Notice of Availability of Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact for License Amendment to Source Materials License No. STC-133, for Unrestricted Release of the Defense Logistics Agency's Facility in Hillsborough, NJ, 54467-54469 [E7-18872]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 25, 2007 / Notices
The following persons have been
selected to serve on the Performance
Review Board of the National
Endowment for the Arts:
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
Eileen B. Mason, Senior Deputy
Chairman
Laurence M. Baden, Deputy Chairman
for Management and Budget
Tony Chauveaux, Deputy Chairman for
Grants and Awards
Ann Guthrie Hingston, Director of the
Office of Government Affairs
Michael R. Burke, Chief Information
Officer
Sunil Iyengar, Deputy Chairman for
Research and Analysis
Notice of Availability of Environmental
Assessment and Finding of No
Significant Impact for License
Amendment to Source Materials
License No. STC–133, for Unrestricted
Release of the Defense Logistics
Agency’s Facility in Hillsborough, NJ
Murray R. Welsh,
Director of Administrative Services, National
Endowment for the Arts.
[FR Doc. E7–18768 Filed 9–24–07; 8:45 am]
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
[Docket No. 04000341]
BILLING CODE 7536–01–P
NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION
SAFETY BOARD
Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Issuance of environmental
assessment and Finding of No
Significant Impact for license
amendment.
AGENCY:
Dennis Lawyer, Health Physicist,
Commercial and R&D Branch, Division
of Nuclear Materials Safety, Region I,
475 Allendale Road, King of Prussia,
Pennsylvania; telephone 610–337–5366;
fax number 610–337–5393; or by e-mail:
drl1@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
I. Introduction
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) is considering the
issuance of a license amendment to
Source Materials License No. STC–133.
This license is held by Defense Logistics
Agency (the Licensee). The license
authorizes the Licensee to use licensed
material at multiple sites in different
States. At issue here is the Licensee’s
Defense National Stockpile Center
Somerville Depot, located at 152 U.S.
Highway Route, Hillsborough, New
Jersey (the Facility). Issuance of the
amendment would authorize release of
the Facility for unrestricted use, but
would not involve termination of the
license. The Licensee requested this
action in a letter dated January 3, 2007.
The NRC has prepared an
Environmental Assessment (EA) in
support of this proposed action in
accordance with the requirements of
Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR), Part 51 (10 CFR Part 51). Based
on the EA, the NRC has concluded that
a Finding of No Significant Impact
(FONSI) is appropriate with respect to
the proposed action. The amendment
will be issued to the Licensee following
the publication of this FONSI and EA in
the Federal Register.
Vicky D’Onofrio, (202) 314–6410.
II. Environmental Assessment
Dated: September 21, 2007.
Vicky D’Onofrio,
Federal Register Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. 07–4733 Filed 9–21–07; 1:11 pm]
Identification of Proposed Action
The proposed action would approve
the Licensee’s January 3, 2007, license
amendment request, resulting in release
of the Facility for unrestricted use in
Sunshine Act Meeting
Agenda
9:30 a.m., Tuesday,
October 2, 2007.
TIME AND DATE:
NTSB Conference Center, 429
L’Enfant Plaza, SW., Washington, DC
20594.
PLACE:
STATUS:
The one item is open to the
public.
MATTER TO BE CONSIDERED:
775E: Aircraft Accident Report—
Runway Overrun and Collision,
Southwest Airlines (SWA) flight 1248,
Boeing 737–74H, N471WN, Chicago
Midway International Airport (MDW),
Chicago, Illinois, December 8, 2005.
Telephone: (202)
314–6100.
Individuals requesting specific
accommodations should contact Chris
Bisett at (202) 314–6305 by Friday,
September 28, 2007.
The public may view the meeting via
a live or archived webcast by accessing
a link under ‘‘News & Events’’ on the
NTSB home page https://www.ntsb.gov.
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with NOTICES
NEWS MEDIA CONTACT:
BILLING CODE 7533–01–M
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:20 Sep 24, 2007
Jkt 211001
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
54467
accordance with 10 CFR 20.1402.
License No. STC–133 was issued on July
27, 1983, pursuant to 10 CFR Part 40,
and has been amended periodically
since that time. With respect to the
Facility, the license authorized the
Licensee to use unsealed source
material for purposes of storage,
sampling, repackaging, and transferring
materials.
The Facility is situated on 77 acres of
land and consists of warehouses and
office space. The Facility is located in
a mixed industrial area. Within the
Facility, use of licensed materials was
confined to a decontamination trailer
and warehouses 1, 3, and 4. The area of
use totaled approximately 50,000 square
feet.
On September 16, 2004, the Licensee
ceased licensed activities at the Facility,
and initiated a survey and
decontamination actions there. Based on
the Licensee’s historical knowledge of
the site and the conditions of the
Facility, the Licensee determined that
only routine decontamination activities,
in accordance with their NRC-approved,
operating radiation safety procedures,
were required. The Licensee was not
required to submit a decommissioning
plan to the NRC because worker cleanup
activities and procedures are consistent
with those approved for routine
operations. The Licensee conducted
surveys of the Facility and provided
information to the NRC to demonstrate
that it meets the criteria in Subpart E of
10 CFR Part 20 for unrestricted release.
Need for the Proposed Action
The Licensee has ceased conducting
licensed activities at the Facility, and
seeks the unrestricted use of its Facility.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed
Action
The historical review of licensed
activities conducted at the Facility
shows that such activities involved use
of the following radionuclides with halflives greater than 120 days: natural
uranium and thorium. Prior to
performing the final status survey, the
Licensee conducted decontamination
activities, as necessary, in the areas of
the Facility affected by these
radionuclides.
The Licensee elected to demonstrate
compliance with the radiological
criteria for unrestricted release as
specified in 10 CFR 20.1402 by
developing derived concentration
guideline levels (DCGLs) for its Facility.
The Licensee conducted site-specific
dose modeling using input parameters
specific to the Facility and a
conservative assumption that all
residual radioactivity is in equilibrium.
E:\FR\FM\25SEN1.SGM
25SEN1
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with NOTICES
54468
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 25, 2007 / Notices
Federal Guidance Report Number 13
was used to modify the dose conversion
factors because it is based on an
improved, more realistic dosimetry
model. The licensee selected adults as
the critical age group as the expected
future use of this facility will be
industrial. Based on the type of
building, railroad distribution, and
truck access, there is no compelling
evidence to indicate that the building
will be used for anything other than
industrial activities. The residual
radioactivity is confined to the
structures of the Facility. Since there is
no land or water residual radioactivity,
the building occupancy scenario may
appropriately be applied to the Facility.
The Facility is located in an area zoned
as Economic Development which
includes a variety of uses. Buildings
previously sold in the area have been
converted to light industrial uses. The
buildings would need substantial
modification to convert to residential
housing. The Licensee thus determined
the maximum amount of residual
radioactivity on building surfaces,
equipment, and materials that will
satisfy the NRC requirements in Subpart
E of 10 CFR Part 20 for unrestricted
release. The NRC reviewed the
Licensee’s methodology and proposed
DCGLs, and concluded that the
proposed DCGLs are acceptable for use
as release criteria at the Facility (this
approval was published October 16,
2006 in the Federal Register at pages
60770 through 60772).
The NRC staff conducted a survey at
the Facility on July 13, 2006, and none
of the staff’s results exceeded the DCGLs
that were later approved for use at the
Facility.
The Licensee conducted a final status
survey on July 11–13 and 25–27, 2006,
August 2, 2006, and November 14–16,
2006 covering the areas of use as stated
in the Final Status Survey Plan, dated
February 2006. The final status survey
results were enclosed with the
Licensee’s amendment request dated
January 3, 2007, and an additional
information letter dated February 6,
2007. The Licensee’s final status survey
results were below the approved DCGLs,
and are thus acceptable. The static
surveys showed that the average
readings in all the survey units are less
than the minimum detectable activity
for the instrumentation used. Based on
the minimum detectable activity for
static measurements, the site residual
activity will result in less than 5
millirem per year dose.
Based on its own survey results, and
its review of the Licensee’s final survey
report, the staff has determined that the
affected environment and any
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:20 Sep 24, 2007
Jkt 211001
environmental impacts associated with
the proposed action are bounded by the
impacts evaluated by the ‘‘Generic
Environmental Impact Statement in
Support of Rulemaking on Radiological
Criteria for License Termination of NRCLicensed Nuclear Facilities’’ (NUREG–
1496) Volumes 1–3 (ML042310492,
ML042320379, and ML042330385). The
staff finds there were no significant
environmental impacts from the use of
radioactive material at the Facility. The
NRC staff reviewed the docket file
records and the final status survey
results to identify any non-radiological
hazards that may have impacted the
environment surrounding the Facility.
No such hazards or impacts to the
environment were identified, and the
NRC has identified no other radiological
or non-radiological activities in the area
that could result in cumulative
environmental impacts.
The NRC staff finds that the proposed
release of the Facility for unrestricted
use is in compliance with 10 CFR
20.1402. Based on its review, the staff
considered the impact of the residual
radioactivity at the Facility and
concluded that the proposed action will
not have a significant effect on the
quality of the human environment.
Environmental Impacts of the
Alternatives to the Proposed Action
Due to the largely administrative
nature of the proposed action, its
environmental impacts are small.
Therefore, the only alternative the staff
considered is the no-action alternative,
under which the staff would leave
things as they are by simply denying the
amendment request. This no-action
alternative is not feasible because it
conflicts with 10 CFR 40.42(d),
requiring that decommissioning of
source material facilities be completed
and approved by the NRC after licensed
activities cease. The NRC’s analysis of
the Licensee’s final status survey data
confirmed that the Facility meets the
requirements of 10 CFR 20.1402 for
unrestricted release. Additionally,
denying the amendment request would
result in no change in current
environmental impacts. The
environmental impacts of the proposed
action and the no-action alternative are
therefore similar, and the no-action
alternative is accordingly not further
considered.
Conclusion
The NRC staff has concluded that the
proposed action is consistent with the
NRC’s unrestricted release criteria
specified in 10 CFR 20.1402. Because
the proposed action will not
significantly impact the quality of the
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
human environment, the NRC staff
concludes that the proposed action is
the preferred alternative.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
NRC provided a draft of this
Environmental Assessment to the State
of New Jersey’s Department of
Environmental Protection (NJDEP) for
review on February 20, 2007. By letter
dated March 22, 2007, the NJDEP
submitted two comments on the
proposed release of the Facility for
unrestricted use:
(1) The NJDEP’s regulations at
N.J.A.C. 7:28–12 considers unrestricted
use as any use that does not require the
continued use of engineering or
institutional controls in order to meet
established standards. The NJDEP wants
the Licensee to have a deed restriction
placed on the Facility property limiting
future use of the site to industrial or
commercial purposes.
(2) The NJDEP also wants the licensee
to demonstrate that the final status
survey results will meet the New Jersey
release criterion of 15 millirem per year.
The NRC staff finds that the proposed
action can go forward notwithstanding
the NJDEP comments. Regarding the
first comment, this release is
unrestricted as specified in 10 CFR
20.1402 in that there are no engineering
or institutional controls required in
order to meet established standards. The
licensee’s use of the DandD computer
code default values, updated with the
Federal Guidance Report 13 values for
dose conversion factors, required them
to consider age groups other than adults.
As reflected above in the impacts
assessment, the NRC staff finds that, the
critical group here is adult light
industrial workers, because the
warehouse buildings would need
substantial modification to convert them
to residential housing. Since the
conditions at the site meet the site
specific DCGL for the critical group, an
unrestricted release is approved. In
addition, putting the requested deed
restriction into place now would not
make 10 CFR 20.1403, ‘‘Criteria for
license termination under restricted
conditions,’’ applicable here. While an
earlier Licensee submittal (dated April
26, 2006, [ML061220479]) contained an
April 17, 2006 memorandum from the
headquarters of the Defense Logistics
Agency indicated that the Licensee
would be willing to put the requested
deed restriction into place, the NRC staff
finds that no deed restriction will be
necessary as a prerequisite to taking the
proposed action. Placing such a
restriction on the property would not be
consistent with unrestricted use under
10 CFR 20.1402.
E:\FR\FM\25SEN1.SGM
25SEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 185 / Tuesday, September 25, 2007 / Notices
Regarding the NJDEP’s second
comment above, the NRC staff
recognizes that the State of New Jersey
has established a 15 millirem per year
standard (under NJDEP’s regulations at
N.J.A.C. 7:28–12). The NRC has
previously advised the NJDEP that these
regulations raise preemption concerns
[ML003763858]. States are preempted
from regulating NRC-licensed materials
for the purposes of radiation protection
unless they enter into a formal
agreement with the NRC. To date, New
Jersey has not done so. Moreover, as
indicated above, the Licensee has
developed DCGLs acceptable to the NRC
which support the 25 millirem per year
standard set forth in 10 CFR 20.1402,
and the staff must implement these
DCGLs for the purpose of evaluating the
proposed action.
The NRC staff has further determined
that the proposed action is of a
procedural nature, and will not affect
listed species or critical habitat.
Therefore, no further consultation is
required under section 7 of the
Endangered Species Act. The NRC staff
has also determined that the proposed
action is not the type of activity that has
the potential to cause effects on historic
properties. Therefore, no further
consultation is required under section
106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act.
yshivers on PROD1PC62 with NOTICES
III. Finding of No Significant Impact
The NRC staff has prepared this EA in
support of the proposed action. On the
basis of this EA, the NRC finds that
there are no significant environmental
impacts from the proposed action, and
that preparation of an environmental
impact statement is not warranted.
Accordingly, the NRC has determined
that a Finding of No Significant Impact
is appropriate.
IV. Further Information
Documents related to this action,
including the application for license
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 documents related to
this action are listed below, along with
their ADAMS accession numbers.
1. NUREG–1757, ‘‘Consolidated
NMSS Decommissioning Guidance;’’
2. Title 10 Code of Federal
Regulations, Part 20, Subpart E,
‘‘Radiological Criteria for License
Termination;’’
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:20 Sep 24, 2007
Jkt 211001
3. Title 10, Code of Federal
Regulations, Part 51, ‘‘Environmental
Protection Regulations for Domestic
Licensing and Related Regulatory
Functions;’’
4. NUREG–1496, ‘‘Generic
Environmental Impact Statement in
Support of Rulemaking on Radiological
Criteria for License Termination of NRCLicensed Nuclear Facilities;’’
5. Defense Logistics Agency,
‘‘Radiological Historical Site
Assessment Report, Defense National
Stockpile Center, Somerville Depot,
Hillsborough, NJ’’ dated January 2006
[ML060730422];
6. ‘‘Final Status Survey Plan, DNSC,
Somerville Depot, Hillsborough, NJ’’
dated February 2006 [ML060730417].
7. Notice of Availability of
Environmental Assessment and Finding
of No Significant Impact for License
Amendment to Source Materials License
No. STC–133 Authorizing the Use of
Site-Specific Derived Concentration
Guideline Levels When Determining if
Unrestricted Release Criteria Has Been
Met for the Defense Logistics Agency,
Defense Nuclear Supply Center Depot in
Somerville, NJ’’ published in the
Federal Register Volume 71, Number
199 on October 16, 2006, pages 60770
and 60772;
8. Defense Logistics Agency,
Amendment Request letter dated
January 3, 2007 containing the ‘‘Final
Status Survey Report, DNSC, Somerville
Depot, Hillsborough, NJ’’ dated
December 2006 [ML070050120];
9. Defense Logistics Agency,
Deficiency Response Letter dated
February 6, 2007 [ML070380535];
10. State of New Jersey, Department of
Environmental Protection Letter dated
March 22, 2007 [ML070950546];
11. Defense Logistics Agency,
Deficiency Response Letter dated April
26, 2006 [ML061220479];
12. Letter to the State of New Jersey
Regarding Proposed Rule, Soil
Remediation Standards for Radioactive
Materials [ML003763858]; and
13. State of New Jersey, Department of
Environmental Protection Letter dated
July 20, 2006 [ML062070300].
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.
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
54469
Dated at Region I 475 Allendale Road, King
of Prussia this 18th day of September 2007.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
James P. Dwyer,
Chief, Commercial and R&D Branch, Division
of Nuclear Materials Safety, Region I.
[FR Doc. E7–18872 Filed 9–24–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50–482]
Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating
Corporation; Wolf Creek Generating
Station, Unit 1; Notice of Availability of
the Draft Supplement 32 to the Generic
Environmental Impact Statement for
License Renewal of Nuclear Plants,
and Public Meeting for the License
Renewal of Wolf Creek Generating
Station, Unit 1
Notice is hereby given that the U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)
has published a draft plant-specific
supplement to the Generic
Environmental Impact Statement for
License Renewal of Nuclear Plants
(GEIS), NUREG–1437, regarding the
renewal of operating license NPF–42 for
an additional 20 years of operation for
the Wolf Creek Generating Station
(WCGS), Unit 1. WCGS is located in
Coffey County, Kansas, approximately
75 miles southwest of Kansas City.
Possible alternatives to the proposed
action (license renewal) include no
action and reasonable alternative energy
sources.
The draft Supplement 32 to the GEIS
is publicly available at the NRC Public
Document Room (PDR), located at One
White Flint North, 11555 Rockville
Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852, or
from the NRC’s Agencywide Documents
Access and Management System
(ADAMS). The ADAMS Public
Electronic Reading Room is accessible at
https://adamswebsearch.nrc.gov/
dologin.htm. The Accession Number for
the draft Supplement 32 to the GEIS is
ML072540026. Persons who do not have
access to ADAMS, or who encounter
problems in accessing the documents
located in ADAMS, should contact the
NRC’s PDR reference staff by telephone
at 1–800–397–4209, or 301–415–4737,
or via e-mail at pdr@nrc.gov. In
addition, the Coffey County Library,
Burlington Branch, located at 410
Juniatta Street, Burlington, KS 66839,
has agreed to make the draft supplement
to the GEIS available for public
inspection.
Any interested party may submit
comments on the draft supplement to
the GEIS for consideration by the NRC
E:\FR\FM\25SEN1.SGM
25SEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 185 (Tuesday, September 25, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 54467-54469]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-18872]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 04000341]
Notice of Availability of Environmental Assessment and Finding of
No Significant Impact for License Amendment to Source Materials License
No. STC-133, for Unrestricted Release of the Defense Logistics Agency's
Facility in Hillsborough, NJ
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Issuance of environmental assessment and Finding of No
Significant Impact for license amendment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dennis Lawyer, Health Physicist,
Commercial and R&D Branch, Division of Nuclear Materials Safety, Region
I, 475 Allendale Road, King of Prussia, Pennsylvania; telephone 610-
337-5366; fax number 610-337-5393; or by e-mail: drl1@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Introduction
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering the
issuance of a license amendment to Source Materials License No. STC-
133. This license is held by Defense Logistics Agency (the Licensee).
The license authorizes the Licensee to use licensed material at
multiple sites in different States. At issue here is the Licensee's
Defense National Stockpile Center Somerville Depot, located at 152 U.S.
Highway Route, Hillsborough, New Jersey (the Facility). Issuance of the
amendment would authorize release of the Facility for unrestricted use,
but would not involve termination of the license. The Licensee
requested this action in a letter dated January 3, 2007. The NRC has
prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA) in support of this proposed
action in accordance with the requirements of Title 10, Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR), Part 51 (10 CFR Part 51). Based on the EA, the NRC
has concluded that a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) is
appropriate with respect to the proposed action. The amendment will be
issued to the Licensee following the publication of this FONSI and EA
in the Federal Register.
II. Environmental Assessment
Identification of Proposed Action
The proposed action would approve the Licensee's January 3, 2007,
license amendment request, resulting in release of the Facility for
unrestricted use in accordance with 10 CFR 20.1402. License No. STC-133
was issued on July 27, 1983, pursuant to 10 CFR Part 40, and has been
amended periodically since that time. With respect to the Facility, the
license authorized the Licensee to use unsealed source material for
purposes of storage, sampling, repackaging, and transferring materials.
The Facility is situated on 77 acres of land and consists of
warehouses and office space. The Facility is located in a mixed
industrial area. Within the Facility, use of licensed materials was
confined to a decontamination trailer and warehouses 1, 3, and 4. The
area of use totaled approximately 50,000 square feet.
On September 16, 2004, the Licensee ceased licensed activities at
the Facility, and initiated a survey and decontamination actions there.
Based on the Licensee's historical knowledge of the site and the
conditions of the Facility, the Licensee determined that only routine
decontamination activities, in accordance with their NRC-approved,
operating radiation safety procedures, were required. The Licensee was
not required to submit a decommissioning plan to the NRC because worker
cleanup activities and procedures are consistent with those approved
for routine operations. The Licensee conducted surveys of the Facility
and provided information to the NRC to demonstrate that it meets the
criteria in Subpart E of 10 CFR Part 20 for unrestricted release.
Need for the Proposed Action
The Licensee has ceased conducting licensed activities at the
Facility, and seeks the unrestricted use of its Facility.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action
The historical review of licensed activities conducted at the
Facility shows that such activities involved use of the following
radionuclides with half-lives greater than 120 days: natural uranium
and thorium. Prior to performing the final status survey, the Licensee
conducted decontamination activities, as necessary, in the areas of the
Facility affected by these radionuclides.
The Licensee elected to demonstrate compliance with the
radiological criteria for unrestricted release as specified in 10 CFR
20.1402 by developing derived concentration guideline levels (DCGLs)
for its Facility. The Licensee conducted site-specific dose modeling
using input parameters specific to the Facility and a conservative
assumption that all residual radioactivity is in equilibrium.
[[Page 54468]]
Federal Guidance Report Number 13 was used to modify the dose
conversion factors because it is based on an improved, more realistic
dosimetry model. The licensee selected adults as the critical age group
as the expected future use of this facility will be industrial. Based
on the type of building, railroad distribution, and truck access, there
is no compelling evidence to indicate that the building will be used
for anything other than industrial activities. The residual
radioactivity is confined to the structures of the Facility. Since
there is no land or water residual radioactivity, the building
occupancy scenario may appropriately be applied to the Facility. The
Facility is located in an area zoned as Economic Development which
includes a variety of uses. Buildings previously sold in the area have
been converted to light industrial uses. The buildings would need
substantial modification to convert to residential housing. The
Licensee thus determined the maximum amount of residual radioactivity
on building surfaces, equipment, and materials that will satisfy the
NRC requirements in Subpart E of 10 CFR Part 20 for unrestricted
release. The NRC reviewed the Licensee's methodology and proposed
DCGLs, and concluded that the proposed DCGLs are acceptable for use as
release criteria at the Facility (this approval was published October
16, 2006 in the Federal Register at pages 60770 through 60772).
The NRC staff conducted a survey at the Facility on July 13, 2006,
and none of the staff's results exceeded the DCGLs that were later
approved for use at the Facility.
The Licensee conducted a final status survey on July 11-13 and 25-
27, 2006, August 2, 2006, and November 14-16, 2006 covering the areas
of use as stated in the Final Status Survey Plan, dated February 2006.
The final status survey results were enclosed with the Licensee's
amendment request dated January 3, 2007, and an additional information
letter dated February 6, 2007. The Licensee's final status survey
results were below the approved DCGLs, and are thus acceptable. The
static surveys showed that the average readings in all the survey units
are less than the minimum detectable activity for the instrumentation
used. Based on the minimum detectable activity for static measurements,
the site residual activity will result in less than 5 millirem per year
dose.
Based on its own survey results, and its review of the Licensee's
final survey report, the staff has determined that the affected
environment and any environmental impacts associated with the proposed
action are bounded by the impacts evaluated by the ``Generic
Environmental Impact Statement in Support of Rulemaking on Radiological
Criteria for License Termination of NRC-Licensed Nuclear Facilities''
(NUREG-1496) Volumes 1-3 (ML042310492, ML042320379, and ML042330385).
The staff finds there were no significant environmental impacts from
the use of radioactive material at the Facility. The NRC staff reviewed
the docket file records and the final status survey results to identify
any non-radiological hazards that may have impacted the environment
surrounding the Facility. No such hazards or impacts to the environment
were identified, and the NRC has identified no other radiological or
non-radiological activities in the area that could result in cumulative
environmental impacts.
The NRC staff finds that the proposed release of the Facility for
unrestricted use is in compliance with 10 CFR 20.1402. Based on its
review, the staff considered the impact of the residual radioactivity
at the Facility and concluded that the proposed action will not have a
significant effect on the quality of the human environment.
Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives to the Proposed Action
Due to the largely administrative nature of the proposed action,
its environmental impacts are small. Therefore, the only alternative
the staff considered is the no-action alternative, under which the
staff would leave things as they are by simply denying the amendment
request. This no-action alternative is not feasible because it
conflicts with 10 CFR 40.42(d), requiring that decommissioning of
source material facilities be completed and approved by the NRC after
licensed activities cease. The NRC's analysis of the Licensee's final
status survey data confirmed that the Facility meets the requirements
of 10 CFR 20.1402 for unrestricted release. Additionally, denying the
amendment request would result in no change in current environmental
impacts. The environmental impacts of the proposed action and the no-
action alternative are therefore similar, and the no-action alternative
is accordingly not further considered.
Conclusion
The NRC staff has concluded that the proposed action is consistent
with the NRC's unrestricted release criteria specified in 10 CFR
20.1402. Because the proposed action will not significantly impact the
quality of the human environment, the NRC staff concludes that the
proposed action is the preferred alternative.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
NRC provided a draft of this Environmental Assessment to the State
of New Jersey's Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) for
review on February 20, 2007. By letter dated March 22, 2007, the NJDEP
submitted two comments on the proposed release of the Facility for
unrestricted use:
(1) The NJDEP's regulations at N.J.A.C. 7:28-12 considers
unrestricted use as any use that does not require the continued use of
engineering or institutional controls in order to meet established
standards. The NJDEP wants the Licensee to have a deed restriction
placed on the Facility property limiting future use of the site to
industrial or commercial purposes.
(2) The NJDEP also wants the licensee to demonstrate that the final
status survey results will meet the New Jersey release criterion of 15
millirem per year.
The NRC staff finds that the proposed action can go forward
notwithstanding the NJDEP comments. Regarding the first comment, this
release is unrestricted as specified in 10 CFR 20.1402 in that there
are no engineering or institutional controls required in order to meet
established standards. The licensee's use of the DandD computer code
default values, updated with the Federal Guidance Report 13 values for
dose conversion factors, required them to consider age groups other
than adults. As reflected above in the impacts assessment, the NRC
staff finds that, the critical group here is adult light industrial
workers, because the warehouse buildings would need substantial
modification to convert them to residential housing. Since the
conditions at the site meet the site specific DCGL for the critical
group, an unrestricted release is approved. In addition, putting the
requested deed restriction into place now would not make 10 CFR
20.1403, ``Criteria for license termination under restricted
conditions,'' applicable here. While an earlier Licensee submittal
(dated April 26, 2006, [ML061220479]) contained an April 17, 2006
memorandum from the headquarters of the Defense Logistics Agency
indicated that the Licensee would be willing to put the requested deed
restriction into place, the NRC staff finds that no deed restriction
will be necessary as a prerequisite to taking the proposed action.
Placing such a restriction on the property would not be consistent with
unrestricted use under 10 CFR 20.1402.
[[Page 54469]]
Regarding the NJDEP's second comment above, the NRC staff
recognizes that the State of New Jersey has established a 15 millirem
per year standard (under NJDEP's regulations at N.J.A.C. 7:28-12). The
NRC has previously advised the NJDEP that these regulations raise
preemption concerns [ML003763858]. States are preempted from regulating
NRC-licensed materials for the purposes of radiation protection unless
they enter into a formal agreement with the NRC. To date, New Jersey
has not done so. Moreover, as indicated above, the Licensee has
developed DCGLs acceptable to the NRC which support the 25 millirem per
year standard set forth in 10 CFR 20.1402, and the staff must implement
these DCGLs for the purpose of evaluating the proposed action.
The NRC staff has further determined that the proposed action is of
a procedural nature, and will not affect listed species or critical
habitat. Therefore, no further consultation is required under section 7
of the Endangered Species Act. The NRC staff has also determined that
the proposed action is not the type of activity that has the potential
to cause effects on historic properties. Therefore, no further
consultation is required under section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act.
III. Finding of No Significant Impact
The NRC staff has prepared this EA in support of the proposed
action. On the basis of this EA, the NRC finds that there are no
significant environmental impacts from the proposed action, and that
preparation of an environmental impact statement is not warranted.
Accordingly, the NRC has determined that a Finding of No Significant
Impact is appropriate.
IV. Further Information
Documents related to this action, including the application for
license 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 documents
related to this action are listed below, along with their ADAMS
accession numbers.
1. NUREG-1757, ``Consolidated NMSS Decommissioning Guidance;''
2. Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 20, Subpart E,
``Radiological Criteria for License Termination;''
3. Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 51, ``Environmental
Protection Regulations for Domestic Licensing and Related Regulatory
Functions;''
4. NUREG-1496, ``Generic Environmental Impact Statement in Support
of Rulemaking on Radiological Criteria for License Termination of NRC-
Licensed Nuclear Facilities;''
5. Defense Logistics Agency, ``Radiological Historical Site
Assessment Report, Defense National Stockpile Center, Somerville Depot,
Hillsborough, NJ'' dated January 2006 [ML060730422];
6. ``Final Status Survey Plan, DNSC, Somerville Depot,
Hillsborough, NJ'' dated February 2006 [ML060730417].
7. Notice of Availability of Environmental Assessment and Finding
of No Significant Impact for License Amendment to Source Materials
License No. STC-133 Authorizing the Use of Site-Specific Derived
Concentration Guideline Levels When Determining if Unrestricted Release
Criteria Has Been Met for the Defense Logistics Agency, Defense Nuclear
Supply Center Depot in Somerville, NJ'' published in the Federal
Register Volume 71, Number 199 on October 16, 2006, pages 60770 and
60772;
8. Defense Logistics Agency, Amendment Request letter dated January
3, 2007 containing the ``Final Status Survey Report, DNSC, Somerville
Depot, Hillsborough, NJ'' dated December 2006 [ML070050120];
9. Defense Logistics Agency, Deficiency Response Letter dated
February 6, 2007 [ML070380535];
10. State of New Jersey, Department of Environmental Protection
Letter dated March 22, 2007 [ML070950546];
11. Defense Logistics Agency, Deficiency Response Letter dated
April 26, 2006 [ML061220479];
12. Letter to the State of New Jersey Regarding Proposed Rule, Soil
Remediation Standards for Radioactive Materials [ML003763858]; and
13. State of New Jersey, Department of Environmental Protection
Letter dated July 20, 2006 [ML062070300].
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 Region I 475 Allendale Road, King of Prussia this 18th
day of September 2007.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
James P. Dwyer,
Chief, Commercial and R&D Branch, Division of Nuclear Materials Safety,
Region I.
[FR Doc. E7-18872 Filed 9-24-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
