[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 93 (Friday, May 14, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26463-26465]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-12241]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 40-8989]


Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact for 
Exemption From Certain NRC Licensing Requirements for Special Nuclear 
Material for Envirocare of Utah, Inc.

Background

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or the Commission) is 
considering issuance of an Order pursuant to Section 274f of the Atomic 
Energy Act that would exempt Envirocare of Utah, Inc. (Envirocare) from 
certain NRC regulations. The exemption would allow Envirocare, under 
specified conditions, to possess waste containing special nuclear 
material (SNM), in greater mass quantities than specified in 10 CFR 
Part 150, at Envirocare's low-level waste (LLW) disposal facility 
located in Clive, Utah, without obtaining an NRC license pursuant to 10 
CFR Part 70. A description of the operations at the facility and 
staff's safety analysis for the exemption are discussed in the 
companion Safety Evaluation Report (SER).

Environmental Assessment

Identification of Proposed Action

    Staff proposes to exempt Envirocare from the licensing requirements 
in 10 CFR Part 70. The exemption would permit Envirocare to possess SNM 
without regard for mass. Rather than relying on mass to ensure 
criticality safety, concentration-based limits are being applied, such 
that accumulations of SNM at or below these concentration limits would 
not pose a criticality safety concern. The methodology used to 
establish these limits is discussed in the SER. The exemption is 
contingent on Envirocare complying with specific conditions in the 
exemption. These conditions are as follows:

    1. Concentrations of SNM in individual waste containers must not 
exceed the following values at time of receipt:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Maximum     Measurement
                Radionuclide                  concentration  uncertainty
                                                  (pCi/g)       (pCi/g)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
U-235 a.....................................          1900           285
U-235 b.....................................          1190           179
U-235 c.....................................           160            24
U-235 d.....................................           680           102
U-233.......................................        75,000        11,250
Pu-236......................................           500            75
Pu-238......................................        10,000         1,500
Pu-239......................................        10,000         1,500
Pu-240......................................        10,000         1,500
Pu-241......................................       350,000        50,000
Pu-242......................................        10,000         1,500
Pu-243......................................           500            75
Pu-244......................................           500            75
------------------------------------------------------------------------
a For uranium below 10 percent enrichment and a maximum of 20 percent
  MgO of the weight of the waste.
b For uranium at or above 10 percent enrichment and a maximum of 20
  percent MgO of the weight of the waste.
c For uranium at any enrichment with unlimited MgO or beryllium.
d For uranium at any enrichment with sum of MgO and beryllium not
  exceeding 49 percent of the weight of the waste.
The measurement uncertainty values in column 3 above represent the
  maximum one-sigma uncertainty associated with the measurement of the
  concentration of the particular radionuclide.
The SNM must be homogeneously distributed throughout the waste. If the
  SNM is not homogeneously distributed, then the limiting concentrations
  must not be exceeded on average in any contiguous mass of 145
  kilograms.

    2. Except as allowed by notes a, b, c, and d in Condition 1, 
waste must not contain ``pure forms'' of chemicals containing 
carbon,

[[Page 26464]]

fluorine, magnesium, or bismuth in bulk quantities (e.g., a pallet 
of drums, a B-25 box). By ``pure forms,'' it is meant that mixtures 
of the above elements such as magnesium oxide, magnesium carbonate, 
magnesium fluoride, bismuth oxide, etc. do not contain other 
elements. These chemicals would be added to the waste stream during 
processing, such as at fuel facilities or treatment such as at mixed 
waste treatment facilities. The presence of the above materials will 
be determined by the generator, based on process knowledge or 
testing.
    3. Except as allowed by notes c and d in Condition 1, waste 
accepted must not contain total quantities of beryllium, hydrogenous 
material enriched in deuterium, or graphite above one percent of the 
total weight of the waste. The presence of the above materials will 
be determined by the generator, based on process knowledge, physical 
observations, or testing.
    4. Waste packages must not contain highly water soluble forms of 
uranium greater than 350 grams of uranium-235 or 200 grams of 
uranium-233. The sum of the fractions rule will apply for mixtures 
of U-233 and U-235. Highly soluble forms of uranium include, but are 
not limited to: uranium sulfate, uranyl acetate, uranyl chloride, 
uranyl formate, uranyl fluoride, uranyl nitrate, uranyl potassium 
carbonate, and uranyl sulfate. The presence of the above materials 
will be determined by the generator, based on process knowledge or 
testing.
    5. Mixed waste processing of waste containing SNM will be 
limited to stabilization (mixing waste with reagents), micro-
encapsulation, and macro-encapsulation using low-density 
polyethylene.
    6. Envirocare shall require generators to provide the following 
information for each waste stream:

Pre-Shipment

    1. Waste Description. The description must detail how the waste 
was generated, list the physical forms in the waste, and identify 
uranium chemical composition.
    2. Waste Characterization Summary. The data must include a 
general description of how the waste was characterized (including 
the volumetric extent of the waste, and the number, location, type, 
and results of any analytical testing), the range of SNM 
concentrations, and the analytical results with error values used to 
develop the concentration ranges.
    3. Uniformity Description. A description of the process by which 
the waste was generated showing that the spatial distribution of SNM 
must be uniform, or other information supporting spatial 
distribution.
    4. Manifest Concentration. The generator shall describe the 
methods to be used to determine the concentrations on the manifests. 
These methods could include direct measurement and the use of 
scaling factors. The generator shall describe the uncertainty 
associated with sampling and testing used to obtain the manifest 
concentrations.
    Envirocare shall review the above information and, if adequate, 
approve in writing this pre-shipment waste characterization and 
assurance plan before permitting the shipment of a waste stream. 
This will include statements that Envirocare has a written copy of 
all the information required above, that the characterization 
information is adequate and consistent with the waste description, 
and that the information is sufficient to demonstrate compliance 
with conditions 1 through 4. Where generator process knowledge is 
used to demonstrate compliance with conditions 1, 2, 3, or 4, 
Envirocare shall review this information and determine when testing 
is required to provide additional information in assuring compliance 
with the conditions. Envirocare shall retain this information as 
required by the State of Utah to permit independent review.

At Receipt

    Envirocare shall require generators of SNM waste to provide a 
written certification with each waste manifest that states that the 
SNM concentrations reported on the manifest do not exceed the limits 
in Condition 1, that the measurement uncertainty does not exceed the 
uncertainty value in Condition 1, and that the waste meets 
conditions 2 through 4.
    7. Sampling and radiological testing of waste containing SNM 
must be performed in accordance with the Utah Division of Radiation 
Control License Condition 58.
    8. Envirocare shall notify the NRC, Region IV office, within 24 
hours if any of the above conditions are violated. A written 
notification of the event must be provided within 7 days.
    9. Envirocare shall obtain NRC approval prior to changing any 
activities associated with the above conditions.

Need for the Proposed Action

    In May 1997, the State of Utah determined that Envirocare had 
exceeded the SNM possession limits in its State of Utah license. 
Consequently, NRC Region IV conducted an inspection of the facility in 
June 1997. The findings of the inspection are discussed in an 
inspection report and demand for information dated May 21, 1998. As a 
result of the inspection, NRC issued a Confirmatory Order (Order) on 
June 25, 1997, which required Envirocare, in part, to reduce its 
possession of SNM and to submit a compliance plan (CP) to NRC for 
approval. As part of the approved CP, trucks containing SNM waste can 
proceed to the disposal cell (assuming the conditions stated in the 
Order apply) without counting the SNM waste in Envirocare's possession 
inventory. This waste is considered ``in-transit,'' under the exemption 
of 10 CFR 70.12, because the carrier is still present.
    In a letter dated October 14, 1997, the State of Utah informed NRC 
that SNM waste was being transferred from rail cars to trucks in the 
Salt Lake City rail yard and then taken to the Envirocare site either 
directly or after storage in transit at a transport facility. To 
evaluate this practice, the NRC and the U.S. Department of 
Transportation (DOT) conducted an inspection. The inspection concluded 
that applicable NRC and DOT regulations were being followed. (The 
inspection is documented in a report dated April 21, 1998.)
    Before the Order and CP, rail shipments were transported directly 
to a rail siding adjacent to the site. Rail cars were staged on the 
siding until the waste could be moved onto the site within licensed 
limits. Subsequent to the Order and CP which, as noted, provide for 
trucks to proceed directly to the disposal cell without being counted 
in the SNM possession inventory, it has been operationally advantageous 
for Envirocare to receive SNM waste via truck. In addition, transfer 
from rail to truck in Salt Lake City is more economical for the 
shippers because rolling stock rental fees are reduced. Thus, the Order 
and CP may have led to a practice of transferring of SNM waste from 
rail cars to trucks in Salt Lake City. Some trucks and SNM waste are 
staged at a nearby industrial facility and do not go directly to the 
disposal site because of the SNM possession limit. Staff concludes that 
this process has resulted in a change in the mode of transportation of 
waste to the site (i.e., more truck shipments), leading to a slightly 
higher probability of a transportation accident. Moreover, the 
increased waste handling has increased the possibility of container 
rupture and resultant spillage in a metropolitan area. In addition, SNM 
waste is being staged while in transit at nearby unlicensed industrial 
facility. Thus, the current practice--while conforming to applicable 
NRC and DOT regulations--might be regarded as less safe and may be a 
direct result of conditions in the CP.
    To resolve this issue, staff explored ways in which rail cars could 
be allowed to proceed directly to the site. Staff considered that if 
the SNM waste was shipped in accordance with 10 CFR Part 71, and 
applicable DOT regulations, that these conditions were sufficiently 
protective while the waste was on the rail cars, regardless of being 
located inside or outside the site boundary. Staff further evaluated 
whether concentration limits could be established to prevent an 
inadvertent criticality. Considering that concentration limits could be 
established, an acceptable rationale, therefore, exists for allowing 
above-ground storage of similar material in a comparable or more 
dispersed configuration. This rationale, in the staff's view, supports 
NRC taking action

[[Page 26465]]

to alleviate the regulatory constraint that appears to have led to the 
less than optimal practice, described above, for transporting SNM waste 
to Envirocare.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    Envirocare is licensed by the State of Utah, an NRC Agreement 
State, under a 10 CFR Part 61 equivalent license for the disposal of 
LLW. Envirocare is also licensed by Utah to dispose of mixed-
radioactive and hazardous wastes. In addition, Envirocare has an NRC 
license (SMC-1559) to dispose of waste containing 11(e)2 byproduct 
material. NRC has prepared an environmental impact statement (EIS) 
(NUREG-1476), SERs, and environmental assessments (EAs) for its 
licensing action. The State of Utah, in support of its licensing 
activities, has also prepared SERs. The proposed actions now under 
consideration would not change the potential environmental effects 
assessed in these documents.
    The regulations regarding SNM possession in 10 CFR part 150 set 
mass limits whereby a licensee is exempted from the licensing 
requirements of 10 CFR part 70 and can be regulated by an Agreement 
State. The licensing requirements in 10 CFR part 70 apply to persons 
possessing greater than critical mass quantities (as defined in 10 CFR 
150.11). The principal emphasis of 10 CFR part 70 is criticality safety 
and safeguarding SNM against diversion or sabotage. The NRC staff 
considers that criticality safety can be maintained by relying on 
concentration limits, under the specified conditions. These 
concentration limits are considered an alternative definition of 
quantities not sufficient to form a critical mass to the weight limits 
in 10 CFR 150.11; thereby, assuring the same level of protection.
    Therefore, the NRC concludes that this proposed exemption will have 
no significant radiological or nonradiological environmental impacts.

Alternatives to the Proposed Action

    The NRC staff considered two alternatives to the proposed action. 
One alternative to the proposed action would be to not grant the 
exemption (no-action alternative); therefore, increased handling of SNM 
waste would continue to occur in Salt Lake City, Utah, and at a nearby 
industrial site. Although the incremental dose increase to 
transportation workers and to the public may be small, it is greater 
than if the shipments continued to the site via rail. The current 
practice is considered less desirable.
    Another alternative would be to grant the exemption without 
condition. This option would not provide sufficient protection of 
health, safety, and the environment.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

    Officials from the State of Utah, Department of Environmental 
Quality, Division of Radiation Control were contacted about this EA for 
the proposed action and had no comments.

Finding of No Significant Impact

    The environmental impacts of the proposed action have been reviewed 
in accordance with the requirements set forth in 10 CFR part 51. Based 
upon the foregoing EA, the NRC finds that the proposed action of 
granting an exemption from NRC licensing requirements in 10 CFR Part 70 
will not significantly impact the quality of the human environment. 
Accordingly, the NRC has decided not to prepare an EIS for the proposed 
exemption.
    For Further Information Contact: Timothy E. Harris, Decommissioning 
Branch, Division of Waste Management, Office of Nuclear Material Safety 
and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 
20555-0001. Telephone: (301) 415-6613. Fax.: (301) 415-5398.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 7th day of May 1999.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
John T. Greeves,
Director, Division of Waste Management, Office of Nuclear Material 
Safety and Safeguards.
[FR Doc. 99-12241 Filed 5-13-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P