Notice of Availability of Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact for License Amendment to Byproduct Materials License No. 19-07538-01, for Unrestricted Release of the Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration, Center for Devices and Radiological Health's Facility in Rockville, MD, 34774-34776 [2010-14749]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
34774
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 117 / Friday, June 18, 2010 / Notices
Day
Event/activity
0 ........................
Publication of FEDERAL REGISTER notice of hearing and opportunity to petition for leave to intervene, including order with instructions for access requests.
Deadline for submitting requests for access to Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information (SUNSI) and/or Safeguards
Information (SGI) with information: supporting the standing of a potential party identified by name and address; describing
the need for the information in order for the potential party to participate meaningfully in an adjudicatory proceeding; demonstrating that access should be granted (e.g., showing technical competence for access to SGI); and, for SGI, including
application fee for fingerprint/background check.
Deadline for submitting petition for intervention containing: (i) Demonstration of standing; (ii) all contentions whose formulation
does not require access to SUNSI and/or SGI (+25 Answers to petition for intervention; +7 petitioner/requestor reply).
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff informs the requester of the staff’s determination whether the request for access
provides a reasonable basis to believe standing can be established and shows (1) need for SUNSI or (2) need to know for
SGI. (For SUNSI, NRC staff also informs any party to the proceeding whose interest independent of the proceeding would
be harmed by the release of the information.) If NRC staff makes the finding of need for SUNSI and likelihood of standing,
NRC staff begins document processing (preparation of redactions or review of redacted documents). If NRC staff makes
the finding of need to know for SGI and likelihood of standing, NRC staff begins background check (including fingerprinting
for a criminal history records check), information processing (preparation of redactions or review of redacted documents),
and readiness inspections.
If NRC staff finds no ‘‘need,’’ no ‘‘need to know,’’ or no likelihood of standing, the deadline for petitioner/requester to file a motion seeking a ruling to reverse the NRC staff’s denial of access; NRC staff files copy of access determination with the presiding officer (or Chief Administrative Judge or other designated officer, as appropriate). If NRC staff finds ‘‘need’’ for
SUNSI, the deadline for any party to the proceeding whose interest independent of the proceeding would be harmed by the
release of the information to file a motion seeking a ruling to reverse the NRC staff’s grant of access.
Deadline for NRC staff reply to motions to reverse NRC staff determination(s).
(Receipt +30) If NRC staff finds standing and need for SUNSI, deadline for NRC staff to complete information processing and
file motion for Protective Order and draft Non-Disclosure Affidavit. Deadline for applicant/licensee to file Non-Disclosure
Agreement for SUNSI.
(Receipt +180) If NRC staff finds standing, need to know for SGI, and trustworthiness and reliability, deadline for NRC staff to
file motion for Protective Order and draft Non-disclosure Affidavit (or to make a determination that the proposed recipient of
SGI is not trustworthy or reliable). NOTE: Before the Office of Administration makes an adverse determination regarding access to SGI, the proposed recipient must be provided an opportunity to correct or explain information.
Deadline for petitioner to seek reversal of a final adverse NRC staff trustworthiness or reliability determination either before
the presiding officer or another designated officer under 10 CFR 2.705(c)(3)(iv)..
If access granted: Issuance of presiding officer or other designated officer decision on motion for protective order for access
to sensitive information (including schedule for providing access and submission of contentions) or decision reversing a
final adverse determination by the NRC staff.
Deadline for filing executed Non-Disclosure Affidavits. Access provided to SUNSI and/or SGI consistent with decision issuing
the protective order.
Deadline for submission of contentions whose development depends upon access to SUNSI and/or SGI. However, if more
than 25 days remain between the petitioner’s receipt of (or access to) the information and the deadline for filing all other
contentions (as established in the notice of hearing or opportunity for hearing), the petitioner may file its SUNSI or SGI contentions by that later deadline.
(Contention receipt +25) Answers to contentions whose development depends upon access to SUNSI and/or SGI.
(Answer receipt +7) Petitioner/Intervenor reply to answers.
Decision on contention admission.
10 ......................
60 ......................
20 ......................
25 ......................
30 ......................
40 ......................
190 ....................
205 ....................
A .......................
A + 3 .................
A + 28 ...............
A + 53 ...............
A + 60 ...............
>A + 60 .............
Significant Impact for License
Amendment.
[FR Doc. 2010–14768 Filed 6–17–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
[Docket No. 030–04544; NRC–2010–0213]
Notice of Availability of Environmental
Assessment and Finding of No
Significant Impact for License
Amendment to Byproduct Materials
License No. 19–07538–01, for
Unrestricted Release of the
Department of Health and Human
Services, Food and Drug
Administration, Center for Devices and
Radiological Health’s Facility in
Rockville, MD
Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Issuance of Environmental
Assessment and Finding of No
AGENCY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:17 Jun 17, 2010
Jkt 220001
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Betsy Ullrich, Senior Health Physicist,
Commercial and R&D Branch, Division
of Nuclear Materials Safety, Region I,
475 Allendale Road, King of Prussia,
Pennsylvania 19406; telephone (610)
337–5040; fax number (610) 337–5269;
or by e-mail: elizabeth.ullrich@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Introduction
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) is considering the
issuance of a license amendment to
Byproduct Materials License No. 19–
07538–01. This license is held by the
Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS), Food and Drug
Administration, Center for Devices and
Radiological Health (FDA/CDRH) (the
Licensee), for its FDA/CDRH Building 1
PO 00000
Frm 00092
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
laboratory (the Facility), located at
12720 Twinbrook Parkway, in
Rockville, Maryland. Issuance of the
amendment would authorize release of
the Facility for unrestricted use. The
Licensee requested this action in a letter
dated December 30, 2009. 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 December 30, 2009,
E:\FR\FM\18JNN1.SGM
18JNN1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 117 / Friday, June 18, 2010 / Notices
license amendment request, resulting in
release of the Facility for unrestricted
use. License No. 19–07538–01 was
issued on July 21, 1961, pursuant to 10
CFR part 30, and has been amended
periodically since that time. This
license authorized the Licensee to use
unsealed byproduct material for
purposes of conducting research and
development activities on laboratory
bench tops and in hoods. The licensee
also used uranyl acetate pursuant to the
general license in 10 CFR 40.22.
The Facility is a 19,229 square foot
building situated on a 4-acre complex
and consists of office space and
laboratories. The Facility is located in a
mixed residential/commercial area.
Within the Facility, use of licensed
materials was confined to 27
laboratories.
In March 2007, the Licensee ceased
licensed activities and initiated a survey
and decontamination of the Facility.
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 NRCapproved, 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.
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
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: Barium 133,
cesium 137, americium 241, and
uranium 238. 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 conducted a final status
survey during November 2009. The final
status survey report was attached to the
Licensee’s amendment request dated
December 30, 2009. The Licensee
elected to demonstrate compliance with
the radiological criteria for unrestricted
release as specified in 10 CFR 20.1402
by using the screening approach
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:17 Jun 17, 2010
Jkt 220001
described in NUREG–1757,
‘‘Consolidated NMSS Decommissioning
Guidance,’’ Volume 2. The Licensee
used the radionuclide-specific derived
concentration guideline levels (DCGLs),
developed there by the NRC, which
comply with the dose criterion in 10
CFR 20.1402. These DCGLs define the
maximum amount of residual
radioactivity on building surfaces,
equipment, and materials, and in soils,
that will satisfy the NRC requirements
in Subpart E of 10 CFR part 20 for
unrestricted release. Because NRC has
not established a screening value for
barium 133, the licensee developed a
DCGL for barium 133 for its Facility.
The Licensee developed the barium 133
DCGL by conducting site-specific dose
modeling using input parameters
specific to the Facility, and by using the
default values in RESRAD–BUILD,
Version 3.4. The NRC reviewed the
Licensee’s methodology and proposed
barium 133 DCGL and concluded that
the proposed barium 133 DCGL is
acceptable for use as release criteria at
the Facility. The Licensee’s final status
survey results were below the relevant
DCGLs and are in compliance with the
As Low As Reasonably Achievable
(ALARA) requirement of 10 CFR
20.1402. Therefore, the NRC thus finds
that the Licensee’s final status survey
results are acceptable.
Based on its review, 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 report 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. 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 and the termination of the NRC
materials license 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
PO 00000
Frm 00093
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
34775
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 30.36(d),
requiring that decommissioning of
byproduct material facilities be
completed by the licensee 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. Because the
environmental impacts of the proposed
action and the no-action alternative are
therefore similar, the no-action
alternative is accordingly not
considered further.
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
Maryland Department of the
Environment, Air and Radiation
Management Administration and Land
Management Administration, for review
on March 9, 2010. On April 26, 2010,
Maryland Department of the
Environment, Air and Radiation
Management Administration and Land
Management Administration responded
by electronic mail. The State agreed
with the conclusions of the EA, and
otherwise had no comments.
The NRC staff has 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,
E:\FR\FM\18JNN1.SGM
18JNN1
34776
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 117 / Friday, June 18, 2010 / Notices
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
James P. Dwyer,
Chief, Commercial and R&D Branch, Division
of Nuclear Materials Safety, Region I.
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.
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
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
Documents 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. Letter dated December 30, 2009,
with the ‘‘Final Radiological Status
Survey Report’’ dated December 2009
[ML100040232];
2. Letter dated May 13, 2009
[ML091350560];
3. NUREG–1757, ‘‘Consolidated
NMSS Decommissioning Guidance’’;
4. Title 10, Code of Federal
Regulations, Part 20, Subpart E,
‘‘Radiological Criteria for License
Termination’’;
5. Title 10, Code of Federal
Regulations, Part 51, ‘‘Environmental
Protection Regulations for Domestic
Licensing and Related Regulatory
Functions;’’ and
6. NUREG–1496, ‘‘Generic
Environmental Impact Statement in
Support of Rulemaking on Radiological
Criteria for License Termination of NRCLicensed Nuclear Facilities.’’
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 this 10th day of June
2010.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:17 Jun 17, 2010
Jkt 220001
[FR Doc. 2010–14749 Filed 6–17–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50–250 and 50–251; NRC–
2010–0212]
Florida Power & Light Company;
Turkey Point Nuclear Generating Plant,
Units 3 and 4; Environmental
Assessment and Finding of No
Significant Impact
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) is considering
issuance of an exemption from Title 10
of the Code of Federal Regulations (10
CFR) Part 26, Section 26.9, for Facility
Operating License Nos. DPR–31 and
DPR–41, issued to Florida Power &
Light Company (the licensee), for
operation of the Turkey Point Nuclear
Generating Plant, Units 3 and 4, located
in Florida City, Florida. Therefore, as
required by 10 CFR 51.21, the NRC
performed an environmental
assessment. Based on the results of the
environmental assessment, the NRC is
issuing a finding of no significant
impact.
Environmental Assessment
Identification of the Proposed Action:
The proposed action would consider
approval of an exemption for Turkey
Point, Units 3 and 4, from certain
requirements of 10 CFR part 26, ‘‘Fitness
for Duty Rule.’’ Specifically, the licensee
requests approval of an exemption from
the requirements of 10 CFR 26.205(c),
‘‘Work hours scheduling,’’ and (d),
‘‘Work hour controls.’’
The licensee states that during severe
weather conditions, for example,
tropical storms or hurricane force
winds, adherence to all work hour
controls requirements could impede the
licensee’s ability to use whatever staff
resources may be necessary to prepare
the site for a pending severe weather
event and ensure that the plant reaches
and maintains a safe and secure status.
The exemption would only apply to
severe weather conditions where
tropical storm or hurricane force winds
are predicted onsite requiring severe
weather preparations and activation and
sequestering of the Turkey Point storm
crew.
The proposed exemption will allow
the licensee not to meet the
requirements of 10 CFR 26.205(c) and
(d), from the time severe weather site
PO 00000
Frm 00094
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
preparation begins until exit conditions
are satisfied. The exemption would only
apply to individuals on the storm crew
who perform duties identified in 10 CFR
26.4(a)(1) through (a)(5). When storm
crew sequestering exit conditions are
met, full compliance with 10 CFR
26.205(c) and (d) will be required.
The proposed action does not involve
any physical changes to the reactor,
fuel, plant, structures, support
structures, water, or land at the Turkey
Point Units 3 and 4, site.
The proposed action is in accordance
with the licensee’s application dated
October 13, 2009.
The Need for the Proposed Action:
Proposed action is needed because the
licensee is unable to meet the
requirements of 10 CFR 26.205(c) and
(d) during declarations of severe
weather conditions that could result due
to prevailing tropical storm or hurricane
force winds impacting the facility.
Compliance with work hour control
requirements could impede the
licensee’s ability to use whatever staff
resources may be necessary to respond
to a plant emergency and ensure that the
plant reaches and maintains a safe and
secure status.
Environmental Impacts of the
Proposed Action:
The NRC staff has completed its
environmental assessment of the
proposed exemption. The NRC staff has
concluded that the proposed exemption
from the implementation of the
requirements of 10 CFR 26.205(c) and
(d) during declaration of severe weather
conditions, would not significantly
affect plant safety and would not have
a significant adverse affect on the
probability of occurrence of an accident.
The proposed action would not result
in any increased radiological hazards
beyond those previously evaluated by
the NRC staff in the Safety Evaluation
Report, dated March 15, 1972, related to
operation of Turkey Point, Units 3 and
4. No changes are being made in the
types of effluents that may be released
offsite. There is no significant increase
in the amount of any effluent released
offsite. There is no significant increase
in occupational or public radiation
exposure. Therefore, there are no
significant radiological environmental
impacts associated with the proposed
action.
The proposed action does not result
in changes to land use or water use, or
result in changes to the quality or
quantity of non-radiological effluents.
No changes to the National Pollution
Discharge Elimination System permit
are needed. No effects on the aquatic or
terrestrial habitat in the vicinity or the
plant, or to threatened, endangered, or
E:\FR\FM\18JNN1.SGM
18JNN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 117 (Friday, June 18, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 34774-34776]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-14749]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 030-04544; NRC-2010-0213]
Notice of Availability of Environmental Assessment and Finding of
No Significant Impact for License Amendment to Byproduct Materials
License No. 19-07538-01, for Unrestricted Release of the Department of
Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration, Center for
Devices and Radiological Health's Facility in Rockville, MD
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Issuance of Environmental Assessment and Finding of No
Significant Impact for License Amendment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Betsy Ullrich, Senior Health
Physicist, Commercial and R&D Branch, Division of Nuclear Materials
Safety, Region I, 475 Allendale Road, King of Prussia, Pennsylvania
19406; telephone (610) 337-5040; fax number (610) 337-5269; or by e-
mail: elizabeth.ullrich@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Introduction
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering the
issuance of a license amendment to Byproduct Materials License No. 19-
07538-01. This license is held by the Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS), Food and Drug Administration, Center for Devices and
Radiological Health (FDA/CDRH) (the Licensee), for its FDA/CDRH
Building 1 laboratory (the Facility), located at 12720 Twinbrook
Parkway, in Rockville, Maryland. Issuance of the amendment would
authorize release of the Facility for unrestricted use. The Licensee
requested this action in a letter dated December 30, 2009. 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 December 30, 2009,
[[Page 34775]]
license amendment request, resulting in release of the Facility for
unrestricted use. License No. 19-07538-01 was issued on July 21, 1961,
pursuant to 10 CFR part 30, and has been amended periodically since
that time. This license authorized the Licensee to use unsealed
byproduct material for purposes of conducting research and development
activities on laboratory bench tops and in hoods. The licensee also
used uranyl acetate pursuant to the general license in 10 CFR 40.22.
The Facility is a 19,229 square foot building situated on a 4-acre
complex and consists of office space and laboratories. The Facility is
located in a mixed residential/commercial area. Within the Facility,
use of licensed materials was confined to 27 laboratories.
In March 2007, the Licensee ceased licensed activities and
initiated a survey and decontamination of the Facility. 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: Barium 133, cesium
137, americium 241, and uranium 238. 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 conducted a final status survey during November 2009.
The final status survey report was attached to the Licensee's amendment
request dated December 30, 2009. The Licensee elected to demonstrate
compliance with the radiological criteria for unrestricted release as
specified in 10 CFR 20.1402 by using the screening approach described
in NUREG-1757, ``Consolidated NMSS Decommissioning Guidance,'' Volume
2. The Licensee used the radionuclide-specific derived concentration
guideline levels (DCGLs), developed there by the NRC, which comply with
the dose criterion in 10 CFR 20.1402. These DCGLs define the maximum
amount of residual radioactivity on building surfaces, equipment, and
materials, and in soils, that will satisfy the NRC requirements in
Subpart E of 10 CFR part 20 for unrestricted release. Because NRC has
not established a screening value for barium 133, the licensee
developed a DCGL for barium 133 for its Facility. The Licensee
developed the barium 133 DCGL by conducting site-specific dose modeling
using input parameters specific to the Facility, and by using the
default values in RESRAD-BUILD, Version 3.4. The NRC reviewed the
Licensee's methodology and proposed barium 133 DCGL and concluded that
the proposed barium 133 DCGL is acceptable for use as release criteria
at the Facility. The Licensee's final status survey results were below
the relevant DCGLs and are in compliance with the As Low As Reasonably
Achievable (ALARA) requirement of 10 CFR 20.1402. Therefore, the NRC
thus finds that the Licensee's final status survey results are
acceptable.
Based on its review, 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 report 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. 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 and the termination of the NRC materials license 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 30.36(d), requiring that decommissioning of
byproduct material facilities be completed by the licensee 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. Because the environmental impacts of
the proposed action and the no-action alternative are therefore
similar, the no-action alternative is accordingly not considered
further.
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
Maryland Department of the Environment, Air and Radiation Management
Administration and Land Management Administration, for review on March
9, 2010. On April 26, 2010, Maryland Department of the Environment, Air
and Radiation Management Administration and Land Management
Administration responded by electronic mail. The State agreed with the
conclusions of the EA, and otherwise had no comments.
The NRC staff has 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,
[[Page 34776]]
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 Documents 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. Letter dated December 30, 2009, with the ``Final Radiological
Status Survey Report'' dated December 2009 [ML100040232];
2. Letter dated May 13, 2009 [ML091350560];
3. NUREG-1757, ``Consolidated NMSS Decommissioning Guidance'';
4. Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 20, Subpart E,
``Radiological Criteria for License Termination'';
5. Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 51, ``Environmental
Protection Regulations for Domestic Licensing and Related Regulatory
Functions;'' and
6. NUREG-1496, ``Generic Environmental Impact Statement in Support
of Rulemaking on Radiological Criteria for License Termination of NRC-
Licensed Nuclear Facilities.''
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 this 10th day of June 2010.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
James P. Dwyer,
Chief, Commercial and R&D Branch, Division of Nuclear Materials Safety,
Region I.
[FR Doc. 2010-14749 Filed 6-17-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
