14800 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 53 / Monday, March 20, 1995 / Notices

3. The form number if applicable: Not

Applicable.

4. How often the collection is

required: One-time.

5. Who will be required or asked to

report: Voluntary submittal by

requesters who receive a final response

from the NRC to a Freedom of

Information Act (FOIA) request during a

three-month survey period.

6. An estimate of the number of

responses: Approximately 200 surveys

will be dispatched and an estimated 150

responses will be received.

7. An estimate of the total number of

hours needed annually to complete the

requirement or request: Total hours for

the one-time survey is 37.5 (15 minutes

per response).

8. Section 3504(h), Pub. L. 96–511

does not apply.

9. Abstract: The NRC is surveying all

requesters who receive a final response

from the NRC to a Freedom of

Information Act (FOIA) request during a

three-month survey period. The survey

will assess customer perceptions of the

NRC FOIA process, and will identify

areas for improvement.

Copies of the submittal may be

inspected or obtained for a fee from the

NRC Public Document Room, 2120 L

Street, NW., (Lower Level), Washington,

DC 20555.

Comments and questions should be

directed by mail to the OMB reviewer:

Troy Hillier, Office of Information &

Regulatory Affairs (3150–0000), NEOB–

10202, Office of Management and

Budget, Washington, DC 20503.

Comments can also be submitted by

telephone at (202) 395–3084.

NRC Clearance Officer is Brenda Jo.

Shelton, (301) 415–7233.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 14th day

of March, 1995.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Gerald F. Cranford,

Designated Senior Official for Information

Resources Management.

[FR Doc. 95–6732 Filed 3–17–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–M

[Docket No. 030–01786; License No. 19–

00296–10]

The National Institutes of Health

Issuance of Director’s Decision Under

10 C.F.R. 2.206 (DD–95–05)

Notice is hereby given that the

Director, Office of Nuclear Material

Safety and Safeguards, United States

Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC

or Commission) has issued a decision

concerning a Petition dated December 2,

1993, submitted by the North Bethesda

Congress of Citizen’s Associations

regarding the National Institutes of

Health (NIH), Bethesda, Maryland.

The Petition requested that the

Commission suspend License Condition

24, which authorizes NIH to incinerate

radioactive waste on the Bethesda

campus, pending resolution of several

regulatory issues. The Petition also

requested copies of the environmental

assessments and/or safety evaluations

that form the base for the NRC’s

authorization of License Condition 21,

which raised the sewer disposal limit

for radioactive materials to 8 Ci per

year, and License Condition 28, which

authorizes storage of radioactive waste

at the NIH Poolesville facility. Finally,

the Petition requested a copy of future

correspondence between NRC and NIH

regarding these matters.

After review of the Petition, the

Director has determined that Petitioner’s

request to suspend License Condition 24

(License Condition 27 in the current

License) was mooted by the removal of

that Condition from the License.

Petitioner’s request for a copy of

environmental assessments and/or

safety evaluations that form the bases

for authorization of license Conditions

21 and 28 cannot be granted. However,

certain documents submitted by the

Licensee in support of license

amendment applications in connection

with License Conditions 21, 24, and 28

have been supplied to Petitioner.

Petitioner’s request for a copy of future

correspondence between NRC and NIH

regarding these matters was granted.

The reasons for this Decision are

explained in a ‘‘Director’s Decision

Under 10 C.F.R. 2.206’’ (DD–95–05),

which is available for public inspection

in the Commission’s Public Document

Room located at 2120 L Street, N.W.,

Washington, D.C. 20555.

A copy of this Decision will be filed

with the Secretary for the Commission’s

review in accordance with 10 C.F.R.

2.206(c). As provided by this regulation,

the Decision will constitute the final

action of the Commission 25 days after

the date of issuance of the Decision,

unless the Commission on its own

motion institutes a review of the

Decision within that time.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 5th day

of March, 1995.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Robert M. Bernero,

Director, Office of Nuclear Material Safety

and Safeguards.

BILLING CODE 7590–01–M

DIRECTOR’S DECISION UNDER 10 C.F.R.

2.206

I. Introduction

By letter addressed to the Executive

Director for Operations, dated December

2, 1993, Arlene S. Allen, on behalf of

the North Bethesda Congress of Citizen’s

Associations, Inc. (North Bethesda

Congress, or Petitioner), requested that

NRC take action with respect to the

National Institutes of Health (NIH, or

the Licensee) in Bethesda, Maryland.

Petitioner requests that the NRC: (1)

suspend License Condition 24 of the

NIH Materials License No. 19–00296–10

(License), which authorizes NIH to

dispose of licensed materials by

incineration, pending resolution of two

regulatory issues: (a) no environmental

report or environmental assessment has

been completed regarding the

incineration of radioactive waste on

NIH’s Bethesda campus; and (b) there

may be less than adequate monitoring to

ensure that radioactive effluents are

within regulatory limits; (2) provide

copies of the NRC environmental

assessments and/or safety evaluations

that provide the bases for (a) an

exception from 10 CFR § 20.303(d)

limits regarding radioactive materials

discharges into sanitary sewer systems

(License Condition 21); and (b) approval

of the construction and operation of a

low level waste storage facility at NIH’s

Poolesville campus (License Condition

28); and (3) forward a copy of future

correspondence between NRC and NIH

regarding these matters to the North

Bethesda Congress.

The Petitioner asserts the following as

bases for these requests: (1) NIH has not

completed or submitted to the NRC an

environmental report regarding

radiological releases from incinerators at

the Bethesda campus, and the NRC has

not issued an environmental assessment

or impact statement regarding NIH

radiological emissions, as required by

the National Environmental Policy Act

and 10 CFR 51.21, 51.45 and 51.60(b);

(2) licensing the disposal of radioactive

waste by incineration is a federal action

subject to the NEPA process; (3) because

releases from the NIH incinerators are

capable of exceeding regulatory limits

and will increase over the next few

years, and because total radiological

emissions from NIH are sufficient to

warrant environmental analysis, the

continued burning of radioactive waste

by NIH without an environmental report

and environmental assessment are in

noncompliance with NRC

environmental regulations; (4) although

NRC cited NIH for its failure to

adequately monitor radioactive effluents

and NIH committed to install

instrumentation for continuous

monitoring as a corrective action for
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 53 / Monday, March 20, 1995 / Notices 14801

having exceeded its yearly radioactive

effluent release limit to unrestricted

areas for 1987, no continuous

monitoring for radioactive airborne

effluents exists for the NIH incinerator

stacks; (5) it is not clear that the box

monitoring system installed by NIH

adequately detects radioactive waste,

and small amounts of iodine continue to

be identified in the incinerator ash,

indicating that medical waste still gets

into the incinerators; and (6) it is

unclear that NIH methods to assess

radioactive effluent releases at the

incinerators satisfy regulatory

requirements and provide assurance

that Part 20 limits are being met.

The NRC staff provided a partial

response to North Bethesda Congress by

letter dated February 24, 1994. The staff

acknowledged receipt of the Petition,

and denied Petitioner’s request to

suspend License Condition 24 pending

resolution of the Petition. The denial of

the request to suspend License

Condition 24 was based on findings of

the then most recent NRC Inspection

Report, Inspection Report No. 030–

01786/92–001, which concluded that

emissions from the incinerators at the

NIH Bethesda campus were within

regulatory limits and that, despite some

deficiencies, the incineration operation

was under adequate control. The NRC

staff, therefore, determined that there

was no immediate risk to public health

and safety from continued operation of

the incinerators. The February 24, 1994,

letter granted Petitioner’s request for

copies of environmental assessments

and/or safety evaluations insofar as such

documents exist and could be retrieved.

A later search of the active and archived

NRC files disclosed no such documents.

The February 24, 1994, letter also

granted Petitioner’s request for copies of

all correspondence with the Licensee

concerning the matters raised by

Petitioner.

As of May 1994, all three incinerators

were taken out of service by NIH. In a

letter dated August 10, 1994, NIH

committed to permanently stop all

incineration of low level radioactive

waste at its Bethesda campus, and

requested a license amendment to delete

License Condition 27 (formerly License

Condition 24) from License No. 19–

00296–10. This application was granted

by NRC on November 3, 1994.

I have completed my evaluation of the

matters raised by Petitioner, and have

determined that, for the reasons stated

below, Petitioner’s request to suspend

authority to incinerate pursuant to

License Condition 24, pending

performance of an environmental

assessment and an environmental report

with regard to incineration operations,

and pending review of incinerator

operating procedures, is moot.

Petitioner’s request for environmental

assessments and/or safety evaluations in

connection with License Conditions 21

and 28 cannot be granted because the

NRC was not required to perform

environmental assessments or formal

safety evaluations in connection with

the low level radioactivity associated

with NIH discharges to the sanitary

sewer system and with the low level

waste storage facility at NIH’s

Poolesville campus, as explained below.

Documents constituting the informal

equivalent of an environmental review

or safety evaluation in connection with

License Conditions 21, 24, and 28, will

be supplied to Petitioner. Petitioner’s

request for a copy of all correspondence

between NRC and NIH regarding these

matters was granted by the NRC staff

letter dated February 24, 1994.

II. Background

The NIH specific license of broad

scope, No. 19–00296–10, was issued in

December 1956 by the Atomic Energy

Commission (AEC). The license is due

to expire in May 1995. The License

replaced a set of nine licenses that had

been issued to different institutes or

laboratories of NIH. At the time of

issuance of this broad scope license,

short-lived radioactive waste (half-life

under 100 days) was allowed to decay

in storage and was then disposed of as

ordinary waste. Long-lived solid and

liquid wastes were incorporated into

concrete and shipped for disposal.

There was no license condition

permitting incineration of licensed

material, and sewer disposal of licensed

material was limited to 1 Ci/yr,

provided other conditions, such as

average concentration limits, were met.

Soon after the License was issued,

NIH requested authorization to

incinerate dead animals used in

experiments, and other combustible

waste containing tritium (H–3), carbon14 (C–14), and sulphur-35 (S–35) in the

two general purpose incinerators then in

use on campus. This request was

granted as License Condition 12 in

February 1959. In April 1968, License

Condition 21 was approved to extend

the incineration authorization to

include incineration of any byproduct

material, provided the effluent

concentration limits specified in the

regulations were met for the air effluents

from the incinerators, as well as for

disposal of the ash resulting from

incineration. Byproduct material is

defined in NRC regulations as ‘‘any

radioactive material (except special

nuclear material) yielded in or made

radioactive by exposure to radiation

incident to the process of producing or

utilizing special nuclear material’’. 10

CFR 20.1003. This, in effect, means any

radioactive material produced in a

nuclear reactor, other than plutonium,

which is considered special nuclear

material. H–3, C–14, and S–35 are all

byproduct materials. Special nuclear

material is any material that has the

potential for use as fuel in a nuclear

reactor, including plutonium, uranium233, and uranium enriched in the

isotope 233 or in the isotope 235.

In 1961, NIH requested raising the

sewer disposal limit from 1 to 20 Ci/yr.

In response to this request, NRC

authorized an increase in the sewer

disposal limit from 1 Ci/yr to 3 Ci/yr in

October 1961, as reflected in License

Condition 21. In April 1968, following

another request, the sewer disposal limit

was raised to 5 Ci/yr, and in April 1969,

the License Condition was amended to

raise the sewer disposal limit from 5 Ci/

yr to its current level of 8 Ci/yr.

License Condition 24, authorizing

incineration of byproduct material, and

the License Condition 21, authorizing

disposal of up to 8 Ci/yr of radioactive

material to the sewer, have not changed

materially since they were first issued.

The NRC regulations pertaining to

incineration and sewage disposal appear

in 10 CFR Part 20, ‘‘Standards for

Protection Against Radiation’’, first

implemented in 1957. The initial 1957

version of 10 CFR Part 20 limited the

quantity of licensed and other

radioactive material released into the

sewerage system to 1 Ci/yr. Limits were

also imposed on the average

concentrations of radioactive materials

in the sewer releases. The regulations in

10 CFR Part 20 were revised in 1982 to

raise the disposal limit for discharges to

sanitary sewerage systems from 1 Ci/yr

to a total of 7 Ci/yr, of which up to 5

Ci/yr may be H–3, up to 1 Ci/yr C–14,

and up to 1 Ci/yr all other isotopes

combined. Permission to incinerate

radioactive waste in the form disposed

of at NIH was sought through the

mechanism then applicable to permit

licensees to apply for approval of a

waste disposal method provided in 10

CFR 20.302, ‘‘Method of obtaining

approval of proposed disposal

procedures.’’

An application for a license

amendment to permit interim storage of

low-level radioactive waste at the NIH

Animal Center in Poolesville, Maryland,

was submitted to the NRC in October

1992. In the same submittal, NIH also

requested an increase in its possession

limits for carbon-14 from 2 to 3 curies,

and for phosphorus-32 from 2 to 4

curies. The increases in possession

limits were requested to provide
14802 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 53 / Monday, March 20, 1995 / Notices

1NIH incinerator effluents were within the 10

CFR Part 20 regulatory limits specified by the

license, and the incineration operation was under

adequate control. See NIH Inspection Report No.

030–01786/92–001 (September 14, 1992) and NRC

Inpsection Report No. 030–01786/94–001 (July 8,

1994). Nonetheless, there were some weak areas in

the program, as indicated by the the possibility that

the amount of iodine that was released in effluents

may have exceeded ALARA goals. See NRC

Inspection Report No. 030–01786/94–01. The

Licensee’s As Low As Reasonably Achievable

(ALARA) commitment, incorporated into License

Condition 27 by the July 1986 application for

authority to incinerate radioactive materials,

obligates the Licensee to have a program with the

objective of limiting the average annual

concentration of radioactive material in the

incinerator stack effluents to ten per cent of the 10

CFR Part 20, Appendix B, Table II, values. The

indications that the incineration effluents may have

exceeded this ten percent limit in 1993 were

inferential, and could not be verified on the basis

of available data. The NRC staff determined that the

ash residue data collected by the Licensee was not

specific enough to permit a determination whether

Iodine-125 releases did in fact violate the License

Condition 27 requirement to have an ALARA

program with the objective of limiting the average

annual concentration of radioactive material in the

incinerator stack effluent to 10 per cent of the 10

CFR Part 20, Appendix B, Table II, values. The

available data, however, indicates that the annual

average concentrations of radioactive materials in

the incinerator effluents were probably

substantially below the 10 CFR Part 20, Appendix

B, Table II, limits for the 1990 through 1993 time

period reviewed in the May 1994 NRC inspection.

2 Petitioner also contends that releases from

sources other than the incinerators, such as

Building 21, did not appear to be routinely

considered in conjunction with incinerator

radionuclide releases when computing overall

facility release totals to unrestricted areas. License

Condition 27 imposed limits only upon incinerator

radionuclide releases. Effluents from Building 21,

and from other buildings on the NIH campus, are

limited separately by other license conditions and

by the limits imposed by 10 CFR Part 20 on

effluents to unrestricted areas.

flexibility in waste storage. The stated

reason for the request to store waste was

partly to allow decay of short-lived

activity before disposal, and partly in

anticipation of a reduction or

elimination of options for permanent

disposal of low-level radioactive waste,

such as the anticipated closure of the

Barnwell, South Carolina waste disposal

facility. In January 1993, the NRC

authorized use of the Poolesville facility

for interim storage of low-level

radioactive waste, as reflected in

License Condition 28.

III. Discussion

A. Petitioner’s Request for Suspension

of Incineration Operations Was Mooted

by Amendment of the NIH License

As explained above, NIH’s authority

to incinerate radioactive waste was

terminated by the NRC Staff’s November

3, 1994, grant of NIH’s application for a

license amendment to remove License

Condition 27. Consequently, Petitioner’s

request for suspension of NIH

incineration operations is moot.

Similarly, any past deficienices in NIH’s

incineration monitoring program 1 need

not be addressed, other than to

emphasize that if, in the future, NIH

were to request authorization to resume

incineration operations, the NRC staff,

as part of its evaluation of such a

request, would review the incineration

program and operating procedures and

require correction of any deficiencies in

the monitoring program 2 before granting

such a request.

B. Request for Environmental

Assessments and Environmental

Reports

1. Incineration of Radioactive Waste

Petitioner contends that incineration

of radioactive wastes and potentially

contaminated medical wastes by NIH,

without complete environmental reports

and environmental assessments, is in

violation of NRC regulations and the

National Environmental Policy Act

(NEPA). Petitioner further states that, in

the Statement of Consideration

accompanying the newly revised 10

CFR Part 20, NRC retained the

requirement for prior approval of

incineration on a site specific basis and

that NRC rejected the notion that

disposal of radioactive waste by

incineration is simply just another form

of general effluent release, and thus

approval of incineration is subject to the

NEPA process. Petitioner also claims

that because radiological releases from

the NIH incinerators are capable of

exceeding regulatory limits, as

discussed in the 1988 NRC Inspection

Report No. 030–01786/88–001, NIH

total radiological emissions warrant

environmental analyses.

The initial authorization to incinerate

H–3, C–14, and S–35, as well as the

1968 license amendment extending this

authorization to all byproduct materials,

predated both the National

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of

1969, and NRC regulations

implementing NEPA (10 CFR Part 51),

which became effective in 1974. There

was, therefore, no requirement at the

time of these amendments to conduct an

environmental assessment. A review of

NRC records pertaining to the NIH

licenses failed to identify any formal

environmental assessments or safety

evaluations in connection with these

license amendments. However, related

correspondence between NRC and NIH

indicate that authorization to incinerate

radioactive wastes was granted on the

condition operations be conducted

within the effluent limits imposed by 10

CFR Part 20. The total activity

incinerated in any given period was

limited indirectly by limiting the

maximum allowable concentrations of

radioactive materials in the effluents

from the incinerator stacks to the levels

specified by 10 CFR Part 20, Appendix

B, Table II.

The original authorization to

incinerate licensed material was

reevaluated in connection with NIH’s

1988 license amendment application to

add a third incinerator of larger capacity

to the two existing smaller incinerators

previously authorized for operation. The

license amendment application was

accompanied by detailed descriptions of

the incineration facility and proposed

modes of operation and control. The

record also shows correspondence from

NRC requesting clarifications and

additional information, as well as

responses from NIH providing the

requested information. These

documents were incorporated into the

License as tie-down conditions, which

means that the Licensee must conduct

operations as described in its

application documents. However, a

formal environmental assessment was

not prepared. The amendment request

was granted on the same condition as

the original 1959 amendment

authorizing incineration of wastes,

which was that effluents from the

incinerators must remain within the

concentration limits specified by 10

CFR Part 20, Appendix B, Tables II.

Incineration at NIH was authorized only

after performance of NRC staff reviews

of the incinerator design and proposed

methods of operation and control of

effluents, including disposal of the ash

resulting from incineration, and

consideration of the public doses

expected from the operation.

The NRC practice in 1988 was, and

still is, to determine on a case-by-case

basis whether to perform an

environmental assessment in

connection with applications for

incineration of waste containing

radioactive material, provided that the

concentration of radioactive materials in

the incinerator effluents at the point of

release, and in the ash residues, do not

exceed the limits specified by 10 CFR

Part 20, Appendix B, Table II, and also

provided that the dose to the highest

exposed member of the public that

results from the authorized activity is no

more than a small fraction of the dose

limit for individual members of the

public (100 millirem per year) specified

by 10 CFR § 20.1301(a)(1). The radiation

dose to a member of the public resulting

from air effluents depends on the

concentration of radioactive materials in

the air at the location of that person.

Limiting the concentrations of

radioactive materials emitted from the

stack at the release point to those
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 53 / Monday, March 20, 1995 / Notices 14803

specified in 10 CFR Part 20, Appendix

B, Table II, ensures that any dose to

members of the public will be a small

fraction of the applicable public dose

limit. This is due to the fact that

dispersion of the effluent air from the

stack will reduce the average

concentration of radioactive materials in

the air at the location of an exposed

individual to a small fraction of the

limits for emissions at the release point,

causing the delivered dose to that

individual in turn to be a small fraction

of the public dose limit. Review of an

application to incinerate licensed

materials involves, in part, verification

that dispersion of the released material

during transit, from the stack to the

closest exposed individual, will reduce

the concentrations sufficiently to ensure

a very small dose to members of the

public, even under the most

conservative assumptions. Since the

NIH application proposed limiting

airborne incinerator effluents at the

release point to 10 CFR Part 20,

Appendix B, Table II, limits, the dose to

the highest exposed member of the

public would be limited to a small

fraction of the dose limit for individual

members of the public specified by 10

CFR § 20.1301(a)(1).

The NEPA and the Commission’s

implementing regulations in 10 CFR

Part 51 do not require the performance

of an environmental assessment in

connection with authorization of

incineration of radiological wastes at

NIH. Under NEPA § 102(2)(c), 42 U.S.C.

4332(2)(c), and 10 CFR 51.21, an

environmental assessment must be

undertaken by the NRC for all licensing

and regulatory actions except where the

Commission’s regulations, See 10 CFR

51.20(b), require the preparation of an

environmental impact statement, or the

licensing actions are eligible for

categorical exclusion from these

requirements because the actions do not

individually or cumulatively have a

significant effect on the human

environment. 10 CFR 51.21 and

51.22(a). Any use of source, byproduct,

or special nuclear material which

involves quantities and forms of these

materials similar to those involved in

activities eligible for categorical

exclusion in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(14)(i)–(xv),

is also eligible for categorical exclusion.

10 CFR 51.22(c)(14)(xvi). The

Commission anticipated that the

quantities of radioactive material

associated with the fifteen types of

activities eligible for categorical

exclusion under 10 CFR 51.22(c)(14)(i)

–(xv) would involve effluent releases of

between zero and 12% of the limits of

10 CFR Part 20. Statement of

Consideration, ‘‘Environmental

Protection Regulations for Domestic

Licensing and Related Regulatory

Functions and Related Conforming

Amendments’’, 49 FR 9352, 9376–9379

(March 12, 1984). Applicants who

propose to limit the concentration of

radioactive material in the incinerator

stack effluents to less than 12 per cent

of the applicable 10 CFR Part 20 limits,

therefore, would be eligible for the

categorical exclusion pursuant to 10

CFR 51.22(c)(14)(xvi). Since NIH

committed, in its application for

authority to incinerate radioactive

waste, to have a program with the

objective of limiting average annual

concentrations of radioactive material in

the incinerator stack effluents to 10

percent of the 10 CFR Part 20, Appendix

B, Table II, limits, the NIH application

for authority to incinerate was eligible

for categorical exclusion pursuant to 10

CFR 51.22(c)(14)(xvi).

NIH’s authority to dispose of

contaminated ash residue from

incinerator operations was also granted

without performance of an

environmental assessment, pursuant to

the categorical exclusion of 10 CFR

51.22(c)(14)(xvi), for the same reasons as

discussed above. The concentrations of

radioactive materials in the ash residue

were required by License Condition 24,

in the case of NIH, to be below those

specified by 10 CFR Part 20, Appendix

B, Table II. Since 10 CFR Part 20 does

not specify concentrations limits for

ash, the limits specified for water were

applied to the incinerator ash.

When the categorical exclusion

provisions of 10 CFR Part 51 exempt a

license application to incinerate

licensed materials from the

requirements to prepare an

environmental assessment or an

environmental impact statement, such

as the NIH incineration operations, the

licensee is not required to submit an

environmental report for such proposed

activity. Although NIH was not required

to submit a formal environmental report

in connection with its application for

authorization of its incineration facility,

NIH was required to submit, and did

submit, detailed descriptions of the

facility and the proposed mode of

operation and control to ensure safe

operation and compliance with NRC

requirements.

In view of the above, the NRC was not

required to and did not perform

environmental assessments, and the

Licensee was not required to and did

not submit environmental reports, in

connection with authorization of NIH

incineration operations or disposal of

incinerator ash residue. Petitioner has

been provided, however, with copies of

documents submitted by the Licensee in

support of License Condition 27 and

documents associated with the grant of

License Condition 27.

2. Radioactive Material Discharges Into

the Sanitary Sewer Systems (License

Condition 21)

Petitioner requests copies of the NRC

environmental assessments and/or

safety evaluations that provide the basis

for the NRC’s grant of an exception from

10 CFR § 20.303(d) limits regarding

radioactive material discharges into

sanitary sewer systems. License

Condition 21 exempts NIH from 10 CFR

§ 20.303(d), now superseded by 10 CFR

§ 20.2003(a)(4), which limits the

quantity of licensed and other

radioactive material released into the

sewerage system to 5 Ci/yr H–3, 1 Ci/

yr C–14, and 1 Ci/yr all other isotopes

combined. License Condition 21,

however, authorizes disposal of up to 8

Ci/yr of all licensed and other

radioactive material, with no separate

limits on the activities of individual

isotopes, provided the provisions in 10

CFR §§ 20.303 (a), (b), and (c),

superseded by 10 CFR §§ 20.2003 (a)(1),

(a)(2) and (a)(3), are met. These

regulations place limits on the monthly

average concentrations of radioactive

materials in sewer releases.

The license amendment which

initially authorized a sewer release limit

of 8 Ci/yr was granted in 1969, and

predates NRC’s 10 CFR Part 51, which

implements the National Environmental

Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969. There was,

therefore, no requirement at the time the

license amendment was granted to

conduct an environmental assessment

in connection with this License

Condition 21. No environmental

assessments or safety evaluations to

support the grant of this amendment

were found in a search of NRC records,

nor were any references to such

documents found.

A review of NRC records pertaining to

the NIH license indicates that the grant

to NIH of the exemption from 10 CFR

20.303(d), by raising the annual release

limit from the 10 CFR Part 20 limit of

1 Ci/yr to 8 Ci/yr in 1969, and from the

10 CFR Part 20 total activity limit of 7

Ci/yr to 8 Ci/yr after 1982, without

separate limits on H–3 and C–14, was

based on concentrations of radioactive

material in the sewer releases from the

facility. The dose to a member of the

public, obtaining drinking water from

the sewer discharge point for the

facility, depends on the concentration of

activity in the sewer water, and not on

the total amount released during the

year.
14804 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 53 / Monday, March 20, 1995 / Notices

10 CFR 51.22(c)(14)(xvi) provides that

any use of source, byproduct, or special

nuclear material which involves

quantities and forms of these materials

similar to those involved in actions

eligible for categorical exclusion from

environmental assessments is also

eligible for exclusion, pursuant to 10

CFR 51.22(c)(14)(i)–(xv). NIH releases

daily to the sewers a very large amount

of water from its various buildings and

the Clinical Center. This volume of

water, which substantially exceeds one

million gallons per day, provides very

large dilution factors for radioactive

wastes released to the sewers. At the

level of 8 Ci/year, the resulting average

concentrations of radioactivity in water

leaving the NIH campus are a small

fraction of the allowable concentrations

specified in the 10 CFR Part 20,

Appendix B, Table 3, and thus NIH

sewer disposal activity is eligible for

categorical exclusion pursuant to 10

CFR 51.22(c)(xvi). See Section III.B.1,

supra. The corresponding doses are,

therefore, also small fractions of the

public dose limits, and are of the same

order of magnitude, or smaller, than

those involved in activities that are

eligible for categorical exclusion. It was,

therefore, concluded that grant of the

NIH application for an 8 Ci/yr sewer

disposal limit was eligible for the

categorical exclusion. NRC’s review of

the NIH amendment application for

License Condition 21 also considered

the fact that radioactive material in the

sewer water released from NIH is further

diluted at the Blue Plains Sewage

Treatment Plant, to which NIH

discharges its sewer water. Further

dilution is provided by the Potomac

River, to which the effluent from Blue

Plains is discharged.

The 10 CFR Part 20 limit on total

activity released to the sewers per year

from a licensee’s facility was imposed to

guard against the possibility that more

than one licensee may discharge

radioactive material to the same sewer

lines, thus raising the overall

concentrations of radioactive materials

in the sewer lines. This was not an

important consideration in the case of

NIH in view of the high water discharge

volume from the facility, which ensures

very low concentrations of radioactive

materials, even in the presence of

possible sewer discharges from other

licensees discharging to the same sewer

system. A review of the NIH records for

sewer discharges in recent years showed

that the annual quantities discharged

have been less than the 7 Ci/yr limit in

10 CFR Part 20. License condition 21

did not impose separate limits on H–3

and C–14 discharges.

In view of the above, Petitioner’s

request for environmental assessments

and/or safety evaluations providing the

basis for authorization of License

Condition 21 cannot be granted.

Petitioner, however, has been provided

with documents submitted by NIH to

the NRC in support of the amendment

requests to raise the sewer discharge

limits.

3. Construction and Operation of the

Low Level Waste Storage Facility at

NIH’s Poolesville Campus (License

Condition 28)

Petitioner requests copies of the NRC

environmental assessments and/or

safety evaluations that provide the bases

for the NRC grant of the Licensee’s

license amendment application for

construction and operation of a low

level waste storage facility at NIH’s

Poolesville campus. License Condition

28 of the License currently states that

‘‘Radioactive waste generated under this

License shall be stored in accordance

with the statements, representations,

and procedures included with the

Licensee’s waste storage plan described

in the Licensee’s application dated

October 13, 1992’’. The conditions

under which radioactive waste is stored

at the Poolesville facility are described

in the Licensee’s 1992 application for an

amendment to permit such storage, and

were incorporated into License

Condition 28 as tie-down conditions.

They were evaluated by the NRC staff

and found to be adequate to ensure

public health and safety and to

minimize adverse environmental effects.

The Poolesville facility is inspected

routinely by NRC’s Region I to ensure

that the conditions described in the

bases for the license amendment are

being observed, in addition to

observance of good radiological safety

practices.

The application documents for the

License Condition 28 provide detailed

descriptions of the Licensee’s

Poolesville facility and surrounding

environment and demography, storage

building construction details, methods

of waste storage, waste form and

inventory control, and other relevant

details. This information was provided

in accordance with the instructions in

NRC Information Notice IN 90–09,

‘‘Extended Interim Storage of Low-Level

Waste by Fuel Cycle and Materials

Licensees’’, which describes the

information required by the NRC for its

review of license amendment requests

to authorize extended interim storage of

low-level radioactive waste. This review

is functionally equivalent to an

environmental assessment for such

facilities.

In view of the above, Petitioner’s

request for environmental assessments

and/or safety evaluations in connection

with authorization of License Condition

28 cannot be granted. Petitioner,

however, has been provided with a copy

of IN 90–09 and the information

submitted by the Licensee in support of

its application for authority to construct

and operate the Poolesville low level

waste storage facility, which is the

functional equivalent of a an

environmental report and safety

evaluation.

C. Request to Forward a Copy of Future

Correspondence Between NRC and NIH

to Petitioner

As requested by Petitioner, North

Bethesda Congress of Citizen’s

Associations will be placed on the

distribution list for all correspondence

regarding operation of the NIH

incinerators, sewer disposal limits, and

interim radioactive waste storage license

amendments at the Poolesville facility.

IV. Conclusion

For the reasons discussed above,

Petitioner’s request to suspend authority

for incineration operations by NIH

pursuant to Condition 24 of the NIH

License, pending a review and

improvement of operating procedures

for the incinerators, and pending

preparation of an environmental

assessment and an environmental

report, was mooted by removal of that

authority from NIH License No. 19–

00296–10 in November 1994.

Petitioner’s request for copies of any

NRC environmental assessments and/or

safety evaluations that provide the bases

for authorization of License Conditions

21 and 28 cannot be granted, as

explained in Section III, supra. Certain

information submitted by the Licensee

in connection with its request for

authorization of License Conditions 21,

24, and 28, and NRC correspondence in

response, however, was provided to

Petitioner. Petitioner’s request for a

copy of all future correspondence

between NRC and NIH regarding these

matters is granted.

A copy of this Decision will be filed

with the Secretary of the Commission

for the Commission to review in

accordance with 10 C.F.R. 2.206(c). As

provided by this regulation, this

Decision will constitute the final action

of the Commission 25 days after

issuance, unless the Commission, on its

own motion, institutes a review of the

decision within that time.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 5th day

of March, 1995.
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 53 / Monday, March 20, 1995 / Notices 14805

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Robert M. Bernero,

Director, Office of Nuclear Materials Safety

and Safeguards.

[FR Doc. 95–6733 Filed 3–17–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

[Docket Nos. 50–317 and 50–318]

Baltimore Gas and Electric Co., Calvert

Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant Unit Nos. 1

and 2; Notice of Partial Withdrawal of

Application for Amendment to Facility

Operating License

The United States Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (the Commission) has

granted the request by the Baltimore Gas

and Electric Company (BG&E) to

withdraw a portion of its December 8,

1993, application for proposed

amendments to Facility Operating

License Nos. DPR–53 and DPR–69 for

the Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant,

Unit Nos. 1 and 2, located in Calvert

County, Maryland.

The proposed amendments would

revise Technical Specifications (TSs)

Section 5.0, Design Features. The

requested changes, for the most part,

adopt the improved Standard Technical

Specifications format and content for

Combustion Engineering plants

provided in NUREG–1432. Included in

the initial December 8, 1993,

application was a request to delete two

subsections of the existing TSs. These

subsections were Subsection 5.3.3,

‘‘Control Element Assemblies,’’ and

5.6.3, ‘‘Drainage.’’ Subsection 5.6.3

relates to inadvertent drainage of the

spent fuel pool. By letter dated March

2, 1995, BG&E withdrew the request to

delete these two subsections. The

existing information in Subsection 5.3.3

will be retained in a new Subsection

5.2.2 and the information in Subsection

5.6.3 will be retained in a new

Subsection 5.3.2. The new subsection

designations are necessary to be

consistent with the reformatting of the

Design Features Section of the TSs.

The Commission has previously

issued a Notice of Consideration of

Issuance of Amendments to Facility

Operating License Nos. DPR–53 and

DPR–69, Proposed No Significant

Hazards Consideration Determination

and Opportunity for a Hearing, which

was published in the Federal Register

on January 19, 1994 (59 FR 2861).

For further details with respect to this

action, see the application for

amendments dated December 8, 1993, as

supplemented on March 2, 1995. The

March 2, 1995, letter provided

clarification of the initial application

and withdrew the request to delete the

two subsections as detailed above.

These documents are available for

public inspection at the Commission’s

Public Document Room, 2120 L Street,

NW., Washington, DC, and at the local

public document room located at the

Calvert County Library, Prince

Frederick, Maryland 20678.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 14th day

of March 1995.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Daniel G. McDonald,

Senior Project Manager, Project Directorate

I–1, Division of Reactor Projects—I/II, Office

of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 95–6731 Filed 3–17–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–M

[Docket No. 50–213]

Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power

Company; Notice of Issuance of

Amendment to Facility Operating

License

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (Commission) has issued

Amendment No. 185 to Facility

Operating License No. DPR–61 issued to

the Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power

Company (the licensee), which revised

the Technical Specifications for

operation of the Haddam Neck Plant

located in Middlesex County,

Connecticut. The amendment is

effective as of the date of issuance to be

implemented within 30 days of

issuance.

The amendment revises the Haddam

Neck Plant Technical Specifications

(TS) to allow an increased limit for fuel

enrichment. The change allows the

storage of fuel with an enrichment not

to exceed a nominal 5.0 weight percent

(w/o) U–235 in the Haddam Neck Plant

new and spent fuel storage racks. The

current new and spent fuel storage rack

maximum nominal enrichment is 3.9 w/

o U–235 for Zircaloy clad fuel and 4.0

w/o U–235 for stainless steel clad fuel.

The application for the amendment

complies with the standards and

requirements of the Atomic Energy Act

of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the

Commission’s rules and regulations.

The Commission has made appropriate

findings as required by the Act and the

Commission’s rules and regulations in

10 CFR Chapter I, which are set forth in

the license amendment.

Notice of Consideration of Issuance of

Amendment and Opportunity for

Hearing in connection with this action

was published in the Federal Register

on June 14, 1994 (59 FR 30620). No

request for a hearing or petition for

leave to intervene was filed following

the notice.

The Commission has prepared an

Environmental Assessment related to

the action and has determined not to

prepare an environmental impact

statement. Based upon the

environmental assessment, the

Commission has concluded that the

issuance of the amendment will not

have a significant effect on the quality

of the human environment (60 FR 7798).

For further details with respect to the

action see (1) the application for

amendment dated May 17, 1994, as

supplemented September 9, 1994, and

January 31, 1995, (2) Amendment No.

185 to License No. DPR–61, (3) the

Commission’s related Safety Evaluation,

and (4) the Commission’s

Environmental Assessment. All of these

items are available for public inspection

at the Commission’s Public Document

Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L

Street NW., Washington, DC 20555, and

at the local public document room

located at the Russell Library, 123 Broad

Street, Middletown, Connecticut 06457.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 10th day

of March 1995.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Alan B. Wang,

Project Management, Project Directorate I–

3, Division of Reactor Projects—I/II, Office

of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 95–6734 Filed 3–17–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–M

POSTAL RATE COMMISSION

[Docket No. RM95–2]

Procedural Streamlining Inquiry;

Notice of Request for Comments on

Information Contained in Postal

Service Requests

March 15, 1995.

Before Commissioners: Edward J. Gleiman,

Chairman; W.H. ‘‘Trey’’ LeBlanc III, ViceChairman; George W. Haley; H. Edward

Quick, Jr.; Wayne A. Schley

On December 14, 1994, the

Commission issued an Advance Notice

of Proposed Rulemaking (Advance

Notice) seeking suggestions concerning

how the Commission’s rules of practice

and procedure could be amended or

supplemented to improve the efficiency

and expedition of consideration of

requests for changes in postal rates and

classifications conducted pursuant to 39

U.S.C. 3624(a). Comments were due on

or before February 21, 1995, and the

Commission has received several

thought provoking statements from

frequent participants in these cases.

Several comments emphasized the

importance of timely access to Postal