27858 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices 

1Copies of this order were sent this date by 

Internet e-mail transmission to counsel for (1) 

licensees Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee, L.L.C., 

and Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.; (2) 

intervenors Vermont Department of Public Service 

and New England Coalition of Brattleboro, 

Vermont; (3) the Staff and (4) the State of New 

Hampshire. 

telephone at 1–800–397–4209 or 301–

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

It is so ordered. 

Dated: May 11, 2007. 

For the Atomic Safety and Licensing 

Board.1

Alex S. Karlin, 

Chairman, Administrative Judge, Rockville, 

Maryland. 

[FR Doc. E7–9524 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

[Docket No. 030–19324] 

Notice of Availability of Environmental 

Assessment and Finding of No 

Significant Impact for License 

Amendment to Byproduct Materials 

License No. 25–19852–01 For 

Unrestricted Release Of Building 7 of 

the Glaxosmithkline BiologicalsHamilton Facility in Hamilton, MT 

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission. 

ACTION: Issuance of environmental 

assessment and finding of no significant 

impact for license amendment. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Janine F. Katanic, Ph.D., Health 

Physicist, Nuclear Materials Inspection 

Branch, Division of Nuclear Materials 

Safety, Region IV, U.S. Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission, 611 Ryan Plaza 

Drive, Suite 400, Arlington, Texas 

76011; telephone: (817) 860–8151; fax 

number: (817) 860–8188; or by e-mail: 

jfk@nrc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Introduction 

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC) is considering the 

issuance of a license amendment to 

Byproduct Materials License No. 25–

19852–01. The license is held by 

GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals-Hamilton 

(the Licensee), for its Hamilton facility 

(the Facility), located at 553 Old 

Corvallis Road in Hamilton, Montana. 

Issuance of the amendment would 

authorize release of Building 7 of the 

Facility for unrestricted use. The 

Licensee requested this action in a letter 

dated June 8, 2006. 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 amendment 

will be issued to the Licensee following 

the publication of this FONSI and EA in 

the Federal Register. 

II. Environmental Assessment 

Identification of Proposed Action 

The proposed action would approve 

the Licensee’s June 8, 2006, license 

amendment request, resulting in the 

release of Building 7 of the Facility for 

unrestricted use. License No. 25–19852–

01 was issued on June 24, 1988, 

pursuant to 10 CFR Part 30, and has 

been amended periodically since that 

time. This license authorizes the 

Licensee to possess and use small 

quantities of byproduct material, in both 

sealed and unsealed form, for laboratory 

research in immunological and 

biochemical studies. Additionally, the 

license authorizes the Licensee to 

possess and use a self-shielded 

irradiator device and to possess and use 

sealed sources for the purposes of 

performing instrument calibration. 

The Facility is situated on 35 acres 

(14 hectares) and consists of a main 

building comprised of office space and 

laboratories as well as several smaller 

buildings used for various purposes. 

The Facility is located in a mixed 

residential/commercial area. The 

Licensee’s June 8, 2006, license 

amendment request specifically 

addressed the release of Building 7 of 

the Facility for unrestricted use. 

Building 7 was constructed of filled 

concrete block walls set on a concrete 

floor, and its dimensions were 30 feet 

(9.1 meters) long by 15 feet (4.6 meters) 

wide and 8 feet (2.4 meters) in height. 

The building had a filled concrete block 

wall down the center which separated 

the building into an East Room and a 

West Room. Each room had a separate 

entry door on the south side of the 

building. Within Building 7, licensed 

materials were confined to the East 

Room. The East Room was an area of 

approximately 15 feet (4.6 meters) by 13 

feet (4 meters) and had been used by the 

Licensee for the storage of licensed 

materials. 

On May 30, 2006, the Licensee ceased 

licensed activities in Building 7 and 

initiated a survey and decontamination 

of the East Room of Building 7. Based 

on the Licensee’s historical knowledge 

of the site and the conditions of the East 

Room of Building 7, the Licensee 

determined that only routine 

decontamination activities, in 

accordance with their radiation safety 

procedures, were required. The Licensee 

was not required to submit a 

decommissioning plan to the NRC. The 

Licensee conducted surveys of the East 

Room of Building 7 and provided 

information to the NRC to demonstrate 

that it meets the criteria in Subpart E of 

10 CFR Part 20 for unrestricted release. 

Need for the Proposed Action 

The Licensee has ceased conducting 

licensed activities in Building 7 of the 

Facility and seeks the unrestricted use 

of Building 7. 

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed 

Action 

The historical review of licensed 

activities conducted at Building 7 of the 

Facility shows that such activities 

involved use of the following 

radionuclides with half-lives greater 

than 120 days: hydrogen-3, carbon-14, 

and calcium-45. Prior to performing the 

final status survey, the Licensee 

conducted decontamination activities, 

as necessary, in the areas of Building 7 

affected by these radionuclides. 

The Licensee conducted a final status 

survey during May-June 2006. This 

survey covered the East Room of 

Building 7. The final status survey 

report was attached to the Licensee’s 

amendment request dated June 8, 2006. 

NRC regulation 10 CFR 20.1402, 

Radiological Criteria for Unrestricted 

Use, states in part that a site will be 

considered acceptable for unrestricted 

use if the residual radioactivity that is 

distinguishable from background 

radiation results in a total effective dose 

equivalent not to exceed 25 millirems 

per year (0.25 milliSeiverts per year) to 

an average member of the critical group 

(the group of individuals reasonably 

expected to receive the greatest 

exposure to residual radioactivity for 

any applicable set of circumstances). 

The Licensee elected to demonstrate 

compliance with the radiological 

criteria for unrestricted release as 

specified in 10 CFR 20.1402 by 

referencing Regulatory Guide 1.86, 

Table 1, Acceptable Surface 

Contamination Levels, and NUREG–

1556, Volume 11, Table S.5, Acceptable 

Surface Contamination Levels. Both 

tables provide a maximum 

contamination limit for uncontrolled 

release of facilities. Because these 

values were not dose-based calculations 

as required by the license termination 

rule in 10 CFR Part 20, they were 

compared to the screening values 

documented in NUREG–1757, Volume 

1, Revision 1, Consolidated NMSS 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 95 / Thursday, May 17, 2007 / Notices 27859 

Decommissioning Guidance, Table B.1. 

NUREG–1757 provides screening values 

for building surface contamination 

which are equivalent to 25 millirem per 

year. The surface contamination levels 

as submitted by the Licensee are 

significantly lower than the acceptable 

screening values as documented in 

NUREG–1757. Accordingly, the 

Licensee’s final status survey results 

were thus acceptable. 

The NRC staff conducted a 

confirmatory survey on August 3, 2006. 

As documented in the inspection report, 

none of the confirmatory survey results 

revealed any radiation distinguishable 

from accepted background radiation 

levels. 

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). 

Further, no incidents were recorded 

involving spills or releases of 

radioactive material in Building 7 of the 

Facility. Accordingly, there were no 

significant environmental impacts from 

the use of radioactive material at the 

Facility. 

The NRC staff finds that the proposed 

release of the portion of the Facility 

described above for unrestricted use is 

in compliance with 10 CFR 20.1402. 

The NRC has found no other activities 

in the area that could result in 

cumulative environmental impacts. 

Based on its review, the staff considered 

the impact of the residual radioactivity 

at Building 7 of the Facility 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 simply 

deny the amendment request. This noaction 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. 

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 

human environment, the NRC staff 

concludes that the proposed action is 

the preferred alternative. 

Agencies and Persons Consulted 

NRC provided a draft of this EA to the 

State of Montana Department of Public 

Health and Human Services for review 

on October 23, 2006. On January 8, 

2007, the State of Montana Department 

of Public Health and Human Services 

responded by telephone and had no 

comments on the draft EA. 

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 

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 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, if 

applicable. 

1. Federal Register Notice, Volume 

65, No. 114, page 37186, dated Tuesday, 

June 13, 2000, ‘‘Use of Screening Values 

to Demonstrate Compliance With The 

Federal Rule on Radiological Criteria for 

License Termination;’’

2. NRC, ‘‘Generic Environmental 

Impact Statement in Support of 

Rulemaking on Radiological Criteria for 

License Termination of NRC-Licensed 

Nuclear Facilities,’’ NUREG–1496, July 

1997 (ML042310492, ML042320379, 

and ML042330385); 

3. NRC, ‘‘Consolidated NMSS 

Decommissioning Guidance,’’ NUREG–

1757, Volume 1, Revision 1, September 

2003 (ML053260027); 

4. Title 10 Code of Federal 

Regulations, Part 20, Subpart E, 

‘‘Radiological Criteria for License 

Termination;’’

5. Title 10, Code of Federal 

Regulations, Part 51, ‘‘Environmental 

Protection Regulations for Domestic 

Licensing and Related Regulatory 

Functions;’’

6. Poletti, Brian, GlaxoSmithKline 

Biologicals—Hamilton, License 

Amendment Request, June 8, 2005 

(ML062920087); 

7. Whitten, Jack E., Acknowledgment 

of Receipt of Final Status Survey, July 

14, 2006 (ML061950672); 

8. NRC Inspection Report 030–19324/ 

06–001, August 25, 2006 

(ML062370479); 

9. NRC, Telephone Conversation 

Record with State of Montana 

Department of Public Health and 

Human Services, January 8, 2007 

(ML071130330); and, 

10. E-mail correspondence between 

Katanic, Janine F. and Poletti, Brian, 

Questions Regarding June 8, 2006 

Amendment Request, April 24–25, 2007 

(ML071160054). 

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 Arlington, Texas this 8th day of 

May 2007. 

For The Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

C. L. Cain, 

Senior Management Analyst, Division of 

Nuclear Materials Safety, Region IV. 

[FR Doc. E7–9522 Filed 5–16–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES