[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