U.S. Army Installation Management Command; Notice of Issuance of Director's Decision, 69293-69294 [2011-28889]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 216 / Tuesday, November 8, 2011 / Notices ensure consideration only for comments received on or before this date. ADDRESSES: Please include Docket ID NRC–2011–0256 in the subject line of your comments. For additional instructions on submitting comments and instructions on accessing documents related to this action, see ‘‘Submitting Comments and Accessing Information’’ in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document. You may submit comments by one of the following methods: • Federal Rulemaking Web Site: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and search for documents filed under Docket ID NRC–2011–0256. Address questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher, telephone: (301) 492–3668; email: Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov. • Mail comments to: Cindy Bladey, Chief, Rules, Announcements, and Directives Branch (RADB), Office of Administration, Mail Stop: TWB–05– B01M, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555– 0001. • Fax comments to: RADB at (301) 492–3446. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. John Wise, Division of License Renewal, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555–0001; telephone: (301) 415–8489; email: John.Wise@nrc.gov. mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Submitting Comments and Accessing Information Comments submitted in writing or in electronic form will be posted on the NRC Web site and on the Federal rulemaking Web site, https:// www.regulations.gov. Because your comments will not be edited to remove any identifying or contact information, the NRC cautions you against including any information in your submission that you do not want to be publicly disclosed. The NRC requests that any party soliciting or aggregating comments received from other persons for submission to the NRC inform those persons that the NRC will not edit their comments to remove any identifying or contact information, and therefore, they should not include any information in their comments that they do not want publicly disclosed. You can access publicly available documents related to this document using the following methods: • NRC’s Public Document Room (PDR): The public may examine and have copied, for a fee, publicly available documents at the NRC’s PDR, Room O1– VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:29 Nov 07, 2011 Jkt 226001 F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. • NRC’s Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS): Publicly available documents created or received at the NRC are available online in the NRC Library at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/ adams.html. From this page, the public can gain entry into ADAMS, which provides text and image files of the NRC’s public documents. If you do not have access to ADAMS or if there are problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, contact the NRC’s PDR reference staff at 1–800–397–4209, 301–415–4737, or by email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. The draft LR– ISG–2011–01 is available electronically under ADAMS Accession Number ML112360626. The GALL Report and SRP–LR are available under ADAMS Accession Nos. ML103490041 and ML103490036, respectively. • Federal Rulemaking Web Site: Public comments and supporting materials related to this notice can be found at https://www.regulations.gov by searching on Docket ID NRC–2011– 0256. • NRC’s Interim Staff Guidance Web Site: The LR–ISG documents are also available online under the ‘‘License Renewal’’ heading at https:// www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doccollections/#int. Background The NRC issues LR–ISGs to communicate insights and lessons learned and to address emergent issues not covered in license renewal guidance documents, such as the GALL Report and SRP–LR. In this way, the NRC staff and stakeholders may use the guidance in an LR–ISG document before it is incorporated into a formal license renewal guidance document revision. The NRC staff issues LR–ISG in accordance with the LR–ISG Process, Revision 2 (ADAMS Accession No. ML100920158), for which a notice of availability was published in the Federal Register on June 22, 2010 (75 FR 35510). The NRC staff has determined that existing guidance in the SRP–LR and GALL Report may not adequately address aging management of stainless steel structures and components exposed to treated borated water. Specifically, for pressurized water reactors, the guidance inappropriately credits boron as a corrosion inhibitor in place of other aging management activities. As a result, aging effects such as loss of material, cracking, and reduction of heat transfer may not be PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 69293 adequately managed. The staff has proposed to revise the SRP–LR and GALL Report to align the guidance for treated borated water with that for treated (non-borated) water. The revisions include adding the One-Time Inspection Program to verify the effectiveness of the Water Chemistry Program to manage loss of material and cracking of stainless steel structures and components exposed to treated borated water and adding reduction of heat transfer due to fouling as an aging effect requiring management for stainless steel heat exchanger tubes exposed to treated borated water. Proposed Action By this action, the NRC is requesting public comments on draft LR–ISG– 2011–01. This LR–ISG proposes certain revisions to NRC guidance in the SRP– LR and GALL Report. The NRC staff will make a final determination regarding issuance of the LR–ISG after it considers any public comments received in response to this request. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 1st day of November, 2011. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Melanie A. Galloway, Acting Director, Division of License Renewal, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. 2011–28891 Filed 11–7–11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590–01–P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [NRC–2009–0352; Docket No. 40–09083] U.S. Army Installation Management Command; Notice of Issuance of Director’s Decision Notice is hereby given that the Director, Office of Federal and State Materials and Environmental Management Programs (FSME) has issued a Director’s Decision with regard to a Petition, dated March 4, 2010, filed by Mr. Issac Harp, herein after referred to as the ‘‘Petitioner,’’ pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) 2.206. The Petition was supplemented on April 14, 2010. The Petition concerns the possession, by the U.S. Army, of depleted uranium (DU), a source material, in spent spotting rounds from the Davy Crockett Weapon System without a valid U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) license. The Petition requested that the NRC take enforcement action against the U.S. Army by initiating an investigation into the potential violation of NRC License SUB–459, and if it was determined that a violation occurred, to apply the full penalty permissible by law. The Petition E:\FR\FM\08NON1.SGM 08NON1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 69294 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 216 / Tuesday, November 8, 2011 / Notices also requested that any monetary fines be used for remediation of the Schofield Barracks and Pohakuloa Training Areas in Hawaii. The basis for the request was that the U.S. Army’s license, SUB–459, expired on October 31, 1964, and that any DU possessed by the U.S. Army or released into the environment after the expiration date was an unlawful act, subject to NRC enforcement policies. The Petition raised a concern about the possession of licensable quantities of DU by the U.S. Army without an NRC license to do so. Section 40.3 states, in part, that persons may not receive title to, own, receive, possess, use, transfer, or dispose of source material unless authorized in a specific or general license issued by the Commission. Contrary to 10 CFR 40.3, the U.S. Army is in possession of DU, a source material, in the form of spent spotting rounds (expended prior to 1968) at firing ranges located at Schofield Barracks and Pohakuloa Training Area, in Hawaii and on other U.S. Army installations, in excess of the exempt and general use limits, without authorization in a specific or general license issued by the NRC. The Petitioner met with the FSME Petition Review Board by teleconference on April 14, 2010, to discuss the Petition. The meeting gave the Petitioner an opportunity to provide additional information and to clarify issues raised in the Petition. The transcript of this meeting was treated as a supplement to the Petition and is available in the Agencywide Document Access and Management System (ADAMS) for inspection at the NRC’s Public Document Room, O1–F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852. Publicly available documents created or receive at the NRC are available online in the NRC Library at https:// www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. The NRC issued a proposed Director’s Decision (DD–11–05) dated August 8, 2011, which granted the Petition, in part, and denied the Petition, in part. The NRC sent a copy of the proposed Director’s Decision to the Petitioner and to the U.S. Army for comment on August 8, 2011. The Petitioner responded on August 21, 2011. The U.S. Army did not provide comments on the proposed Director’s Decision. The Petitioner’s comments and the NRC staff’s responses are included in the Director’s Decision. The Director of the Office of Federal and State Materials and Environmental Management Programs has determined that the activities requested by the Petitioner have been granted in part and denied in part. The reasons for this VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:29 Nov 07, 2011 Jkt 226001 decision are explained in the Director’s Decision pursuant to 10 CFR 2.206 [DD– 11–05], the complete text of which is available in ADAMS for inspection at the NRC’s Public Document Room, O1– F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852. Publicly available documents created or receive at the NRC are available online in the NRC Library at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/ adams.html. The Petition requested that the NRC investigate whether, contrary to applicable law and regulations, the U.S. Army possessed or released into the environment DU from spent spotting rounds after the expiration of NRC License SUB–459. NRC conducted an investigation of the U.S. Army’s possession of licensable quantities of DU and issued a Severity Level III Notice of Violation to the U.S. Army (ML111680087). Consistent with NRC Enforcement Policy (www.nrc.gov/ about-nrc/regulatory/enforcement/ enfore-pol.html) the NRC chose not to impose any civil penalty because: (1) The U.S. Army installations in Hawaii have not been previously the subject of escalated enforcement action; (2) the U.S. Army identified and notified the NRC of the presence of radioactive material; and (3) the U.S. Army implemented corrective actions in response to the discovery of the presence of the depleted uranium. Therefore, insofar as the NRC has undertaken certain activities requested by the Petitioner, that being the initiation of an investigation to determine whether the U.S. Army possesses DU in licensable quantities without authorization from the NRC to do so and the issuance of an enforcement action based on that investigation, the NRC granted that portion of the Petition concerned with such activities. In addition, the Petition requested that, if the NRC determined that a violation occurred, to assess against the U.S. Army the maximum penalty permitted by law, and asked that any assessed monetary fines be applied to the environmental remediation of DU contamination at the Schofield Barracks and Pohakuloa Training Area installations in Hawaii, if the law provides for such action. Were the NRC to have chosen to impose a civil penalty, the law does not provide for the application of that assessed civil penalty to the environmental remediation of DU contamination as requested by the Petitioner. Fines assessed for violations of NRC requirements are sent to the U.S. Treasury. Therefore, this portion of the Petition was denied. PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 As provided in 10 CFR 2.206(c), a copy of this Director’s Decision will be filed with the Secretary of the Commission for the Commission to review. As provided for by this regulation, the Decision will constitute the final action of the Commission 25 days after the date of the Decision, unless the Commission, on its own motion, institutes a review of the Decision within that time. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 29th day of October 2011. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Cynthia A. Carpenter, Deputy Director, Office of Federal and State Materialsand Environmental Management Programs. [FR Doc. 2011–28889 Filed 11–7–11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590–01–P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [NRC–2011–0204] Proposed Generic Communication Draft Generic Letter on Seismic Risk Evaluations for Operating Reactors Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Draft generic letter; extension of comment period. AGENCY: On September 1, 2011 (76 FR 54507), the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) published for public comment Draft Generic Letter 2011–XX: Seismic Risk Evaluations for Operating Reactors. The public comment period was scheduled to expire on October, 31, 2011; however, on September 16, 2011 (76 FR 57767), the NRC issued a correction and extended the public comment period to November 15, 2011. In order to allow the public sufficient time to review and comment on the Draft Generic Letter, the NRC has decided to extend the comment period for the Draft Generic Letter until December 15, 2011. DATES: The comment period has been extended and expires on December 15, 2011. Comments received after this date will be considered if it is practical to do so. The NRC is only able to assure consideration of comments received on or before this date. ADDRESSES: Please include Docket ID NRC–2011–0204 in the subject line of your comments. For instructions on submitting comments and accessing documents related to this action, see Section I, ‘‘Submitting Comments and Accessing Information’’ in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document. You may submit SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\08NON1.SGM 08NON1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 216 (Tuesday, November 8, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 69293-69294]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-28889]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[NRC-2009-0352; Docket No. 40-09083]


U.S. Army Installation Management Command; Notice of Issuance of 
Director's Decision

    Notice is hereby given that the Director, Office of Federal and 
State Materials and Environmental Management Programs (FSME) has issued 
a Director's Decision with regard to a Petition, dated March 4, 2010, 
filed by Mr. Issac Harp, herein after referred to as the 
``Petitioner,'' pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations 
(10 CFR) 2.206. The Petition was supplemented on April 14, 2010. The 
Petition concerns the possession, by the U.S. Army, of depleted uranium 
(DU), a source material, in spent spotting rounds from the Davy 
Crockett Weapon System without a valid U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission (NRC) license.
    The Petition requested that the NRC take enforcement action against 
the U.S. Army by initiating an investigation into the potential 
violation of NRC License SUB-459, and if it was determined that a 
violation occurred, to apply the full penalty permissible by law. The 
Petition

[[Page 69294]]

also requested that any monetary fines be used for remediation of the 
Schofield Barracks and Pohakuloa Training Areas in Hawaii. The basis 
for the request was that the U.S. Army's license, SUB-459, expired on 
October 31, 1964, and that any DU possessed by the U.S. Army or 
released into the environment after the expiration date was an unlawful 
act, subject to NRC enforcement policies.
    The Petition raised a concern about the possession of licensable 
quantities of DU by the U.S. Army without an NRC license to do so. 
Section 40.3 states, in part, that persons may not receive title to, 
own, receive, possess, use, transfer, or dispose of source material 
unless authorized in a specific or general license issued by the 
Commission. Contrary to 10 CFR 40.3, the U.S. Army is in possession of 
DU, a source material, in the form of spent spotting rounds (expended 
prior to 1968) at firing ranges located at Schofield Barracks and 
Pohakuloa Training Area, in Hawaii and on other U.S. Army 
installations, in excess of the exempt and general use limits, without 
authorization in a specific or general license issued by the NRC.
    The Petitioner met with the FSME Petition Review Board by 
teleconference on April 14, 2010, to discuss the Petition. The meeting 
gave the Petitioner an opportunity to provide additional information 
and to clarify issues raised in the Petition. The transcript of this 
meeting was treated as a supplement to the Petition and is available in 
the Agencywide Document Access and Management System (ADAMS) for 
inspection at the NRC's Public Document Room, O1-F21, One White Flint 
North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852. 
Publicly available documents created or receive at the NRC are 
available online in the NRC Library at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html.
    The NRC issued a proposed Director's Decision (DD-11-05) dated 
August 8, 2011, which granted the Petition, in part, and denied the 
Petition, in part. The NRC sent a copy of the proposed Director's 
Decision to the Petitioner and to the U.S. Army for comment on August 
8, 2011. The Petitioner responded on August 21, 2011. The U.S. Army did 
not provide comments on the proposed Director's Decision. The 
Petitioner's comments and the NRC staff's responses are included in the 
Director's Decision.
    The Director of the Office of Federal and State Materials and 
Environmental Management Programs has determined that the activities 
requested by the Petitioner have been granted in part and denied in 
part. The reasons for this decision are explained in the Director's 
Decision pursuant to 10 CFR 2.206 [DD-11-05], the complete text of 
which is available in ADAMS for inspection at the NRC's Public Document 
Room, O1-F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first 
floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852. Publicly available documents created 
or receive at the NRC are available online in the NRC Library at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html.
    The Petition requested that the NRC investigate whether, contrary 
to applicable law and regulations, the U.S. Army possessed or released 
into the environment DU from spent spotting rounds after the expiration 
of NRC License SUB-459. NRC conducted an investigation of the U.S. 
Army's possession of licensable quantities of DU and issued a Severity 
Level III Notice of Violation to the U.S. Army (ML111680087). 
Consistent with NRC Enforcement Policy (www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/regulatory/enforcement/enfore-pol.html) the NRC chose not to impose any 
civil penalty because: (1) The U.S. Army installations in Hawaii have 
not been previously the subject of escalated enforcement action; (2) 
the U.S. Army identified and notified the NRC of the presence of 
radioactive material; and (3) the U.S. Army implemented corrective 
actions in response to the discovery of the presence of the depleted 
uranium. Therefore, insofar as the NRC has undertaken certain 
activities requested by the Petitioner, that being the initiation of an 
investigation to determine whether the U.S. Army possesses DU in 
licensable quantities without authorization from the NRC to do so and 
the issuance of an enforcement action based on that investigation, the 
NRC granted that portion of the Petition concerned with such 
activities.
    In addition, the Petition requested that, if the NRC determined 
that a violation occurred, to assess against the U.S. Army the maximum 
penalty permitted by law, and asked that any assessed monetary fines be 
applied to the environmental remediation of DU contamination at the 
Schofield Barracks and Pohakuloa Training Area installations in Hawaii, 
if the law provides for such action. Were the NRC to have chosen to 
impose a civil penalty, the law does not provide for the application of 
that assessed civil penalty to the environmental remediation of DU 
contamination as requested by the Petitioner. Fines assessed for 
violations of NRC requirements are sent to the U.S. Treasury. 
Therefore, this portion of the Petition was denied.
    As provided in 10 CFR 2.206(c), a copy of this Director's Decision 
will be filed with the Secretary of the Commission for the Commission 
to review. As provided for by this regulation, the Decision will 
constitute the final action of the Commission 25 days after the date of 
the Decision, unless the Commission, on its own motion, institutes a 
review of the Decision within that time.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 29th day of October 2011.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Cynthia A. Carpenter,
Deputy Director, Office of Federal and State Materialsand Environmental 
Management Programs.
[FR Doc. 2011-28889 Filed 11-7-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.