[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 171 (Thursday, September 4, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 46780-46782]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-23475]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 70-3085]


Draft Environmental Impact Statement--Decommissioning of the 
Babcock & Wilcox Shallow Land Disposal Area in Parks Township, 
Pennsylvania

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has published a 
Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) regarding the proposed 
decommissioning of the Babcock & Wilcox (B&W) Shallow Land Disposal 
Area (SLDA) in Parks Township, Pennsylvania. This DEIS describes and 
evaluates the potential environmental impacts of B&W's proposed 
approach to decommissioning the radiologically contaminated waste. The 
B&W preferred approach would allow radioactive material to remain on-
site. The wastes would be stabilized by installing an engineered cover 
system and a system of hydrologic barriers and controls surrounding the 
trench areas to provide groundwater protection. The coal mine 
underlying the SLDA would be stabilized by injecting grout into the 
voids under the trenches to prevent subsidence. Institutional controls 
would be required in perpetuity to prevent inadvertent intrusion into 
the waste. The DEIS evaluates the radiological and nonradiological 
impacts associated with the B&W proposed action and four alternative 
actions, including no action. Based on the evaluations in this DEIS, 
the staff's preliminary conclusion is that another alternative, 
modified stabilization in-place, would protect public health and the 
environment and would be less costly than the other alternatives. This 
alternative would include institutional controls and backfilling of the 
coal mine, but the engineered barriers and cap would not be 
implemented. For any of the alternatives, off-site impacts would be low 
and no off-site dose is expected. The DEIS is a preliminary analysis of 
the environmental impacts of B&W's proposed approach and alternative 
actions. The issuance of a final EIS, and any NRC decisionmaking based 
on a final EIS, will not be made until public comments on the DEIS are 
received and evaluated.

DATES: Written comments on the DEIS should be received at the address 
listed below by December 15, 1997. Comments received after this date 
will be considered if it is practical to do so, but NRC is able to 
assure consideration only for comments received on or before this date.
    To the extent practicable, NRC staff will grant reasonable requests 
for extensions of time for comment up to fifteen (15) days.

ADDRESSES: Mail written comments to David L. Meyer, Chief, Rules and 
Directives Branch, Mail Stop T-6D59, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. Deliver comments to 11545 
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, between 7:30 am and 4:15 pm, 
Federal workdays.
    Copies of comments received may be examined at the NRC Public 
Document Room, 2120 L Street, N.W., Washington, DC 20555. A single copy 
of the DEIS

[[Page 46781]]

(NUREG-1613) may be requested by those considering public comment by 
writing to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Printing and 
Graphics Branch, Washington, DC 20555-0001. A copy of the DEIS is 
available for inspection and/or copying in the NRC Public Document 
Room, 2120 L St. NW., Washington, DC 20555-0001. A copy is being made 
available for public inspection at the local Public Document Room in 
the Apollo Memorial Library, 219 North Pennsylvania Avevue, Apollo, 
Pennsylvania 15613; telephone number (412) 478-4214.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Phyllis Sobel, Low-Level Waste and 
Decommissioning Projects Branch, Mail Stop T7F-27, Division of Waste 
Management, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555-0001. Telephone 
301-415-6714.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NRC has prepared a DEIS that evaluates the 
environmental impacts and alternatives associated with B&W's proposed 
action to decommission radiologically contaminated wastes in trenches 
at the SLDA. NRC noticed its intent to prepare an EIS on the 
decommissioning of the SLDA facility in Parks Township, Pennsylvania 
(59 FR 67344) on December 29, 1994, and conducted a public meeting to 
obtain comments on the intended scope of the EIS in Leechburg, 
Pennsylvania, on January 26, 1995.
    Until 1970, the SLDA at Parks Township, Pennsylvania, was used for 
the disposal of hazardous and low-level wastes from a nuclear fuel 
fabrication facility in nearby Apollo, Pennsylvania. The materials 
placed in the trenches consisted of wastes, scrap and trash. These 
disposals were made pursuant to the requirements of 10 CFR 20.304, 
which was in effect at the time. The radioactive materials in the SLDA 
include natural uranium, enriched and depleted uranium, and lesser 
quantities of thorium, americium, and plutonium.
    The SLDA is currently owned by B&W, which maintains the site under 
an active NRC license no. SNM-2001 for use in possession, storage, 
monitoring, and characterization of the SLDA. B&W intends to 
decommission the site as part of license termination activities. The 
site requires decommissioning because it contains activities higher 
than NRC regulations allow for release of the property for unrestricted 
use and termination of the license. The site is listed in NRC's Site 
Decommissioning Management Plan because it warrants special NRC 
oversight to ensure safe and timely decommissioning.
    B&W's preferred approach to decommissioning would allow radioactive 
material to remain on-site. The wastes would be stabilized by 
installing an engineered cover system and a system of hydrologic 
barriers and controls surrounding the trench areas to provide 
groundwater protection. The coal mine underlying the SLDA would be 
stabilized by injecting grout into the voids under the trenches to 
prevent subsidence. Institutional controls would be required in 
perpetuity to prevent inadvertent intrusion into the waste. Because the 
licensee's proposed decommissioning alternative would allow radioactive 
material to remain on-site and the quantities of materials in some 
areas would exceed existing radiological criteria for decommissioning 
for unrestricted release, approval of the licensee's proposal requires 
the preparation of an EIS in accordance with the National Environmental 
Policy Act and NRC's implementing requirements in 10 CFR part 51.
    The DEIS evaluates the radiological and nonradiological impacts 
associated with the B&W proposed action (stabilization in-place) and 
four alternative actions (no action, disposal off-site, stabilization 
on-site, and modified stabilization in-place). Under the no action 
alternative, wastes in the SLDA would be retained in their current 
configuration within the trenches without any additional processing, 
stabilization, or controls. This alternative is analyzed in the EIS to 
provide a baseline for comparison with the other alternatives; however, 
the no action alternative cannot be considered because the on-site 
doses exceed NRC's criteria for unrestricted use and thereby require 
institutional controls. Disposal off-site would involve excavating all 
wastes, treating the waste, as necessary, to meet disposal facility 
acceptance criteria, and shipping the waste to an off-site facility 
licensed for disposal. No wastes would remain in the trenches at the 
site after remediation, but contaminated soil and rock that are below 
NRC and EPA cleanup limits would remain on-site. Under the 
stabilization on-site alternative, all wastes would be excavated, 
treated, and stored in a newly constructed on-site disposal cell. Under 
NRC's staff-developed alternative, modified stabilization in-place, 
institutional controls and backfilling of the coal mine would be used, 
but the engineered barriers and cap would not be implemented.
    The DEIS assesses the impacts of the B&W proposed action and the 
four alternative actions for socioeconomics, land use, cultural 
resources, geology, air quality, water quality, human health, 
biological resources, and wetlands. Additionally an analysis and 
comparison of the costs and benefits of each alternative has been 
performed. The analyses indicate that the radioactive and chemical 
contaminants at the SLDA, in their current condition (i.e., no action 
alternative) would leach extremely slowly from the trenches and would 
be heavily diluted to near background levels both by groundwater and by 
surface water. For any of the alternatives, off-site impacts would be 
low and no off-site dose is expected.
    Based on the evaluations in this DEIS, the staff's preliminary 
conclusion is that modified stabilization in-place would protect public 
health and the environment and would be less costly than the other 
alternatives. Since the uranium is highly immobile, the barriers 
proposed in the stabilization in-place alternative are not needed to 
prevent migration. The air quality and noise impacts of the modified 
stabilization in-place alternative would be similar but not as large as 
those for the stabilization in-place alternative in that there will be 
some construction on-site for the mine stabilization and erosion 
controls around Dry Run. However, the air quality and noise impacts 
would be less because the cap, slurry wall, and grout curtain would not 
be built and construction times would be much shorter than for 
stabilization in-place. Human health impacts of the modified 
stabilization in-place alternative would be similar to those for 
stabilization in-place. The costs for modified stabilization in-place 
would be about 31 percent of the cost for stabilization in-place, but 
slightly greater (approximately $7 million) than no action because of 
costs associated with mine stabilization and institutional controls. 
The stabilization on-site alternative would offer no advantages. The 
disposal off-site alternative would allow the SLDA property to be 
released for unrestricted use, but there would be increased risks 
associated with the removal and processing of the material from the 
trenches.
    The principal health concern related to leaving wastes on-site 
would be the effects of possible future human intrusion directly into 
the waste. Direct intrusion into the waste could be prevented by 
continuing institutional controls on the site in perpetuity. Under the 
modified stabilization in-place alternative, institutional controls 
would be used to: (1) Prevent people from

[[Page 46782]]

intruding into the trenches or living on the site; (2) provide for a 
maintenance program to maintain the soil cap in its present condition 
and to prevent any erosion of the cap caused by runoff or headward 
erosion of Dry Run; and (3) provide for a monitoring program to 
continue monitoring the wells on-site to ensure off-site doses continue 
to be negligible.
    NRC is offering an opportunity for public review and comment on the 
DEIS in accordance with NRC requirements in 10 CFR 51.73, 51.74, and 
51.117. Any comments of Federal, State, and local agencies, Indian 
tribes, or other interested parties will be made available for public 
inspection when received. The DEIS is a preliminary analysis of the 
environmental impacts of B&W's proposed approach. The issuance of a 
final EIS, and any NRC decisionmaking based on a final EIS, will not be 
made until public comments on the DEIS are received and evaluated. NRC 
staff will review the comments, conduct any necessary analyses, and 
make appropriate revisions in developing the final EIS on the 
decommissioning of the SLDA facility in Parks Township, Pennsylvania. 
NRC anticipates completing the EIS on this facility in 1998; however, 
this schedule may need to be adjusted during the review of public 
comments.
    NRC is also arranging a public meeting on the DEIS to be held in 
the vicinity of Parks Township, Pennsylvania, during the public comment 
period in the fall of 1997. The meeting will consist of an overview of 
the DEIS and an opportunity for the NRC to hear any public comments on 
the DEIS. NRC will announce the date and location for this meeting in a 
subsequent Federal Register notice in advance of the public meeting.

Opportunity for a Hearing

    Pursuant to the Commission's rules in 10 CFR part 2, subpart L, an 
opportunity for a hearing is hereby offered with respect to the 
licensee's proposed action, stabilization in place, or any alternative 
described in the DEIS that the licensee may include in a request to 
amend its license to incorporate a decommissioning plan. Pursuant to 
Sec. 2.1205(a), any person whose interest may be affected by the 
licensee's decommissioning actions (the ``proceeding'') may file a 
request for a hearing in accordance with Sec. 2.1205(c). A request for 
a hearing must be filed within thirty (30) days of the date of 
publication of this Federal Register notice.
    The request for a hearing must be filed with the Office of the 
Secretary either:
    1. By delivery to the Rulemakings and Adjudications staff, Office 
of the Secretary at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, 
Rockville, MD 20852-2738; or
    2. By mail or telegram addressed to the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555. Attention: Rulemakings and 
Adjudications staff.
    In addition to meeting other applicable requirements of 10 CFR Part 
2 of the NRC's regulations, a request for a hearing filed by a person 
other than an applicant must describe in detail:
    1. The interest of the requester in the proceeding;
    2. How that interest may be affected by the results of the 
proceeding, including the reasons why the requester should be permitted 
a hearing, with particular reference to the factors set out in 
Sec. 2.1205(g);
    3. The requester's areas of concern about the proposed activity 
that is the subject matter of the proceeding; and
    4. The circumstances establishing that the request for a hearing is 
timely in accordance with Sec. 2.1205(c).
    In accordance with 10 CFR Sec. 2.1205(e), each request for a 
hearing must also be served, by delivering it personally or by mail, 
to:
    1. The licensee, B & W Nuclear Environmental Services, Inc., 2220 
Langhorne Road, P.O. Box 10548, Lynchburg, VA 24506-0548 Attention: Mr. 
Philip R. Rosenthal; and
    2. The NRC staff, by delivery to the Executive Director for 
Operations, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 
20852, or by mail, addressed to the Executive Director for Operations, 
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 28th day of August 1997.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
John W. N. Hickey,
Chief, Low-Level Waste and Decommissioning Projects Branch, Division of 
Waste Management, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.
[FR Doc. 97-23475 Filed 9-3-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P