55874 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 188 / Friday, September 26, 2008 / Notices 

devices. Furthermore, NRC inspections 

have evaluated the Licensee’s 

performance and determined that the 

Licensee has safely handled these 

unregistered sources for many years. 

Accordingly, the NRC staff has 

concluded that granting this exemption 

is authorized by law and will not 

endanger life or property or the common 

defense and security, and is in the 

public interest. 

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed 

Action 

The proposed action is largely 

administrative in nature. The Licensee 

has handled sources and devices which 

have not been registered by the NRC 

under 10 CFR 32.210, or by an 

Agreement State, for many years. The 

Licensee is qualified by sufficient 

training and experience and has 

sufficient facilities and equipment to 

handle these sources and devices. 

Approving this exemption will have no 

environmental impact. 

Environmental Impacts of the 

Alternatives to the Proposed Action 

Due to the largely administrative 

nature of the proposed action, its 

environmental impacts are small. 

Additionally, denying the exemption 

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 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 

The NRC staff has determined that the 

proposed action is of a procedural 

nature, and will not affect listed species 

or critical habitat. Therefore, no further 

consultation is required under Section 7 

of the Endangered Species Act. The 

NRC staff has also determined that the 

proposed action is not the type of 

activity that has the potential to cause 

effects on historic properties. Therefore, 

no further consultation is required 

under Section 106 of the National 

Historic Preservation Act. 

III. Finding of No Significant Impact 

The NRC staff has prepared this EA in 

support of the proposed action. On the 

basis of this EA, the NRC finds that 

there are no significant environmental 

impacts from the proposed action, and 

that preparation of an environmental 

impact statement is not warranted. 

Accordingly, the NRC has determined 

that a Finding of No Significant Impact 

is appropriate. 

IV. Further Information 

Documents related to this action, 

including the application for exemption 

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. License renewal application dated 

June 29, 2005 [ML052130136] 

2. Licensee letter dated October 31, 

2005 [ML053130381] 

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, O1 F21, One 

White Flint North, 11555 Rockville 

Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. The PDR 

reproduction contractor will copy 

documents for a fee. 

Dated at Region I, 475 Allendale Road, 

King of Prussia, PA, this 11th day of 

September, 2008. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

James P. Dwyer, 

Chief, Commercial and R&D Branch, Division 

of Nuclear Materials Safety, Region I. 

[FR Doc. E8–22689 Filed 9–25–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

[Docket No. 030–11789] 

Notice of Environmental Assessment 

Related to the Issuance of a License 

Amendment to Byproduct Material 

License No. 24–00196–07, for 

Unrestricted Release of a Facility for 

Saint Louis University, St. Louis, MO 

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission. 

ACTION: Issuance of Environmental 

Assessment and Finding of No 

Significant Impact for License 

Amendment. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

George M. McCann, 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) 

829–9856; fax number: (630) 515–1259; 

or by e-mail at Mike.McCann@nrc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Introduction 

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC) is considering the 

issuance of an amendment to terminate 

NRC Byproduct Materials License No. 

24–00196–07, which is held by Saint 

Louis University (licensee). The 

issuance of the amendment would 

authorize the unrestricted release of the 

licensee’s Institute for Molecular 

Virology (the facility), which consists of 

a 25,000 square foot building located on 

the licensee’s campus at 3681 Park 

Avenue, St. Louis, Missouri. 

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 request to release the 

facility for unrestricted use in 

accordance with 10 CFR Part 20, 

Subpart E. The Licensee requested this 

action in a letter dated July 9, 2008 

(ADAMS Accession Number 

ML081930612). The license was issued 

on January 16, 1976, pursuant to 10 CFR 

Part 30, and has been amended 

periodically since that time. This 

license authorized the Licensee to use 

unsealed byproduct materials for 

conducting research and development 

activities involving medical research, 

diagnostic and therapy medical 

procedures, laboratory studies and 

educational programs in the areas of 

molecular virology, viral oncology, and 

cancer biology. 

The licensee performed a Historical 

Site Assessment (HSA) in May and June 

of 2008. The purpose of the HSA was to 

determine the current status of the 

facility including potential, likely, or 

known sources of radioactive 

contamination by gathering data from 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 188 / Friday, September 26, 2008 / Notices 55875 

various sources. This data included 

physical characteristics and location of 

the site as well as information gathered 

from personnel interviews and 

inspection of site operating records, and 

from radiological surveys. Records 

reviewed included: radioactive 

materials licenses, license applications, 

amendment requests, meeting minutes, 

radiological surveys, radionuclide 

receipt and distribution records, 

incident reports, facility renovation 

records, blueprints, plans and design 

specifications. Personnel interviews 

included radiation safety, research, 

maintenance, operations, and facilities 

personnel. Current employees having 

knowledge of facility historical 

operations were interviewed. 

The licensee did not dispose of 

radioactive waste via on-site burial. All 

waste containing long lived 

radioisotopes was shipped offsite to a 

licensed landfill, approved to receive 

and dispose of radioactive materials. No 

waste-related environmental concerns 

were identified during the record search 

or interviews of the radiation safety 

staff. There were no recorded spills or 

loss of control that required additional 

investigation. 

Decontamination of the facility was 

completed on June 20, 2008. The 

licensee’s ‘‘SLU IMV Final Status 

Report, Rev 4.pdf Institute for Molecular 

Virology Decommissioning Final Status 

Report,’’ dated June 24, 2008 

(ML081930612), was submitted to the 

NRC on July 9, 2008. 

Based on the Licensee’s survey results 

it was determined that only routine 

decontamination activities, in 

accordance with the licensee’s NRCapproved, operating radiation safety 

procedures, were required. The Licensee 

was not required to submit a 

decommissioning plan to the NRC 

because worker cleanup activities and 

procedures are consistent with those 

approved for routine operations. The 

Licensee conducted surveys of the 

facility 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 at its facility and 

seeks the termination of its NRC license. 

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed 

Action 

The historical review of licensed 

activities conducted at the Facility 

shows that such activities involved use 

of the following radionuclides with halflives greater than 120 days: Hydrogen3 and carbon-14. Prior to performing the 

final status survey, the Licensee 

conducted radiation surveys and 

decontamination activities, as 

necessary, in the areas of the Facility 

affected by these radionuclides. 

The Licensee conducted a final status 

survey between June 17 and June 20, 

2008, in the facility. The licensee’s 

surveys included the liquid drain, 

ventilation exhaust and vacuum 

systems. No areas were considered to 

have a potential for delivering a dose to 

the public above the release criteria. 

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 radionuclidespecific 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 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). 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 

release of the Facility for unrestricted 

use is in compliance with 10 CFR 

20.1402. Based on its review, the staff 

considered the impact of the residual 

radioactivity at 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 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 Facility meets 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 

The NRC provided a draft of this 

Environmental Assessment to the 

Missouri Department of Health and 

Senior Services Waste, Division of 

Community and Public Health, Office of 

Emergency Coordination on September 

3, 2008. On September 4, 2008, the State 

responded by telephone to the NRC 

indicating that the State did not have 

any comments or concerns regarding the 

release of the licensee’s facility. 

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 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
55876 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 188 / Friday, September 26, 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. Mark Haenschen, M.S., J.D., letter 

to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 

Region III, dated July 9, 2008 (ADAMS 

Accession No. ML081930612). 

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;’’ NUREG– 

1757, Consolidated Decommissioning 

Guidance. 

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 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 16th day of 

September 2008. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

Christine A. Lipa, 

Chief, Decommissioning Branch, Division of 

Nuclear Materials Safety, Region III. 

[FR Doc. E8–22687 Filed 9–25–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

[Docket No. 52–016] 

Calvert Cliffs 3 Nuclear Project, LLC, 

and Unistar Nuclear Operating 

Services, LLC Notice of Hearing and 

Opportunity To Petition for Leave To 

Intervene and Order Imposing 

Procedures for Access to Sensitive 

Unclassified Non-Safeguards 

Information and Safeguards 

Information for Contention Preparation 

on a Combined License for the Calvert 

Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant Unit 3 

Pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act of 

1954, as amended, and the regulations 

in Title 10 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations (10 CFR) Part 2, ‘‘Rules of 

Practice for Domestic Licensing 

Proceedings and Issuance of Orders,’’ 10 

CFR Part 50, ‘‘Domestic Licensing of 

Production and Utilization Facilities,’’ 

and 10 CFR Part 52, Licenses, 

Certifications, and Approvals for 

Nuclear Power Plants,’’ notice is hereby 

given that a hearing will be held, at a 

time and place to be set in the future by 

the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC, the Commission) or 

designated by the Atomic Safety and 

Licensing Board (Board). The hearing 

will consider the application dated July 

13, 2007, and March 14, 2008, filed by 

Constellation Generation Group, LLC, 

and UniStar Nuclear Operating Services, 

LLC (CGG and UniStar), pursuant to 

Subpart C of 10 CFR Part 52 for a 

combined license (COL). The 

application was supplemented by letters 

dated July 16, August 2, September 11, 

October 30, December 14, 2007, and 

January 14, March 3, March 14, May 15, 

May 30, June 20, July 31, August 18 and 

August 19, 2008. The application was 

revised by letter dated August 20, 2008, 

which among other things changed the 

applicants to Calvert Cliffs 3 Nuclear 

Project, LLC, and UniStar Nuclear 

Operating Services, LLC. The 

application requests approval of a COL 

for Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 

Unit 3, to be located in Calvert County, 

Maryland. The two parts of the 

application were accepted for docketing 

on January 25, 2008 (73 FR 5877, 

January 31, 2008) and June 3, 2008 (73 

FR 32606, June 9, 2008). The docket 

number established for this COL 

application is 52–016. The Calvert Cliffs 

COL application incorporates by 

reference the application for a Standard 

Design Certification for the U.S. EPR, 

which was submitted to the NRC by 

AREVA NP on December 11, 2007, and 

supplemented by AREVA on February 

7, 2008, and February 18, 2008. The 

Standard Design Certification for the 

U.S. EPR is the subject of an ongoing 

rulemaking under docket number 52– 

020. By letter to AREVA dated February 

25, 2008, the staff has accepted the 

Standard Design Certification for the 

U.S. EPR for docketing. 

The hearing on the COL application 

will be conducted by a Board that will 

be designated by the Chairman of the 

Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 

Panel or will be conducted by the 

Commission. Notice as to the 

membership of the Board will be 

published in the Federal Register at a 

later date. The NRC staff will complete 

a detailed technical review of the COL 

application and will document its 

findings in a safety evaluation report. 

The Commission will refer a copy of the 

COL application to the Advisory 

Committee on Reactor Safeguards 

(ACRS) in accordance with 10 CFR 

52.87, ‘‘Referral to the ACRS,’’ and the 

ACRS will report on those portions of 

the application that concern safety. 

Any person whose interest may be 

affected by this proceeding and who 

desires to participate as a party to this 

proceeding must file a written petition 

for leave to intervene in accordance 

with 10 CFR 2.309. Those permitted to 

intervene become parties to the 

proceeding, subject to any limitations in 

the order granting leave to intervene, 

and have the opportunity to participate 

fully in the conduct of the hearing. 

All documents filed in NRC 

adjudicatory proceedings, including a 

request for hearing, a petition for leave 

to intervene, any motion or other 

document filed in the proceeding prior 

to the submission of a request for 

hearing or petition to intervene, and 

documents filed by interested 

governmental entities participating 

under 10 CFR 2.315(c), must be filed in 

accordance with the NRC E-Filing rule, 

which the NRC promulgated in August 

28, 2007, (72 FR 49139). The E-Filing 

process requires participants to submit 

and serve all adjudicatory documents 

over the internet, or in some cases to 

mail copies on electronic storage media. 

Participants may not submit paper 

copies of their filings unless they seek 

an exemption in accordance with the 

procedures described below. 

To comply with the procedural 

requirements of E-Filing, at least 10 

days prior to the filing deadline, the 

petitioner must contact the Office of the 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES