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 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 http://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 http://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