSSR, the licensee stated that
radioactive waste material from
previously licensed operations was
transferred to an authorized waste
contractor. All other previously licensed
radioactive materials were transferred to
authorized recipients. Solid waste
disposal did not include on-site burial
or incineration. Discharges to sewers
were reviewed by inspectors during
routine inspections to ensure
compliance with the release limits
specified in 10 CFR part 20.
Accordingly, the NRC finds that surface
and groundwater sources were not
impacted by previous EPA operations
involving licensed material at the
subject facilities.
Environmental Impacts of the
Alternatives of the Proposed Action:
PO 00000
Frm 00074
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
The licensee seeks NRC approval of the
license termination request. The
alternatives to the proposed action are:
(1) The no-action alternative, or (2) to
deny the license termination request
and require the licensee to take some
alternate action.
1. No-Action Alternative: One
alternative available to the NRC is to
take no action by denying the license
termination request. The no-action
alternative is not feasible because it
conflicts with the NRC’s regulation (10
CFR 30.36(d)) requiring licensees to
decommission their facilities when
licensed activities permanently cease.
2. Environmental Impacts of
Alternative 2: A second alternative is to
deny the licensee’s request in favor of
alternate release criteria as allowed by
§ 20.1403 (criteria for restricted
conditions) or § 20.1404 (alternate
criteria). However, the NRC’s analysis of
the final status survey data confirmed
that the proposed DCGLs meet the
license termination requirements of
§ 20.1402. Accordingly, the NRC has
determined that the second alternative
is not reasonable, and this alternative
action is eliminated from further
consideration.
Conclusion: Based on its review, the
NRC staff concludes that the
environmental impacts associated with
the proposed action do not warrant
denial of the license termination
request. The staff believes that the
proposed action will result in no
significant environmental impacts. The
staff has determined that the proposed
action, approval of the license
termination, is the appropriate
alternative for selection.
Agencies and Persons Contacted: The
NRC staff did not consult with the local
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service or the State
Historic Preservation Officer because
licensed activities occurred only within
the three EPA facilities in Corvallis and
Newport, Oregon. There was no
evidence of use or release of radioactive
material outside of these facilities.
Accordingly, there was no impact to
historic properties or the cultural
resources, endangered species, or
critical habitats outside these facilities.
The State of Oregon notified the NRC by
telephone on March 29, 2006 that it had
no comments on the EA. This
conversation was documented in a
Memorandum to the Docket File dated
March 29, 2006. EPA notified the NRC
by letter dated March 29, 2006 that it
had four clarification comments on the
EA. These comments have been
incorporated.
E:\FR\FM\11MYN1.SGM
11MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 91 / Thursday, May 11, 2006 / Notices
cchase on PROD1PC60 with NOTICES
III. Finding of No Significant Impact
The NRC staff has prepared this EA in
support of the proposed license
amendment to release the subject
facilities for unrestricted use and
terminate the license. On the basis of
the EA, the NRC has concluded that
there are no significant environmental
impacts from the proposed action, and
the license amendment does not warrant
the preparation of an environmental
impact statement. Accordingly, it has
been determined that a Finding of No
Significant Impact is appropriate.
IV. Further Information
Documents related to this action,
including the application for
amendment and supporting
documentation, are available
electronically at the NRC’s Electronic
Reading Room at https://www.nrc.gov/
reading-rm/adams.html. From this site,
you can access the NRC’s Agencywide
Document Access and Management
System (ADAMS), which provides text
and image files of NRC’s public
documents. The ADAMS accession
numbers for the documents related to
this Notice are:
1. NRC, ‘‘Generic Environmental
Impact Statement in Support of
Rulemaking on Radiological Criteria for
License Termination of NRC-Licensed
Nuclear Facilities,’’ NUREG–1496, July
1997 (ML042310492, ML042320379,
and ML042330385).
2. Gile, Jay D., U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency’s Western Ecology
Division, Cessation of Licensed
Activities and Request for License
Termination, November 30, 2004
(ML043620316, ML043620322,
ML043620325, ML043620321).
3. Gile, Jay D., Environmental
Protection Agency’s Western Ecology
Division, NRC Form 314 Certificate of
Disposition of Materials, December 1,
2004 (ML043620317).
4. McBride, Kathy, Environmental
Protection Agency’s Western Ecology
Division, NRC Form 314 (Certificate of
Disposition of Materials) Retraction
Memo, December 14, 2005
(ML060110330).
5. Burr, Dave, Environmental
Protection Agency’s Western Ecology
Division, Decommissioning Audit
Response, Addendum to the Final
Status Survey Report, Certificate of
Disposition of Materials and Request for
License Termination, December 27,
2005 (ML060110298, ML060110337,
ML060110472, ML060110496).
6. NRC Inspection Report 030–05976/
05–001, January 10, 2006
(ML060120525).
7. Burr, Dave, Environmental
Protection Agency’s Western Ecology
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:29 May 10, 2006
Jkt 208001
Division, EPA Comments on the draft
Environmental Assessment, March 29,
2006 (ML060890410).
8. Schlapper, Beth A., Memorandum
to Docket File 030–05976, State of
Oregon Telephone Response Of No
Comment For Comments On The Draft
Environmental Assessment, March 29,
2006 (ML060880514).
If you do not have access to ADAMS
or if there are problems in accessing the
documents located in ADAMS, contact
the NRC Public Document Room (PDR)
Reference staff at 1–800–397–4209, 301–
415–4737, or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov.
These documents may also be viewed
electronically on the public computers
located at the NRC’s PDR, O 1 F21, One
White Flint North, 11555 Rockville
Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. The PDR
reproduction contractor will copy
documents for a fee.
Dated at Arlington, Texas this 19th day of
April, 2006.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
D. Blair Spitzberg,
Chief, Fuel Cycle & Decommissioning Branch,
Division of Nuclear Materials Safety, Region
IV.
[FR Doc. E6–7163 Filed 5–10–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
Advisory Committee on Nuclear
Waste; Notice of Meeting
The Advisory Committee on Nuclear
Waste (ACNW) will hold its 170th
meeting on May 23–26, 2006, Room T–
2B3, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville,
Maryland.
The schedule for this meeting is as
follows:
Tuesday, May 23, 2006
ACNW Working Group Meeting on
Low-Level Radioactive Waste (LLW)
Management Issues
8:30 a.m.–8:40 a.m.: Greeting and
Introductions (Open)—The ACNW
Chairman, Dr. Michael Ryan, will state
the purpose and objectives for this
Working Group Meeting. He will also
provide an overview of the planned
technical sessions for Day 1 and
introduce invited panelists and
speakers.
Purpose of ACNW Working Group
Meeting. The purposes of this ACNW
Working Group Meeting are to:
—Obtain current information on
commercial LLW management
practices.
—Identify emerging LLW management
issues and concerns.
PO 00000
Frm 00075
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
27523
—Solicit stakeholder views on what
changes to the regulatory framework
for managing LLW should be
recommended for Commission
consideration.
—Solicit stakeholder views on actions
the NRC can take to ensure a stable,
reliable and adaptable regulatory
framework for effective LLW
management.
—Identify specific impacts, both
positive and negative, of potential
staff activities.
8:40 a.m.–9:40 a.m.: Existing LLW
Licensee Operational Experience and
Perspective (Open)—The Committee
will hear presentations by
representatives of Chem-Nuclear
Systems, LLC and EnergySolutions,
LLC.
9:40 a.m.–10:40 a.m.: Alternative
Disposal Options and Practices
(Open)—The Committee will hear
presentations by Waste Control
Specialists and U.S. Ecology—American
Ecology.
11 a.m.–11:30 a.m.: NRC’s Current
LLW Program: Challenges (Open)—The
Committee will hear a presentation by a
NRC staff representative regarding the
current LLW program.
11:30 a.m.–12:30 p.m.: NRC’s 10 CFR
Part 61: Historical Perspective (Open)—
The Committee will hear presentations
from former NRC staff regarding the
development of NRC’s LLW regulatory
framework.
2 p.m.–3:30 p.m.: State/Compact
Disposal Experience (Open)—The
Committee will hear presentations from
representatives of the Southwestern
Low-Level Radioactive Waste
Commission and the South Carolina
Department of Health and
Environmental Control.
3:30 p.m.–4 p.m.: LLW Definitions and
Decommissioning Experience (Open)—
The Committee will hear a presentation
by a representative from the Nuclear
Energy Institute.
4 p.m.–4:30 p.m.: New License
Application Perspectives (Open)—The
Committee will hear a presentation by a
representative from Waste Control
Specialists, LLC.
4:30 p.m.–5:30 p.m.: Stakeholder and
Public Comments (Open).
Wednesday, May 24, 2006
8:30 a.m.–8:40 a.m.: Greeting and
Introductions (Open)—Dr. Ryan will
provide an overview of the planned
technical sessions for Day 2 and
introduce the invited panelists and
speakers.
8:40 a.m.–11 a.m.: Industry
Roundtable Discussion (Open)—
Scheduled participants are expected to
include representatives from Entergy,
E:\FR\FM\11MYN1.SGM
11MYN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 91 (Thursday, May 11, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27521-27523]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-7163]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 030-05976]
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Western Ecology Division,
Corvallis and Newport Facilities, OR: Issuance of Environmental
Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact for License Amendment
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Issuance of environmental assessment and Finding of No
Significant Impact for license amendment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: D. Blair Spitzberg, Ph.D., Chief, Fuel
Cycle and Decommissioning Branch, Division of Nuclear Materials Safety,
Region IV, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 611 Ryan Plaza Drive,
Suite 400, Arlington, TX 76011. Telephone: (817) 860-8100; e-mail:
dbs@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Introduction
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering issuance of
an amendment to Material License No. 36-12343-02 issued to the United
States Environmental Protection Agency, Western Ecology Division (EPA
or the licensee). This license pertains to the following three EPA
facilities located in Oregon: (1) Corvallis Environmental Research
Laboratory; (2) Willamette Research Station (also in Corvallis); and
(3) the Pacific Coastal Ecology Branch facility in Newport. Granting
the amendment request would authorize the release of these facilities
for unrestricted use, and would terminate the license as requested. In
accordance with conditions in its license, the EPA was authorized to
use radioactive material at its three facilities to conduct tracer
studies involving marine organisms and plants (excluding animal
studies); perform sample analysis; conduct tests for soil moisture; and
for instrument calibration.
On November 30, 2004 (as supplemented by letter dated December 27,
2005), EPA requested that NRC release the three facilities for
unrestricted use and to terminate the license. The licensee conducted
radiological surveys of the subject facilities and concluded that the
license termination criteria specified in subpart E to 10 CFR part 20
for unrestricted release have been met. The amendment will be issued if
NRC determines that the request meets the standards specified in 10 CFR
part 20 and related NRC guidance documents.
II. Environmental Assessment (EA)
Identification of Proposed Action: The proposed action is to enable
the licensee to use its subject facilities in any manner without NRC
restriction. The NRC proposes to accomplish this by terminating NRC
License No. 36-12343-02 because the licensee has permanently ceased all
licensed activities and transferred or disposed of all licensed
radioactive materials.
The Need for the Proposed Action: The licensee has permanently
ceased all licensed activities at its subject facilities. The EPA
desires to release these facilities for unrestricted use. The
facilities will continue to be used for research with non-licensed
materials. When the licensing action is complete, the licensee will be
in compliance with the requirements of 10 CFR 30.36, ``Expiration and
Termination of Licenses and Decommissioning of Sites and Separate
Buildings or Outdoor Areas.''
Environmental Impact of the Proposed Action: NRC Materials License
No. 36-12343-02 authorizes the EPA to possess small quantities of
radioactive material, in both sealed and unsealed form. Under its
license, the EPA's use of licensed material included the performance of
tracer studies involving marine organisms and plants (excluding animal
studies), use in gas chromatographs for sample analysis, use in Troxler
Model 4300 Series gauges to measure soil moisture, and use in a liquid
scintillation counter for instrument calibration. By letter dated
November 30, 2004, EPA requested that NRC release the subject
facilities for unrestricted use and terminate the license.
A final status survey report (FSSR) was completed by the licensee,
and a copy of the report was attached to the November 30, 2004, letter.
During the November 2005 NRC inspection, EPA identified additional
previous locations of use that had not been documented in
[[Page 27522]]
the November 2004 FSSR submittal. An addendum to the FSSR was attached
to a letter from EPA dated December 27, 2005. As discussed below, the
EPA concluded that all three facilities were sufficiently free of
radioactive material to permit unrestricted release of the facilities.
As part of its amendment request, the licensee conducted a
historical review of its three facilities and found that the
radionuclides of concern were carbon-14, calcium-45, chromium-51,
hydrogen-3, phosphorus-32, sulfur-35, nickel-63, americium-241, and
barium-133. Radioactive materials were used at the two Corvallis
facilities from 1977 to 2004. Radioactive materials were used at the
Newport facility from 1987-1995 under NRC License No. 36-23261-01.
(This license was terminated in July 1995 after NRC License No. 36-
12343-02 was amended to bring the Newport facility within its scope).
To demonstrate compliance with the radiological criteria for
unrestricted release as specified in 10 CFR 20.1402, the licensee
developed derived concentration guideline levels (DCGLs). The NRC
compared the licensee's proposed DCGLs to the screening criteria
provided in NUREG-1757, ``Consolidated NMSS Decommissioning Guidance,''
Volume 2. The NRC concluded that the proposed DCGLs were acceptable for
use as release criteria.
The EPA's historical assessment identified two incidents that may
have involved leaking sealed sources at the Corvallis Environmental
Research Laboratory. One event occurred in March 1979 involving a
sealed source containing a tritium-scandium foil. At the time of the
event, the laboratory was cleaned and decontaminated. Significant
remodeling had taken place since the laboratory had been cleaned and
decontaminated, so additional NRC confirmatory surveys were not
performed in this area. A second event occurred in June 1982 involving
either a leaking nickel-63 sealed source detector or radiotracers
injected into a gas chromatograph. The licensee believed that the
detector did not leak and that the contamination was tritium, not
nickel-63. The laboratory was decontaminated and the event reported to
the NRC at the time.
The NRC staff reviewed the docket file records and the FSSR to
identify any non-radiological hazards that may have impacted the
environment. No additional hazards or impacts were identified.
The licensee's radiation safety program allowed unrestricted
release of previous locations of use once the areas were shown to be
free from residual contamination. Final status surveys of the former
locations of use were conducted when the laboratories were removed from
service. Additional limited final status surveys were performed in 12
previous locations of use within the three subject facilities during
November 2004, because the historical survey records were not adequate
or complete to show that the locations were free from residual
contamination. Final status surveys on remaining locations of use that
had not been previously released were also performed during June 2004,
November 2004 and December 2005. These final status surveys were
conducted in buildings and laboratories identified during the
historical assessment as previous locations of use with licensed
radioactive materials.
The NRC conducted a confirmatory survey of 26 separate locations in
the subject facilities during the NRC's November 2005 inspection. The
NRC focused these confirmatory surveys in previous locations of use
that were identified in the licensee's historical assessment as
locations that potentially used licensed material in unsealed form. The
confirmatory survey included the site at the Corvallis Environmental
Research Laboratory where a leak from a sealed source may have occurred
in June 1982. These confirmatory surveys also included the licensee-
identified previous locations of use that were not in the original FSSR
submittal dated November 2004. The surveys included ambient gamma
exposure rate measurements, as well as, fixed and removable surface
contamination measurements. The removable surface contamination
measurements included measurements for hydrogen-3 and carbon-14. None
of the confirmatory sample results exceeded the proposed DCGLs
identified in the FSSR.
In its FSSR, the licensee stated that radioactive waste material
from previously licensed operations was transferred to an authorized
waste contractor. All other previously licensed radioactive materials
were transferred to authorized recipients. Solid waste disposal did not
include on-site burial or incineration. Discharges to sewers were
reviewed by inspectors during routine inspections to ensure compliance
with the release limits specified in 10 CFR part 20. Accordingly, the
NRC finds that surface and groundwater sources were not impacted by
previous EPA operations involving licensed material at the subject
facilities.
Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives of the Proposed Action:
The licensee seeks NRC approval of the license termination request. The
alternatives to the proposed action are: (1) The no-action alternative,
or (2) to deny the license termination request and require the licensee
to take some alternate action.
1. No-Action Alternative: One alternative available to the NRC is
to take no action by denying the license termination request. The no-
action alternative is not feasible because it conflicts with the NRC's
regulation (10 CFR 30.36(d)) requiring licensees to decommission their
facilities when licensed activities permanently cease.
2. Environmental Impacts of Alternative 2: A second alternative is
to deny the licensee's request in favor of alternate release criteria
as allowed by Sec. 20.1403 (criteria for restricted conditions) or
Sec. 20.1404 (alternate criteria). However, the NRC's analysis of the
final status survey data confirmed that the proposed DCGLs meet the
license termination requirements of Sec. 20.1402. Accordingly, the NRC
has determined that the second alternative is not reasonable, and this
alternative action is eliminated from further consideration.
Conclusion: Based on its review, the NRC staff concludes that the
environmental impacts associated with the proposed action do not
warrant denial of the license termination request. The staff believes
that the proposed action will result in no significant environmental
impacts. The staff has determined that the proposed action, approval of
the license termination, is the appropriate alternative for selection.
Agencies and Persons Contacted: The NRC staff did not consult with
the local U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service or the State Historic
Preservation Officer because licensed activities occurred only within
the three EPA facilities in Corvallis and Newport, Oregon. There was no
evidence of use or release of radioactive material outside of these
facilities. Accordingly, there was no impact to historic properties or
the cultural resources, endangered species, or critical habitats
outside these facilities. The State of Oregon notified the NRC by
telephone on March 29, 2006 that it had no comments on the EA. This
conversation was documented in a Memorandum to the Docket File dated
March 29, 2006. EPA notified the NRC by letter dated March 29, 2006
that it had four clarification comments on the EA. These comments have
been incorporated.
[[Page 27523]]
III. Finding of No Significant Impact
The NRC staff has prepared this EA in support of the proposed
license amendment to release the subject facilities for unrestricted
use and terminate the license. On the basis of the EA, the NRC has
concluded that there are no significant environmental impacts from the
proposed action, and the license amendment does not warrant the
preparation of an environmental impact statement. Accordingly, it has
been determined that a Finding of No Significant Impact is appropriate.
IV. Further Information
Documents related to this action, including the application for
amendment and supporting documentation, are available electronically at
the NRC's Electronic Reading Room at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/
adams.html. From this site, you can access the NRC's Agencywide
Document Access and Management System (ADAMS), which provides text and
image files of NRC's public documents. The ADAMS accession numbers for
the documents related to this Notice are:
1. NRC, ``Generic Environmental Impact Statement in Support of
Rulemaking on Radiological Criteria for License Termination of NRC-
Licensed Nuclear Facilities,'' NUREG-1496, July 1997 (ML042310492,
ML042320379, and ML042330385).
2. Gile, Jay D., U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Western
Ecology Division, Cessation of Licensed Activities and Request for
License Termination, November 30, 2004 (ML043620316, ML043620322,
ML043620325, ML043620321).
3. Gile, Jay D., Environmental Protection Agency's Western Ecology
Division, NRC Form 314 Certificate of Disposition of Materials,
December 1, 2004 (ML043620317).
4. McBride, Kathy, Environmental Protection Agency's Western
Ecology Division, NRC Form 314 (Certificate of Disposition of
Materials) Retraction Memo, December 14, 2005 (ML060110330).
5. Burr, Dave, Environmental Protection Agency's Western Ecology
Division, Decommissioning Audit Response, Addendum to the Final Status
Survey Report, Certificate of Disposition of Materials and Request for
License Termination, December 27, 2005 (ML060110298, ML060110337,
ML060110472, ML060110496).
6. NRC Inspection Report 030-05976/05-001, January 10, 2006
(ML060120525).
7. Burr, Dave, Environmental Protection Agency's Western Ecology
Division, EPA Comments on the draft Environmental Assessment, March 29,
2006 (ML060890410).
8. Schlapper, Beth A., Memorandum to Docket File 030-05976, State
of Oregon Telephone Response Of No Comment For Comments On The Draft
Environmental Assessment, March 29, 2006 (ML060880514).
If you do not have access to ADAMS or if there are problems in
accessing the documents located in ADAMS, contact the NRC Public
Document Room (PDR) Reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or
by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov.
These documents may also be viewed electronically on the public
computers located at the NRC's PDR, O 1 F21, One White Flint North,
11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. The PDR reproduction
contractor will copy documents for a fee.
Dated at Arlington, Texas this 19th day of April, 2006.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
D. Blair Spitzberg,
Chief, Fuel Cycle & Decommissioning Branch, Division of Nuclear
Materials Safety, Region IV.
[FR Doc. E6-7163 Filed 5-10-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
