[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 120 (Thursday, June 22, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35957-35960]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-9850]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 040-07455]


Notice of Availability of Environmental Assessment and Finding of 
No Significant Impact for License Amendment to Source Materials License 
No. Sma-1018, Approving the Final Status Survey Plan for Section 2 of 
the Whittaker Corporation's Facility in Transfer, PA

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

[[Page 35958]]


ACTION: Issuance of Environmental Assessment and Finding of No 
Significant Impact for License Amendment.

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marjorie McLaughlin, Health Physicist, 
Decommissioning Branch, Division of Nuclear Materials Safety, Region I, 
475 Allendale Road, King of Prussia, Pennsylvania 19406-1415; telephone 
(610) 337-5240; fax number (610) 337-5269; or by e-mail: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Introduction

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering the 
issuance of a license amendment to Source Materials License No. SMA-
1018. This license is held by Whittaker Corporation (the Licensee), for 
its Whittaker facility (the Facility), located at 99 Crestview Drive in 
Transfer, Pennsylvania. Issuance of the amendment would approve a Final 
Status Survey Plan (FSSP) for Section 2 of the Facility. The Licensee 
requested this action in a letter dated October 5, 2005. 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 
Regulation (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 following the publication of this FONSI and EA in the Federal 
Register.

II. Environmental Assessment

Identification of Proposed Action

    The proposed action would grant the Licensee's October 5, 2005, 
license amendment request, thereby approving the FSSP for Section 2 of 
the Facility. Specifically, the FSSP describes the Licensee's methods 
and procedures for determining whether that portion of the site 
currently meets the radiological criteria for release for unrestricted 
use specified in Subpart E of 10 CFR part 20, or if additional 
remediation is required. NRC approval of the FSSP does not constitute 
termination of the license or release of the site for unrestricted use. 
Instead, it would allow the Licensee to obtain the information required 
by the NRC in support of any later request to release the Facility (or 
a portion of the Facility) for unrestricted use.
    License No. SMA-1018 was issued on December 15, 1969, pursuant to 
10 CFR part 40, and has been amended periodically since that time. The 
license authorized the possession and use of unsealed source material 
(natural thorium and natural uranium) contained in ores used for 
minerals processing and as a contaminant that was isolated by the 
processing of scrap metal. The Facility originally consisted of a plant 
and a slag waste storage area. In 1974, the Licensee ceased licensed 
operations at the Facility, and initiated decommissioning of plant 
equipment and buildings. Waste slag, raw materials, feed-metal scrap, 
and contaminated building materials that were generated from the 
decontamination activities were placed in the slag storage area. The 
portion of the property housing the plant was released for unrestricted 
use in 1975, following the performance of a confirmatory survey by the 
NRC. An additional plant building was decommissioned in 1983 and 
released for unrestricted use in 1985. The plant is an active facility 
under a new owner (Greenville Metals), who is not associated with the 
Licensee. Greenville Metals processes and refines scrap and other 
metals to produce metal alloys and conversion products. Greenville 
Metals does not utilize NRC-licensed radioactive material, and is 
separated from the Whittaker property by metal fencing.
    The Facility that the Licensee plans to decommission consists of 
the slag area, located on a 5.9 acre strip of land, that is 
characterized by four sections according to topography and site use. 
Section 2 is in the center, bordered by Section 3 to the north, the 
boundary fence with the Greenville Metals plant to the west, a ravine 
to the south, and floodplain and the Shenango River to the east. 
Section 2 contained the highest-activity slag, most of which has now 
been excavated and disposed in accordance with the Licensee's 
procedures that were approved by NRC in the license amendment dated 
June 10, 1999. The Facility is located within an industrial park. There 
are no buildings remaining at the Facility (with the exception of 
temporary trailers supplied by the decommissioning contractor), and the 
surrounding area is primarily rural.
    In July 2004, the Licensee initiated excavation and survey of the 
slag and waste materials in Section 2 of the Facility. On September 12, 
2005, the Licensee commenced shipping the material to an authorized 
radioactive waste disposal site. The proposed action is to approve the 
Licensee's plan for conducting a radiological survey of Section 2 of 
the Facility. The Licensee will perform the survey to determine if 
Section 2 meets the site-specific Derived Concentration Guideline 
Levels (DCGLs), approved by the NRC on September 20, 2005 (70 FR 
54779). These DCGLs describe the maximum amount of residual 
radioactivity on building surfaces, equipment, materials, and soils 
that will satisfy the NRC requirements in Subpart E of 10 CFR part 20 
for unrestricted release of the Facility.

Need for the Proposed Action

    The Licensee is no longer using licensed materials at the Facility. 
In accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR 40.42(h), the Licensee 
must complete decommissioning of the site no later than 24 months 
following the initiation of decommissioning. The Licensee will use the 
proposed FSSP to determine if Section 2 of the Facility meets the NRC 
criteria for release for unrestricted use, or if additional 
decommissioning activities are required.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    The survey described in the proposed Section 2 FSSP follows the 
guidance contained in NUREG-1575, Rev 1, ``Multi-Agency Radiation 
Survey and Site Investigation Manual'' (MARSSIM). The proposed FSSP 
divides Section 2 into Class 1 and Class 2 survey units, based on the 
expected remaining radioactive contamination. Under the proposed 
action, each survey unit will receive a walkover radiation survey of 
the soil surface (one-hundred percent of the area for the Class 1 units 
and a minimum of ten percent of the area for the Class 2 units). The 
walkover surveys will be performed using a two-inch by two-inch 
(2 x 2) Sodium-Iodide (NAI) radiation detector. 
The proposed FSSP also provides for obtaining 11 discrete soil samples 
from each survey unit. The sample locations would be determined using a 
random-start grid pattern, in accordance with the MARSSIM guidance. The 
samples would consist of filling one-gallon bags with soil from the 
remediated area, and having the soil analyzed by gamma spectroscopy to 
determine the radiological composition. In addition, the proposed FSSP 
includes the performance of exposure rate measurements at each soil 
sample location at a height of one meter (m).
    The proposed action would have minimal effect on environmental 
resources because it involves passive surveys and the removal of only a 
small amount of soil from an area that was previously-impacted by 
licensed operations. The proposed action would not result in the 
release of radioactivity to the air or water. The proposed action

[[Page 35959]]

also would not authorize release of Section 2 of the Facility for 
unrestricted use. Based on its review, the NRC staff has determined 
that the proposed FSSP is in compliance with approved NRC standards, as 
described in NUREG-1575, Rev.1.
    Area groundwater is chemically contaminated with trichloroethylene 
(TCE). The origin of this contamination is being investigated by the 
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP). PADEP has 
indicated that it believes the contamination is being leached onto the 
Facility property from surrounding industrial sites. The Licensee is 
working with PADEP and the surrounding industries to identify and 
remediate the TCE source and the contamination. The proposed action 
will not result in the release of TCE to the environment. The NRC staff 
has found no other radiological or non-radiological activities in the 
area that could result in cumulative environmental impacts. Based on 
its review, the staff 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

    The only alternative to the proposed action is the no-action 
alternative, under which the staff would deny the amendment request for 
the proposed FSSP. This alternative would result in no environmental 
impacts, but would prohibit the performance of a FSS for Section 2 of 
the Facility. This no-action alternative is not feasible because it 
conflicts with 10 CFR 20.1402, requiring licensees to verify that 
residual radioactivity meets the radiological unrestricted release 
criteria. The Licensee cannot demonstrate that the site meets the 
decommissioning criteria without performing the FSS. The licensee must 
verify that the decommissioning criteria are met before it can request 
release of Section 2 of the Facility for unrestricted use. 
Additionally, denying the amendment request would prevent the Licensee 
from completing decommissioning in the timeframe required by 10 CFR 
40.42(h). The environmental impacts of the proposed action are minimal, 
and the no-action alternative is accordingly not further considered.

Conclusion

    The NRC staff has concluded that the proposed action is consistent 
with NRC guidance and regulations. 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 the EA to PADEP on January 24, 2006. On 
February 15, 2006, PADEP responded by e-mail. The State agreed with the 
conclusions of the EA, and provided some typographical comments on the 
EA document, and two specific comments on the FSSP:
    Comment 1: PADEP asked whether the contractor, NRC, will use to 
perform a confirmatory survey of Section 2 of the Facility will review 
and comment on the FSSP.
    Resolution: NRC provided the proposed FSSP to the NRC contractor 
for review and comment on February 21, 2006. Comments were received on 
March 2, 2006. NRC provided the comments to the Licensee in a Request 
for Additional Information on March 29, 2006. The Licensee revised the 
proposed FSSP in response to the comments, and provided the revised 
FSSP in a letter dated May 15, 2006. The staff reviewed the revised 
FSSP for the preparation of this EA.
    Comment 2: PADEP asked how the Licensee has verified the belief 
stated in the proposed FSSP that Section 2 of the Facility has been 
excavated to native soil, and that there is not additional 
contamination at a greater depth.
    Resolution: NRC discussed the comment with the Licensee and PADEP. 
The bottom of the excavation is characterized by foundry sand in most 
locations, and by river rock and coarse soil in others. The Licensee 
believes, and NRC concurs that the river rock and coarse soil is native 
soil. In areas exposing foundry sand, the Licensee will perform surveys 
to verify that contamination is not present at greater depths. PADEP 
indicated that they are satisfied with this response.
    The NRC staff has determined that the proposed action has minimal 
environmental impacts, and will not affect listed species or critical 
habitat. Therefore, no 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, no further 
consultation is required under Section 106 of the National Historic 
reservation 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 Document 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. Initial Amendment Request with Final Status Survey Plan, dated 
October 5, 2005 (ML052900082);
    2. Request for Additional Information (RAI), dated October 18, 2005 
(ML052910472);
    3. Section 2 FSSP, Revision 1, dated November 14, 2005 
(ML053190091);
    4. Additional RAI, dated January 9, 2006 (ML060090311);
    5. Section 2 FSSP, Revision 2, dated January 31, 2006 
(ML060300532);
    6. Comments on the Section 2 FSSP from the Oak Ridge Institute for 
Science and Education, dated March 2, 2006 (ML060690388);
    7. Telephone Log, dated March 22, 2006 (ML060810706);
    8. Additional RAI, dated March 29, 2006 (ML060880199);
    9. Section 2 FSSP, Revision 3, dated May 15, 2006 (ML061420467);
    10. Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 20, Subpart E, 
``Radiological Criteria for License Termination;''
    11. Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 40. 42, ``Expiration 
and Termination of Licenses and Decommissioning of Sites and Separate 
Buildings or Outdoor Areas;''
    12. Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 51, ``Environmental 
Protection Regulations for Domestic Licensing and Related Regulatory 
Functions;''
    13. NUREG-1575, Rev 1, ``Multi-Agency Radiation Survey and Site 
Investigation Manual''
    If you do not have access to ADAMS, or if there are problems in 
accessing the documents located in ADAMS, contact the NRC's Public 
Document Room (PDR) Reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or 
by e-mail to [email protected]. These documents may also be viewed 
electronically on the public computers

[[Page 35960]]

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 King of Prussia, Pennsylvania this 15th day of June, 
2006.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Marie Miller,
Chief, Decommissioning Branch, Division of Nuclear Materials Safety, 
Region I.
 [FR Doc. E6-9850 Filed 6-21-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P