National Environmental Policy Act; Santa Susana Field Laboratory, 55763-55765 [2013-22118]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 176 / Wednesday, September 11, 2013 / Notices
DEIS regarding alternatives and
environmental issues to be considered
in the Draft EIS. The scoping meetings
are scheduled as follows:
1. Cocoa Beach, FL, Wednesday,
October 9, 2013 from 6:00–8:30
p.m. at Cocoa Beach Country Club,
5000 Tom Warriner Boulevard,
Cocoa Beach, FL 32931.
2. Viera, FL, Thursday, October 10, 2013
from 6:00–8:30 p.m. at Brevard
County Government Center, 2725
Judge Fran Jamieson Way, Viera, FL
32940.
Written public input and comments
on alternatives and potential
environmental impacts and concerns
associated with the proposed Mars 2020
mission are hereby requested.
Calvin Williams,
Director, Integrated Asset Management
Division, Office Strategic Infrastructure.
[FR Doc. 2013–22116 Filed 9–10–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7510–13–P
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND
SPACE ADMINISTRATION
[Notice 13–112]
National Environmental Policy Act;
Santa Susana Field Laboratory
National Aeronautics and
Space Administration (NASA).
ACTION: Notice of Extension of the
Comment Period for the Draft
Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS)
for Demolition and Environmental
Cleanup Activities for the NASAadministered portion of the Santa
Susana Field Laboratory (SSFL),
Ventura County, California.
AGENCY:
A Notice of Availability
(NOA) for the DEIS for Demolition and
Cleanup Activities for the NASAadministered portion of the Santa
Susana Field Laboratory was published
in the Federal Register by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
on August 2, 2013, Vol. 78, No. 149,
page 46940.
NASA also published an NOA of the
DEIS in the Federal Register on the
same day (August 2, 2013, Vol. 78, No.
149, pages 47007–47009). The comment
period for the DEIS was to end on
September 16, 2013. This notice extends
the comment period an additional
fifteen days to October 1, 2013, to allow
the public further time to comment on
the DEIS.
DATES: Interested parties are invited to
submit comments on environmental
issues and concerns, preferably in
writing by October 1, 2013.
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:50 Sep 10, 2013
Jkt 229001
Comments submitted by
mail should be addressed to Allen
Elliott, SSFL Project Director, NASA
MSFC AS01, Building 4494, Huntsville,
AL 35812. Comments may be submitted
via email to msfc-ssfl-eis@
mail.nasa.gov.
The DEIS may be reviewed at the
following locations:
1. Simi Valley Library, 2969 Tapo
Canyon Road, Simi Valley, CA
93063, Web site: https://
simivalleylibrary.org/home/, Phone:
(805) 526–1735
2. Platt Library, 23600 Victory Blvd.,
Woodland Hills, CA 91367, Web
site: https://www.lapl.org/branches/
platt, Phone: (818) 340–9386
3. California State University,
Northridge Oviatt Library, 18111
Nordhoff Street, 2nd Floor, Room
265, Northridge, CA 91330, Web
site: https://library.csun.edu, Phone:
(818) 677–2285
4. Department of Toxic Substances
Control, 9211 Oakdale Avenue,
Chatsworth, CA 91311, Web site:
https://www.dtsc.ca.gov, Phone:
(818) 717–6521
The DEIS is available on the internet
in Adobe® portable document format at
https://www.nasa.gov/agency/nepa/
news/SSFL.html.
The Federal Register Notice of Intent
to prepare the DEIS, issued in the
Federal Register on July 6, 2011, is also
available on the Internet at https://
ssfl.msfc.nasa.gov/public-involvement/.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Allen Elliott, SSFL Project Director, by
phone at (256) 544–0662 or by email at
msfc-ssfl-eis@mail.nasa.gov. Additional
information about NASA’s SSFL site,
the proposed demolition and cleanup
activities, and the associated EIS
planning process and documentation (as
available) may be found on the Internet
at https://ssfl.msfc.nasa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
ADDRESSES:
Decision To Be Made
This DEIS informs NASA decision
makers, regulating agencies, and the
public of the potential environmental
consequences of the proposed
demolition of SSFL buildings and
structures and the proposed
technologies for groundwater and soil
remediation, as implemented through
the Proposed Action. This DEIS
analyzes a range of remedial
technologies that might be implemented
to achieve the proposed groundwater
and soil remediation goals. NASA will
use the DEIS analysis to consider the
potential environmental, economic, and
social impacts from the Proposed
Action. On the basis of the DEIS
PO 00000
Frm 00088
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
55763
findings, NASA will issue a Record of
Decision (ROD) documenting the
findings. The ROD will further identify
which buildings will be demolished to
support disposition of the property, and
which remedial technology(ies) would
will be applied to meet the soil cleanup
and groundwater quality goals.
The purpose of this notice is to
apprise interested agencies,
organizations, tribal governments, and
individuals of the availability of the
DEIS and to invite comments on the
document. NASA will hold public
meetings as part of the DEIS review
process.
Site Description
The SSFL site is 2,850 acres located
in Ventura County, California,
approximately seven miles northwest of
Canoga Park and approximately 30
miles northwest of downtown Los
Angeles. SSFL is composed of four areas
known as Areas I, II, III, and IV and two
unnumbered areas known as the
‘‘undeveloped land.’’ NASA administers
41.7 acres within Area I and all 409.5
acres of Area II. The Boeing Company
manages the remaining 2,398.8 acres
within Areas I, III, and IV, and the two
undeveloped areas.
Since the mid-1950s, when the two
federally owned areas were owned by
the U.S. Air Force, this site has been
used for developing and testing rocket
engines. Four test stand complexes were
constructed in Area II between 1954 and
1957 named Alfa, Bravo, Coca, and
Delta. Area II and the LOX Plant portion
of Area I were acquired by NASA from
the U.S. Air Force in the 1970s. These
test stands and related ancillary
structures have been found to have
historical significance based on the
historic importance of the engine testing
and the engineering and design of the
structures.
The NASA-administered areas of
SSFL also contain cultural resources not
related to rocket development. SSFL is
located near the crest of the Simi Hills
that are part of the Santa Monica
Mountains running east-west across
Southern California. The diverse terrain
consists of ridges, canyons, and
sandstone rock outcrops. The region
was occupied by Native Americans from
the earliest Chumash, Tongva, and
Tataviam cultures. NASA has
conducted several previous surveys to
locate archaeological and architectural
resources within its portion of the SSFL.
As a result, NASA has identified one
historic property, the Burro Flats
Painted Cave, that is listed on the
National Register of Historic Places
(NRHP), as well as multiple buildings
and structures that are either
E:\FR\FM\11SEN1.SGM
11SEN1
55764
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 176 / Wednesday, September 11, 2013 / Notices
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES
individually eligible for listing on the
NRHP or are elements of NRHP-eligible
historic districts containing multiple
architectural resources.
Previous environmental sampling on
the NASA-administered property
indicates that metals, dioxins,
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs),
volatile organics, and semivolatile
organics are present in the soils and
upper groundwater (known as the
Surficial Media Operable Unit). Volatile
organics, metals, and semivolatile
organics are also present in the deeper
groundwater (known as the Chatsworth
Formation Operable Unit).
Environmental Commitments and
Associated Environmental Review
Rocket engine testing has been
discontinued at these sites and the
property has been excessed to the
General Services Administration (GSA).
GSA has conditionally accepted the
Report of Excess pending (i) NASA’s
certification that all action necessary to
protect human health and the
environment with respect to hazardous
substances on the property has been
taken or receipt of EPA’s written
concurrence that an approved and
installed remedial design is operating
properly and successfully; OR (ii) the
Governor’s concurrence in the
suitability of the property for transfer
per CERCLA Section 120(h)(3)(C).
In 2007, a Consent Order among
NASA, Boeing, the Department of
Energy (DOE), and Department of Toxic
Substances Control (DTSC) for the State
of California was signed addressing the
demolition of certain infrastructure and
environmental cleanup of SSFL. NASA
entered into an Administrative Order on
Consent (AOC) for Remedial Action
with DTSC on December 6, 2010, ‘‘to
further define and make more specific
NASA’s obligations with respect to the
cleanup of soils at the Site.’’ Based on
the 2010 AOC, NASA is required to
complete a federal environmental
review pursuant to NEPA. ‘‘An EIS is
being prepared by NASA to include
demolition of site infrastructure and soil
cleanup (pursuant to the AOC), and
groundwater remediation within Area II
and a portion of Area I (Liquid Oxygen
[LOX] Plant) of SSFL (pursuant to the
2007 Consent Order).’’ As part of the
environmental review process, certain
studies have been or are being
completed, to characterize the existing
conditions and to inform the analysis
and consultation. These include surveys
for wildlife, critical habitat, rare plants,
wetlands, and archaeological and
cultural resources. The findings of these
studies are being incorporated into the
DEIS.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:50 Sep 10, 2013
Jkt 229001
Alternatives
To prepare SSFL for disposition,
NASA describes the demolition of SSFL
structures and cleanup of the site
necessary to meet only the strictest
cleanup alternative, as dictated by the
2007 Consent Order and the 2010 AOC
requirements, and the ‘‘No Action’’
alternative required by NEPA. During
the Scoping Process, per the standard
consistent with the alternatives
evaluated under previous Superfund or
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA) cleanup processes, NASA
originally proposed to evaluate a range
of cleanup standard levels, including
the ‘‘Cleanup to Background’’
alternative required by the AOC, the
‘‘No Action’’ alternative required by
NEPA, and other alternatives that are,
consistent with the potential future use
of the land. The latter alternatives
include soil cleanup requirements to
suburban residential, to industrial, and
to recreational cleanup standards. Based
on comments from some members of the
public, DTSC, Senator Boxer, and
guidance from the White House’s
Council on Environmental Quality, the
DEIS now considers only the strictest
‘‘Cleanup to Background’’ and the least
effective ‘‘No Action’’ alternatives. All
other cleanup alternatives, consistent
with both the Scoping Process and the
potential future use of the land, were
specifically removed from the DEIS.
The DEIS will consider a range of
alternative technologies that meet
NASA’s objectives to clean up soil and
groundwater contamination at the
portion of the SSFL site administered by
NASA. Implementation of this Proposed
Action would occur by implementing
one Demolition Alternative and one or
more Cleanup Technologies, from the
following: (1) Soil Cleanup
Technologies: Excavation and Offsite
Disposal, Soil Washing, Soil Vapor
Extraction, Ex Situ Treatment Using
Land Farming, Ex Situ Treatment Using
oxidation, In Situ Chemical Oxidation,
In Situ Anaerobic or Aerobic Biological
Treatment; (2) Groundwater Treatment
Technologies: Pump and Treat, Vacuum
Extraction, Heat Driven Extraction, In
situ Chemical Oxidation, In situ
Enhanced Bioremediation, and
Monitored Natural Attenuation.
NEPA requires analysis of the ‘‘No
Action’’ alternative which in this case
means no environmental cleanup at the
site and/or no demolition of test stands
and ancillary structures on the NASAadministered property.
GSA will conduct a separate
environmental review under NEPA for
the action of transferring the land out of
NASA stewardship. The options could
PO 00000
Frm 00089
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
include reuse or redevelopment of the
property under local, state, or private
ownership.
DTSC is preparing a separate
Environmental Impact Report (EIR)
under the California Environmental
Quality Act, which requires that State
agencies give major consideration, when
regulating public and private activities,
to preventing environmental
degradation and to identifying
environmentally superior mitigations
and alternatives, when possible. This
State-led environmental review must
identify the potentially significant
environmental effects of a project and
environmentally preferable alternatives
to implementing the project. The EIR
also indicates the manner in which
significant effects could be mitigated or
avoided. DTSC will analyze the
potential environmental effects of
environmental cleanup activities
occurring SSFL-wide by NASA, Boeing,
and DOE. NASA and DTSC have
coordinated during these processes to
maintain consistency pertaining to the
analysis of the NASA-administered
demolition and remedial activities.
Cumulative effects of the proposed
Boeing, DOE, and NASA demolition and
remedial activities at SSFL will be
considered. The DTSC EIR is likely to be
prepared following publication of
NASA’s EIS, and could incorporate
some of NASA’s EIS analysis. A
programmatic EIR will be developed
that evaluates the remedial activities
that will be conducted at SSFL by
NASA, Boeing, and DOE, as well as
project-specific EIRs that evaluate the
localized remedial activities.
Public Meetings
NASA plans to hold two public
meetings to receive comments on the
DEIS regarding alternatives and
environmental issues to be considered
in the DEIS. The public meetings are
scheduled as follows:
1. Corporate Pointe, West Hills, CA,
Tuesday, August 27, 2013 from
2:00–4:00 p.m. at the Auditorium,
8413 Fallbrook Avenue, West Hills,
CA 91304
2. Corporate Pointe, West Hills, CA,
Wednesday, August 28, 2013 from
6:00–8:00 p.m. at the Auditorium,
8413 Fallbrook Avenue, West Hills,
CA 91304
NASA will consider all comments
received in developing its Final EIS;
comments received and responses to
comments will be included in the Final
document. In conclusion, written public
input on environmental issues and
E:\FR\FM\11SEN1.SGM
11SEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 176 / Wednesday, September 11, 2013 / Notices
concerns associated with NASA’s
cleanup of SSFL are hereby requested.
Calvin Williams,
Director, Integrated Asset Management
Division, Office of Strategic Infrastructure.
[FR Doc. 2013–22118 Filed 9–10–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7510–13–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
Submitting Comments’’ in the
section of
this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Felix E. Gonzalez, Division of Risk
Analysis, Office of Nuclear Regulatory
Research, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555–
0001; telephone: 301–251–7596, email:
Felix.Gonzalez@nrc.gov
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
[NRC–2013–0103]
I. Accessing Information and
Submitting Comments
Compensatory and Alternative
Regulatory Measures for Nuclear
Power Plant Fire Protection (CARMEN–
FIRE)
A. Accessing Information
Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Draft NUREG/CR, reopening of
comment period.
AGENCY:
On July 29, 2013, the U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)
published in the Federal Register (78
FR 45573) a request for public comment
on NUREG/CR–7135, ‘‘Compensatory
and Alternative Regulatory Measures for
Nuclear Power Plant Fire Protection
(CARMEN–FIRE).’’ In response to
comments from members of the public,
the NRC is reopening the public
comment period until September 25,
2013.
SUMMARY:
The comment period has been
reopened and expires on September 25,
2013. Comments received after this date
will be considered if it is practical to do
so, but the NRC staff is able to ensure
consideration only for comments
received on or before this date.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
by any of the following methods (unless
this document describes a different
method for submitting comments on a
specific subject):
• Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov and search
for Docket ID NRC–2013–0103. Address
questions about NRC dockets to Carol
Gallagher; telephone: 301–287–3442;
email: Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov. For
technical questions, contact the
individual(s) listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this
document.
• Mail comments to: Cindy Bladey,
Chief, Rules, Announcements, and
Directives Branch (RADB), Office of
Administration, Mail Stop: 3WFN–06–
44M, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555–
0001.
For additional direction on accessing
information and submitting comments,
see ‘‘Accessing Information and
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES
DATES:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:50 Sep 10, 2013
Jkt 229001
Please refer to Docket ID NRC–2013–
0103 when contacting the NRC about
the availability of information regarding
this document. You may access
publicly-available information related to
this document by any of the following
methods:
• Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov and search
for Docket ID NRC–2013–0103.
• NRC’s Agencywide Documents
Access and Management System
(ADAMS): You may access publicly
available documents online in the NRC
Library at https://www.nrc.gov/readingrm/adams.html. To begin the search,
select ‘‘ADAMS Public Documents’’ and
then select ‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS
Search.’’ For problems with ADAMS,
please contact the NRC’s Public
Document Room (PDR) reference staff at
1–800–397–4209, 301–415–4737, or by
email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. The
ADAMS accession number for each
document referenced in this document
(if that document is available in
ADAMS) is provided the first time that
a document is referenced.
• NRC’s PDR: You may examine and
purchase copies of public documents at
the NRC’s PDR, Room O1–F21, One
White Flint North, 11555 Rockville
Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
B. Submitting Comments
Please include Docket ID NRC–2013–
0103 in the subject line of your
comment submission, in order to ensure
that the NRC is able to make your
comment submission available to the
public in this docket.
The NRC cautions you not to include
identifying or contact information that
you do not want to be publicly
disclosed in you comment submission.
The NRC will post all comment
submissions at https://
www.regulations.gov as well as enter the
comment submissions into ADAMS.
The NRC does not routinely edit
comment submissions to remove
identifying or contact information.
PO 00000
Frm 00090
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
55765
If you are requesting or aggregating
comments from other persons for
submission to the NRC, then you should
inform those persons not to include
identifying or contact information that
they do not want to be publicly
disclosed in their comment submission.
Your request should state that the NRC
does not routinely edit comment
submissions to remove such information
before making the comment
submissions available to the public or
entering the comment submissions into
ADAMS.
I. Background
Employing appropriate compensatory
measures, on a short-term basis, is an
integral part of NRC-approved fire
protection programs. However,
compensatory measures are not
expected to be in place for an extended
period of time. The NRC staff expects
that the corrective action(s) will be
completed, and reliance on the
compensatory measure eliminated, at
the first available opportunity, typically
the first refueling outage. Thus, a
compensatory measure that is in place
beyond the next refueling outage
(typically 18–24 months) is considered
to be a ‘‘ long-term compensatory
measure.’’
This report is intended to serve as a
reference guide for agency staff
responsible for evaluating the
acceptability of alternative interim
compensatory measures provided to
offset the degradation in fire safety
caused by impaired fire protection
features at nuclear power plants. The
report documents the history of
compensatory measures and details the
regulatory framework established by
NRC to ensure they are appropriately
implemented and maintained. This
report also explores technologies that
did not exist when the current plants
were licensed such as video-based
detection, temporary penetration seals
and portable suppression systems which
under certain conditions may provide
an effective alternative to traditional
measures specified in a plant’s
approved fire protection program.
The NRC is seeking public comment
in order to receive feedback from the
widest range of interested parties and to
ensure that all information relevant to
the information contained within this
document is correct and accurate. We
are specifically interested in receiving
feedback on the following questions:
1. Do licensees differentiate between
compensatory measures related to
impaired structures, systems, and
components (SSC) used for Reactor
Post-Fire Safe-Shutdown Protection vs.
impaired classical Fire Protection (FP)
E:\FR\FM\11SEN1.SGM
11SEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 176 (Wednesday, September 11, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 55763-55765]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-22118]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION
[Notice 13-112]
National Environmental Policy Act; Santa Susana Field Laboratory
AGENCY: National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA).
ACTION: Notice of Extension of the Comment Period for the Draft
Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for Demolition and Environmental
Cleanup Activities for the NASA-administered portion of the Santa
Susana Field Laboratory (SSFL), Ventura County, California.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: A Notice of Availability (NOA) for the DEIS for Demolition and
Cleanup Activities for the NASA-administered portion of the Santa
Susana Field Laboratory was published in the Federal Register by the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on August 2, 2013, Vol. 78,
No. 149, page 46940.
NASA also published an NOA of the DEIS in the Federal Register on
the same day (August 2, 2013, Vol. 78, No. 149, pages 47007-47009). The
comment period for the DEIS was to end on September 16, 2013. This
notice extends the comment period an additional fifteen days to October
1, 2013, to allow the public further time to comment on the DEIS.
DATES: Interested parties are invited to submit comments on
environmental issues and concerns, preferably in writing by October 1,
2013.
ADDRESSES: Comments submitted by mail should be addressed to Allen
Elliott, SSFL Project Director, NASA MSFC AS01, Building 4494,
Huntsville, AL 35812. Comments may be submitted via email to msfc-ssfl-eis@mail.nasa.gov.
The DEIS may be reviewed at the following locations:
1. Simi Valley Library, 2969 Tapo Canyon Road, Simi Valley, CA 93063,
Web site: https://simivalleylibrary.org/home/, Phone: (805) 526-1735
2. Platt Library, 23600 Victory Blvd., Woodland Hills, CA 91367, Web
site: https://www.lapl.org/branches/platt, Phone: (818) 340-9386
3. California State University, Northridge Oviatt Library, 18111
Nordhoff Street, 2nd Floor, Room 265, Northridge, CA 91330, Web site:
https://library.csun.edu, Phone: (818) 677-2285
4. Department of Toxic Substances Control, 9211 Oakdale Avenue,
Chatsworth, CA 91311, Web site: https://www.dtsc.ca.gov, Phone: (818)
717-6521
The DEIS is available on the internet in Adobe[supreg] portable
document format at https://www.nasa.gov/agency/nepa/news/SSFL.html.
The Federal Register Notice of Intent to prepare the DEIS, issued
in the Federal Register on July 6, 2011, is also available on the
Internet at https://ssfl.msfc.nasa.gov/public-involvement/.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Allen Elliott, SSFL Project Director,
by phone at (256) 544-0662 or by email at msfc-ssfl-eis@mail.nasa.gov.
Additional information about NASA's SSFL site, the proposed demolition
and cleanup activities, and the associated EIS planning process and
documentation (as available) may be found on the Internet at https://ssfl.msfc.nasa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Decision To Be Made
This DEIS informs NASA decision makers, regulating agencies, and
the public of the potential environmental consequences of the proposed
demolition of SSFL buildings and structures and the proposed
technologies for groundwater and soil remediation, as implemented
through the Proposed Action. This DEIS analyzes a range of remedial
technologies that might be implemented to achieve the proposed
groundwater and soil remediation goals. NASA will use the DEIS analysis
to consider the potential environmental, economic, and social impacts
from the Proposed Action. On the basis of the DEIS findings, NASA will
issue a Record of Decision (ROD) documenting the findings. The ROD will
further identify which buildings will be demolished to support
disposition of the property, and which remedial technology(ies) would
will be applied to meet the soil cleanup and groundwater quality goals.
The purpose of this notice is to apprise interested agencies,
organizations, tribal governments, and individuals of the availability
of the DEIS and to invite comments on the document. NASA will hold
public meetings as part of the DEIS review process.
Site Description
The SSFL site is 2,850 acres located in Ventura County, California,
approximately seven miles northwest of Canoga Park and approximately 30
miles northwest of downtown Los Angeles. SSFL is composed of four areas
known as Areas I, II, III, and IV and two unnumbered areas known as the
``undeveloped land.'' NASA administers 41.7 acres within Area I and all
409.5 acres of Area II. The Boeing Company manages the remaining
2,398.8 acres within Areas I, III, and IV, and the two undeveloped
areas.
Since the mid-1950s, when the two federally owned areas were owned
by the U.S. Air Force, this site has been used for developing and
testing rocket engines. Four test stand complexes were constructed in
Area II between 1954 and 1957 named Alfa, Bravo, Coca, and Delta. Area
II and the LOX Plant portion of Area I were acquired by NASA from the
U.S. Air Force in the 1970s. These test stands and related ancillary
structures have been found to have historical significance based on the
historic importance of the engine testing and the engineering and
design of the structures.
The NASA-administered areas of SSFL also contain cultural resources
not related to rocket development. SSFL is located near the crest of
the Simi Hills that are part of the Santa Monica Mountains running
east-west across Southern California. The diverse terrain consists of
ridges, canyons, and sandstone rock outcrops. The region was occupied
by Native Americans from the earliest Chumash, Tongva, and Tataviam
cultures. NASA has conducted several previous surveys to locate
archaeological and architectural resources within its portion of the
SSFL. As a result, NASA has identified one historic property, the Burro
Flats Painted Cave, that is listed on the National Register of Historic
Places (NRHP), as well as multiple buildings and structures that are
either
[[Page 55764]]
individually eligible for listing on the NRHP or are elements of NRHP-
eligible historic districts containing multiple architectural
resources.
Previous environmental sampling on the NASA-administered property
indicates that metals, dioxins, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs),
volatile organics, and semivolatile organics are present in the soils
and upper groundwater (known as the Surficial Media Operable Unit).
Volatile organics, metals, and semivolatile organics are also present
in the deeper groundwater (known as the Chatsworth Formation Operable
Unit).
Environmental Commitments and Associated Environmental Review
Rocket engine testing has been discontinued at these sites and the
property has been excessed to the General Services Administration
(GSA). GSA has conditionally accepted the Report of Excess pending (i)
NASA's certification that all action necessary to protect human health
and the environment with respect to hazardous substances on the
property has been taken or receipt of EPA's written concurrence that an
approved and installed remedial design is operating properly and
successfully; OR (ii) the Governor's concurrence in the suitability of
the property for transfer per CERCLA Section 120(h)(3)(C).
In 2007, a Consent Order among NASA, Boeing, the Department of
Energy (DOE), and Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) for the
State of California was signed addressing the demolition of certain
infrastructure and environmental cleanup of SSFL. NASA entered into an
Administrative Order on Consent (AOC) for Remedial Action with DTSC on
December 6, 2010, ``to further define and make more specific NASA's
obligations with respect to the cleanup of soils at the Site.'' Based
on the 2010 AOC, NASA is required to complete a federal environmental
review pursuant to NEPA. ``An EIS is being prepared by NASA to include
demolition of site infrastructure and soil cleanup (pursuant to the
AOC), and groundwater remediation within Area II and a portion of Area
I (Liquid Oxygen [LOX] Plant) of SSFL (pursuant to the 2007 Consent
Order).'' As part of the environmental review process, certain studies
have been or are being completed, to characterize the existing
conditions and to inform the analysis and consultation. These include
surveys for wildlife, critical habitat, rare plants, wetlands, and
archaeological and cultural resources. The findings of these studies
are being incorporated into the DEIS.
Alternatives
To prepare SSFL for disposition, NASA describes the demolition of
SSFL structures and cleanup of the site necessary to meet only the
strictest cleanup alternative, as dictated by the 2007 Consent Order
and the 2010 AOC requirements, and the ``No Action'' alternative
required by NEPA. During the Scoping Process, per the standard
consistent with the alternatives evaluated under previous Superfund or
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) cleanup processes, NASA
originally proposed to evaluate a range of cleanup standard levels,
including the ``Cleanup to Background'' alternative required by the
AOC, the ``No Action'' alternative required by NEPA, and other
alternatives that are, consistent with the potential future use of the
land. The latter alternatives include soil cleanup requirements to
suburban residential, to industrial, and to recreational cleanup
standards. Based on comments from some members of the public, DTSC,
Senator Boxer, and guidance from the White House's Council on
Environmental Quality, the DEIS now considers only the strictest
``Cleanup to Background'' and the least effective ``No Action''
alternatives. All other cleanup alternatives, consistent with both the
Scoping Process and the potential future use of the land, were
specifically removed from the DEIS.
The DEIS will consider a range of alternative technologies that
meet NASA's objectives to clean up soil and groundwater contamination
at the portion of the SSFL site administered by NASA. Implementation of
this Proposed Action would occur by implementing one Demolition
Alternative and one or more Cleanup Technologies, from the following:
(1) Soil Cleanup Technologies: Excavation and Offsite Disposal, Soil
Washing, Soil Vapor Extraction, Ex Situ Treatment Using Land Farming,
Ex Situ Treatment Using oxidation, In Situ Chemical Oxidation, In Situ
Anaerobic or Aerobic Biological Treatment; (2) Groundwater Treatment
Technologies: Pump and Treat, Vacuum Extraction, Heat Driven
Extraction, In situ Chemical Oxidation, In situ Enhanced
Bioremediation, and Monitored Natural Attenuation.
NEPA requires analysis of the ``No Action'' alternative which in
this case means no environmental cleanup at the site and/or no
demolition of test stands and ancillary structures on the NASA-
administered property.
GSA will conduct a separate environmental review under NEPA for the
action of transferring the land out of NASA stewardship. The options
could include reuse or redevelopment of the property under local,
state, or private ownership.
DTSC is preparing a separate Environmental Impact Report (EIR)
under the California Environmental Quality Act, which requires that
State agencies give major consideration, when regulating public and
private activities, to preventing environmental degradation and to
identifying environmentally superior mitigations and alternatives, when
possible. This State-led environmental review must identify the
potentially significant environmental effects of a project and
environmentally preferable alternatives to implementing the project.
The EIR also indicates the manner in which significant effects could be
mitigated or avoided. DTSC will analyze the potential environmental
effects of environmental cleanup activities occurring SSFL-wide by
NASA, Boeing, and DOE. NASA and DTSC have coordinated during these
processes to maintain consistency pertaining to the analysis of the
NASA-administered demolition and remedial activities. Cumulative
effects of the proposed Boeing, DOE, and NASA demolition and remedial
activities at SSFL will be considered. The DTSC EIR is likely to be
prepared following publication of NASA's EIS, and could incorporate
some of NASA's EIS analysis. A programmatic EIR will be developed that
evaluates the remedial activities that will be conducted at SSFL by
NASA, Boeing, and DOE, as well as project-specific EIRs that evaluate
the localized remedial activities.
Public Meetings
NASA plans to hold two public meetings to receive comments on the
DEIS regarding alternatives and environmental issues to be considered
in the DEIS. The public meetings are scheduled as follows:
1. Corporate Pointe, West Hills, CA, Tuesday, August 27, 2013 from
2:00-4:00 p.m. at the Auditorium, 8413 Fallbrook Avenue, West Hills, CA
91304
2. Corporate Pointe, West Hills, CA, Wednesday, August 28, 2013 from
6:00-8:00 p.m. at the Auditorium, 8413 Fallbrook Avenue, West Hills, CA
91304
NASA will consider all comments received in developing its Final
EIS; comments received and responses to comments will be included in
the Final document. In conclusion, written public input on
environmental issues and
[[Page 55765]]
concerns associated with NASA's cleanup of SSFL are hereby requested.
Calvin Williams,
Director, Integrated Asset Management Division, Office of Strategic
Infrastructure.
[FR Doc. 2013-22118 Filed 9-10-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7510-13-P