[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 62 (Friday, April 1, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16881-16882]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E5-1452]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 72-11]


Sacramento Municipal Utility District Issuance of Environmental 
Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact Regarding an Amendment

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Environmental Assessment.

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James R. Hall, Senior Project Manager, 
Spent Fuel Project Office, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and 
Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555. 
Telephone: (301) 415-1336; fax number: (301) 415-8555; e-mail: 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC 
or the staff) is considering issuance of an amendment to Special 
Nuclear Materials License No. 2510 that would allow for the storage of 
Greater Than Class C (GTCC) waste at the Rancho Seco Independent Spent 
Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI). The Sacramento Municipal Utility 
District (SMUD) is currently storing spent nuclear fuel at the Rancho 
Seco ISFSI on the site of the decommissioned Rancho Seco Nuclear 
Generating Station in Sacramento County, California.

Environmental Assessment (EA)

Identification of Proposed Action

    By application, dated July 29, 2004, SMUD submitted a request to 
the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in accordance with Title 
10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) 72.56, ``Application for 
amendment of license,'' to amend the license to allow for the storage 
of GTCC waste at the Rancho Seco ISFSI. SMUD proposes to store the GTCC 
waste in a GTCC canister and load the canister into a Horizontal 
Storage Module in the NUHOMS-24P dry cask storage system used at the 
Rancho Seco ISFSI. SMUD proposes to co-locate the GTCC waste canister 
with the spent fuel canisters at the ISFSI, but no GTCC waste will be 
co-mingled with the spent fuel.
    The proposed action before the NRC is whether to approve the 
amendment.

Need for the Proposed Action

    SMUD is in the process of decommissioning the Rancho Seco Nuclear 
Generating Station in Sacramento County, California. SMUD needs to 
temporarily store GTCC waste resulting from plant operations and from 
decommissioning, such as activated metals in the form of baffles and 
formers, cut-up sections of incore-instrument tips, and associated 
surface contamination, in the ISFSI until there is a permanent 
repository that will accept GTCC waste. Approving the amendment would 
allow the licensee to store GTCC at the Rancho Seco ISFSI.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    The staff has reviewed the amendment request submitted by the 
licensee and has determined that allowing the storage of GTCC waste at 
the Rancho Seco ISFSI would have no significant impacts to the 
environment. In its Safety Evaluation Report related to the ISFSI 
license, the NRC staff found

[[Page 16882]]

that the proposed GTCC canister is functionally identical to those 
spent fuel canisters currently being stored at the ISFSI. Once the GTCC 
waste is loaded into the canister, the operational steps to drain, seal 
and transfer the GTCC waste to the ISFSI are essentially identical to 
those for a fuel canister except that the GTCC waste canister loading 
and processing operations will be conducted in the Reactor Building as 
opposed to the Spent Fuel Building. There are no credible scenarios by 
which liquid or gaseous effluents could be released from the GTCC waste 
canister. Furthermore, the NUHOMS-24P dry cask storage system used at 
the Rancho Seco ISFSI is a passive system which, by design, produces no 
gaseous or liquid effluent.
    The staff has determined that the proposed action would not 
endanger life or property. Further, the staff concludes that there is 
reasonable assurance that the proposed amendment will have no impact on 
off-site doses because the licensee is currently storing GTCC at the 
Rancho Seco Site under its 10 CFR Part 50 license.
    The proposed action would not increase the probability or 
consequences of accidents, no changes would be made to the types of 
effluents that may be released offsite, and there would be no increase 
in public exposure, and only minimal increase in occupational exposure. 
Therefore, there are no significant radiological environmental impacts 
associated with the proposed action. Additionally, the proposed action 
would have no significant impact on the safe storage of spent fuel at 
the Rancho Seco ISFSI.
    Furthermore, as documented in the Environmental Assessment and 
Finding of No Significant Environmental Impact for the final rule, 
``Interim Storage of Greater than Class C Waste'' (66 FR 51823; October 
11, 2001), the NRC staff found for the following reasons that storing 
NRC-licensed reactor-related GTCC waste using 10 CFR Part 72 has no 
significant environmental impacts:
    (1) There is a smaller source term available for release from 
normal operations, or as a result of an accident, involving GTCC waste 
as compared to spent fuel or HLW;
    (2) There is a smaller total volume and curie content of the GTCC 
waste as compared to the spent fuel or HLW;
    (3) The previous findings related to the environmental impacts in 
NUREG-0575, ``Final Generic Environmental Impact Statement on Handling 
and Storage of Spent Light Water Power Reactor Fuel,'' dated August 
1979, and NUREG-1092, ``Environmental Assessment for 10 CFR Part 72 
Licensing Requirements for the Independent Storage of Spent Fuel and 
High-Level Radioactive Waste'' concluded that there are no significant 
environmental impacts for these activities; and
    (4) GTCC waste is already being safely stored by 10 CFR Part 50 
licensees. Re-licensing of this material under a 10 CFR Part 72 
specific license requires an approved safety analysis report. The 
approval process requires that each application or amendment be 
individually reviewed and approved before storage would be allowed 
under a specific 10 CFR Part 72 license.

Alternative to the Proposed Action

    As an alternative to the proposed action, the staff considered 
denial of the amendment request (i.e., the ``no-action'' alternative). 
If the request was denied, SMUD would need to continue to store the 
GTCC waste under its 10 CFR Part 50 license, either in its existing 
location or in another appropriately shielded configuration. This would 
limit the extent to which SMUD could complete its decommissioning 
activities for the Rancho Seco Nuclear Generating Station. Approval or 
denial of the amendment request would result in no change in the 
environmental impacts. Therefore, the environmental impacts of the 
proposed action and the alternative action are similar.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

    The NRC staff prepared this environmental assessment (EA) and 
contacted the California Department of Health Services, Radiologic 
Health Branch. Staff provided the State with a draft copy of this EA 
for review. Mr. Steve Hsu responded on behalf of the State of 
California and stated that he had no comments on the EA or the Finding 
of No Significant Impact. The NRC staff has determined that 
consultation under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act is not 
required for this specific amendment, which will not affect listed 
species or critical habitat. The NRC staff has also determined that the 
proposed action is not a type of activity having the potential to cause 
effects on historic properties. Therefore, no consultation is required 
under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act.

Conclusion

    The staff has reviewed the amendment request submitted by SMUD and 
has determined that allowing the storage of GTCC waste at the Rancho 
Seco ISFSI would have no significant impact on the environment.

Finding of No Significant Impact

    The environmental impacts of allowing the storage of GTCC waste at 
the Rancho Seco ISFSI 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 approving the amendment to 
the license will not significantly impact the quality of the human 
environment. Accordingly, the NRC has determined that an environmental 
impact statement for the proposed amendment is not warranted.
    The request for amendment was docketed under 10 CFR part 72, Docket 
72-11. For further details with respect to this action, see the request 
for the license amendment dated July 29, 2004. Supporting documentation 
is available for inspection at the NRC's Public Electronic Reading Room 
at: http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. A copy of the EA and 
FONSI can be found at this site using the Agencywide Documents Access 
and Management System (ADAMS). These documents may also be viewed 
electronically on the public computers located at the NRC's Public 
Document Room (PDR), O-1F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville 
Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. The PDR reproduction contractor will copy 
documents for a fee. Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who 
encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, should 
contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209 or 
(301) 415-4737, or by e-mail to [email protected].

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 24th day of March, 2005.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
James R. Hall,
Senior Project Manager, Spent Fuel Project Office, Office of Nuclear 
Material Safety and Safeguards.
[FR Doc. E5-1452 Filed 3-31-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P