10262 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 44 / Wednesday, March 7, 2007 / Notices 

1See 69 FR 61411 (Oct. 18, 2004); see also 10 CFR 

Parts 30, 40, and 70. 

2 69 FR at 61411–61412. 

3Copies of this Notice were sent this date by 

Internet electronic mail transmission to counsel for 

(1) USEC; and (2) the NRC Staff. 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

[Docket No. 70–7004–ML; ASLBP No. 05–

838–01–ML] 

Atomic Safety and Licensing Board; In 

the Matter of USEC, Inc. (American 

Centrifuge Plant); Notice (Notice of 

Hearing) 

March 1, 2007. 

Before Administrative Judges: Lawrence 

G. McDade, Chairman; Dr. Peter S. 

Lam; Dr. Richard E. Wardwel. 

This Atomic Safety and Licensing 

Board hereby gives notice that it will 

convene an evidentiary session to 

receive testimony and exhibits in the 

‘‘mandatory hearing’’ portion of this 

proceeding regarding the August 23, 

2004 application of USEC, Inc. (USEC) 

for authorization to construct a facility 

and to possess and use source, 

byproduct, and special nuclear material 

in order to enrich natural uranium to a 

maximum of ten percent uranium-235 

by the gas centrifuge process.1 USEC 

proposes to do this at a facility—

denominated the American Centrifuge 

Plant—to be constructed near Piketon, 

Ohio. This mandatory hearing will 

concern safety and environmental 

matters relating to the proposed 

issuance of the requested license, as 

more fully described below. 

A. Matters To Be Considered 

As set forth by the Commission in the 

October 2004 Notice of Hearing 2 the 

matters to be considered are (1) Whether 

the application and record of the 

proceeding contain sufficient 

information and whether the NRC 

Staff’s review of the application has 

been adequate to support findings to be 

made by the Director of the Office of 

Nuclear Materials Safety and 

Safeguards, with respect to the 

applicable standards contained in 10 

CFR 30.33, 40.32, and 70.23, and (2) 

whether the review conducted by the 

NRC Staff pursuant to 10 CFR Part 51 

has been adequate. Additionally, in 

accord with the Commission’s October 

2004 notice, also at issue in this 

proceeding is: (3) Whether the 

requirements of Sections 102(2)(A), (C), 

and (E) of the National Environmental 

Policy Act of 1969 and 10 CFR Part 51, 

Subpart A, have been complied with in 

this proceeding; (4) whether the final 

balance among conflicting factors 

contained in the record of this 

proceeding indicate that granting the 

license is the appropriate action to be 

taken; and (5) whether the license 

should be issued, denied, or 

appropriately conditioned to protect the 

environment. 

B. Date, Time, and Location of 

Mandatory Hearing 

The Board will conduct this 

mandatory hearing at the specified 

location and time: 

1. Date: Tuesday, March 13, 2007. 

Time: Beginning at 10 a.m. EST. 

Location: ASLBP Hearing Room, Two 

White Flint North, Third Floor, 11545 

Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 

20852–2738. 

The hearing on these issues will then 

be continued until Monday, March 19, 

2007, and thereafter day-to-day until 

concluded. 

Any members of the public who plan 

to attend the mandatory hearing are 

advised that security measures will be 

employed at the entrance to the hearing 

facility, including searches of handcarried items such as briefcases or 

backpacks. The public is further advised 

that, in accordance with 10 CFR 2.390, 

portions of the hearing sessions will be 

closed to the public because the matters 

at issue will involve the discussion of 

protected information. 

C. Availability of Documentary 

Information Regarding the Proceeding 

Documents relating to this proceeding 

are available for public inspection at the 

Commission’s Public Document Room 

(PDR), located at One White Flint North, 

11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), 

Rockville, Maryland, or electronically 

from the publicly available records 

component of NRC’s document system 

(ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible from 

the NRC Web site at www.nrc.gov/ 

reading-rm/adams.html (the Public 

Electronic Reading Room). 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 (800) 397–4209 or (301) 

415–4737, or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov. 

D. Scheduling Information Updates 

Any updated/revised scheduling 

information regarding the evidentiary 

hearing can be found on the NRC Web 

site at www.nrc.gov/public-involve/ 

public-meetings/index.cfm or by calling 

(800) 368–5642, extension 5036, or (301) 

415–5036. 

It is so ordered. 

Dated in Rockville, Maryland, on March 1, 

2007. 

For the Atomic Safety And Licensing 

Board.3

Lawrence G. McDade, 

Chairman, Administrative Judge. 

[FR Doc. E7–4103 Filed 3–6–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

[Docket No. 030–17584] 

Notice of Availability of Environmental 

Assessment and Finding of No 

Significant Impact for License 

Amendment to Byproduct Materials 

License No. 01–02861–05, for 

Termination of the License and 

Unrestricted Release of the 

Department of the Army’s Chemical 

School Facility in Fort McClellan, AL 

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission. 

ACTION: Issuance of environmental 

assessment and finding of no significant 

impact for license amendment. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Orysia Masnyk Bailey, Health Physicist, 

Materials Security & Industrial Branch, 

Division of Nuclear Materials Safety, 

Region I, 475 Allendale Road, King of 

Prussia, Pennsylvania, 19401; phone 

number (864) 427–1032; fax number 

(610) 680–3497; or by e-mail: 

omm@nrc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Introduction 

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC) is considering 

terminating Byproduct Materials 

License No. 01–02861–05. This license 

is held by the Department of the Army 

(the Licensee), for remaining residual 

ground contamination at a 1950s era 

radioactive materials burial ground, 

located within the LaGarde Park (the 

Site) in Anniston, Alabama, adjacent to 

Fort McClellan. Termination of the 

license would authorize release of the 

site for unrestricted use. 

The Army requested this action in a 

letter dated April 26, 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 Regulations 

(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 license will be 

terminated following the publication of 

this FONSI and EA in the Federal 

Register. 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 44 / Wednesday, March 7, 2007 / Notices 10263 

II. Environmental Assessment 

Identification of Proposed Action 

The proposed action would approve 

the Licensee’s April 26, 2005, request, 

resulting in release of the Site for 

unrestricted use and the termination of 

its NRC materials license. The U.S. 

Army Chemical School was located at 

Fort McClellan from 1951–1973 and 

1979–1999. Several Byproduct Materials 

Licenses were issued and terminated 

over the years which authorized the use 

of byproduct material by the Army 

Chemical School at Fort McClellan. 

License No. 01–02861–05 was issued in 

1979, pursuant to 10 CFR Part 30, and 

has been amended periodically since 

that time. This license initially was a 

license of broad scope, but now is 

limited to authorizing the possession of 

unsealed byproduct material in 

contaminated soil at the Site. Over the 

past 10 years, portions of the Army’s 

Chemical School at Fort McClellan have 

been incrementally released for 

unrestricted use as remediation 

activities and radiological surveys have 

allowed in support of the Base Closure 

and Relocation (BRAC) process Fort 

McClellan is undergoing. As buildings 

and outdoor areas were released they 

were turned over to the State of 

Alabama. The Site now under 

consideration for release is on property 

that was deeded to the city of Anniston 

from the Army in 1974, and has been 

used as a recreational park. 

A flyover survey of Fort McClellan 

was completed in October 2001 and the 

Site was found to contain a ‘‘hot spot’’. 

Cesium 137 contamination on the east 

side of the Site was identified and was 

determined to be from training activities 

at the former Army Chemical School. 

The contaminated area (adjacent to the 

Fort McClellan perimeter fence) was 

then fenced. This area is located in a 

wooded section of the park containing 

walking and biking trails. Because the 

property no longer belonged to the 

Army, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 

(USACE) assumed responsibility for site 

remediation under the Comprehensive 

Environmental Response Compensation 

and Liability Act (CERCLA). Since the 

contamination found at the site was 

associated with the Army’s use of the 

property during the 1950s, the property 

was found to be eligible for action under 

the Defense Environmental Restoration 

Program (DERP). This program 

authorizes the Secretary of Defense to 

undertake remediation action at 

formerly used defense sites (FUDS) 

related to contamination associated with 

past Department of Defense (DOD) use. 

USACE is DOD’s delegated execution 

agent for DERP–FUDS response actions. 

The permit waiver provision of CERCLA 

121(e) thus applies to the Site, and 

USACE therefore was not required to 

submit a decommissioning plan to the 

NRC prior to initiating remediation 

activities in September 2003. 

Need for the Proposed Action 

The Licensee has ceased conducting 

licensed activities at the site, and seeks 

the unrestricted use of the site and the 

termination of its NRC materials license. 

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed 

Action 

The historical review of licensed 

activities conducted at the site shows 

that such activities involved use of the 

following radionuclides with half-lives 

greater than 120 days: cobalt-60 and 

cesium-137. Prior to performing the 

final status survey, USACE contracted to 

have 244 tons of contaminated materials 

and dirt removed from the site from 

September 2003 through March 2005. 

USACE conducted a final status 

survey of the Site in August 2005 and 

submitted its draft data (later submitted 

unchanged in final form in June 2006) 

showing that the Site meets the criteria 

in Subpart E of 10 CFR Part 20 for 

unrestricted release and permits license 

termination. USACE demonstrated 

compliance with the radiological 

criteria for unrestricted release specified 

in 10 CFR 20.1402 by using the 

screening approach described in 

NUREG–1757, ‘‘Consolidated NMSS 

Decommissioning Guidance,’’ Volume 

2. USACE used the radionuclidespecific derived concentration guideline 

levels (DCGLs), developed there by the 

NRC. These DCGLs define the maximum 

amount of residual radioactivity on 

building surfaces, equipment, and 

materials, and in soils, that will satisfy 

the NRC requirements in Subpart E of 

10 CFR Part 20 for unrestricted release. 

USACE’s final status survey results were 

below these DCGLs and are in 

compliance with the As Low As 

Reasonably Achievable (ALARA) 

requirement of 10 CFR 20.1402. USACE 

also considered the dose contribution 

from previous site releases. The NRC 

concludes that USACE’s final status 

survey results are acceptable. NRC staff 

conducted a confirmatory survey on 

September 27, 2005. Results were 

comparable to those observed by 

USACE and none of the confirmatory 

sample results exceeded the DCGLs. 

Based on its review, the staff has 

determined that the affected 

environment and any environmental 

impacts associated with the proposed 

action are bounded by the impacts 

evaluated by the ‘‘Generic 

Environmental Impact Statement in 

Support of Rulemaking on Radiological 

Criteria for License Termination of NRCLicensed Nuclear Facilities’’ (NUREG–

1496) Volumes 1–3 (ML042310492, 

ML042320379, and ML042330385). 

Accordingly, there were no significant 

environmental impacts from the use of 

radioactive material at the site. The NRC 

staff reviewed the docket file records 

and the final status survey report to 

identify any non-radiological hazards 

that may have impacted the 

environment surrounding the site. No 

such hazards or impacts to the 

environment were identified. The NRC 

has found no other radiological or nonradiological activities in the area that 

could result in cumulative 

environmental impacts. 

The NRC staff finds that the proposed 

release of the site for unrestricted use 

and the termination of the NRC 

materials license is in compliance with 

10 CFR 20.1402 including the impact of 

residual radioactivity at previouslyreleased site locations of use. Based on 

its review, the staff considered the 

impact of the residual radioactivity at 

the Site and 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 

Due to the largely administrative 

nature of the proposed action, its 

environmental impacts are small. 

Therefore, the only alternative the staff 

considered is the no-action alternative, 

under which the staff would leave 

things as they are by denying the 

termination request. This no-action 

alternative is not feasible because it 

conflicts with 10 CFR 30.36(d), 

requiring that decommissioning of 

byproduct material facilities be 

completed and approved by the NRC 

after licensed activities cease. The 

NRC’s analysis of the USACE’s final 

status survey data confirmed that the 

Site meets the requirements of 10 CFR 

20.1402 for unrestricted release and for 

license termination. Additionally, this 

denial of the application would result in 

no change in current environmental 

impacts. The environmental impacts of 

the proposed action and the no-action 

alternative are therefore similar, and the 

no-action alternative is accordingly not 

further considered. 

Conclusion 

The NRC staff has concluded that the 

proposed action is consistent with the 

NRC’s unrestricted release criteria 

specified in 10 CFR 20.1402. Because 

the proposed action will not 

significantly impact the quality of the 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
10264 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 44 / Wednesday, March 7, 2007 / Notices 

human environment, the NRC staff 

concludes that the proposed action is 

the preferred alternative. 

Agencies and Persons Consulted 

NRC provided a draft of this 

Environmental Assessment to the State 

of Alabama, Department of Radiation 

Control for review on October 31, 2006. 

On November 11, 2006, the State of 

Alabama Department of Radiation 

Control responded by e-mail. The State 

agreed with the conclusions of the EA, 

and otherwise had no substantive 

comments. 

The NRC staff has determined that the 

proposed action is of a procedural 

nature and will not affect listed species 

or critical habitat. Therefore, no further 

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 Preservation 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. NUREG–1757, ‘‘Consolidated 

NMSS Decommissioning Guidance’’; 

2. Title 10, Code of Federal 

Regulations, Part 20, Subpart E, 

‘‘Radiological Criteria for License 

Termination’’; 

3. Title 10, Code of Federal 

Regulations, Part 51, ‘‘Environmental 

Protection Regulations for Domestic 

Licensing and Related Regulatory 

Functions’’; 

4. NUREG–1496, ‘‘Generic 

Environmental Impact Statement in 

Support of Rulemaking on Radiological 

Criteria for License Termination of NRCLicensed Nuclear Facilities’’; 

5. August 1, 2002 U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers (USACE) to NRC 

memorandum (ML031490516); 

6. October 2002 ‘‘Airborne 

Radiological Survey—Main Post and 

Pelham Range, Walkover Radiological 

Survey at Rideout Field and Anomaly 

Surveys on Main Post and Pelham 

Range, Groundwater Investigation—

Burial Mound at Rideout Field’’

(Package ML030100136); 

7. June 2003 ‘‘Final Completion 

Report, Site Investigation at LaGarde 

Park, Anniston, Alabama’’

(ML052710179); 

8. August 25, 2003 NRC Inspection 

Report No. 01–02861–05/03–01 

(ML032380139); 

9. October 13, 2003, STEP, Inc. to 

USACE, ‘‘Removal Action at LaGrange 

Park, Phase II Memorandum’’

(ML052710136); 

10. February 10, 2004, Shaw Group, 

Inc. response to NRC Inspection Report 

01–02861–05/03–01 (ML042100101); 

11. NRC letter dated June 24, 2004, 

acknowledging the receipt of the Army’s 

Airborne Survey Report 

(ML041770403); 

12. May 2004 ‘‘Final Report for 

Removal Action at LaGarde Park’’ (TBS); 

13. April 2005 ‘‘Final Remedial 

Investigation Report, Expanded Site 

Investigation at LaGarde Park, Anniston, 

Alabama’’ (ML061940256); 

14. April 26, 2005, Department of the 

Army request for termination of 

Materials License No. 01–02861–05 

(ML051430344); 

15. August 2005 ‘‘Draft Final 

Remedial Action Report, Final Interim 

Removal Action at LaGarde Park, 

Anniston, Alabama’’ (ML052840081); 

16. November 4, 2005 ‘‘Final 

Remedial Action Report, Final Interim 

Removal Action at LaGarde Park, 

Anniston, Alabama’’ (ML061940267 ); 

17. December 14, 2005 NRC 

Inspection Report 03017584/2005001 

(ML053480096); 

18. May 2006 ‘‘Proposed Plan for the 

LaGarde Park Site of the Former Fort 

McClellan, Anniston, Alabama’’

(ML061940273); and 

19. June 2006 ‘‘Final Decision 

Document for the LaGarde Park Site of 

the former Fort McClellan, Anniston, 

Alabama’’ (ML061940269). 

If you do not have access to ADAMS, 

or if there are problems in accessing the 

documents located in ADAMS, contact 

the NRC Public Document Room (PDR) 

Reference staff at 1–800–397–4209, 301–

415–4737, or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov. 

These documents may also be viewed 

electronically on the public computers 

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 

27th day of February, 2007. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

Marie Miller, 

Chief, Materials Security & Industrial Branch, 

Division of Nuclear Materials Safety, Region 

I. 

[FR Doc. E7–4096 Filed 3–6–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES 

TRADE REPRESENTATIVE 

Determination Regarding Waiver of 

Discriminatory Purchasing 

Requirements With Respect to Goods 

and Services Covered by Chapter 9 of 

the Dominican Republic-Central 

America-United States Free Trade 

Agreement for the Dominican Republic 

AGENCY: Office of the United States 

Trade Representative. 

ACTION: Determination Regarding 

Waiver of Discriminatory Purchasing 

Requirements under the Trade 

Agreements Act of 1979. 

DATES: Effective Date: March 1, 2007. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jean 

Heilman Grier, Senior Procurement 

Negotiator, Office of the United States 

Trade Representative, (202) 395–9476. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On August 

5, 2004, the United States and the 

Dominican Republic entered into the 

Dominican Republic-Central AmericaUnited States Free Trade Agreement 

(‘‘the CAFTA–DR’’). Chapter 9 of the 

CAFTA–DR sets forth certain 

obligations with respect to government 

procurement of goods and services, as 

specified in Annex 9.1.2(b)(i) of the 

CAFTA–DR. On August 2, 2005, the 

President signed into law the 

Dominican Republic-Central AmericaUnited States Free Trade Agreement 

Implementation Act (‘‘the Act’’) (Pub. L. 

No. 109–53, 119 Stat. 462). In section 

101(a) of the Act, the Congress approved 

the CAFTA–DR. The CAFTA–DR will 

enter into force on March 1, 2007, for 

the Dominican Republic. 

Section 1–201 of Executive Order 

12260 of December 31, 1980 delegated 

the functions of the President under 

Sections 301 and 302 of the Trade 

Agreements Act of 1979 (‘‘the Trade 

Agreements Act’’) (19 U.S.C. 2511, 

2512) to the United States Trade 

Representative. 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES