[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 54 (Thursday, March 20, 2003)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13733-13735]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-6731]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-146]
Saxton Nuclear Experimental Corporation and GPU Nuclear, Inc.
Saxton Nuclear Experimental Facility; Notice of Issuance of
Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering
issuance of an amendment for Amended Facility License No. DPR-4, issued
to the Saxton Nuclear Experimental Corporation (SNEC) and GPU Nuclear,
Inc. (the licensees), for the Saxton Nuclear Experimental Facility. The
proposed action would approve the SNEC Facility License Termination
Plan (LTP).
Description of Proposed Action
The proposed action is NRC approval of the SNEC's LTP, which
contains the radiation release criteria [i.e., derived concentration
guideline levels (DCGLs)], and the description of the final status
survey plan required by the NRC. NRC review and approval of the LTP
will verify that the remainder of the decommissioning activities will
be performed in accordance with NRC regulations.
The SNEC Facility is a deactivated pressurized-water nuclear
reactor located on about 5,300 square meters (1.148 acres) less than a
mile north of the Borough of Saxton in Liberty Township, Bedford
County, Pennsylvania. The reactor was licensed to operate at 23.5
megawatt thermal (MWT).
The SNEC Facility was built from 1960 to 1962 and operated from
1962 to 1972. The Facility was placed in a SAFSTOR-equivalent status
after its shutdown in 1972 when all the nuclear fuel was removed from
the reactor and returned to the owner of the fuel, the Atomic Energy
Commission. The control rod blades and superheated steam test loop were
also shipped offsite. Following fuel removal, some equipment, tanks,
and piping located outside of the reactor containment vessel (CV) were
removed. From 1972 to 1974, the buildings and structures that supported
reactor operations were partially decontaminated.
Radiological decontamination of reactor support structures and
buildings was performed between 1987-1989 in preparation for demolition
of these structures. This work included decontamination of the Control
and Auxiliary Building, the Radioactive Waste Disposal Facility, the
Yard Pipe
[[Page 13734]]
Tunnel, and the Filled Drum Storage Bunker, and removal of the
Refueling Water Storage Tank. After the NRC accepted the final release
radiological survey for this work, these structures were demolished in
1992.
In April of 1998, the NRC approved the final stage of
decommissioning. In 1998, the large component structures: pressurizer,
steam generator, and reactor vessel were removed and shipped to the
Chem-Nuclear low-level waste disposal facility in Barnwell, South
Carolina. The only remaining structure of the original facility is the
CV. The Saxton Steam Generating Station basement and adjoining Intake/
Discharge Tunnels and associated underground discharge piping have also
been involved in decommissioning activities. This decommissioning is in
preparation for release of the site for unrestricted use.
The licensees are proposing to decontaminate the site to meet the
unrestricted release criteria [0.25 Sieverts per year (Sv/yr) (25
milliroentgen-equivalent-man per year (25 mrem/yr)) and residual
radioactivity as low as reasonably achievable] per 10 CFR 20.1402.
Summary of the Environmental Assessment
The NRC staff reviewed the licensees' application which included a
Decommissioning Environmental Report. To document its review, the NRC
staff has prepared an environmental assessment (EA) which discusses the
SNEC Facility background; site description; current environmental
conditions including land use, geology, water resources (surface water
and groundwater) and waste management; examines the no action
alternative to the proposed action; and presents the environmental
impact of the proposed action including radiological, non-radiological
and cumulative environmental impacts. The radiological and non-
radiological impacts of the proposed action are reproduced from the EA
below.
Radiological Impacts
At the time of license termination, the only source of exposure to
members of the public would be any residual radioactivity within
remaining buildings or within the site soils.
The derived concentration guideline levels (DCGLs) are
concentration limits on the residual radioactivity that can be left in
buildings and in soils, and still be in compliance with the dose limit
of 0.25 Sv/yr (25 mrem/yr) as specified in 10 CFR part 20, subpart E.
The manner in which the DCGLs are derived for the SNEC is documented in
the LTP.
NRC would evaluate the adequacy of the DCGLs in providing
protection for members of the public as the site is released for
unrestricted use based on the approved LTP. The LTP would be bounded by
the dose limit of 0.25 Sv/yr (25 mrem/yr) as specified in 10 CFR part
20, subpart E.
In deriving the soil DCGLs, a resident-farmer would be considered
as the average member of the critical population group. The
hypothetical resident farmer is assumed to build a house, draw water
from a well, grow plant food and fodder, raise livestock, and catch
fish from a pond all within or affected by residual radioactivity in
the soil. The resident farmer scenario is considered to embody the
greatest number of exposure pathways of any scenario envisioned.
The DCGLs for buildings assumes a light industrial worker as the
average member of the critical group. The worker is assumed to be
exposed to residual radioactivity remaining on the walls and floor of a
remaining structure at the site as he goes about light industrial
activities.
NRC would evaluate the appropriateness of the exposure scenarios
postulated and the methodology used for deriving the DCGLs. NRC would
only approve the LTP if the evaluation concluded that the potential
radiation exposures caused by residual radionuclide concentrations have
not been underestimated by the licensees and are protective of the
general public.
The licensees would use a series of surveys and a final status
survey to demonstrate compliance with 10 CFR part 20, subpart E,
consistent with the Radiation Survey and Site Investigation process and
the Data Quality Objectives (DQO) process. Planning for the final
status survey involves an iterative process that requires appropriate
site classification (on the basis of the potential residual
radionuclide concentration levels relative to the DCGLs) and formal
planning using the DQO process. The licensees have committed to an
integrated design that would address the selection of appropriate
survey and laboratory instrumentation and procedures, and that includes
a statistically based measurement and sampling plan for collecting and
evaluating the data needed for the final status survey. The staff has
determined that the sampling strategy and survey data evaluation
methodology presented in the LTP are adequate.
Based on the discussion above, there are no significant
radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.
Non-Radiological Impacts
The scope of the EA is limited to the adequacy of the DCGLs and the
adequacy of the final status survey described in the LTP. The purposed
action does not involve any historic sites. Therefore, there are no
significant non-radiological impacts on the environmental resources.
Finding of No Significant Impact
On the basis of the EA, NRC concludes that the approval of the LTP
will not cause any significant impacts on the human environment and is
protective of human health. Accordingly, the NRC has determined not to
prepare an environmental impact statement for the proposed action.
For further details with respect to the proposed action, see the
licensees' letter dated February 2, 2000, as supplemented on June 23,
August 11, September 18 and December 4, 2000, January 30, February 14,
March 15 and 19, June 20, July 2 and September 4, 2001, and January 11
and 24, February 4, May 22 and 28, July 11, August 20, September 17,
23, 24, and 26, October 10, and December 16, 2002. Documents may be
examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public Document Room
(PDR), located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first
floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be
accessible electronically from the Agencywide Documents Access and
Management System (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the
Internet at the NRC Web site, http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html.
The EA can be found in ADAMS under accession number ML030350564.
Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in
accessing the documents located in ADAMS should contact the NRC PDR
Reference staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209 or 301-415-4737, or by
e-mail to [email protected]. Single copies of the EA may be obtained from
Alexander Adams, Jr., Senior Project Manager, Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, M.S. O-12-G-13,
Washington, DC 20555.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 13th day of March, 2003.
[[Page 13735]]
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Patrick M. Madden,
Chief, Research and Test Reactors Section, Operating Reactor
Improvements Program, Division of Regulatory Improvement Programs,
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 03-6731 Filed 3-19-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P