[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 105 (Thursday, June 1, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 31223-31226]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-8448]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 70-143]


Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc., Environmental Assessment and Finding 
of No Significant Impact for Proposed Exemption of Waste Shipments From 
Certain Requirements

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact.

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kevin M. Ramsey, Project Manager, Fuel 
Cycle Facilities Branch, Division of Fuel Cycle Safety and Safeguards, 
Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission, Mail Stop T-8F42, Rockville, MD 20555-0001, 
Telephone (301) 415-7887; fax (301) 415-5955; e-mail [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Introduction

    The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff is considering the 
issuance of a license amendment to Materials License SNM-124, to 
Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc. (NFS) (the licensee), to exempt it from 
certain safety requirements when shipping low-level radioactive waste. 
The NRC has prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA) in support of 
this amendment in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR part 51. 
Based on the EA, the NRC has concluded that a Finding of No Significant 
Impact (FONSI) is appropriate and, therefore, an Environmental Impact 
Statement (EIS) will not be prepared.

[[Page 31224]]

II. Environmental Assessment

Background

    The NFS facility in Erwin, Tennessee is authorized, under License 
SNM-124 to manufacture high-enriched nuclear reactor fuel. In addition, 
NFS is authorized to blend highly enriched uranium (HEU) with natural 
uranium and manufacture low-enriched nuclear reactor fuel. These 
activities generate low-level radioactive waste contaminated with small 
amounts of enriched uranium. In addition, ongoing decommissioning 
activities generate large quantities of soil and debris contaminated 
with enriched uranium. Regulations in 10 CFR define enriched uranium as 
special nuclear material (SNM) and specify safety requirements when SNM 
is shipped. On June 20, 2005, NFS requested an exemption from certain 
safety requirements when the SNM is shipped as contamination on 
radioactive waste (Ref. 5). On December 16, 2005, and March 24, 2006, 
NFS provided additional information to support its request (Ref. 6 and 
7).

Review Scope

    The purpose of this EA is to assess the environmental impacts of 
the proposed license amendment. It does not approve the request. This 
EA is limited to the proposed exemption and any cumulative impacts on 
existing plant operations. The existing conditions and operations for 
the Erwin facility were evaluated by the NRC for environmental impacts 
in a 1999 EA related to the renewal of the NFS license (Ref. 1) and a 
2002 EA related to the first amendment for the Blended Low-Enriched 
Uranium (BLEU) Project (Ref. 2). The 2002 EA assessed the impact of the 
entire BLEU Project, using information available at that time. A 2003 
EA (Ref. 3) and a 2004 EA (Ref. 4), related to additional BLEU Project 
amendments, confirmed the FONSI issued in 2002. The present EA sets 
forth information and analysis for determining that the issuance of a 
FONSI is appropriate, and that an EIS will not be prepared in 
connection with the exemption request now being considered.

Proposed Action

    The proposed action is to amend NRC Materials License SNM-124 to 
exempt shipments of low-level radioactive waste contaminated with SNM 
from certain safety measures normally required for such shipments. The 
exemption would authorize less stringent measures. The proposed action 
is limited to safety measures for waste shipments only. No change to 
processing, packaging, or storage operations is requested, and no 
construction of new facilities is requested.

Need for Proposed Action

    The proposed action is being requested because NFS has generated a 
large quantity of low-level radioactive waste from decommissioning 
activities and normal operations. This waste contains SNM which is not 
readily separable from the waste and is uneconomical for further 
uranium recovery processing. When waste packages meeting disposal site 
requirements are grouped together for a shipment, the total quantity of 
SNM can exceed the threshold requiring more stringent safety measures. 
To avoid the need for more stingent measures, NFS is making waste 
shipments with smaller quantities of SNM. This results in shipments 
that are not fully loaded and requires additional shipments to dispose 
of the waste. NFS believes that the more stringent measures are 
inappropriate for waste bearing incidental SNM in the form of 
contamination.

Alternatives

    The alternatives available to NRC are:
    1. Approve the license amendment as described; or
    2. No action (i.e., deny the request).

Affected Environment

    The affected environment for the proposed action is the vicinity of 
the vehicle used to transport the waste to a disposal facility.
    The affected environment for the no action alternative is the NFS 
site. The NFS facility is located in Unicoi County, Tennessee, about 32 
km (20 mi) southwest of Johnson City, Tennessee. The facility is about 
0.8 km (0.5 mi) southwest of the Erwin city limits. The affected 
environment is identical to the affected environment assessed in the 
2002 EA related to the first amendment for the BLEU Project (Ref. 2). A 
full description of the site and its characteristics is given in the 
2002 EA. Additional information can be found in the 1999 EA related to 
the renewal of the NFS license (Ref. 1). The site occupies about 28 
hectares (70 acres). The site is bounded to the northwest by the CSX 
Corporation (CSX) railroad property and the Nolichucky River, and by 
Martin Creek to the northeast. The plant elevation is about 9 m (30 ft) 
above the nearest point on the Nolichucky River.
    The area adjacent to the site consists primarily of residential, 
industrial, and commercial areas, with a limited amount of farming to 
the northwest. Privately owned residences are located to the east and 
south of the facility. Tract size is relatively large, leading to a low 
housing density in the areas adjacent to the facility. The CSX railroad 
right-of-way is parallel to the western boundary of the site. 
Industrial development is located adjacent to the railroad on the 
opposite side of the right-of-way. The site is bounded by Martin Creek 
to the north, with privately owned, vacant property and low-density 
residences.

Environmental Impacts of Proposed Action and Alternatives

1. Occupational and Public Health Proposed Action
    The risk to human health from the transportation of all radioactive 
material in the U.S. was evaluated in the Final Environmental Impact 
Statement on the Transportation of Radioactive Material by Air and 
Other Modes (Ref. 8). The principal radiological environmental impact 
during normal transportation is direct radiation exposure to nearby 
persons from radioactive material in the package. The average annual 
individual dose from all radioactive material transportation in the 
U.S. was calculated to be approximately 0.5 mrem, well below the 10 CFR 
part 20 requirement of 100 mrem for a member of the public. The 
proposed action would result in fewer shipments. Fewer shipments would 
expose fewer members of the public to radiation, reduce nonradiological 
truck emissions, and reduce the risk of injuries from traffic 
accidents. However, the reductions would be so small that the 
differences would be negligible.
    Occupational health was also considered in the Final Environmental 
Impact Statement on the Transportation of Radioactive Material by Air 
and Other Modes (Ref. 8). The average annual occupational dose to the 
driver(s) is estimated to be 8.7 mSv (870 mrem), which is below the 10 
CFR Part 20 requirement of 50 mSv (5000 mrem). The Department of 
Transportation (DOT) regulations in 49 CFR 177.842(g) require that the 
radiation dose rate may not exceed 0.02 mSv (2 mrem) per hour in any 
position normally occupied in a motor vehicle. The proposed action 
would not cause dose rates to the driver exceeding the DOT limit.
    The NRC staff is evaluating the possibility of an incident due to 
transportation of this material. Incidents involving SNM were 
considered in the Final Environmental Impact Statement on the 
Transportation of Radioactive Material by Air and Other Modes (Ref.

[[Page 31225]]

8). The NRC staff concluded that the risks of an incident in transit, 
resulting in a significant release, were sufficiently small to 
constitute no significant adverse impact on the environment. The staff 
will approve the proposed amendment only if it concludes that the 
safety measures are adequate to protect public health and safety, and 
the environment, based on the statements and representations in the 
application. A detailed discussion of this evaluation will be provided 
in the Safety Evaluation Report for the amendment if it is approved.
    Under the proposed action, the doses to the public and to the 
workers are not increased beyond those considered in the Final 
Environmental Impact Statement on the Transportation of Radioactive 
Material by Air and Other Modes (Ref. 8). Therefore, shipment of these 
materials as proposed would be consistent with the previous assessment 
of environmental impacts and the conclusions reached.
No Action
    Denying this amendment request would not result in any significant 
difference in the risk to the public health from radiological 
materials. If this amendment request is denied, the licensee would be 
required to ship the contaminated waste more frequently in smaller 
quantities. The larger number of shipments is also consistent with the 
assessment of environmental impacts, and the conclusions in the Final 
Environmental Impact Statement on the Transportation of Radioactive 
Material by Air and Other Modes (Ref. 8). As noted above, the level of 
nonradiological truck emissions and the risk of injuries from traffic 
accidents would be higher, but the differences would be negligible.
    The occupational health impacts would not change significantly as a 
result of denial of this amendment request. Occupational doses at the 
facility may be slightly higher as a result of the larger number of 
shipments that workers must prepare, however, the facility will 
continue to implement NRC-approved radiation safety procedures for 
handling radioactive materials. Thus, the dose to workers under the 
``no action'' alternative will remain within acceptable regulatory 
limits.
2. Effluent Releases, Environmental Monitoring, Water Resources, 
Geology, Soils, Air Quality, Demography, Biota, Cultural and Historic 
Resources
Proposed Action
    The NRC staff has determined that the approval of the proposed 
amendment will not impact effluent releases, environmental monitoring, 
water resources, geology, soils, air quality, demography, biota, or 
cultural or historic resources under normal transport conditions.
No Action
    The NRC staff has determined that denial of the proposed amendment 
will not impact effluent releases, environmental monitoring, water 
resources, geology, soils, air quality, demography, biota, or cultural 
or historic resources at or near the NFS site.

Conclusion

    Based on its review, the NRC has concluded that the environmental 
impacts associated with the proposed action are not significant and, 
therefore, do not warrant denial of the proposed license amendment. 
Based on an evaluation of the environmental impacts of the proposed 
license amendment, the NRC has determined that the proper action is to 
issue a FONSI.

Agencies and Persons Contacted

    On January 11, 2005, the NRC staff contacted the Deputy Director of 
the Division of Radiological Health in the Tennessee Department of 
Environment and Conservation (TDEC) concerning this EA. On February 2, 
2006, the Deputy Director responded that TDEC reviewed the draft EA and 
had no comments (Ref. 9).
    The NRC staff has determined that the proposed action will not 
affect listed species or critical habitat. Therefore, no consultation 
is required under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act. Likewise, 
the NRC staff has determined that the proposed action is not the type 
of activity that has the potential to cause effects on historic 
properties. Therefore, no consultation is required under Section 106 of 
the National Historic Preservation Act.

References

    1. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ``Environmental Assessment 
for Renewal of Special Nuclear Material License No. SNM-124,'' January 
1999, ADAMS No. ML031150418.
    2. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ``Environmental Assessment 
for Proposed License Amendments to Special Nuclear Material License No. 
SNM-124 Regarding Downblending and Oxide Conversion of Surplus High-
Enriched Uranium,'' June 2002, ADAMS No. ML021790068.
    3. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ``Environmental Assessment 
and Finding of No Significant Impact for the BLEU Preparation 
Facility,'' September 2003, ADAMS No. ML032390428.
    4. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ``Environmental Assessment 
and Finding of No Significant Impact for the Oxide Conversion Building 
and the Effluent Processing Building at the BLEU Complex,'' June 2004, 
ADAMS No. ML041470176.
    5. Nuclear Fuel Services, ``Request for Exemption,'' June 20, 2005, 
ADAMS No. ML051810254.
    6. Nuclear Fuel Services, ``Response to Request for Additional 
Information Concerning Request for Exemption of Low-Level Waste from 
Definitions in 10 CFR 73,'' December 16, 2005, ADAMS No. ML053610013.
    7. Nuclear Fuel Services, ``Response to Second Request for 
Additional Information Concerning Request for Exemption of Low-Level 
Waste from Definitions in 10 CFR 73,'' March 24, 2006, ADAMS No. 
ML061090569.
    8. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, NUREG-0170, ``Final 
Environmental Impact Statement on the Transportation of Radioactive 
Material by Air and Other Modes,'' December 1977, ADAMS No. 
ML022590355.
    9. D. Shults, Tennessee Division of Radiological Health, e-mail to 
K. Ramsey, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ``EA for NFS 
Exemption,'' February 2, 2006, ADAMS No. ML060370160.

III. Finding of No Significant Impact

    Pursuant to 10 CFR Part 51, the NRC staff has considered the 
environmental consequences of amending NRC Materials License SNM-124 to 
exempt shipments of low-level radioactive waste contaminated with SNM 
from certain safety requirements. On the basis of this EA, the NRC has 
concluded that there are no significant environmental impacts 
associated with the proposed amendment and has determined not to 
prepare an EIS for the proposed amendment.

IV. Further Information

    The documents referenced in this notice contain sensitive 
information, and may be made available only upon

[[Page 31226]]

a showing that applicable security requirements have been met.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 23rd day of May 2006.
    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Gary S. Janosko,
Chief, Fuel Cycle Facilities Branch, Division of Fuel Cycle Safety and 
Safeguards, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.
 [FR Doc. E6-8448 Filed 5-31-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P