ML20154D223

SER Accepting Amend 49 to License SNM-696 for General Atomics

ML20154D223
Person / Time
Site:	07000734
Issue date:	09/30/1998
From:	NRC
To:
Shared Package
ML20154D215	List: ML20154D210 ML20154D217 ML20154D223
References
NUDOCS 9810070160
Download: ML20154D223 (2)

Text

1 l

p ato

.f" 4 UNITED STATES )

E

)Lf E! NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 i

V ,# September 30, 1998

%*sse e DOCKET NO: 70-734 l l

LICENSEE: General Atomics (GA)

San Diego, California l

SUBJECT:

SAFETY EVALUATION REPORT: APPLICATION DATED AUGUST 14, 1998, REQUEST TO RELEASE FOR UNRESTRICTED USE BUILDING 2 LABORATORIES - GROUP 10 BACKGROUND ,

By letter dated August 14,1998, GA notified the NRC of the completion of decommissioning of nine laboratories in Building 2 (also known as the Science Laboratories Building or "L" Building).

This group of laboratories is designated as " Group 10." in accordance with 10 CFR 70.38(j),

the August 14 submittalincluded the results of a survey condugted by GA in a report entitled,

" Final Radiological Survey of Selected Building 2 Laboratories for Release to Unrestricted Use Group 10," dated August 13,1998.

DISCUSSLOE Radioactive materials were used in only two of the nine Group 10 laboratories. One of these laboratories was used from the early 1970's until 1986 to perform chemical and spectrographic analyses on materials containing uranium and thorium. The second laboratory was used to perform grinding, screening, densitometric analysis, and cutting of irradiated graphite beginning around 1968 until the early 1970's. GA's survey identified a small area of Cs-137 contamination in this laboratory, which was then decontaminated with a mechanical scabbling device.

The licensee's final survey data showed that any remaining residual radioactivity in the Group 10 Laboratories was well below the criteria established in " Guidelines for Decontamination of Facilities and Equipment Prior to Release for Unrestricted Use or Termination of Licenses for Byproduct, Source or Special Nuclear Material," dated April 1993, as incorporated in General Atomics Materials License SNM-696. These criteria are consistent with NRC's Site Decommissioning Management Plan Action Plan Criteria (57FR13389). In addition, the State of Califomia performed confirmatory surveys of the areas with alpha and beta radiation detection equipment and found no contamination.

This decommissioning action was conducted in accordance with an approved decommissioning plan. Since the decommissioning plan was approved by the NRC prior to August 20,1999, the criteria in Subpart E of 10 CFR Part 20 do not apply.

Additional clean-up of these areas will only be approved if, based on new information, the NRC determines that the release criteria established in " Guidelines for Decontamination of Facilities and Equipment Prior to Release for Unrestricted Use or Termination of Licenses for Byproduct, Source or Special Nuclear Material," dated April 1993, were not met, and residual radioactivity remaining at the site could result in a significant threat to public health and safety.

~

9810070160 980930 PDR ADOCK 07000734 C PDR

~

, e ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Based on the information submitted by GA and the NRC Regional Inspector, the staff has ';

determined that the following conditions have been met: i

1. There is no significant change in the types or significant increase in the amounts of any ,

effluents that may be released offsite,

2. There is no significant increase in individual or cumu!ative occupational radiation exposure,

3. There is no significant construction impact, and )

4. There is no significant increase in the potential for or consequences from radiological l accidents.  ;

Accordingly, pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(c)(11), neither an environmental assessment nor an environmental impact statement is warranted for this action.

CONCLUSION The staff concludes that GA's request to release the Building 2 - Group 10 Laboratories for unrestricted use meets regulatory requirements and that there is reasonable assurance that the proposed action will not adversely impact upon the health and safety of the public or the environment.

The Region IV Principal Inspector has no objection to this proposed action.

Princioal Contributor Susan D. Chotoo l

l i

i

. .