53052 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 178 / Friday, September 12, 2008 / Notices 

These matters are exempt under 5 U.S.C. 

552b(c)(6) of the Government in the Sunshine 

Act. 

Dated: September 9, 2008. 

Susanne Bolton, 

Committee Management Officer. 

[FR Doc. E8–21244 Filed 9–11–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7555–01–P 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

[Docket No. 040–08502] 

Notice of Availability of Environmental 

Assessment and Finding of No 

Significant Impact for License 

Amendment Request To Revert to 

Operating Status From Restoration 

and Decommissioning Status, Cogema 

Mining Inc., Christensen and Irigaray 

Ranch Facilities, Johnson and 

Campbell Counties, WY 

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission. 

ACTION: Notice of availability. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ron 

C. Linton, Project Manager, Uranium 

Recovery Licensing Branch, Division of 

Waste Management and Environmental 

Protection, Office of Federal and State 

Materials and Environmental 

Management Programs, U.S. Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission, Washington, 

DC 20555. Telephone: 301–415–7777; 

fax number: 301–415–5369; e-mail: 

ron.linton@nrc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Introduction 

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission 

(NRC) is issuing a license amendment to 

source Materials License No. SUA–1341 

issued to Cogema Mining, Inc. 

(COGEMA) (the licensee), to authorize a 

return to uranium production 

operations and the recovery of uranium 

by in situ leach (ISL) extraction 

techniques as previously licensed by the 

NRC at its Christensen and Irigaray 

Ranch Facilities, Johnson and Campbell 

Counties, Wyoming. NRC has prepared 

an Environmental Assessment (EA) in 

support of this amendment in 

accordance with the requirements of 10 

CFR Part 51. Based on the EA, the NRC 

has concluded that a Finding of No 

Significant Impact (FONSI) is 

appropriate. The amendment will be 

issued following the publication of this 

Notice. 

II. EA Summary 

On April 3, 2007, COGEMA requested 

that NRC approve an amendment to 

authorize a return to uranium 

production operations and the recovery 

of uranium by ISL extraction techniques 

at the licensee’s Christensen and 

Irigaray Ranch facilities in Johnson and 

Campbell Counties, Wyoming. 

Specifically, COGEMA’s source 

materials license will be amended to 

allow for the resumption of uranium 

recovery operations by the injection of 

lixiviant with license conditions that are 

essentially the same as those contained 

in the last operational license, SUA– 

1341, Amendment 3. COGEMA’s 

request for the proposed amendment 

was noticed in the Federal Register on 

March 17, 2008, with a notice of an 

opportunity to request a hearing. The 

Federal Register notice of an 

opportunity to request a hearing was 

also posted on NRC’s public Web site 

under ‘‘Hearing Opportunities and 

License Applications.’’ No hearing 

requests were received. 

The staff has prepared the EA in 

support of the proposed license 

amendment. The NRC staff found that 

the type of impacts would be similar to 

those that already exist and that have 

been evaluated in previous 

environmental reviews. The staff 

reviewed impacts to land use, 

transportation, geology and soils, 

ecology, air quality, noise, cultural and 

historical resources, visual and scenic 

resources, socioeconomic resources, 

public and occupational health, and 

waste management. All impacts were 

found to be low with the exception of 

some moderate short-term visual 

impacts to the Pumpkin Buttes which 

have been determined by the Bureau of 

Land Management to be a Native 

American traditional cultural property. 

III. Finding of No Significant Impact 

On the basis of the EA, NRC has 

concluded that there are no significant 

environmental impacts from the 

proposed amendment, and that 

preparation of an environmental impact 

statement is not warranted. 

IV. Further Information 

Documents related to this action, 

including the application for 

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 ADAMS accession 

numbers for the documents related to 

this notice are: ML071020274, Letter 

from T. Hardgrove, COGEMA Mining, 

Re: Request for Amendment to License 

SUA–1341 for Restart of Irigaray/ 

Christensen Ranch Facilities; 

ML082110026, Environmental 

Assessment Regarding the License 

Amendment Request to Return to 

Operating Status from Decommissioning 

Status Cogema Mining, Inc. Irigaray and 

Christensen Ranch Projects Wyoming. 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.resource@nrc.gov. 

These documents may also be viewed 

electronically on the public computers 

located at the NRC’s Public Document 

Room (PDR), O 1 F21, One White Flint 

North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, 

Maryland 20852. The PDR reproduction 

contractor will copy documents for a 

fee. 

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 8th day 

of September 2008. 

For The Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

Keith I. McConnell, 

Deputy Director, Decommissioning and 

Uranium Recovery, Licensing Directorate, 

Division of Waste Management, and 

Environmental Protection, Office of Federal 

and State Materials and Environmental 

Management Programs. 

[FR Doc. E8–21275 Filed 9–11–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

[Docket No. 030–04794] 

Notice of Availability of Environmental 

Assessment and Finding of No 

Significant Impact for License 

Amendment to Byproduct Materials 

License No. 21–01443–06, for 

Unrestricted Release of the WarnerLambert Facility in Ann Arbor, MI 

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission. 

ACTION: Issuance of Environmental 

Assessment and Finding of No 

Significant Impact for License 

Amendment. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

William Snell, Senior Health Physicist, 

Decommissioning Branch, Division of 

Nuclear Materials Safety, Region III, 

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 

2443 Warrenville Road, Lisle, Illinois 

60532; telephone: (630) 829–9871; fax 

number: (630) 515–1259; or by e-mail: at 

william.snell@nrc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 


ebenthall on PROD1PC60 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 178 / Friday, September 12, 2008 / Notices 53053 

I. Introduction 

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC) proposing to 

terminate Byproduct Materials License 

No. 21–01443–06. This license is held 

by Warner-Lambert, LLC (the Licensee), 

which is a wholly owned subsidiary of 

Pfizer, Inc., for its facilities located at 

2800 Plymouth Road and 1600 Huron 

Parkway in Ann Arbor, Michigan (the 

Facilities). Termination of the license 

would authorize release of the Facilities 

for unrestricted use. The Licensee 

requested this action in a letter dated 

June 3, 2008 (ADAMS Accession No. 

ML081610504). 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. 

II. Environmental Assessment 

Identification of Proposed Action 

The proposed action would approve 

the Licensee’s June 3, 2008, license 

termination request, resulting in release 

of the Facilities for unrestricted use. 

License No. 21–01443–06 was issued on 

April 20, 1959, pursuant to 10 CFR Part 

30, and has been amended periodically 

since that time. The license authorizes 

the use of byproduct materials for 

conducting research and development. 

The Facilities comprise a campus of 

research laboratories and offices of more 

than two million square feet of floor 

area on approximately 50 acres of 

property located in a commercial and 

residential area. The Licensee ceased 

using licensed materials in the Facilities 

in May 2007, and has conducted final 

status surveys of the Facilities. The 

results of these surveys along with other 

supporting information were provided 

to the NRC to demonstrate that the 

criteria in Subpart E of 10 CFR Part 20 

for unrestricted release have been met. 

Need for the Proposed Action 

The licensee has ceased conducting 

licensed activities at the Facilities, and 

seeks the unrestricted use of its 

Facilities. 

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed 

Action 

The historical review of licensed 

activities conducted at the Facilities 

shows that such activities involved use 

of the following radionuclides with halflives greater than 120 days: hydrogen-3, 

carbon-14, sodium-22, chlorine-36, 

calcium-45, calcium-47, iron-55, cobalt60, nickel-63, zinc-65, strontium-90, 

antimony-125, barium-133, and cesium137. Prior to performing the final status 

survey, the Licensee conducted 

decontamination activities, as 

necessary, in the areas of the Facilities 

affected by these radionuclides. 

The Licensee conducted onsite final 

status surveys on the Facilities from 

February 24 to April 23, 2008. The final 

status survey report was attached to the 

Licensee’s amendment request dated 

June 3, 2008. The Licensee elected to 

demonstrate compliance with the 

radiological criteria for unrestricted 

release as specified in 10 CFR 20.1402 

by using the screening approach 

described in NUREG–1757, 

‘‘Consolidated NMSS Decommissioning 

Guidance,’’ Volume 2. The Licensee 

used the radionuclide-specific derived 

concentration guideline levels (DCGLs), 

developed there by the NRC, which 

comply with the dose criterion in 10 

CFR 20.1402. 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. The Licensee’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. The NRC thus finds that 

the Licensee’s final status survey results 

are acceptable. 

Based on its review, the staff 

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). The 

staff finds there were no significant 

environmental impacts from the use of 

radioactive material at the Facility. 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 Facility. 

No such hazards or impacts to the 

environment were identified. The NRC 

has identified no other radiological or 

non-radiological activities in the area 

that could result in cumulative 

environmental impacts. 

The NRC staff finds that the proposed 

termination of the license and release of 

the Facilities for unrestricted use is in 

compliance with 10 CFR 20. Based on 

its review, the staff considered the 

impact of the residual radioactivity at 

the Facilities 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 simply denying the 

amendment 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 Licensee’s final status survey data 

confirmed that the Facilities meet the 

requirements of 10 CFR 20.1402 for 

unrestricted release. Additionally, 

denying the amendment request 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 

Environmental Assessment to the 

Michigan Department of Environmental 

Quality (DEQ) for review on July 23, 

2008. By response dated July 24, 2008, 

the State agreed with the conclusions of 

the EA, and otherwise provided no 

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 


ebenthall on PROD1PC60 with NOTICES
53054 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 178 / Friday, September 12, 2008 / Notices 

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. Carol Lentz, Pfizer, Inc., letter to 

Patricia Pelke, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission, June 3, 2008 (ADAMS 

Accession No. ML081610504); 

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. NUREG–1757, ‘‘Consolidated 

NMSS Decommissioning Guidance.’’ 

6. By response dated July 24, 2008, 

the State had no comments. 

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 Lisle, Illinois, this 29th day of 

August 2008. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

Christine Lipa, 

Chief, Decommissioning Branch, Division of 

Nuclear Materials Safety, Region III. 

[FR Doc. E8–21274 Filed 9–11–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

[Docket No. 50–443–LA; ASLBP No. 08– 

872–02–LA–BD01] 

FPL Energy Seabrook LLC; 

Establishment of Atomic Safety and 

Licensing Board 

Pursuant to delegation by the 

Commission dated December 29, 1972, 

published in the Federal Register, 37 FR 

28,710 (1972), and the Commission’s 

regulations, see 10 CFR 2.104, 2.300, 

2.303, 2.309, 2.311, 2.318, and 2.321, 

notice is hereby given that an Atomic 

Safety and Licensing Board (Board) is 

being established to preside over the 

following proceeding: 

FPL Energy Seabrook LLC 

(Seabrook Station, Unit 1) 

This proceeding involves a license 

amendment request from FPL Energy 

Seabrook LLC proposing a revision to 

the Technical Specifications for 

Seabrook Station, Unit 1 in Rockingham 

County, New Hampshire. In response to 

an August 26, 2008 Notice of 

Consideration of Issuance of 

Amendments to Facility Operating 

Licenses, Proposed No Significant 

Hazards Consideration Determination, 

and Opportunity for a Hearing (73 FR 

50,356, 50,361), a request for hearing 

has been submitted by Thomas Saporito 

on behalf of himself and Saporito 

Energy Consultants. 

The Board is comprised of the 

following administrative judges: 

William J. Froehlich, Chairman, 

Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 

Panel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission, Washington, DC 20555– 

0001. 

E. Roy Hawkens, Atomic Safety and 

Licensing Board Panel, U.S. Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission, Washington, 

DC 20555–0001. 

Thomas S. Elleman, Atomic Safety 

and Licensing Board Panel, U.S. Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission, Washington, 

DC 20555–0001. 

All correspondence, documents, and 

other materials shall be filed in 

accordance with the NRC E-Filing rule, 

which the NRC promulgated in August 

2007 (72 FR 49,139). 

Issued at Rockville, Maryland, this 8th day 

of September 2008. 

E. Roy Hawkens, 

Chief Administrative Judge, Atomic Safety 

and Licensing Board Panel. 

[FR Doc. E8–21278 Filed 9–11–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES 

TRADE REPRESENTATIVE 

Generalized System of Preferences 

(GSP): Notice Regarding the 2008 

Annual Review for Acceptance of 

Product and Country Practices 

Petitions 

AGENCY: Office of the United States 

Trade Representative. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The Office of the United 

States Trade Representative (USTR) 

received petitions in connection with 

the 2008 GSP Annual Review to modify 

the list of products that are eligible for 

duty-free treatment under the GSP 

program and to modify the GSP status 

of certain GSP beneficiary developing 

countries because of country practices. 

This notice announces the product 

petitions, other than those requesting 

competitive need limitation (CNL) 

waivers, and country practice petitions 

accepted in previous GSP annual 

reviews that continue to be under 

review in the 2008 GSP Annual Review, 

and sets forth the schedule for comment 

and public hearings on these petitions, 

for requesting participation in the 

hearings, and for submitting pre-hearing 

and post-hearing briefs. The list of 

accepted petitions is available at: 

http://www.ustr.gov/ 

Trade_Development/ 

Preference_Programs/GSP/ 

Section_Index.html. [2008 Annual 

review]. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Regina Teeter, GSP Program, Office of 

the United States Trade Representative, 

1724 F Street, NW., Room F–214, 

Washington, DC 20508. The telephone 

number is (202) 395–6971, fax number 

is (202) 395–9481, and e-mail address is 

Regina_Teeter@ustr.eop.gov. 

DATES: The GSP regulations (15 CFR 

Part 2007) provide the schedule of dates 

for conducting an annual review unless 

otherwise specified in a Federal 

Register notice. The schedule for the 

2008 annual review is set forth below. 

Notification of any other changes will be 

given in the Federal Register. 

October 3, 2008—Due date for 

submission of pre-hearing briefs and 

requests to appear at the GSP 


ebenthall on PROD1PC60 with NOTICES