[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 59 (Monday, March 28, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page ]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-7209]


[Federal Register: March 28, 1994]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket 70-36]


Environmental Statements; Availability, etc.: Combustion 
Engineering, Inc.

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission is considering the renewal 
of Special Nuclear Material License SNM-33 for the continued operation 
of the Combustion Engineering, Inc. (CE), Hematite Nuclear Fuel 
Manufacturing Facility, for 10 years.

Summary of the Environmental Assessment

Identification of the Proposed Action

    The proposed action is the renewal of License SNM-33, allowing CE 
to continue manufacturing low-enriched nuclear fuel for 10 years. The 
current license authorizes CE to receive, possess, use, and transfer 
special nuclear material in accordance with 10 CFR part 70 and source 
material in accordance with 10 CFR part 40. This license also allows CE 
to delivery radioactive material to a carrier for transportation in 
accordance with 10 CFR part 71. CE produces low-enriched (5 
percent U-235) ceramic nuclear fuel for light-water cooled reactors.

The Need for the Proposed Action

    The proposed action is needed for CE to continue to produce low-
enriched nuclear fuel pellets which will ultimately be used by 
commercial nuclear power plants to produce electricity. Since CE is one 
of only a few facilities that manufacture nuclear fuel in this country, 
there remains a need for the fuel by the nuclear power industry.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    Airborne effluents from process areas and process equipment 
involving uranium in a dispersible form are subject to air filtering, 
prior to release to the atmosphere. Effluents from the process areas 
are continuously collected on a particulate filter and are analyzed for 
gross alpha activity. The monitoring data for 1982 through September 
1993 demonstrates that the levels of gross alpha activity released from 
the site do not exceed the limits specified in 10 CFR part 20, Appendix 
B, Table II, Column 1.
    There are no planned releases of radioactive liquid wastes from 
routine production processes. Liquids with low-uranium content, such as 
mop water, cleanup water, and grinder coolant water, are collected and 
then evaporated to recover the uranium. Liquids with higher uranium 
content are processed to recover the uranium, usually by precipitation 
and filtration. Process filtrates, including wet recovery system 
filtrate and spent scrubber solutions, are routed to a calibrated tank, 
mixed, sampled, and the filtrates are then evaporated, solidified with 
concrete, and packaged for shipment to a licensed burial site.
    A potential source of radioactive liquid waste is from the laundry, 
sink and shower areas, and the chemistry laboratory. The laundry water 
is filtered and sampled prior to discharge to the sanitary sewer 
system. The water from change room sinks and showers is also discharged 
through the sanitary waste system. Effluents from the sanitary waste 
system enter the site creek immediately below the site pond dam. A grab 
sample of the water is taken each week and analyzed for gross alpha and 
beta activities. The chemistry laboratory discharges to the storm drain 
system. While analytical residues are recycled to recover the uranium 
and therefore do not contribute to the effluents, when the laboratory 
glassware is cleaned, small amounts of liquids wash down the sinks and 
are discharged to the storm drain system. The storm drain system 
discharges into the site pond which overflows to form the site creek. 
The overflow is sampled weekly and analyzed for gross alpha and beta.
    Liquid effluent sample data for 1982 through September 1993 was 
reviewed and indicates that the results are a small fraction of the 
values set forth in 10 CFR part 20, Appendix B, Table II, Column 2.
    CE conducts an environmental sampling program to determine if site 
operations are impacting the environment. Air, soil, vegetation, 
surface water, and ground water samples are collected from various 
locations on or near the plant site. Review of the data for 1982 
through September 1993 indicates there is no significant impact to the 
environment from manufacturing operations.
    A dose assessment was performed to evaluate the impact from site 
operations to the maximally exposed individual who would be the nearest 
resident. The maximally exposed individual is located 950 feet (290 m), 
west-northwest of the plant site. The effective whole body dose for the 
maximally exposed individual is 3.31E-02 mrem/year. The critical organ 
for this exposure would be the lungs, with a dose of 1.90E-01 mrem/
year. The annual dose received by the nearest resident is below the 
federal dose limits set forth in 10 CFR part 20 and 40 CFR part 190, 
500 mrem/year and 25 mrem/year, respectively.

Conclusion

    Liquid and airborne effluents released to the environment are well 
below all regulatory limits. Results of the environmental monitoring 
program have shown that environmental radiation levels are not 
increasing as a result of site operations. The total whole body dose 
received by the maximally exposed individual from site operations is 
well below federal limits. Therefore, the staff concludes that the 
impact to the environment and to human health and safety from 
manufacturing nuclear fuel at this site has been minimal.

Alternatives to the Proposed Action

    The alternative to the proposed action would be to deny the license 
renewal. Not renewing the operating license would cause CE to cease 
operations and begin decontamination and decommissioning activities at 
the site. While terminating licensed activities at CE may create a 
minimal positive effect on the immediate environment, the socioeconomic 
impact of denying the license would adversely affect the area because 
CE is one of the largest employers in the area. This alternative would 
be considered if there were public health and safety issues that could 
not be resolved to the satisfaction of the NRC.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

    Staff utilized the application dated November 22, 1989, and 
additional information dated October 11, and December 16, 1991, and 
December 10, 1993. Staff toured the CE facility on August 18 and 19, 
1990. The region III inspector and CE staff were consulted in preparing 
this document. The staff also contacted personnel from the State of 
Missouri, Department of Natural Resources, Air Pollution Control 
Program.

Finding of No Significant Impact

    The Commission has prepared an Environmental Assessment related to 
the renewal of Special Nuclear Material License SNM-33. On the basis of 
the assessment, the Commission has concluded that environmental impacts 
that would be created by the proposed licensing action would not be 
significant and do not warrant the preparation of an Environmental 
Impact Statement. Accordingly, it has been determined that a Finding of 
No Significant Impact is appropriate.
    The Environmental Assessment and the above documents related to 
this proposed action are available for public inspection and copying at 
the Commission's Public Document Room at the Gelman Building, 2120 L 
Street NW., Washington, DC, and the Local Public Document Room located 
at the Jefferson College Library, 1000 Viking Drive, Hillsboro, MO.

Opportunity for a Hearing

    Any person whose interest may be affected by the issuance of this 
renewal may file a request for a hearing. Any request for hearing must 
be filed with the Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission, Washington, DC 20555, within 30 days of the publication of 
this notice in the Federal Register; be served on the NRC staff 
(Executive Director for Operations, One White Flint North, 11555 
Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852), and on the licensee (Combustion 
Engineering, Inc., P.O. Box 107, Hematite, Missouri, 63047); and must 
comply with the requirements for requesting a hearing set forth in the 
Commission's regulation, 10 CFR part 2, Subpart L, ``Informal Hearing 
Procedures for Adjudications in Materials Licensing Proceedings.''
    These requirements, which the requestor must address in detail, 
are:

1. The interest of the requestor in the proceeding;
2. How that interest may be affected by the results of the proceeding, 
including the reasons why the requestor should be permitted a hearing;
3. The requestor's areas of concern about the licensing activity that 
is the subject matter of the proceeding; and
4. The circumstances establishing that the request for hearing is 
timely, that is, filed within 30 days of the date of this notice.

    In addressing how the requestor's interest may be affected by the 
proceeding, the request should describe the nature of the requestor's 
right under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, to be made a 
party to the proceeding; the nature and extent of the requestor's 
property, financial, or other (i.e., health, safety) interest in the 
proceeding; and the possible effect of any order that may be entered in 
the proceeding upon the requestor's interest.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 17th day of March 1994.

Robert C. Pierson,
Chief, Licensing Branch, Division of Fuel Cycle Safety and Safeguards, 
NMSS.
[FR Doc. 94-7209 Filed 3-25-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-M