28906 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 110 / Thursday, June 6, 1996 / Notices

mail addressed to the Executive Director

for Operations, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission, Washington, DC 20555.

For further details with respect to this

action, the application for amendment

request is available for inspection at the

NRC’s Public Document Room, 2120 L

Street NW, Washington, DC 20555.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 31st day

of May 1996.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Robert A. Nelson,

Acting Chief, Low-Level Waste and

Decommissioning Projects Branch, Division

of Waste Management, Office of Nuclear

Material Safety, and Safeguards.

[FR Doc. 96–14235 Filed 6–5–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

[Docket No.: 040–08724]

Finding of No Significant Impact

Related To Amendment To Materials

License SUB–1357, Chemetron

Corporation, Inc.

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory

Commission.

ACTION: Notice of Finding of No

Significant Impact associated with

amendment to Materials License SUB–

1357, Chemetron Corporation, Inc.,

Cuyahoga Heights, Ohio, to authorize

remediation of Harvard Avenue site.

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission is considering issuing an

amendment of Materials License No.

SUB–1357, held by Chemetron

Corporation, Inc., to authorize the

remediation of the Harvard Avenue site

located on Harvard Avenue in Cuyahoga

Heights, Ohio.

Environmental Assessment Summary

Background

By the letter of March 24, 1994,

Chemetron Corporation, Inc.,

(Chemetron) requested that NRC amend

its license to authorize it to perform the

remediation of the Harvard Avenue and

Bert Avenue sites in accordance with its

remediation plan entitled, ‘‘Site

Remediation Plan, Chemetron

Remediation Project, Harvard and Bert

Avenue Sites, Chemetron Corporation,

Inc., Newburgh Heights, Ohio,’’

Revision 1, dated February 25, 1995.

This remediation plan also included

Chemetron’s plans for remediating

buildings, adjacent to the Harvard

Avenue site, owned by the McGeanRohco, Inc., that are contaminated with

radioactive material. By letter of May

18, 1995, Chemetron requested NRC

staff to expedite and separately review

the remediation of the Harvard Avenue

site so that remediation would not be

delayed due to the required Ohio

Environmental Protection Agency

(OEPA) review of the solid waste issues

at the Bert Avenue site, under the

jurisdiction of OEPA.

Following the review of the portions

of the Chemetron Final Remediation

Plan for Harvard Avenue and Bert

Avenue sites that addressed the

McGean-Rohco building remediation,

NRC staff published, in the Federal

Register (FR), on August 5, 1994, a

Finding of No Significant Impact

(FONSI) and an environmental

assessment for the McGean-Rohco

complex remediation. On August 9,

1994, NRC staff issued Amendment 4 to

the Chemetron license authorizing

Chemetron to conduct the McGeanRohco building remediation. On August

9, 1994, NRC staff also issued a Safety

Evaluation Report for the proposed

remediation of the McGean-Rohco

complex.

Proposed Action

In this action, Chemetron is proposing

to utilize onsite disposal, under 10 CFR

20.2002, at the Harvard Avenue facility,

for wastes, from the remediation of the

Harvard Avenue site, with

concentrations up to the Option 2 limit

in the NRC’s Branch Technical Position

on ‘‘Disposal or Onsite Storage of

Thorium or Uranium Wastes from Past

Operations’’ (1981 BTP). If wastes, that

exceed the Option 2 concentration

limits in the 1981 BTP, are discovered

at the Harvard Avenue site, these wastes

would be shipped offsite, to a licensed

low-level waste disposal site.

Need for Proposed Action

The purpose of the proposed action is

to decommission the Harvard Avenue

site, by removing depleted uranium

contamination in soils and building

rubble, so that the site can be released

for unrestricted use. Remediating the

site will allow Chemetron to release the

site back to the site owner, McGeanRohco, Inc., and to remove the site from

Chemetron’s NRC license.

Environmental Impacts of Proposed

Action

The NRC staff reviewed the levels of

contamination, the proposed

remediation methods, and the

radiological and environmental controls

that will be used during the

remediation. These controls include

worker dosimetry, the As Low As Is

Reasonably Achievable (ALARA)

program, air monitoring, routine

surveys, a bioassay program for workers,

and routine monitoring of both airborne

and liquid effluent releases to meet 10

CFR Part 20 radiation protection

requirements. Worker and public doses

will be limited so that exposures will

not exceed 10 CFR Part 20 requirements.

Chemetron proposed to remediate the

Harvard Avenue site in accordance with

‘‘Guidelines for Decontamination of

Facilities and Equipment Prior to

Release for Unrestricted Use or

Termination of Licenses for Byproduct,

Source, and Special Nuclear Materials,’’

dated August 1987. Chemetron also

proposed to dispose of depleted

uranium wastes onsite in accordance

with the 1981 BTP. Based on uranium

solubility testing of the Harvard Avenue

wastes, the maximum depleted uranium

concentration that is acceptable for

disposal in the disposal cell is 7.4 Bq/

gm (200 pCi/gm) total uranium.

The staff also analyzed the

radiological impacts to the public from

the disposal of depleted uranium

contaminated soils and building rubble

in the proposed onsite disposal cell.

Radiological impacts to members of the

public will result from inhalation and

ingestion of releases of radioactivity in

air and in water during the remediation

operations and direct exposure to

radiation from radioactive materials at

the site during remediation operations.

The public will also be exposed to

radiation as a result of the onsite

disposal. Decommissioning workers will

receive doses primarily by inhalation

and direct exposure during the

remediation activities. In addition to

impacts from routine operations, the

potential radiological consequences of

accidents were considered.

The licensee provided an estimate of

the dose to the public from airborne

effluents to be generated during the

excavation activities associated with the

decommissioning of Harvard Avenue

site. The maximum public dose from

airborne effluents is 0.02 mSv (2 mrem)

for the Harvard Avenue site. The staff

performed a more conservative,

independent analysis of the potential for

public exposure from airborne effluents.

The staff estimated the dose to the

nearest resident during excavation of

soil at the Chemetron Harvard Avenue

site to be approximately 0.09 mSv (9

mrem).

The licensee performed dose

assessments for the Harvard Avenue

disposal cell using the RESRAD

computer code, Version 5.05. The

RESRAD code calculates dose impacts

assuming a resident-farmer scenario,

where an individual would construct a

residence, live there, grow food, and

consume all drinking water from a

conservatively located groundwater

well. Radiation doses were calculated to

be 0.132 mSv/yr (13.2 mrem/yr) at 1000

years and peak at 0.142 mSv/yr (14.2
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 110 / Thursday, June 6, 1996 / Notices 28907

mrem/yr) at 2150 years after

construction of the disposal cell. These

predicted doses are less than NRC’s

limit of 1 mSv/yr (100 mrem/yr) for

radiation doses to the public in 10 CFR

Part 20. These doses reflect the worst

case scenario with the proposed cover

over the disposal cell assumed to have

been removed.

NRC staff verified Chemetron’s

RESRAD code analyses, using Version

5.05, and obtained the same results as

Chemetron. NRC staff also ran the

calculations using an individual

groundwater consumption rate of 730 l/

yr, as recommended in NRC Policy and

Guidance Directive PG–8–08,

‘‘Scenarios for Assessing Potential Doses

Associated with Residual

Radioactivity.’’ Chemetron assumed a

consumption rate of 510 l/yr,

recommended in Argonne National

Laboratory’s ANL/EAIS–8, ‘‘Data

Collection Handbook to Support

Modeling the Impacts of Radioactive

Material in Soil.’’ The peak dose,

assuming a cover, was computed to be

0.26 mSv/yr (26 mrem/yr) at 2160 years

after disposal. At 1000 years after

disposal, the dose would be 0.22 mSv/

yr (22 mrem/yr). The peak dose,

assuming no cover, was computed to be

0.20 mSv/yr (20 mrem/yr) at 2150 years

after disposal. At 1000 years after

disposal, the dose would be 0.185 mSv/

yr (18.5 mrem/yr). The above doses

estimated for the public are

substantially less than the 1 mSv/yr

(100 mrem/yr) limit for exposures to the

public in 10 CFR Part 20.

During the remediation of the

contaminated materials, workers will

receive doses from direct exposure and

from the inhalation of dusts containing

depleted uranium. From direct

exposure, assuming the maximum

measured background radiation levels at

the Harvard Avenue site of 0.2 mSv/

month (20 mrem/month) and a 2000 hr

exposure, Chemetron computed the

direct exposure dose to be 0.55 mSv (55

mrem). Chemetron computed the

inhalation dose to be 0.03 mSv (3

mrem). NRC staff reviewed and agrees

with these calculations. The above

doses are substantially below the 10

CFR Part 20 limit of 0.05 Sv/yr (5 rem/

yr) for routine occupational exposure.

Based on the above evaluations,

radiation exposures of persons living or

traveling near the site due to onsite

operations will be well within limits

contained in NRC regulations and will

be small in comparison to natural

background radiation. The licensee has

a radiation protection program that will

maintain radiation exposures and

effluent releases within the limits of 10

CFR Part 20 and will maintain

exposures as low as is reasonably

achievable.

The NRC staff reviewed the licensee’s

estimated potential consequences of

postulated accidents. The licensee

evaluated two worst case accident

scenarios—a truck tipping over

releasing its contents and a truck fire

causing radioactivity to be dispersed

into the air. The scenarios assumed the

maximum total uranium concentration

of 507 Bq/gm (13,700 pCi/gm) total

uranium found at the Bert Avenue site

in Chemetron’s site characterization.

This concentration is substantially

higher than the maximum total uranium

concentration of 5.9 Bq/gm (160 pCi/

gm) at the Harvard Avenue site.

Receptors 10 meters away would receive

a dose of 4.3E–4 mSv (4.3E–2 mrem)

from the truck spill accident and 0.04

mSv (4 mrem) from the truck fire

accident. These postulated accidents do

not have the potential for onsite or

offsite radiation doses that exceed the

minimum Protective Action Guide level

of 1 Rem, recommended in the U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency’s

‘‘Manual of Protective Action Guides

and Protective Actions for Nuclear

Incidents,’’ or above the 10 CFR Part 20

limit of 0.05 Sv (5 Rem/yr) for routine

occupational exposure.

No wastes that exceed the Option 2

limits in the 1981 BTP are expected at

the Harvard Avenue site. However, if

wastes that exceed the Option 2 limits

are discovered, the wastes will be

shipped offsite to a licensed low-level

waste disposal site. Wastes will be

packaged and shipped in containers or

covered railcars or trucks in accordance

with NRC and Department of

Transportation requirements. Wastes

will be disposed of in accordance with

the disposal site license conditions.

Therefore, there are no expected

impacts from the transportation or

offsite disposal of radioactive materials.

The NRC staff also considered

nonradiological impacts and concluded

that all such impacts are negligible.

Chemetron has identified, at the

Harvard Avenue site, no solid wastes

and hazardous wastes, as defined under

the Resource, Conservation, and

Recovery Act (RCRA) that will need to

be managed in accordance with the

requirements of the OEPA. If such

wastes are encountered, the wastes will

be managed in accordance with OEPA

requirements. Any impacts for handling

RCRA solid and hazardous wastes, if

identified, are expected to be small.

Based on the very low minority

populations in Cuyahoga Heights, Ohio,

and in Newburgh Heights, Ohio, which

borders the Harvard Avenue site, and

income statistics that show no

significant low-income populations

compared with those in Cuyahoga

County and in the State of Ohio, there

will be no significant impacts to

minorities and low-income households

from the proposed activities.

The proposed remediation of the

Harvard Avenue site will enable

Chemetron to release the site for

unrestricted use. On the basis of the

NRC staff’s evaluation of Chemetron’s

proposed remediation approach for the

Harvard Avenue site, and analysis of the

environmental impacts of the proposed

action, the staff concludes that the

proposed remediation activities will not

result in any significant environmental

or radiological impact.

Alternatives to the Proposed Action

The staff evaluated the following

alternatives to the proposed action: (1)

leaving the depleted uranium in place;

(2) delaying the remediation; (3)

disposing of contamination at an

existing licensed low-level radioactive

disposal site; (4) applying volume

reduction methods to the contaminated

materials; and, (5) onsite disposal.

Alternatives 1 and 2 would not allow

the license to be terminated and would

be unacceptable. There are no

significant environmental impacts

associated with Alternatives 3, 4, and 5.

However, Alternatives 3 and 4 are

substantially more expensive than

Alternative 5, the licensees proposed

option. Based on this evaluation, NRC

staff concludes that there are no

reasonably available alternatives to the

licensee’s proposed plan that are

obviously superior.

Agencies and Persons Consulted, and

Sources Used

This environmental assessment was

prepared by staff of the U.S. Nuclear

Regulatory Commission, Office of

Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards,

Rockville, MD, and Region III, Lisle, IL.

During the review of Chemetron’s

Final Site Remediation Plan, NRC

requested comments from the Mayor of

Newburgh Heights, the Ohio

Department of Health (ODH), the OEPA,

and the Cuyahoga County Board of

Health (CCBH). NRC received formal

comments from ODH and CCBH, and

informal comments from OEPA. The

principle comments received from ODH

and OEPA were that NRC should

require post-closure controls and

monitoring, for the radiologic

components in the waste, after

completion of the onsite disposal cells.

These controls would be consistent with

the post-closure controls required by

OEPA for solid waste landfills. NRC

staff indicated that under the conditions
28908 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 110 / Thursday, June 6, 1996 / Notices

of onsite disposal under the Option 2

limits of the 1981 BTP the Harvard

Avenue site could be released for

unrestricted use, and doses to

hypothetical intruders, who might

construct homes and consume

groundwater and foodstuffs grown in

the wastes, would be acceptable. The

principle comments made by CCBH

were to correct technical

inconsistencies, in the Site Remediation

Plan, related to the design of the

proposed Bert Avenue disposal cell.

A draft of this environmental

assessment was also transmitted to

ODH, OEPA, CCBH, and the Mayor of

Newburgh Heights, Ohio. The CCBH,

OEPA, and the Mayor of Newburgh

Heights had no comments on the draft

EA. ODH concurred with the dose

assessment modeling results, and

indicated that the proposed action will

be protective of public health. ODH also

commented that they desired a

mechanism for detecting disposal cell

failure and deed restrictions that would

limit any type of activity that might

jeopardize disposal cell integrity. As

indicated above, NRC staff consider that

under the Option 2 disposal conditions,

the Harvard Avenue site can be released

for unrestricted use, without postclosure controls related to radioactive

materials.

The NRC staff requested a review by

the Ohio Historic Preservation Office

(OHPO) of the Harvard Avenue

property. The OHPO concluded that the

project, if completed as proposed,

would have no effect on properties

listed on or eligible for the National

Register of Historical Places.

No other sources of information were

used beyond those which are referenced

in the report.

Finding of No Significant Impact

Based on the environmental

assessment, the Commission concludes

that the issuance of the license

amendment will not have a significant

impact on the quality of the human

environment. Accordingly, the

Commission has determined not to

prepare an environmental impact

statement for the proposed action.

Opportunity for a Hearing

On April 11, 1994, the NRC published

in the FR a notice of Consideration of

Amendment to Chemetron Corporation

License and Opportunity for Hearing (59

FR 17124) with respect to the matters

covered in the amendment that is the

subject of this notice. In response to that

notice, Earth Day Coalition submitted a

petition for hearing. On July 7, 1994, the

Presiding Officer granted a three week

period for Earth Day Coalition to

supplement a deficient hearing request.

The Coalition’s petition failed to

demonstrate that the NRC’s standing

requirements were met and that its

concerns were germane to the subject

matter of the proceeding. Because the

Coalition did not file the supplemental

information, on September 1, 1994, the

Presiding Officer dismissed the

proceeding. Accordingly, the agency has

complied with its rules in 10 CFR Part

2, Subpart L, and no further offer of an

opportunity for a hearing is made

regarding the subject matter of this

notice.

The environmental assessment and

the documents related to this proposed

action are available for public

inspection and copying at the NRC’s

Public Document Room, 2120 L Street,

N.W., Washington, DC 20555, and the

NRC’s Local Public Document Room at

the Garfield Heights Branch Library,

5409 Turney Road, Garfield Heights,

Ohio, (Docket No. 040–08724).

For additional information, contact

Timothy C. Johnson, Section Leader,

Materials Decommissioning Section,

Low-Level Waste and Decommissioning

Projects Branch, Division of Waste

Management, Office of Nuclear Material

Safety and Safeguards, (310) 415–7299.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 31st day

of May 1996.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Robert A. Nelson,

Acting Chief, Low-Level Waste and

Decommissioning Projects Branch, Division

of Waste Management, Office of Nuclear

Material Safety and Safeguards.

[FR Doc. 96–14236 Filed 6–5–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

Advisory Committee on Nuclear

Waste; Renewal Notice

AGENCY: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (NRC)

ACTION: Notice of renewal of the

Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste

for a period of two years.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

Nuclear Regulatory Commission has

determined that renewal of the Charter

for the Advisory Committee on Nuclear

Waste for the two year period

commencing on May 30, 1996, is in the

public interest in connection with

duties imposed on the Commission by

law. This action is being taken in

accordance with the Federal Advisory

Committee Act after consultation with

the Committee Management Secretariat,

General Services Administration.

The purpose of the Advisory

Committee on Nuclear Waste is to

provide advice to the U.S. Nuclear

Regulatory Commission (NRC) on

nuclear waste disposal facilities, as

directed by the Commission. This

includes 10 CFR Parts 60 and 61 and

other applicable regulations and

legislative mandates such as the Nuclear

Waste Policy Act, the Low-Level

Radioactive Waste Policy Act, and the

Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation

Control Act, as amended. The primary

emphasis will be on disposal facilities.

In performing its work, the Committee

will examine and report on those areas

of concern referred to it by the

Commission or its designated

representatives, and will undertake

other studies and activities related to

those issues as directed by the

Commission. The Committee will

interact with representatives of NRC,

ACRS, other federal agencies, state and

local agencies, Indian Tribes, private

organizations, etc., as appropriate to

fulfill its responsibilities.

For Further Information Please

Contact: John T. Larkins, Executive

Director of the Committee, U.S. Nuclear

Regulatory Commission, Washington,

D.C. 20555, telephone (301) 415–7360.

Dated: May 30, 1996.

Andrew L. Bates,

Federal Advisory Committee Management

Officer.

[FR Doc. 96–14237 Filed 6–5–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

OFFICE OF GOVERNMENT ETHICS

Extension and Revocation of PostEmployment Waiver

AGENCY: Office of Government Ethics

(OGE).

ACTION: Notice; extension and

revocation of waiver.

SUMMARY: The Office of Government

Ethics is giving notice of the extension,

for up to an additional four months

(until November 1, 1996 or the effective

date of any corrective legislation, if

earlier), of a short-term postGovernment employment waiver of

certain ‘‘senior employee’’ restrictions it

granted earlier this year to position

holders who, but for the pay raise

authorized by Executive Order 12984 (or

a pay raise tied thereto), would not

receive a rate of basic pay equal to or

greater than the rate of basic pay for

level V of the Executive Schedule. This

additional extension is provided to

allow time for full consideration of

legislation pending in this Congress

which contains a new definition of

‘‘senior employee’’ complementary to

this waiver. This shall also serve as