[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 131 (Monday, July 10, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35571-35574]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-16787]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket 70-364]
Babcock and Wilcox Company; Parks Township Facility; Director's
Decision Under 10 CFR 2.206
Notice is hereby given that the Director, Office of Nuclear
Material Safety and Safeguards, has taken action with regards to the
remaining issues (Sections Q and X) referred to the Commission's
Executive Director for Operations, by the Atomic Safety and Licensing
Board, in its Initial Director's Decision, dated January 3, 1995,
Babcock and Wilcox Company (Pennsylvania Nuclear Service Operation
Parks Township, PA), LBP-95-1, 41 NRC 1, 35 (1995). Section Q was
interpreted as a request that the NRC test for radioactive
contamination in the general vicinity of Kepple Hill and Riverview in
Parks Township, and Section X was interpreted as a request
[[Page 35572]]
for the NRC to investigate radiological contamination on the Farmers
Delight Dairy Farm. Notice of Receipt of Petition for Director's
Decision under 10 CFR 2.206, dated March 3, 1995, was published in the
Federal Register on March 13, 1995, (60 FR 13478).
The Director of the Office of Nuclear Material Safety and
Safeguards has determined, after taking actions with respect to each
request discussed in the Decision, that no further action by the
Commission is warranted. The reasons for this Decision are explained in
the ``Director's Decision under 10 CFR 2.206'' (DD-95-12), which is
published below.
A copy of the Decision will be filed with the Office of the
Secretary of the Commission in accordance with 10 CFR 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.
A copy of the Petition, Initial Decision, Notice of Receipt of
Petition for Director's Decision under 10 CFR 2.206, and other
documents related to the Petition are available for inspection in the
NRC Public Document Room, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC 20555, and
the Local Public Document Room located at the Apollo Memorial Library,
219 N. Pennsylvania Avenue, Apollo, Pennsylvania 15613.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 26th day of June 1995.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Malcolm R. Knapp,
Deputy Director, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.
I. Introduction
By Petition dated January 5, 1994, Citizens' Action for a Safe
Environment (CASE) and the Kiski Valley Coalition To Save Our Children
(the Coalition) (together referred to as Intervenors or Petitioners)
filed a joint request for an informal hearing pursuant to 10 CFR Part
2, Subpart L, with regard to Babcock & Wilcox Company's (Licensee)
application for renewal of Special Nuclear Material (SNM) License SNM-
414 issued to the Licensee by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(NRC or Commission) for the Pennsylvania Nuclear Service Operations
facility located in Parks Township, Armstrong County, Pennsylvania
(Parks Township facility). In a Memorandum and Order dated April 22,
1994, the Presiding Officer granted the request for hearing and
admitted the Petitioners as Intervenors.\1\ An informal hearing was
conducted pursuant to Subpart L of the Commission's procedural
regulations. In the Initial Decision, dated January 3, 1995,
authorizing the renewal of the materials license, the Presiding
Officer, pursuant to 10 CFR 2.1205(k)(2), referred to the Commission's
Executive Director for Operations for consideration, as a request for
action under 10 CFR 2.206, 12 areas of concern raised in that
proceeding by the Intervenors.\2\ These concerns were referred to my
office for review. Each of these concerns were reviewed with respect to
the requirements of 10 CFR 2.206. Two concerns \3\ (Sections Q and X)
were found to satisfy the requirements of 10 CFR 2.206. On March 7,
1995, a latter was sent to the Intervenors acknowledging the treatment
of the Intervenors' Sections Q and X as requests for action under 10
CFR 2.206.\4\
\1\ Babcock and Wilcox Company (Pennsylvania Nuclear Service
Operations, Parks Township, PA), LBP-94-12, 39 NRC 215 (1994).
\2\ Id., LBP-95-1, 41 NRC 1, 35 (1995).
\3\ As the Commission recently noted, there were three concerns
(Sections Q, R, and X). However, one of the concerns (Section R) was
included within Section Q. See Babcock and Wilcox Company
(Pennsylvania Nuclear Service Operations, Parks Township, PA), CLI-
95-04, slip op. at 7 (April 26, 1995), 41 NRC ____.
\4\ In the acknowledgement letter it was noted that the other
concerns (Sections B, H, I, M, P, S, T, U, W, and Y) had been
addressed by the Commission staff in affidavits of Michael A.
Lamastra and Heather M. Astwood. These affidavits were submitted to
the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board in the Subpart L proceeding on
September 22, 1994.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section Q has been interpreted as a request for the Commission to
test for radioactive contamination in the general vicinity of Kepple
Hill and Riverview in Parks Township. The apparent concern is that this
area is downwind of the Apollo facility, which the Intervenors assert
had been releasing radioactivity at a rate above regulatory limits. The
Intervenors rely on letters dated April 20, 1966, and May 26, 1969,
concerning the need for experimental data for an air surveillance
program at the Apollo plant and authorization by the Commission's
predecessor, the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC), for the discharge of
radioactive materials in concentrations exceeding 10 CFR Part 20
limits.
Section X has been interpreted as a request for the Commission to
investigate radiological contamination on the Farmers Delight Dairy
Farm (apparently located in Parks Township). The apparent concern is
that past operations of the Parks Township facility caused radioactive
contamination of the farm. As basis for this request, the Intervenors
assert that there is information in a 1966 U.S. Department of
Agriculture (USDA) study that indicates that the cattle on the farm
were having thyroid problems and that radionuclides were showing up in
the cows' milk.
I have completed my evaluation of the matters raised by the
Intervenors and have determined that, for the reasons stated below, no
further action by the Commission is warranted.
II. Background
The Nuclear Material and Equipment Company (NUMEC) began operations
at the Apollo and Parks Township facilities in the late 1950s. The
Atlantic Richfield Company (ARCO) purchased the stock of NUMEC in 1967.
In 1971, Babock & Wilcox (B&W) purchased NUMEC and is the current owner
of the Apollo and Parks Township facilities.
The primary function of the NUMEC Apollo facility was the
conversion of low-enriched (less than 5 wt. percent U-235) uranium
hexafluoride to uranium oxide for use in fuel for light-water-moderated
power reactors and to produce high-enriched (> 93 wt. percent U-235)
nuclear fuel material for use in naval reactors. The B&W Apollo
facility ceased manufacturing nuclear fuel in 1983 and has completed
site decommissioning. The Commission staff expects to terminate the
Apollo facility license in 1995.
The primary function of the NUMEC Parks Township facility was the
fabrication of plutonium fuel, the preparation of high-enriched uranium
fuel, and the production of zirconium/hafnium bars. The Parks Township
facility ceased fuel fabrication activities in 1980 and is currently
conducting decontamination and refurbishment of nuclear reactor
components and equipment. The Parks Township license was last renewed
on May 16, 1984, with an expiration date of May 31, 1989, and the
license is currently under timely renewal.\5\
\5\ The Commission on April 26, 1995, denied the Intervenors'
petition for review of the Presiding Officer's January 3, 1995,
Initial Decision (License Renewal), LBP-95-1 (``Initial Decision'').
The staff expects to renew the license in 1995.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Discussion
The NRC staff has evaluated the Intervenors' two requests for
action pursuant to 10 CFR 2.206. The evaluation and my disposition for
each request are discussed below.
1. Test for radioactive contamination in the general vicinity of
Kepple Hill and Riverview areas in Parks Township.
The Intervenors' request is based on their interpretation of
letters dated April 20, 1966, and May 26, 1969, from Roger D. Caldwell,
Manager, Health, Safety
[[Page 35573]]
and Licensing, of NUMEC concerning the need for experimental data for
an air surveillance program at the NUMEC Apollo plant\6\ and
authorization by the Atomic Energy Commission for the discharge of
radioactive materials in concentrations exceeding 10 CFR Part 20
limits.\7\
\6\ One of the sub-areas of concern accepted as an issue in the
informal hearing was ``[w]hether B&W Management practices as
manifested by the management of the Apollo facility threaten offsite
releases of radiation from the Park Township facility.'' LBP-94-12,
39 NRC, 215, 222-23 (1994).
\7\ Prior to January 1994, NRC regulations for radioactivity in
effluents to unrestricted areas were contained in 10 CFR 20.106. The
current requirements are found in 10 CFR 1302. 10 CFR 20.106(a)
limited radioactivity in air effluents to unrestricted areas to less
than those listed in Appendix B, Table II, except as authorized in
10 CFR 20.106(b). 10 CFR 20.106(b) allowed licensees to propose
limits higher than those specified in 10 CFR 20.106(a), if certain
conditions were met. 10 CFR 20.106(d) clarified that the limits
listed in Appendix B, Table II, apply at the boundary of the
restricted area and not at the stack discharge point.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
By application dated November 13, 1968, and supplement dated March
5, 1969, and pursuant to 10 CFR 20.106(b), NUMEC requested that License
SNM-145 be amended to permit concentrations up to 100 times the limits
specified in Part 20, Appendix B, Table II, in any stack effluent,
provided that concentrations at the roof edge and in the local
environment complied with 10 CFR Part 20 limits. By License Amendment
31, dated May 26, 1969, the AEC authorized NUMEC to discharge
radioactive material from any stack, in concentrations up to 100 times
the values specified in Appendix B, Table II, of 10 CFR Part 20\8\
subject to the following conditions:
\8\ The values set forth in 10 CFR Part 20, Appendix B, Table
II, are the regulatory limits applicable at the site boundary, not
at the stack.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(a) Concentrations of radioactive material measured by the
continuously operating air samplers positioned at the plant roof
perimeter shall not exceed the values specified in Appendix B, Table
II, of 10 CFR Part 20; and
(b) an environmental air sampling program shall be conducted in the
neighboring unrestricted areas\9\ of the plant.
\9\ 10 CFR 20.1003 defines ``unrestricted area'' as ``... an
area, access to which is neither limited nor controlled by the
licensee.'' Prior to January 1, 1994, an unrestricted area was
defined as ``... any area access to which is not controlled by the
licensee for purposes of protection of individuals from exposure to
radiation and radioactive materials, and any area used for
residential quarters.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Accordingly, even though NUMEC was authorized to discharge at the
stack up to 100 times the value specified in Appendix B, Table II,
NUMEC was still required to meet the limits at the site boundary (see
footnote 8). Moreover, NUMEC was required to meet these same values at
the plant roof perimeter.
To evaluate the Intervenors' concern about the alleged
contamination in the general vicinity of the Kepple Hill and Riverview
areas of Parks Township, the staff estimated the average airborne
uranium concentrations using the results from the environmental
monitoring program, which was a condition of the License. The NRC staff
calculated the average airborne uranium concentrations to be
3.6 x 10-13uCi/cc.\10\ This calculated value is less than one
tenth of the maximum permissible concentration in air for insoluble
uranium-238 and uranium-235; the requirement for unrestricted air
effluent set forth in 10 CFR Part 20, Appendix B, Table II.
Accordingly, the releases from the facility were within 10 CFR Part 20
requirements for unrestricted release and, therefore, were not a safety
concern.
\10\ An estimate of the average airborne uranium concentration
can be calculated using a uranium deposition rate of 20 pCi/
Ft2/week (measured by NUMEC during plant operation) and
assuming a gravitational settlement rate of 0.001 meters per second.
The NRC staff also estimated the potential contamination of soil
outside the plant boundary from facility operations.\11\ Using
conservative assumptions, the Commission staff calculated a maximum
concentration of 12 pCi per gram of soil. This is less than the
Commission's current release criteria for uranium.\12\
\11\ An estimate of the soil uranium concentration can be
calculated using a uranium deposition rate of 20 pCi/Ft2/week
(measured by NUMEC during plant operation) and assuming a 1cm depth,
a soil density of 1.5g cm-3, and a 15-year operating period at
Apollo.
\12\ The current release criteria for uranium, which is 30 pCi
per gram, is set forth in the Commission's ``Branch Technical
Position'' (BTP) published in the Federal Register, October 23,
1981.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission staff also reviewed environmental radiation
monitoring data collected during the facility's period of operation.
Environmental radiation monitoring has been conducted at the Apollo
site since 1968. Monitoring programs included measurements of
radioactive materials in the environment (river water, and sediment,
air, soil, and vegetation) and thermoluminescent dosimetry (TLD)
measurements of direct radiation in the environment. Radiological
monitoring stations have been active in the Apollo facility area for as
long as three decades, monitoring the Allegheny and Kiskiminetas Rivers
and various tributaries, as well as other surface waters and ground
water. These include Commission, State, and B&W stations. Based on its
review of this data, the Commission staff concludes that operation of
the Apollo facility did not result in any significant changes to normal
background levels outside the immediate site area.
The Commission staff also reviewed the results of an aerial
radiological survey to measure gamma radiation \13\ levels in the area
of the Apollo facility. At the request of the Commission, the survey
was conducted by EG&G Energy Measurement Group from June 15-19, 1981.
The survey data identified only background levels of radiation.
\13\ Gamma radiation is electromagnetic photons originating from
the nucleus of an atom. Gamma rays are similar to x-rays.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In summary, the Commission staff calculated the potential airborne
uranium concentration and potential contamination of soil, reviewed the
environmental monitoring and aerial radiological survey data, and
concluded that the radioactive releases from the Apollo facility have
been within regulatory limits and have not resulted in concentrations
of radioactivity in the soil greater than the NRC release criteria
stated in the Branch Technical Position (see footnote 12). In reaching
this conclusion, the staff took into account the fact that in 1969, the
AEC authorized NUMEC to release at the stack, radioactive materials in
concentrations up to 100 times the values (applicable at the site
boundary) listed in Appendix B of 10 CFR Part 20. The Intervenors'
request that the Commission test for radiological contamination in the
general vicinity of Kepple Hill and Riverview in Parks Township is
granted to the extent of the review described above. However, the
Intervenors have failed to raise any substantial health or safety
issues. Therefore, no further action is warranted.
2. Investigate potential radiological contamination on the Farmers
Delight Dairy Farm located in the vicinity of the Parks Township
facility.
In its request for the Commission to investigate radiological
contamination on the Farmers Delight Dairy Farm, the Intervenors assert
that information contained in a U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)
report entitled NUMEC-1966 indicates that cattle on the farm are having
thyroid problems and that radionuclides are showing up in the cows'
milk. The Intervenors indicate that the report was read to them over
the telephone by a reference librarian at the USDA Library in
Beltsville, Maryland. The Intervenors also assert that the report
``vanished'' from that Library.
To evaluate the NUMEC-1966 report, the Commission staff searched
its files,
[[Page 35574]]
requested both B&W and ARCO to search their files, and requested the
USDA to check its files for a copy of the report. No copy was found.
However, the USDA did confirm that the only copy in its system was
missing from the USDA Beltsville, Maryland, library. It was also
determined that NUMEC-1966 was not a USDA report but a NUMEC-published
document. The Commission staff again searched its files and requested
that B&W and ARCO search their files for a NUMEC report entitled NUMEC-
1966. Again, no copy was found.
Since the Commission staff was unable to evaluate the NUMEC-1966
report, the staff reviewed environmental radiation monitoring data
collected from the area of the Parks Township facility. Environmental
radiation monitoring has been conducted at the Parks Township site
since 1969. The monitoring program includes measurements of radioactive
materials in the environment (air, soil, and vegetation) and TLD
measurements of direct radiation in the environment. These include
Commission, State, and B&W monitoring stations. The NRC staff has also
taken soil samples from private residences and other locations in the
Parks Township area.\14\ The NRC staff has reviewed the environmental
monitoring data, including the soil samples, and concluded that there
has been no significant increase in background levels outside of the
immediate site area of the Parks Township facility. The Intervenors'
request that the Commission investigate potential radiological
contamination on the Farmers Delight Dairy Farm is granted to the
extent of the review described above. The Intervenors have, however,
failed to raise a substantial health or safety concern; therefore, no
further action is warranted.
\14\ The NRC soil sampling results were reported in NRC combined
Inspection Reports Nos. 70-135/93-01 and 70-364/93-02; 70-135/93-02
and 70-364/93-03; 70-135/93-03 and 70-364/93-04; 70-135/94-01 and
70-364/94-01; and 70-135/94-02 and 70-364/94-02.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Conclusion
The institution of proceedings pursuant to 10 CFR 2.206 is
appropriate only where substantial health and safety issues have been
raised. See Consolidated Edison Co. of New York (Indian Point, Units 1,
2, and 3), CLI-75-8, 2 NRC 173, 175-76 (1975), and Washington Public
Power Supply System (WPPSS Nuclear Project No. 2), DD-84-7, 19 NRC 899,
923 (1984). This is the standard that I have applied to determine
whether the actions requested by the Intervenors are warranted. Since
no substantial health and safety issues have been raised by the
Intervenors and for the reasons discussed above, no basis exists for
taking any further action in response to the requests beyond that
described above. Accordingly, in this matter, the Commission is taking
no further action pursuant to 10 CFR 2.206.
As provided by 10 CFR 2.206(c), a copy of this Decision will be
filed with the Secretary of the Commission for the Commission's review.
The Decision will become the final action of the Commission 25 days
after issuance unless the Commission, on its own motion, institutes a
review of the Decision.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 26th day of June, 1995.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Malcolm R. Knapp,
Deputy Director, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.
[FR Doc. 95-16787 Filed 7-7-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-M
