[Date Prev][Date Next][Date Index]
E-M:/ release of NRC regulated site at Upjohn - Portage
- Subject: E-M:/ release of NRC regulated site at Upjohn - Portage
- From: "Alex J. Sagady & Associates" <email@example.com>
- Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2008 13:14:32 -0500
- Delivered-to: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Delivered-to: email@example.com
- List-name: Enviro-Mich
- Reply-to: "Alex J. Sagady & Associates" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Enviro-Mich message from "Alex J. Sagady & Associates" <email@example.com>
[Federal Register: November 5, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 215)]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 030-04781]
Notice of Availability of Environmental Assessment and Finding of
No Significant Impact for License Amendment to Byproduct Materials;
License No. 21-00182-03, for Unrestricted Release of the Pharmacia &
Upjohn Company LLC; Facility in Kalamazoo, 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 <A HREF="mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org">email@example.com</A>.
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is proposing to amend
Byproduct Materials License No. 21-00182-03. This license is held by
Pharmacia & Upjohn Company LLC (the Licensee), and authorizes the use
of byproduct materials within Building 267 (the Facility), located at
333 Portage Street, Kalamazoo, Michigan. Amendment of the license would
authorize release of the Facility for unrestricted use. The Licensee
requested this action in a letter dated July 9, 2008 (ADAMS Accession
No. ML081920702). 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 amended 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 July 9, 2008,
license amendment request, resulting in release of the Facility for
unrestricted use. License No. 21-00182-03 was issued on April 24, 1958,
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 Facility is a six-story steel frame building on a 39-acre
pharmaceutical research and development campus comprised of offices and
laboratories located in a primarily commercial area. The Licensee
ceased using licensed materials in the Facility in April 2008, and has
conducted final status surveys of the Facility. 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
Facility, and seeks the unrestricted use of its Facility.
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 half-lives greater than 120 days: Hydrogen-3 and
carbon-14. Prior to performing the final status survey, the Licensee
conducted decontamination activities, as necessary, in the areas of the
Facility affected by these radionuclides.
The Licensee conducted onsite final status surveys on the Facility
during April, May and June 2008. The final status survey report was
attached to the Licensee's amendment request dated July 9, 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
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 NRC-Licensed Nuclear Facility''
(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
The NRC staff finds that the proposed amendment of the license and
release of the Facility for unrestricted use is in compliance with 10
CFR Part 20. 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 Facility 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.
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
October 1, 2008. By response dated October 9, 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 under section 106 of the National Historic
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 <A HREF="http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html">http://
www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html</A>. 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
1. Dee L. Clement, Pfizer, Inc., letter to William Snell, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, July 9, 2008 (ADAMS Accession No.
2. Dee L. Clement, Pfizer, Inc., letter to William Snell, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, April 8, 2008 (ADAMS Accession No.
3. Dee L. Clement, Pfizer, Inc., letter to William Snell, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, March 25, 2008 (ADAMS Accession No.
4. Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 20, Subpart E,
``Radiological Criteria for License Termination'';
5. Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 51, ``Environmental
Protection Regulations for Domestic Licensing and Related Regulatory
6. NUREG-1496, ``Generic Environmental Impact Statement in Support
of Rulemaking on Radiological Criteria for License Termination of NRC-
Licensed Nuclear Facility'';
7. NUREG-1757, ``Consolidated Decommissioning Guidance.''
8. By response dated October 9, 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 <A HREF="mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org">email@example.com</A>. 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 22nd day of October 2008.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Chief, Materials Control, ISFSI, and Decommissioning Branch, Division
of Nuclear Materials Safety, Region III.
[FR Doc. E8-26361 Filed 11-4-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
EPA's Federal Register: http://epa.gov/fedreg/
Alex J. Sagady & Associates http://www.sagady.com
Environmental Enforcement, Permit/Technical Review, Public Policy,
Expert Witness Review and Litigation Investigation on Air, Water and
Waste/Community Environmental and Resource Protection
Prospectus at: http://www.sagady.com/sagady.pdf
657 Spartan Avenue, East Lansing, MI 48823
(517) 332-6971; firstname.lastname@example.org
ENVIRO-MICH: Internet List and Forum for Michigan Environmental
and Conservation Issues and Michigan-based Citizen Action. Archives at
Postings to: email@example.com For info, send email to
firstname.lastname@example.org with a one-line message body of "info enviro-mich"
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
All views and opinions presented above are solely those of the author or
attributed source and do not necessarily reflect those of GLIN or the Great Lakes Commission.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *