Notice of Availability of Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact Related to Issuance of Amendment No. 52 to Materials License No. SNM-00033, Westinghouse Electric Company, LLC Hematite Former Fuel Fabrication Facility Located in Festus, MO, Site (TAC No. L52641), 37124-37129 [E6-10267]
Download as PDF
37124
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 125 / Thursday, June 29, 2006 / Notices
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
III. Finding of No Significant Impact
The NRC staff has prepared an EA in
support of the proposed license
amendment to release Kunia Substation
for unrestricted use. On the basis of this
EA, NRC has concluded that no
significant environmental impacts will
result 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.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
D. Blair Spitzberg,
Chief, Fuel Cycle & Decommissioning Branch,
Division of Nuclear Materials Safety, Region
IV.
[FR Doc. E6–10265 Filed 6–28–06; 8:45 am]
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. Whalen, Stephanie, Hawaii
Agriculture Research Center, Response
to NRC Information Notice 96–47,
October 31, 1996 (ML060890606).
2. 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).
3. NRC, ‘‘Consolidated NMSS
Decommissioning Guidance,’’ NUREG–
1757, Volume 1, Revision 1, September
2003 (ML053260027).
4. Whalen, Stephanie A., Hawaii
Agriculture Research Center, License
Amendment Request, December 2, 2005
(ML060120252).
5. Takata, Russell, S., Response to
Request for Comments on Draft
Environmental Assessment for
Decommissioning of Kunia Substation
at Hawaii Agriculture Research Center,
May 30, 2006 (ML061630274).
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.
Notice of Availability of Environmental
Assessment and Finding of No
Significant Impact Related to Issuance
of Amendment No. 52 to Materials
License No. SNM–00033,
Westinghouse Electric Company, LLC
Hematite Former Fuel Fabrication
Facility Located in Festus, MO, Site
(TAC No. L52641)
Dated at Arlington, Texas this 16th day of
June 2006.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:03 Jun 28, 2006
Jkt 208001
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket No. 70–0036]
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Notice of Availability of
Environmental Assessment and Finding
of No Significant Impact.
AGENCY:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Amy M. Snyder, Senior Project
Manager, Decommissioning Directorate,
Division of Waste Management and
Environmental Protection, Office of
Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards,
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
M.S. T7 E–18, Rockville, MD, 20852–
2738. Telephone: (301) 415–8580; Fax
number: (301) 415–5398; e-mail:
ams3@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Introduction
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) is considering
amending Nuclear Materials License
Number SNM–00033 issued to
Westinghouse Electric Company, LLC
(WEC) to authorize the dismantlement
and demolition of Buildings 101, 110,
115, 120, 230, 231, 235, 240, 245, 252,
253, 254, 255, 256, 260, and 261 down
to building slabs and foundations at
grade at the WEC Hematite Former Fuel
Fabrication Facility in Festus, Missouri.
This consideration is being supported
by this Environmental Assessment (EA)
and a separate Safety Evaluation Report
(SER). In a letter dated October 5, 2004
(ML042860234), WEC submitted a
request to NRC to amend Materials
License Number SNM–00033 to obtain
authorization to dismantle and
demolish Buildings 101, 110, 115, 120,
230, 231, 235, 240, 245, 252, 253, 254,
255, 256, 260, and 261 down to building
slabs and foundations at grade. In its
request, WEC noted that it wants the
PO 00000
Frm 00093
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
flexibility to not demolish all the nonprocess buildings, if it later decides to
keep these buildings for reuse. The
licensee’s October 5, 2004, license
amendment request (ML051310063) was
noticed in the Federal Register on
November 16, 2004 (69 FR 67187). That
Federal Register notice also provided an
opportunity for a hearing on this
licensing action, and no hearing
requests were submitted. NRC has
prepared this EA in support of its
consideration of the amendment request
and in accordance with the
requirements of 10 CFR part 51. This EA
evaluates the potential environmental
impacts of WEC’s request. Based on this
EA, the staff has concluded that a
Finding of No Significant Impact
(FONSI) is appropriate.
II. Environmental Assessment
Background
From the mid 1950s until 2001, the
Hematite site was involved in
production and manufacturing of
nuclear fuel. The majority of the
buildings were constructed during 1956
through 1974 with final construction in
1989. There are currently no fuel
manufacturing activities at the site.
Building 101 (Tile Barn) housed the
former Emergency Operations Center
during plant operations and was later
used for the storage of both clean and
contaminated equipment. Building 110
houses the security and some
administrative office spaces. Building
115 housed the plant diesel emergency
generator and fire pumps. Building 120
(Wood Barn) was used for storing both
clean and contaminated equipment.
Building 230 was used for the fuel
assembly operations. The building
surfaces have no known levels of
contamination above the level for
unrestricted use. Building 230 currently
houses administrative offices. Building
231 was used as a warehouse to store
shipping containers. Building 235 was
used as a vault to store depleted,
natural, and enriched uranium. Building
240 contained a laboratory and
maintenance area, a recycle recovery
area, and a waste incinerator. Past
operations in this building also
included the conversion of high
enriched uranium using a wet
conversion process and recovery. A
portion of the building was used for
recycle and recovery operations and
high-enriched material operations.
Another portion of the building was
used for the incinerator and housed
low-enriched powder operations,
including ammonium diurinate and
oxidation/reduction furnaces. Building
245 (Well House) was used for treating
E:\FR\FM\29JNN1.SGM
29JNN1
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 125 / Thursday, June 29, 2006 / Notices
potable water by chlorination. Building
252 (South Vault) is a reinforced
concrete structure with six bays and was
used for storage of low-enriched
uranium. Building 253 contains offices,
various site utilities, a former uranium
storage facility, former processing areas
and decontamination facilities.
Contained within Building 253 is
Building 250, which was formerly a
stand-alone structure. Building 250
became room 250–1, and in 1958, rooms
250–2 and 250–3 were added to
Building 250. Building 250 was used for
the storage of fuel feed stock. Nuclear
fuel was manufactured in Buildings 254
(Pellet Plant) and 255 (Erbia Plant).
Buildings 256–1 (Pellet Drying) was
initially used for a warehouse space and
later was used for pellet drying.
Building 256–2 (Workhouse) was used
as the main warehouse for shipping
pellets and receiving supply. Building
260 was used for a conversion process.
Building 261 was used for storage of
unused limestone and contained a
preheat furnace.
Since there is known contamination
under the process buildings and the
licensee has not yet characterized the
soil under the process and non-process
buildings, the licensee will not be able
to release the non-process buildings that
it does not demolish under this
proposed licensing action for
unrestricted use. Furthermore, building
foundation and subsurface soil removal
are not covered under this proposed
licensing action nor the current license.
In accordance with a previously
issued amendment to Materials License
Number SNM–00033, the licensee has
been performing limited
decommissioning for the purpose of
reducing residual radioactivity and
other industrial contaminants from
internal building equipment and
components for the process buildings.
WEC completed this work in March
2006. The NRC performed an EA, using
NUREG–1748 as guidance, to evaluate
these limited decommissioning
activities. The EA and associated SER
for limited decommissioning of the
equipment and materials in the
buildings, waste removal, and limited
site characterization activities form the
basis for NRC granting license
amendment 42 to Materials License
Number SNM–00033. In addition, WEC
has produced an engineering
evaluation/cost analysis and a work
plan to comply with Comprehensive
Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act
(CERCLA) for the building demolition.
These documents can be found on the
Missouri Department of Natural
Resources (MDNR) Web site at https://
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:03 Jun 28, 2006
Jkt 208001
www.mdnr.mo.gov. In addition, WEC
has made these documents available at
the Festus, Missouri Public Library.
The radioactive contamination at
WEC’s Hematite, Missouri site consists
of soils, and building and equipment
surfaces contaminated with uranium,
fission products, and by-product
material from licensed operations that
occurred from the mid 1950s until 2001.
The groundwater is contaminated with
uranium, technicium, and volatile
organic compounds (VOCs). At this
point in time, only the VOCs in the
groundwater have migrated offsite.
Remediation of this groundwater
contamination will be the subject of a
separate NRC action that addresses
subsurface remediation.
As stated above, WEC submitted a
request to NRC in 2004 for authorization
to dismantle and demolish designated
buildings at its site. By letters dated
June 28, 2005 (ML051720051),
December 23, 2005 (ML053330179), and
March 2, 2006 (ML06540109), the NRC
staff transmitted requests for additional
information (RAIs) related to the
proposed building demolition and
dismantlement. In letters dated July 22,
2005 (ML052140426), January 31, 2006
(ML060330438) and March 17, 2006
(ML060800265), WEC responded to the
RAIs. NRC found these responses to the
RAIs acceptable.
Site Local and Physical Description
The WEC Hematite site is located
approximately 3⁄4 of a mile northeast of
the unincorporated town of Hematite
and approximately 35 miles south of the
City of St. Louis, Missouri. The site is
primarily surrounded by suburban and
residential communities in Jefferson
County, Missouri. Jefferson County is
predominantly rural and characterized
by rolling hills with many sizeable
woodland tracts. The land area is
classified as 51% forest, 33%
agricultural, and approximately 16%
urban, suburban, commercial, and
unused or undeveloped. The primary
land within a five-mile radius of the
facility consists of deciduous forest,
pasture and residential areas.
Residential land use is centered in the
communities of Festus/Crystal City to
the northeast, Horine to the north, and
Hillsboro to the northwest. Other land
uses include row crop and urban/
residential. Land use classifications are
based on the National Land Cover
Dataset. The plant facilities are located
on a central site tract of approximately
10 to 20 acres. The entire site is
approximately 220 acres. Much of the
northern portion of the property is
wooded. Surface water bodies on the
site include the East Lake, located on
PO 00000
Frm 00094
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
37125
the eastern end of the site, the Site
Pond, located west of the site buildings,
Joachim Creek along the southern site
boundary, Northeast Site Creek and Site
Creek. The Hematite facility is located
on the north, northeast flank of the
Precambrian age St. Francis Mountains
uplift, which created the Ozark Dome. A
full description of the site and its
characteristics is provided in the WEC
Environmental Report for Building
Demolition at the Hematite Facility
which was submitted in conjunction
with the license amendment request for
dismantlement and demolition of the
buildings. The nearby community of
Hematite has expressed interest in
future development of the site.
However, as of April 2006, no definite
future plans have been developed for
the site.
Regulatory Requirements
10 CFR part 70, ‘‘Domestic Licensing
of Special Nuclear Material’’ applies to
the decommissioning of the Hematite
Former Fuel Fabrication Facility.
Termination of licenses and
decommissioning are addressed in
§ 70.38. However, this proposed action
will not result in license termination. It
will only address building demolition.
Financial assurance requirements are
found in § 70.25 and 70.38.
Completeness and accuracy of the
radiation safety records and information
provided to NRC are addressed in
§ 70.9. Section 2.1205 discusses the
public’s opportunities to request
hearings on licensing actions. 10 CFR
part 20, subpart E, sets forth radiological
criteria for license termination in
§ 20.1402, 20.1403, and 20.1404. The
requirements for final status surveys are
contained in § 20.1501(a); 10 CFR part
51, ‘‘Environmental Protection
Regulations for Domestic Licensing and
Related Regulatory Functions,’’ and 10
CFR part 71, ‘‘Packaging and
Transportation of Radioactive Material’’
(part 71 requires that licensees or
applicants who transport licensed
material, or who may offer such material
to a carrier for transportation, must
comply with the applicable
requirements of the Department of
Transportation that are found in 49 CFR
parts 170 through 189).
The Proposed Action
The proposed action is to amend NRC
Materials License Number SNM–00033
to allow the dismantlement and
demolition of the buildings 101, 110,
115, 120, 230, 231, 235, 240, 245, 252,
253, 254, 255, 256, 260, and 261 down
to building slabs and foundations at
grade. No work will be performed on
sub-grade soil, the building slabs/
E:\FR\FM\29JNN1.SGM
29JNN1
37126
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 125 / Thursday, June 29, 2006 / Notices
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
foundations, or sub-grade structures and
systems. WEC states in its application
that the demolition of concrete
buildings will be performed as
determined by an engineering
evaluation. WEC plans to perform an
engineering evaluation of the
demolition of the concrete masonry unit
(CMU) structures and concrete
buildings, and use dismantlement and
demolition techniques, such as cutting
and shearing to demolish the buildings.
Manual jack-hammers, equipment
mounted jack-hammers (hoe ram), skidsteer loader, or shears will be used to
remove/dismantle and to size reduce
concrete or CMU structures. The CMU
walls may also be brought down using
pushover techniques. Steel
reinforcement bars will be torch-cut,
sheared, or saw-cut as required for
dismantlement, leveling, or size
reduction purposes. The only potential
waste streams from the facility will
result from the building dismantlement
and demolition process. Wastes that are
anticipated are: (1) Debris; (2) dust; (3)
rubble and (4) water. Based on
characterization data, WEC proposes to
segregate and analyze the waste as
required by the disposal facility site’s
waste acceptance criteria. WEC
proposes that debris will be
characterized, and will meet free release
criteria for radiological and hazardous
contamination, and will be shipped to
an approved waste disposal facility for
disposal. If the debris does not meet free
release criteria, then it will be packaged
accordingly and shipped to an approved
waste disposal facility for disposal.
Need for the Proposed Action
The NRC regulations require licensees
to begin timely decommissioning of
their sites, or any separate buildings,
that contain residual radioactivity, upon
cessation of licensed operations, in
accordance with § 70.38(d). The purpose
of the proposed action is to reduce
residual radioactivity at WEC’s Hematite
site. Additionally, although no definite
future use plans have been developed
for the site at this time, due to potential
commercial value of the site property,
the licensee plans to eventually return
the land to unrestricted use in
accordance with § 20.1402. The
proposed licensing action is a step
toward this goal. If this proposed
licensing action is not granted, the
licensee will not be able to fully address
surface and subsurface contamination
under buildings, which will prolong the
overall cleanup of the site. The NRC is
fulfilling its responsibilities under the
Atomic Energy Act, as amended, and
the National Environmental Policy Act
to make a decision on this proposed
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:03 Jun 28, 2006
Jkt 208001
license amendment for building
dismantlement and demolition that will
ensure adequate protection of the public
health, safety and the environment.
Alternatives to the Proposed Action
The proposed action is to
decontaminate the buildings with
dismantlement and demolition down to
building slabs and foundations at grade.
There are three alternatives to the
proposed action of dismantlement and
demolition of the buildings: (1) To take
no further action; (2) to decontaminate
the buildings without dismantlement
and demolition; and (3) to
decontaminate the buildings with
dismantlement and demolition to
include removal of the slabs and
foundations. Alternative one, the noaction alternative, is not consistent with
§ 70.38(d), requiring that
decommissioning of special nuclear
material facilities be completed and
approved by the NRC after licensed
activities cease. The no-action
alternative would keep radioactive
material on site without disposal. The
second alternative would involve
maintaining the buildings on site due to
known and potential subsurface soil
contamination under the process
building. This would provide negligible,
if any, environmental benefit and would
greatly reduce options for future
unrestricted use of the site. Alternative
3 would result in exposing the
subsurface contamination, that was
contained under the buildings, to the
open environment. Specifically,
exposing the subsurface would expose
workers and visitors to radiological and
potential non-radiological hazards in
the subsurface soil. As discussed earlier,
the licensee has not yet fully evaluated
the subsurface contamination under the
buildings. Potentially contaminated
materials could be released into the
surrounding environment via effluents
or airborne particles. Shipping the
subsurface contaminated material offsite for disposal could also potentially
expose workers and others to the
material before, during, and after
shipment to a waste disposal facility.
The environmental impact could
potentially put workers and the
surrounding environment at risk, and
therefore, is not an environmentally
sound option at this time. Therefore,
these alternatives are not considered to
be reasonable and are not analyzed
further in the EA.
The licensee’s proposed action is
described in detail in the proposed
building dismantlement and demolition
license amendment application. This
action is preferred over the alternative
actions because the proposed action has
PO 00000
Frm 00095
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
little, if any, impact on the environment.
Once the buildings are dismantled and
demolished down to the slabs and
foundations at grade, all radiological
materials will be confined to either the
slabs and foundations or the subsurface.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed
Action
The NRC staff has reviewed the
license amendment request for the WEC
facility in Hematite and examined the
impacts of this license amendment
request. Potential impacts include
impacts to water resources (e.g., water
may be used for dust control), impacts
to air quality from dust emissions,
temporary impacts to local traffic
resulting from transporting the building
debris offsite, beneficial local economic
effects due to the creation of jobs to
perform dismantlement and demolition,
dose impacts, noise impacts from
equipment operation, scenic quality
impacts, and waste management
impacts. There may be minor impacts to
surface water resources at the Hematite
facility as a result of water runoff that
could occur during the building
dismantlement and demolition process.
According to the licensee’s amendment
request, the runoff, whether as a result
of natural precipitation or from water
used to control fugitive dust emission,
will be managed by WEC Hematite
erosion and sediment control
management plan. Any discharge will
be in compliance with Material License
Number SNM–00033 and the WEC
Hematite National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permit
issued and managed by the State of
Missouri. There will be no significant
surface and no subsurface soil
disturbances as the buildings will be
removed down to the grade and
concrete slab level. There are no flood
plains or wetlands present within the
central site tract where the building
demolition will take place. The central
site tract soil consists primarily of
relatively impermeable soil. WEC has
committed to using best practices to
manage all potential impacts during
building dismantlement and demolition.
Overall, it is anticipated that there will
be no significant impact on surface
water or groundwater.
Additionally, the staff has determined
that significant air quality, noise, land
use, economic and off-site radiation
exposure impacts are not expected. No
significant air quality impacts are
anticipated because of the
contamination controls and dust
suppression techniques that will be
implemented by WEC during building
dismantlement and demolition. WEC
license amendment request describes
E:\FR\FM\29JNN1.SGM
29JNN1
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 125 / Thursday, June 29, 2006 / Notices
the work to be performed and its
strategy for controlling radiation diffuse
emissions and discharge. WEC has
committed to have procedures for
performing building dismantlement and
demolition that will include guidance
for controlling emissions and run-off.
The staff determined that no significant
economic impact will result from the
creation of jobs to perform
dismantlement and demolition because
the work should take a small amount of
time to complete.
The staff evaluated the temporary
local traffic impacts resulting from
transporting the building debris and
wastes offsite due to the licensee’s
proposed request. WEC ceased fuel
production operations at the Hematite
Facility and has no future plans for
operating the site as a nuclear fuel
processing facility. WEC states that
clean debris will be containerized,
transported, and disposed of at a
licensed facility. The risk to human
health from the transportation of all
radioactive material in the U.S. was
evaluated in NUREG–0170, ‘‘Final
Environmental Statement on the
Transportation of Radioactive Materials
by Air and Other Modes.’’ The principal
radiological environmental impact
during normal transportation is minimal
direct radiation exposure to transport
workers and nearby persons from
radioactive material in the package. The
average annual individual dose from all
radioactive material transportation in
the U.S. was calculated as
approximately 0.5 mrem per year, well
below the § 20.1301 limit of 100 mrem
per year for a member of the public.
WEC estimates that 2 to 3 truck loads of
demolition waste will leave the site per
working day compared to an average
daily traffic flow of approximately 2,570
vehicles per day (2002 data) on State
Route P. The trucks will then travel on
State Route A, a two-lane rural/
suburban highway which connects to
State Route P approximately 2 miles
east of the site. State Route A enters the
western edge of Festus, Missouri.
Interstate 55, a major north-south
freeway, is located approximately 3.5
miles east of the site and intersects with
State Route A in Festus, Missouri. This
four-lane interstate freeway connects to
Interstate Highways 270, 44, and 70 in
the St. Louis, Missouri area,
approximately 35 miles north of the site.
The annual average daily traffic count
for I–55 near Festus was 35,347 vehicles
per day (2002 data). There are no public
transit systems, such as bus or light rail
available in the immediate vicinity of
the site. The trucks, once entering the
above Interstate Highways, will then
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:47 Jun 28, 2006
Jkt 208001
travel to their intended destinations.
Based on the Environmental Report for
Building Demolition at the Hematite
Facility, the licensee states that it
anticipates that debris from the
dismantled buildings would likely be
transported by truck to the Envirocare
Facility in Clive, Utah or to the
Radiological Assistance, Consulting and
Engineering (RACE) Facility in
Memphis, Tennessee. The proposed
transportation of waste from the
building, dismantlement, and
demolition is not anticipated to result in
significant impacts.
Monitoring
The license amendment request
submitted by WEC described the
effluent/environmental monitoring that
will take place during building
dismantlement and demolition. This
description included not only the
routine effluent/environmental
monitoring program that WEC presently
has in place, but also that additional air
monitoring (local demolition projectspecific perimeter air monitors) shall be
performed during the demolition
activities.
Work activities are not anticipated to
result in radiation exposures to
individual members of the public in
excess of ten percent of the § 20.1301
limits. However, WEC’s environmental
monitoring program must implement
the requirements of its Radioactive
Materials License, Chapter 3, Radiation
Protection, and Chapter 5,
Environmental Protection. WEC has
acknowledged that building demolition
activities will require that building stack
monitoring be terminated and has
committed to shift compliance
monitoring to air monitoring devices
located around the site to assure that all
pathways for release of radioactive
material are monitored. WEC has
updated its technical basis for its
Environmental Monitoring Program to
address building dismantlement and
demolition activities. Moreover, WEC
has stated it will modify and
supplement approved environmental
monitoring plans, policies, and
procedures that support the license,
before and during the proposed work, as
necessary, to support building
dismantlement and demolition.
Perimeter monitors to measure air
borne radiation levels are to be
established as close to the demolition
activities as possible and again at the
boundary of the work area. Currently,
three onsite remote air monitoring
samples are collected continuously and
the results are analyzed weekly. During
the demolition activities, the licensee
has committed to use a minimum of
PO 00000
Frm 00096
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
37127
three area monitors. The locations for
the air samplers will be chosen
considering meteorological conditions
relative to the dismantlement and
demolition activities to ensure that
maximum airborne concentrations are
collected. The air sampling data will be
used by WEC to demonstrate that any
effluent from the proposed building
dismantlement and demolition will be
in accordance with 10 CFR part 20
requirements.
Additionally, WEC has indicated in
its application that it will evaluate the
existing building characterization data
and pre-demolition characterization
data for each building it plans to
dismantle and/or demolish prior to
building demolition to verify the
radiological conditions and controls that
WEC incorporated in implementing
building demolition procedures remain
appropriate.
On February 26, 2006, staff asked
WEC additional questions regarding the
radiological status of the buildings with
respect to Nuclear Criticality Safety
(NCS). Staff evaluated the data and
determined that there is no NCS
concern for the building demolition
activities because the total residual mass
of UO2 in the buildings (i.e., 5 kg UO2)
is less than the favorable geometry mass
limit in the license application (i.e., 16
kg UO2). Also, NRC staff determined
that the licensee is not required to have
a criticality accident alarm system for
building demolition because the
conservative estimate of mass of U235 in
the buildings (i.e., 250 grams U235) is
less than the action limit in § 70.24 (i.e.,
700 grams of U235). Thus, NRC has
reasonable assurance of NCS during
building demolition activities. Work
activities are not anticipated to result in
radiation exposures to individual
members of the public in excess of ten
percent of the § 20.1301 limits. In
addition, the staff agrees that the
Environmental Monitoring plan is
appropriate for the proposed activities
and it is not anticipated to result in
significant impacts to public health,
safety, and the environment.
Cumulative Impacts
The NRC has evaluated whether
cumulative environmental impacts
could result from an incremental impact
of the proposed action when added to
other past, present, or reasonably
foreseeable future actions in the area.
The proposed NRC approval of the
License Amendment Request, when
combined with known effects on
resource areas at the site, including
future further site remediation, are not
anticipated to result in any cumulative
impacts at the site.
E:\FR\FM\29JNN1.SGM
29JNN1
37128
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 125 / Thursday, June 29, 2006 / Notices
Mitigation Measures
The license amendment request
submitted by WEC contains mitigation
measures to further ensure that the
requested licensing action will not have
any adverse environmental impact.
WEC plans to implement procedural
controls, such as the use of less
aggressive dismantlement and
demolition techniques, including
cutting and shearing, to minimize the
generation of fugitive emissions. Other
engineering controls, including water
sprays, will also be utilized to control
fugitive emissions and visible dust, if
needed. In addition, WEC has agreed to
perform the mitigative measures that
have been proposed by the Missouri
State Historic Preservation Office
(SHPO) regarding the historical impact
of the proposed action. WEC will
provide erosion and sediment control,
as necessary, in accordance with best
management practices, regulatory
guidance, and good engineering
practices. This will include structural
features, stabilization, and storm water
management. The controls may be
temporary or permanent.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Agencies and Individuals Consulted
The NRC staff prepared a draft EA and
sent it to the Missouri SHPO, by letter
datedNovember 4, 2004, and the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), by
letter dated November 9, 2004. The
Missouri SHPO, in its response letter
dated January 4, 2005, noted that ‘‘In
order for the project to move forward, it
is acceptable to our office that
Westinghouse and NRC proceed with
the project, in accordance with the draft
MOA (Memorandum of Agreement).’’
The FWS, in its response letter dated
December 10, 2004, indicated that ‘‘our
evaluation and search of existing
information indicates no federally
listed, proposed, or candidate species or
critical habitat occurs on or near the
project site. This fulfills your
consultation requirements under section
7 of the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended’’.
The staff provided a draft of this EA
to the MDNR for review. In its letter
dated April 20, 2005, which commented
on draft EA, the MDNR responded by
stating it agreed with the proposed
alternative, but made no other
comments about the draft EA. However,
this letter from the MDNR also mentions
the MNDR’s January 2005 letter to WEC.
The MDNR’s letter to WEC identified
concerns related to monitoring and
mitigation. Staff addressed
environmental monitoring concerns
through the RAI process, noted above
and found WEC’s responses acceptable.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:03 Jun 28, 2006
Jkt 208001
The staff then developed a Final Draft
of this EA and provided it to MDNR for
its review and comment by letter dated
April 28, 2006 (ML061170223). By letter
dated, May 11, 2006, MDNR concurred
with the conclusions in the Final Draft
of this EA (ML061170282).
Conclusion
NRC has prepared this EA in support
of the proposed license amendment to
approve the building demolition and
dismantlement of site buildings down to
building slabs and foundations at grade
at the Hematite Facility in Festus, MO.
On the basis of the EA, NRC has
concluded that the environmental
impacts from the proposed action are
not expected to be significant and has
determined that preparation of an
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
is not needed for the proposed action.
Approval of the license amendment will
not cause significant impacts on the
health and safety of the public or on the
environment due to mitigation measures
that WEC is committing to use. The NRC
staff has concluded that radiological
exposures to workers will be low and
well within the limits specified in 10
CFR part 20. Dismantlement and
demolition of the buildings, as proposed
by the amendment request, will result in
an overall reduction of radioactive
material at the WEC Hematite which
will reduce the long term potential for
release of radiological contamination to
the environment. No significant
radiologically contaminated effluents
are expected during building
dismantlement and demolition. No
significant effluent releases of
radiological material or other releases
are expected.
List of Preparers
This Environmental Assessment was
prepared entirely by the following NRC
staff:
Amy Snyder, Senior Project Manager,
Decommissioning Directorate, Division
of Waste Management and
Environmental Protection, Office of
Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards
(NMSS), Decommissioning Issues.
Alicia Mullins, Environmental Project
Managers, Division of Waste
Management and Environmental
Protection, NMSS, Environmental
Issues.
Sources Used
1. NRC Materials License No. SNM–00033.
2. WEC’s October 5, 2004, license
amendment request was noticed in the
Federal Register on November 16, 2004 (69
FR 67187). This Federal Register notice also
provided an opportunity for a hearing on this
licensing action (See ADAMS Accession No.
ML043000467).
PO 00000
Frm 00097
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
3. The application for the license
amendment and supporting documentation
are available for review at the U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission’s (NRC’s) Public
Electronic Reading Room at https://
www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. (See
ADAMS Accession No. ML042860234,
ML042880279, and ML050250347).
4. NUREG–0170, 1977. Final
Environmental Impact Statement on the
Transportation of Radioactive Material by Air
and Other Modes, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC.
5. NUREG–0586, 1988. Final Generic
Environmental Impact Statement on the
Decommissioning of Nuclear Facilities, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC.
6. NUREG–1496, 1977. Generic
Environmental Impact Statement in Support
of Rulemaking on Radiological Criteria for
License Termination of NRC-Licensed
Nuclear Facilities Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC, July.
7. NUREG–1748, 2003. Environmental
Review Guidance for Licensing Actions
Associated with NMSS Programs Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC,
August.
8. REGULATORY GUIDE–1.86, 1974.
Termination of Operating Licenses for
Nuclear Reactors, Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC, June.
9. NRC letter to Missouri Historic
Preservation Office, to Allison Dubbert from
Amir Kouhestani, dated November 4, 2004
(ML043070004).
10. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services letter
to Amir Kouhestani, dated November 11,
2004 (ML043520384).
11. WEC, January 4, 2005. ‘‘Demolition
Permit Application for Demolition of the
Buildings’’, Jefferson County Building
Commission, Hillsboro, Missouri.
12. State of Missouri Department of Natural
Resources, letter to Amir Kouhestani from
Mark A. Miles, dated January 4, 2005
(ML050130140).
13. Asbestos Abatement Registration Form
for WEC filed with the Missouri Department
of Public Health.
14. State of Missouri Department of Natural
Resources, letter to Amir Kouhestani from
Ben L. Moore, dated January 18, 2005,
(ML050310161).
15. State of Missouri Department of Natural
Resources, letter to Henry A. Sepp, dated
January 18, 2005 (ML050310182).
16. NRC Draft EA, letter to Honorable
Doyle Childers, dated March 2, 2005.
17. State of Missouri Department of Natural
Resources, letter to Daniel Gillen from Doyle
Childers, dated April 20, 2005.
18. United States Department of the
Interior, Fish and Wildlife Services, letter to
Amir Kouhestani from Charles M. Scott,
dated December 10, 2004 (ML043520384).
19. NRC, RAI letters to WEC, dated June
28, 2005 (ML051720051), December 23, 2005
(ML053330179), and March 2, 2006
(ML060540109).
20. WEC, Response to RAI letters to NRC,
dated July 22, 2005 (ML052140426), January
31, 2006 [ML060330438], and March 17,
2006 (ML060800265).
21. WEC, Submittal of Technical Report to
NRC, DO–05–001, Environmental Report for
E:\FR\FM\29JNN1.SGM
29JNN1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 125 / Thursday, June 29, 2006 / Notices
Hematite Site Decommissioning, dated
August 31, 2005 (ML052580255).
22. NRC, Final Draft EA letter to State of
Missouri Department of Natural Resources, to
Ben Moore, from Amy M. Snyder, letter
dated April 28, 2006 (ML061170223).
23. State of Missouri Department of Natural
Resources, letter to Amy M. Snyder from Ben
L. Moore, dated May 11, 2006
(ML061560372).
III. Finding of No Significant Impact
On the basis of this EA, NRC has
concluded that there are no significant
environmental impacts and the license
amendment does not warrant the
preparation of an EIS. Accordingly, it
has been determined that a FONSI 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.
If you do not have access to ADAMS
or if there are problems in accessing the
documents located in ADAMS, contact
the NRC’s 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–1F21, One
White Flint North, 11555 Rockville
Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. The PDR
reproduction contractor will copy
documents for a fee.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 14th day
of June 2006.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Andrew Persinko,
Acting Deputy Director, Decommissioning
Directorate, Division of Waste Management
and Environmental Protection, Office of
Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.
[FR Doc. E6–10267 Filed 6–28–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES
TRADE REPRESENTATIVE
Generalized System of Preferences
(GSP): Notice Regarding the Initiation
of the 2006 Annual GSP Product and
Country Eligibility Practices Review
and Change in Deadlines for Filing
Certain Petitions
Office of the United States
Trade Representative.
AGENCY:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:03 Jun 28, 2006
Jkt 208001
Notice and solicitation for
public petition.
ACTION:
SUMMARY: This notice announces that
the Office of the United States Trade
Representative (USTR) will receive
petitions in 2006 to modify the list of
products that are eligible for duty-free
treatment under the GSP program, and
to modify the GSP status of certain GSP
beneficiary developing countries
because of country practices. This
notice further determines that the
deadline for submission of product
petitions, other than those requesting
competitive need limitation (CNL)
waivers, and country practice petitions
for the 2006 Annual GSP Product and
Country Eligibility Practices Review is 5
p.m., July 20, 2006. The deadline for
submission of product petitions
requesting CNL waivers is 5 p.m.,
November 17, 2006. The list of product
petitions and country practice petitions
accepted for review will be announced
in the Federal Register at later dates.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Contact the GSP Subcommittee of the
Trade Policy Staff Committee, Office of
the United States Trade Representative,
1724 F Street, NW., Room F–220,
Washington, DC 20508. The telephone
number is (202) 395–6971, the facsimile
number is (202) 395–9481, and the email address is FR0618@USTR.GOV.
Public versions of all documents
relating to this Review will be available
for examination approximately 30 days
after the pertinent due date, by
appointment, in the USTR public
reading room, 1724 F Street, NW.,
Washington, DC. Availability of
documents may be ascertained, and
appointments may be made from 9:30
a.m. to noon and 1 p.m. to 4 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, by calling (202)
395–6186.
2006 Annual GSP Review
The GSP regulations (15 CFR part
2007) provide the schedule of dates for
conducting an annual review, unless
otherwise specified by Federal Register
notice. Notice is hereby given that, in
order to be considered in the 2006
Annual GSP Product and Country
Eligibility Practices Review, all petitions
to modify the list of articles eligible for
duty-free treatment under GSP or to
review the GSP status of any beneficiary
developing country, with the exception
of petitions requesting CNL waivers,
must be received by the GSP
Subcommittee of the Trade Policy Staff
Committee no later than 5 p.m. on July
20, 2006. Petitions requesting CNL
waivers must be received by the GSP
Subcommittee of the Trade Policy Staff
Committee no later than 5 p.m. on
PO 00000
Frm 00098
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
37129
November 17, 2006 in order to be
considered in the 2006 Annual Review.
Petitions submitted after the respective
deadlines will not be considered for
review.
Interested parties, including foreign
governments, may submit petitions to:
(1) Designate additional articles as
eligible for GSP benefits, including to
designate articles as eligible for GSP
benefits only for countries designated as
least-developed beneficiary developing
countries, or only for countries
designated as beneficiary sub-Saharan
African countries under the African
Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA);
(2) withdraw, suspend or limit the
application of duty-free treatment
accorded under the GSP with respect to
any article, either for all beneficiary
developing countries, least-developed
beneficiary developing countries or
beneficiary sub-Saharan African
countries, or for any of these countries
individually; (3) waive the ‘‘competitive
need limitations’’ for individual
beneficiary developing countries with
respect to specific GSP-eligible articles
(these limits do not apply to either leastdeveloped beneficiary developing
countries or beneficiary sub-Saharan
African countries); and (4) otherwise
modify GSP coverage. As specified in 15
CFR 2007.1, all product petitions must
include a detailed description of the
product and the subheading of the
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the
United States (HTSUS) under which the
product is classified. Product petitions
requesting CNL waivers for GSP-eligible
articles from beneficiary developing
countries that exceed the CNLs in 2006
must be filed in the 2006 Annual
Review. In order to allow petitioners an
opportunity to review additional 2006
export data, these petitions may be filed
after June 30, 2006, but must be received
on or before the November 17, 2006,
deadline described above in order to be
considered in the 2006 Annual Review.
Copies will be made available for public
inspection after the November 17, 2006,
deadline.
Any person may also submit petitions
to review the designation of any
beneficiary developing country,
including any least-developed
beneficiary developing country, with
respect to any of the designation criteria
listed in sections 502(b) or 502(c) of the
Trade Act (19 U.S.C. 2462(b) and (c))
(petitions to review the designation of
beneficiary sub-Saharan African
countries are considered in the Annual
Review of the AGOA, a separate
administrative process not governed by
the GSP regulations). Such petitions
must comply with the requirements of
15 CFR 2007.0(b).
E:\FR\FM\29JNN1.SGM
29JNN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 125 (Thursday, June 29, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 37124-37129]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-10267]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 70-0036]
Notice of Availability of Environmental Assessment and Finding of
No Significant Impact Related to Issuance of Amendment No. 52 to
Materials License No. SNM-00033, Westinghouse Electric Company, LLC
Hematite Former Fuel Fabrication Facility Located in Festus, MO, Site
(TAC No. L52641)
AGENCY: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Notice of Availability of Environmental Assessment and Finding
of No Significant Impact.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Amy M. Snyder, Senior Project Manager,
Decommissioning Directorate, Division of Waste Management and
Environmental Protection, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and
Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, M.S. T7 E-18,
Rockville, MD, 20852-2738. Telephone: (301) 415-8580; Fax number: (301)
415-5398; e-mail: ams3@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Introduction
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering
amending Nuclear Materials License Number SNM-00033 issued to
Westinghouse Electric Company, LLC (WEC) to authorize the dismantlement
and demolition of Buildings 101, 110, 115, 120, 230, 231, 235, 240,
245, 252, 253, 254, 255, 256, 260, and 261 down to building slabs and
foundations at grade at the WEC Hematite Former Fuel Fabrication
Facility in Festus, Missouri. This consideration is being supported by
this Environmental Assessment (EA) and a separate Safety Evaluation
Report (SER). In a letter dated October 5, 2004 (ML042860234), WEC
submitted a request to NRC to amend Materials License Number SNM-00033
to obtain authorization to dismantle and demolish Buildings 101, 110,
115, 120, 230, 231, 235, 240, 245, 252, 253, 254, 255, 256, 260, and
261 down to building slabs and foundations at grade. In its request,
WEC noted that it wants the flexibility to not demolish all the non-
process buildings, if it later decides to keep these buildings for
reuse. The licensee's October 5, 2004, license amendment request
(ML051310063) was noticed in the Federal Register on November 16, 2004
(69 FR 67187). That Federal Register notice also provided an
opportunity for a hearing on this licensing action, and no hearing
requests were submitted. NRC has prepared this EA in support of its
consideration of the amendment request and in accordance with the
requirements of 10 CFR part 51. This EA evaluates the potential
environmental impacts of WEC's request. Based on this EA, the staff has
concluded that a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) is
appropriate.
II. Environmental Assessment
Background
From the mid 1950s until 2001, the Hematite site was involved in
production and manufacturing of nuclear fuel. The majority of the
buildings were constructed during 1956 through 1974 with final
construction in 1989. There are currently no fuel manufacturing
activities at the site. Building 101 (Tile Barn) housed the former
Emergency Operations Center during plant operations and was later used
for the storage of both clean and contaminated equipment. Building 110
houses the security and some administrative office spaces. Building 115
housed the plant diesel emergency generator and fire pumps. Building
120 (Wood Barn) was used for storing both clean and contaminated
equipment. Building 230 was used for the fuel assembly operations. The
building surfaces have no known levels of contamination above the level
for unrestricted use. Building 230 currently houses administrative
offices. Building 231 was used as a warehouse to store shipping
containers. Building 235 was used as a vault to store depleted,
natural, and enriched uranium. Building 240 contained a laboratory and
maintenance area, a recycle recovery area, and a waste incinerator.
Past operations in this building also included the conversion of high
enriched uranium using a wet conversion process and recovery. A portion
of the building was used for recycle and recovery operations and high-
enriched material operations. Another portion of the building was used
for the incinerator and housed low-enriched powder operations,
including ammonium diurinate and oxidation/reduction furnaces. Building
245 (Well House) was used for treating
[[Page 37125]]
potable water by chlorination. Building 252 (South Vault) is a
reinforced concrete structure with six bays and was used for storage of
low-enriched uranium. Building 253 contains offices, various site
utilities, a former uranium storage facility, former processing areas
and decontamination facilities. Contained within Building 253 is
Building 250, which was formerly a stand-alone structure. Building 250
became room 250-1, and in 1958, rooms 250-2 and 250-3 were added to
Building 250. Building 250 was used for the storage of fuel feed stock.
Nuclear fuel was manufactured in Buildings 254 (Pellet Plant) and 255
(Erbia Plant). Buildings 256-1 (Pellet Drying) was initially used for a
warehouse space and later was used for pellet drying. Building 256-2
(Workhouse) was used as the main warehouse for shipping pellets and
receiving supply. Building 260 was used for a conversion process.
Building 261 was used for storage of unused limestone and contained a
preheat furnace.
Since there is known contamination under the process buildings and
the licensee has not yet characterized the soil under the process and
non-process buildings, the licensee will not be able to release the
non-process buildings that it does not demolish under this proposed
licensing action for unrestricted use. Furthermore, building foundation
and subsurface soil removal are not covered under this proposed
licensing action nor the current license.
In accordance with a previously issued amendment to Materials
License Number SNM-00033, the licensee has been performing limited
decommissioning for the purpose of reducing residual radioactivity and
other industrial contaminants from internal building equipment and
components for the process buildings. WEC completed this work in March
2006. The NRC performed an EA, using NUREG-1748 as guidance, to
evaluate these limited decommissioning activities. The EA and
associated SER for limited decommissioning of the equipment and
materials in the buildings, waste removal, and limited site
characterization activities form the basis for NRC granting license
amendment 42 to Materials License Number SNM-00033. In addition, WEC
has produced an engineering evaluation/cost analysis and a work plan to
comply with Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act (CERCLA) for the building demolition. These documents can
be found on the Missouri Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) Web
site at https://www.mdnr.mo.gov. In addition, WEC has made these
documents available at the Festus, Missouri Public Library.
The radioactive contamination at WEC's Hematite, Missouri site
consists of soils, and building and equipment surfaces contaminated
with uranium, fission products, and by-product material from licensed
operations that occurred from the mid 1950s until 2001. The groundwater
is contaminated with uranium, technicium, and volatile organic
compounds (VOCs). At this point in time, only the VOCs in the
groundwater have migrated offsite. Remediation of this groundwater
contamination will be the subject of a separate NRC action that
addresses subsurface remediation.
As stated above, WEC submitted a request to NRC in 2004 for
authorization to dismantle and demolish designated buildings at its
site. By letters dated June 28, 2005 (ML051720051), December 23, 2005
(ML053330179), and March 2, 2006 (ML06540109), the NRC staff
transmitted requests for additional information (RAIs) related to the
proposed building demolition and dismantlement. In letters dated July
22, 2005 (ML052140426), January 31, 2006 (ML060330438) and March 17,
2006 (ML060800265), WEC responded to the RAIs. NRC found these
responses to the RAIs acceptable.
Site Local and Physical Description
The WEC Hematite site is located approximately \3/4\ of a mile
northeast of the unincorporated town of Hematite and approximately 35
miles south of the City of St. Louis, Missouri. The site is primarily
surrounded by suburban and residential communities in Jefferson County,
Missouri. Jefferson County is predominantly rural and characterized by
rolling hills with many sizeable woodland tracts. The land area is
classified as 51% forest, 33% agricultural, and approximately 16%
urban, suburban, commercial, and unused or undeveloped. The primary
land within a five-mile radius of the facility consists of deciduous
forest, pasture and residential areas. Residential land use is centered
in the communities of Festus/Crystal City to the northeast, Horine to
the north, and Hillsboro to the northwest. Other land uses include row
crop and urban/residential. Land use classifications are based on the
National Land Cover Dataset. The plant facilities are located on a
central site tract of approximately 10 to 20 acres. The entire site is
approximately 220 acres. Much of the northern portion of the property
is wooded. Surface water bodies on the site include the East Lake,
located on the eastern end of the site, the Site Pond, located west of
the site buildings, Joachim Creek along the southern site boundary,
Northeast Site Creek and Site Creek. The Hematite facility is located
on the north, northeast flank of the Precambrian age St. Francis
Mountains uplift, which created the Ozark Dome. A full description of
the site and its characteristics is provided in the WEC Environmental
Report for Building Demolition at the Hematite Facility which was
submitted in conjunction with the license amendment request for
dismantlement and demolition of the buildings. The nearby community of
Hematite has expressed interest in future development of the site.
However, as of April 2006, no definite future plans have been developed
for the site.
Regulatory Requirements
10 CFR part 70, ``Domestic Licensing of Special Nuclear Material''
applies to the decommissioning of the Hematite Former Fuel Fabrication
Facility. Termination of licenses and decommissioning are addressed in
Sec. 70.38. However, this proposed action will not result in license
termination. It will only address building demolition. Financial
assurance requirements are found in Sec. 70.25 and 70.38. Completeness
and accuracy of the radiation safety records and information provided
to NRC are addressed in Sec. 70.9. Section 2.1205 discusses the
public's opportunities to request hearings on licensing actions. 10 CFR
part 20, subpart E, sets forth radiological criteria for license
termination in Sec. 20.1402, 20.1403, and 20.1404. The requirements
for final status surveys are contained in Sec. 20.1501(a); 10 CFR part
51, ``Environmental Protection Regulations for Domestic Licensing and
Related Regulatory Functions,'' and 10 CFR part 71, ``Packaging and
Transportation of Radioactive Material'' (part 71 requires that
licensees or applicants who transport licensed material, or who may
offer such material to a carrier for transportation, must comply with
the applicable requirements of the Department of Transportation that
are found in 49 CFR parts 170 through 189).
The Proposed Action
The proposed action is to amend NRC Materials License Number SNM-
00033 to allow the dismantlement and demolition of the buildings 101,
110, 115, 120, 230, 231, 235, 240, 245, 252, 253, 254, 255, 256, 260,
and 261 down to building slabs and foundations at grade. No work will
be performed on sub-grade soil, the building slabs/
[[Page 37126]]
foundations, or sub-grade structures and systems. WEC states in its
application that the demolition of concrete buildings will be performed
as determined by an engineering evaluation. WEC plans to perform an
engineering evaluation of the demolition of the concrete masonry unit
(CMU) structures and concrete buildings, and use dismantlement and
demolition techniques, such as cutting and shearing to demolish the
buildings. Manual jack-hammers, equipment mounted jack-hammers (hoe
ram), skid-steer loader, or shears will be used to remove/dismantle and
to size reduce concrete or CMU structures. The CMU walls may also be
brought down using pushover techniques. Steel reinforcement bars will
be torch-cut, sheared, or saw-cut as required for dismantlement,
leveling, or size reduction purposes. The only potential waste streams
from the facility will result from the building dismantlement and
demolition process. Wastes that are anticipated are: (1) Debris; (2)
dust; (3) rubble and (4) water. Based on characterization data, WEC
proposes to segregate and analyze the waste as required by the disposal
facility site's waste acceptance criteria. WEC proposes that debris
will be characterized, and will meet free release criteria for
radiological and hazardous contamination, and will be shipped to an
approved waste disposal facility for disposal. If the debris does not
meet free release criteria, then it will be packaged accordingly and
shipped to an approved waste disposal facility for disposal.
Need for the Proposed Action
The NRC regulations require licensees to begin timely
decommissioning of their sites, or any separate buildings, that contain
residual radioactivity, upon cessation of licensed operations, in
accordance with Sec. 70.38(d). The purpose of the proposed action is
to reduce residual radioactivity at WEC's Hematite site. Additionally,
although no definite future use plans have been developed for the site
at this time, due to potential commercial value of the site property,
the licensee plans to eventually return the land to unrestricted use in
accordance with Sec. 20.1402. The proposed licensing action is a step
toward this goal. If this proposed licensing action is not granted, the
licensee will not be able to fully address surface and subsurface
contamination under buildings, which will prolong the overall cleanup
of the site. The NRC is fulfilling its responsibilities under the
Atomic Energy Act, as amended, and the National Environmental Policy
Act to make a decision on this proposed license amendment for building
dismantlement and demolition that will ensure adequate protection of
the public health, safety and the environment.
Alternatives to the Proposed Action
The proposed action is to decontaminate the buildings with
dismantlement and demolition down to building slabs and foundations at
grade. There are three alternatives to the proposed action of
dismantlement and demolition of the buildings: (1) To take no further
action; (2) to decontaminate the buildings without dismantlement and
demolition; and (3) to decontaminate the buildings with dismantlement
and demolition to include removal of the slabs and foundations.
Alternative one, the no-action alternative, is not consistent with
Sec. 70.38(d), requiring that decommissioning of special nuclear
material facilities be completed and approved by the NRC after licensed
activities cease. The no-action alternative would keep radioactive
material on site without disposal. The second alternative would involve
maintaining the buildings on site due to known and potential subsurface
soil contamination under the process building. This would provide
negligible, if any, environmental benefit and would greatly reduce
options for future unrestricted use of the site. Alternative 3 would
result in exposing the subsurface contamination, that was contained
under the buildings, to the open environment. Specifically, exposing
the subsurface would expose workers and visitors to radiological and
potential non-radiological hazards in the subsurface soil. As discussed
earlier, the licensee has not yet fully evaluated the subsurface
contamination under the buildings. Potentially contaminated materials
could be released into the surrounding environment via effluents or
airborne particles. Shipping the subsurface contaminated material off-
site for disposal could also potentially expose workers and others to
the material before, during, and after shipment to a waste disposal
facility. The environmental impact could potentially put workers and
the surrounding environment at risk, and therefore, is not an
environmentally sound option at this time. Therefore, these
alternatives are not considered to be reasonable and are not analyzed
further in the EA.
The licensee's proposed action is described in detail in the
proposed building dismantlement and demolition license amendment
application. This action is preferred over the alternative actions
because the proposed action has little, if any, impact on the
environment. Once the buildings are dismantled and demolished down to
the slabs and foundations at grade, all radiological materials will be
confined to either the slabs and foundations or the subsurface.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action
The NRC staff has reviewed the license amendment request for the
WEC facility in Hematite and examined the impacts of this license
amendment request. Potential impacts include impacts to water resources
(e.g., water may be used for dust control), impacts to air quality from
dust emissions, temporary impacts to local traffic resulting from
transporting the building debris offsite, beneficial local economic
effects due to the creation of jobs to perform dismantlement and
demolition, dose impacts, noise impacts from equipment operation,
scenic quality impacts, and waste management impacts. There may be
minor impacts to surface water resources at the Hematite facility as a
result of water runoff that could occur during the building
dismantlement and demolition process. According to the licensee's
amendment request, the runoff, whether as a result of natural
precipitation or from water used to control fugitive dust emission,
will be managed by WEC Hematite erosion and sediment control management
plan. Any discharge will be in compliance with Material License Number
SNM-00033 and the WEC Hematite National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) permit issued and managed by the State of Missouri.
There will be no significant surface and no subsurface soil
disturbances as the buildings will be removed down to the grade and
concrete slab level. There are no flood plains or wetlands present
within the central site tract where the building demolition will take
place. The central site tract soil consists primarily of relatively
impermeable soil. WEC has committed to using best practices to manage
all potential impacts during building dismantlement and demolition.
Overall, it is anticipated that there will be no significant impact on
surface water or groundwater.
Additionally, the staff has determined that significant air
quality, noise, land use, economic and off-site radiation exposure
impacts are not expected. No significant air quality impacts are
anticipated because of the contamination controls and dust suppression
techniques that will be implemented by WEC during building
dismantlement and demolition. WEC license amendment request describes
[[Page 37127]]
the work to be performed and its strategy for controlling radiation
diffuse emissions and discharge. WEC has committed to have procedures
for performing building dismantlement and demolition that will include
guidance for controlling emissions and run-off. The staff determined
that no significant economic impact will result from the creation of
jobs to perform dismantlement and demolition because the work should
take a small amount of time to complete.
The staff evaluated the temporary local traffic impacts resulting
from transporting the building debris and wastes offsite due to the
licensee's proposed request. WEC ceased fuel production operations at
the Hematite Facility and has no future plans for operating the site as
a nuclear fuel processing facility. WEC states that clean debris will
be containerized, transported, and disposed of at a licensed facility.
The risk to human health from the transportation of all radioactive
material in the U.S. was evaluated in NUREG-0170, ``Final Environmental
Statement on the Transportation of Radioactive Materials by Air and
Other Modes.'' The principal radiological environmental impact during
normal transportation is minimal direct radiation exposure to transport
workers and nearby persons from radioactive material in the package.
The average annual individual dose from all radioactive material
transportation in the U.S. was calculated as approximately 0.5 mrem per
year, well below the Sec. 20.1301 limit of 100 mrem per year for a
member of the public. WEC estimates that 2 to 3 truck loads of
demolition waste will leave the site per working day compared to an
average daily traffic flow of approximately 2,570 vehicles per day
(2002 data) on State Route P. The trucks will then travel on State
Route A, a two-lane rural/suburban highway which connects to State
Route P approximately 2 miles east of the site. State Route A enters
the western edge of Festus, Missouri. Interstate 55, a major north-
south freeway, is located approximately 3.5 miles east of the site and
intersects with State Route A in Festus, Missouri. This four-lane
interstate freeway connects to Interstate Highways 270, 44, and 70 in
the St. Louis, Missouri area, approximately 35 miles north of the site.
The annual average daily traffic count for I-55 near Festus was 35,347
vehicles per day (2002 data). There are no public transit systems, such
as bus or light rail available in the immediate vicinity of the site.
The trucks, once entering the above Interstate Highways, will then
travel to their intended destinations. Based on the Environmental
Report for Building Demolition at the Hematite Facility, the licensee
states that it anticipates that debris from the dismantled buildings
would likely be transported by truck to the Envirocare Facility in
Clive, Utah or to the Radiological Assistance, Consulting and
Engineering (RACE) Facility in Memphis, Tennessee. The proposed
transportation of waste from the building, dismantlement, and
demolition is not anticipated to result in significant impacts.
Monitoring
The license amendment request submitted by WEC described the
effluent/environmental monitoring that will take place during building
dismantlement and demolition. This description included not only the
routine effluent/environmental monitoring program that WEC presently
has in place, but also that additional air monitoring (local demolition
project-specific perimeter air monitors) shall be performed during the
demolition activities.
Work activities are not anticipated to result in radiation
exposures to individual members of the public in excess of ten percent
of the Sec. 20.1301 limits. However, WEC's environmental monitoring
program must implement the requirements of its Radioactive Materials
License, Chapter 3, Radiation Protection, and Chapter 5, Environmental
Protection. WEC has acknowledged that building demolition activities
will require that building stack monitoring be terminated and has
committed to shift compliance monitoring to air monitoring devices
located around the site to assure that all pathways for release of
radioactive material are monitored. WEC has updated its technical basis
for its Environmental Monitoring Program to address building
dismantlement and demolition activities. Moreover, WEC has stated it
will modify and supplement approved environmental monitoring plans,
policies, and procedures that support the license, before and during
the proposed work, as necessary, to support building dismantlement and
demolition.
Perimeter monitors to measure air borne radiation levels are to be
established as close to the demolition activities as possible and again
at the boundary of the work area. Currently, three onsite remote air
monitoring samples are collected continuously and the results are
analyzed weekly. During the demolition activities, the licensee has
committed to use a minimum of three area monitors. The locations for
the air samplers will be chosen considering meteorological conditions
relative to the dismantlement and demolition activities to ensure that
maximum airborne concentrations are collected. The air sampling data
will be used by WEC to demonstrate that any effluent from the proposed
building dismantlement and demolition will be in accordance with 10 CFR
part 20 requirements.
Additionally, WEC has indicated in its application that it will
evaluate the existing building characterization data and pre-demolition
characterization data for each building it plans to dismantle and/or
demolish prior to building demolition to verify the radiological
conditions and controls that WEC incorporated in implementing building
demolition procedures remain appropriate.
On February 26, 2006, staff asked WEC additional questions
regarding the radiological status of the buildings with respect to
Nuclear Criticality Safety (NCS). Staff evaluated the data and
determined that there is no NCS concern for the building demolition
activities because the total residual mass of UO2 in the
buildings (i.e., 5 kg UO2) is less than the favorable
geometry mass limit in the license application (i.e., 16 kg
UO2). Also, NRC staff determined that the licensee is not
required to have a criticality accident alarm system for building
demolition because the conservative estimate of mass of U235
in the buildings (i.e., 250 grams U235) is less than the
action limit in Sec. 70.24 (i.e., 700 grams of U235). Thus,
NRC has reasonable assurance of NCS during building demolition
activities. Work activities are not anticipated to result in radiation
exposures to individual members of the public in excess of ten percent
of the Sec. 20.1301 limits. In addition, the staff agrees that the
Environmental Monitoring plan is appropriate for the proposed
activities and it is not anticipated to result in significant impacts
to public health, safety, and the environment.
Cumulative Impacts
The NRC has evaluated whether cumulative environmental impacts
could result from an incremental impact of the proposed action when
added to other past, present, or reasonably foreseeable future actions
in the area. The proposed NRC approval of the License Amendment
Request, when combined with known effects on resource areas at the
site, including future further site remediation, are not anticipated to
result in any cumulative impacts at the site.
[[Page 37128]]
Mitigation Measures
The license amendment request submitted by WEC contains mitigation
measures to further ensure that the requested licensing action will not
have any adverse environmental impact. WEC plans to implement
procedural controls, such as the use of less aggressive dismantlement
and demolition techniques, including cutting and shearing, to minimize
the generation of fugitive emissions. Other engineering controls,
including water sprays, will also be utilized to control fugitive
emissions and visible dust, if needed. In addition, WEC has agreed to
perform the mitigative measures that have been proposed by the Missouri
State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) regarding the historical
impact of the proposed action. WEC will provide erosion and sediment
control, as necessary, in accordance with best management practices,
regulatory guidance, and good engineering practices. This will include
structural features, stabilization, and storm water management. The
controls may be temporary or permanent.
Agencies and Individuals Consulted
The NRC staff prepared a draft EA and sent it to the Missouri SHPO,
by letter datedNovember 4, 2004, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(FWS), by letter dated November 9, 2004. The Missouri SHPO, in its
response letter dated January 4, 2005, noted that ``In order for the
project to move forward, it is acceptable to our office that
Westinghouse and NRC proceed with the project, in accordance with the
draft MOA (Memorandum of Agreement).'' The FWS, in its response letter
dated December 10, 2004, indicated that ``our evaluation and search of
existing information indicates no federally listed, proposed, or
candidate species or critical habitat occurs on or near the project
site. This fulfills your consultation requirements under section 7 of
the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended''.
The staff provided a draft of this EA to the MDNR for review. In
its letter dated April 20, 2005, which commented on draft EA, the MDNR
responded by stating it agreed with the proposed alternative, but made
no other comments about the draft EA. However, this letter from the
MDNR also mentions the MNDR's January 2005 letter to WEC. The MDNR's
letter to WEC identified concerns related to monitoring and mitigation.
Staff addressed environmental monitoring concerns through the RAI
process, noted above and found WEC's responses acceptable. The staff
then developed a Final Draft of this EA and provided it to MDNR for its
review and comment by letter dated April 28, 2006 (ML061170223). By
letter dated, May 11, 2006, MDNR concurred with the conclusions in the
Final Draft of this EA (ML061170282).
Conclusion
NRC has prepared this EA in support of the proposed license
amendment to approve the building demolition and dismantlement of site
buildings down to building slabs and foundations at grade at the
Hematite Facility in Festus, MO. On the basis of the EA, NRC has
concluded that the environmental impacts from the proposed action are
not expected to be significant and has determined that preparation of
an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not needed for the proposed
action. Approval of the license amendment will not cause significant
impacts on the health and safety of the public or on the environment
due to mitigation measures that WEC is committing to use. The NRC staff
has concluded that radiological exposures to workers will be low and
well within the limits specified in 10 CFR part 20. Dismantlement and
demolition of the buildings, as proposed by the amendment request, will
result in an overall reduction of radioactive material at the WEC
Hematite which will reduce the long term potential for release of
radiological contamination to the environment. No significant
radiologically contaminated effluents are expected during building
dismantlement and demolition. No significant effluent releases of
radiological material or other releases are expected.
List of Preparers
This Environmental Assessment was prepared entirely by the
following NRC staff:
Amy Snyder, Senior Project Manager, Decommissioning Directorate,
Division of Waste Management and Environmental Protection, Office of
Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards (NMSS), Decommissioning Issues.
Alicia Mullins, Environmental Project Managers, Division of Waste
Management and Environmental Protection, NMSS, Environmental Issues.
Sources Used
1. NRC Materials License No. SNM-00033.
2. WEC's October 5, 2004, license amendment request was noticed
in the Federal Register on November 16, 2004 (69 FR 67187). This
Federal Register notice also provided an opportunity for a hearing
on this licensing action (See ADAMS Accession No. ML043000467).
3. The application for the license amendment and supporting
documentation are available for review at the U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission's (NRC's) Public Electronic Reading Room at
https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. (See ADAMS Accession No.
ML042860234, ML042880279, and ML050250347).
4. NUREG-0170, 1977. Final Environmental Impact Statement on the
Transportation of Radioactive Material by Air and Other Modes, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC.
5. NUREG-0586, 1988. Final Generic Environmental Impact
Statement on the Decommissioning of Nuclear Facilities, U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC.
6. NUREG-1496, 1977. Generic Environmental Impact Statement in
Support of Rulemaking on Radiological Criteria for License
Termination of NRC-Licensed Nuclear Facilities Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC, July.
7. NUREG-1748, 2003. Environmental Review Guidance for Licensing
Actions Associated with NMSS Programs Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC, August.
8. REGULATORY GUIDE-1.86, 1974. Termination of Operating
Licenses for Nuclear Reactors, Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC, June.
9. NRC letter to Missouri Historic Preservation Office, to
Allison Dubbert from Amir Kouhestani, dated November 4, 2004
(ML043070004).
10. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services letter to Amir Kouhestani,
dated November 11, 2004 (ML043520384).
11. WEC, January 4, 2005. ``Demolition Permit Application for
Demolition of the Buildings'', Jefferson County Building Commission,
Hillsboro, Missouri.
12. State of Missouri Department of Natural Resources, letter to
Amir Kouhestani from Mark A. Miles, dated January 4, 2005
(ML050130140).
13. Asbestos Abatement Registration Form for WEC filed with the
Missouri Department of Public Health.
14. State of Missouri Department of Natural Resources, letter to
Amir Kouhestani from Ben L. Moore, dated January 18, 2005,
(ML050310161).
15. State of Missouri Department of Natural Resources, letter to
Henry A. Sepp, dated January 18, 2005 (ML050310182).
16. NRC Draft EA, letter to Honorable Doyle Childers, dated
March 2, 2005.
17. State of Missouri Department of Natural Resources, letter to
Daniel Gillen from Doyle Childers, dated April 20, 2005.
18. United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife
Services, letter to Amir Kouhestani from Charles M. Scott, dated
December 10, 2004 (ML043520384).
19. NRC, RAI letters to WEC, dated June 28, 2005 (ML051720051),
December 23, 2005 (ML053330179), and March 2, 2006 (ML060540109).
20. WEC, Response to RAI letters to NRC, dated July 22, 2005
(ML052140426), January 31, 2006 [ML060330438], and March 17, 2006
(ML060800265).
21. WEC, Submittal of Technical Report to NRC, DO-05-001,
Environmental Report for
[[Page 37129]]
Hematite Site Decommissioning, dated August 31, 2005 (ML052580255).
22. NRC, Final Draft EA letter to State of Missouri Department
of Natural Resources, to Ben Moore, from Amy M. Snyder, letter dated
April 28, 2006 (ML061170223).
23. State of Missouri Department of Natural Resources, letter to
Amy M. Snyder from Ben L. Moore, dated May 11, 2006 (ML061560372).
III. Finding of No Significant Impact
On the basis of this EA, NRC has concluded that there are no
significant environmental impacts and the license amendment does not
warrant the preparation of an EIS. Accordingly, it has been determined
that a FONSI 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.
If you do not have access to ADAMS or if there are problems in
accessing the documents located in ADAMS, contact the NRC's 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-
1F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852.
The PDR reproduction contractor will copy documents for a fee.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 14th day of June 2006.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Andrew Persinko,
Acting Deputy Director, Decommissioning Directorate, Division of Waste
Management and Environmental Protection, Office of Nuclear Material
Safety and Safeguards.
[FR Doc. E6-10267 Filed 6-28-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P