[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 200 (Thursday, October 16, 2003)]
[Notices]
[Pages 59645-59647]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-26137]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 40-8989]


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

I Introduction

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering 
issuance of an Order pursuant to

[[Page 59646]]

Section 274f of the Atomic Energy Act that would modify an Order 
transmitted to Envirocare of Utah, Inc. (Envirocare). The original 
Order was published in the Federal Register on May 21, 1999 (64 FR 
27826). The 1999 Order exempted Envirocare from certain NRC regulations 
and permitted Envirocare, under specified conditions, to possess waste 
containing special nuclear material (SNM), in greater 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. At the request of Envirocare, the 
Order was subsequently modified on January 30, 2003, and published in 
the Federal Register on February 13, 2003 (68 FR 7399).
    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 waste. In addition, Envirocare has an NRC 
license (SMC-1559) to dispose of waste containing 11(e)2 byproduct 
material.
    In a letter dated July 8, 2003, Envirocare requested that the 
January 2003 Order be amended as discussed below. Staff's safety 
analysis for the revisions to the January 2003 Order is discussed in 
the companion Safety Evaluation Report (SER).

II Environmental Assessment (EA)

Identification of Proposed Action

    Envirocare proposes that NRC amend the January 2003 Order to: (1) 
Modify the table in Condition 1 to a criticality basis for uranium-233 
and plutonium isotopes, and revise the concentration limits for uranium 
and plutonium to include limits for waste without magnesium oxide; (2) 
modify the units of the table from pCi of SNM per gram of waste 
material to gram of SNM per gram of waste material; and (3) revise the 
language of Condition 5 to be consistent with the revised units in the 
table.

Need for the Proposed Action

    The table in Condition 1 of the January 2003 Order prescribes 
concentration limits that are based on Class A low-level radioactive 
waste limits rather than a criticality-based analysis. Envirocare would 
like to expand its capabilities to accept additional waste streams. In 
order to do so, the SNM concentration limits in the table in Condition 
1 of the Order would need to be revised.

Alternatives to the Proposed Action

    The NRC staff considered the proposed action and the no-action 
alternative. The no-action alternative would be not to revise the 
Order.

Affected Environment

    NRC has prepared an environmental impact statement (EIS) (NUREG-
1476), SERs, and EAs for its previous actions. The affected environment 
for the Envirocare site is described in detail in NUREG-1476.

Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives

    No-Action Alternative: For the no-action alternative, the 
environmental impacts would be the same as evaluated in the 
Environmental Assessments to support the 1999 Order (64 FR 26463, May 
14, 1999) and the January 2003 modification of the Order (68 FR 3281). 
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 principle 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. The 1999 and January 2003 EAs 
concluded that the Order would have no significant radiological or 
nonradiological environmental impacts.
    Proposed Action: For the proposed action, the environmental impacts 
are not expected to be significant. Effluent releases and potential 
doses to the public are regulated by the State of Utah and are not 
anticipated to change as a result of this revision. In a 2001 EA for 
Waste Control Specialists, LLC (WCS) (66 FR 56358), the staff found 
that there would be no significant radiological or nonradiological 
impacts resulting from the proposed limits of uranium and plutonium, 
and the same limits are being applied to Envirocare in this revision of 
its Order. In addition, these revisions to the Order are not expected 
to significantly change environmental impacts from current operations 
at Envirocare. WCS does not use magnesium oxide in its processing; 
therefore, in order to use the same limits for uranium and plutonium at 
its facility, Envirocare will not use magnesium oxide during treatment 
of the waste stream allowed by the revision. This will help ensure 
criticality safety during processing.
    For Envirocare, the changes to the limits will allow the site to 
accept a new waste stream, which may increase the number of waste 
shipments to the site. The addition of a new waste stream would result 
in approximately 40 additional shipments per year to the site, which 
equates to less than one shipment per week. It is not expected that the 
small increase in shipments would have a significant environmental 
impact to the local area.

Preferred Alternative

    The staff has concluded that the proposed action is the preferred 
alternative. The radiological and nonradiological impacts are not 
expected to be significant.

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. Because the proposed action is 
not expected to have any impact on threatened or endangered species or 
historic resources, the Fish and Wildlife Service and the State of Utah 
Historic Preservation Officer were not contacted.

III. 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 forgoing EA, the NRC finds that the preferred alternative of 
the proposed action will not significantly impact the quality of the 
human environment. Accordingly, the NRC has decided not to prepare an 
EIS for the proposed exemption.

IV. Further Information

    The request for modifying the Order is available for inspection at 
NRC's Public Electronic Reading Room at http://www.nrc.gov/NRC/ADAMS/index.html ML031950334. The September 23, 2003, Safety Evaluation 
Report is available at ML032680942. The EA for the January 2003 Order 
is available in the Federal Register at 68 FR 3281. The EA for the 
exemption for WCS is available in the Federal Register at 66 FR 56358. 
Documents may also be obtained from NRC's Public Document Room at U.S. 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Public Document Room,

[[Page 59647]]

Washington DC 20555. Any questions with respect to this action should 
be referred to Anna H. Bradford, Environmental and Performance 
Assessment Branch, Division of Waste Management, Office of Nuclear 
Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 
Washington DC 20555-0001. Telephone: (301) 415-5228, Fax: (301) 415-
5397.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 8th day of October, 2003.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Lawrence E. Kokajko,
Chief, Environmental and Performance Assessment Branch, Division of 
Waste Management, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.
[FR Doc. 03-26137 Filed 10-15-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P