ML993490324
| ML993490324 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 07000734 |
| Issue date: | 12/06/1999 |
| From: | Adams M, Emeigh C, Gaskin C Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards |
| To: | |
| References | |
| -RFPFR | |
| Download: ML993490324 (2) | |
Text
,0 jk*PRr*G J*2.
NUCLEAR UNITED STATES C
0 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
-t WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 December 6, 1999 DOCKET NO: 70-734 LICENSEE: General Atomics (GA)
San Diego, California
SUBJECT:
SAFETY EVALUATION REPORT: BUILDING 31-1 RELEASE TO UNRESTRICTED USE BACKGROUND In an application dated August 27, 1999, GA requested that their license be amended to remove authorized activities at Building 31-1 from the license and to release Building 31-1 for unrestricted use. This facility is the Neutron Radiography Building on GA's main site. GA conducted a survey of Building 31-1 in accordance with the NRC-approved General Atomics' Site Decommissioning Plan and provided the results of that survey with their submittal. The licensee used the same methodology as they used for decontamination and decommissioning of the other facilities previously released at the site.
DISCUSSION Building 31-1 consists of five rooms. These rooms were used as laboratories, offices, SNM and source material storage vaults, and a control room for a critical assembly that had been previously located in nearby Building 31-2. GA completed the decontamination and final survey of Building 31-1 and submitted a final report entitled, "Final Radiological Survey Performed at General Atomics' Building 31-1," dated August 25, 1999. The report documents the results of radiological measurements completed inside the building and on the roof, and of soil samples collected from beneath the concrete floor inside the building and from the footprint areas 1 meter outside the building. The decontamination procedures and survey methodology were the same rigorous procedures as used in the Group 6, Group 7, Group 8, Group 9, Group 10, and Group 11 laboratories, Building 30 phases I and II, Triga Fuel Fabrication Facility, and others which have been previously released.
GA's radiological measurements and soil sample results provided in the final survey report for Building 31-1 demonstrate that the building and soil underneath the building and in the surrounding footprint meet the NRC-approved criteria for release to unrestricted use indicated in the GA Site Decommissioning Plan.
Inspectors from Region IVperformed a confirmatory survey of Building 31-1 on August 2-6, 1999, and collected numerous split samples for independent analysis (Inspection Report 70-734/99-01) and determined the following:
Building 31-1 housed offices, laboratories, storage vaults and a control room for a critical facility that was located in another building. The areas were classified as either "non-suspect affected" or "suspect affected areas." The licensee made surface and area measurements and analyses of the walls, floors, roof, and roof tar and gravel layers. Confirmatory surveys were accomplished in these areas by the NRC during this inspection.
2 The licensee's "Final Radiological Survey Performed at General Atomics' Building 31-1,"
dated August 24, 1999, was reviewed and found acceptable.
The licensee has implemented a program for the conduct and documentation of final surveys that follows the guidance contained in Draft NUREG/CR-5849, "Manual for Conducting Radiological Surveys in Support of License Termination."
Based upon GA's final survey data and NRC confirmatory surveys and soil samples, NRC has determined that Building 31-1 decommissioning meets the NRC-approved release criteria and that Building 31-1 can be released for unrestricted use.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Based on the information submitted by GA and confirmed by NRC inspection, the staff has determined that the changes to the license are related to decreased operations at the facility resulting from the proposed overall decommissioning of the site. Accordingly, the staff has determined that the criteria in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(1 1) for categorically excluding an action from an environmental review have been met. Therefore, neither an Environmental Assessment nor Environmental Impact Statement is necessary for this action.
CONCLUSION The staff concludes that GA's request to reduce licensed activities 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 IVPrincipal Inspector has no objection to this proposed action.
Principal Contributor Charles E. Gaskin Mary T. Adams