[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 215 (Wednesday, November 7, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 62880-62883]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-21861]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 70-143]


Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc., Environmental Assessment and Finding 
of No Significant Impact Related to Proposed License Amendment 
Authorizing Increased Possession Limit

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact.

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kevin M. Ramsey, Fuel Manufacturing 
Branch, Division of Fuel Cycle Safety and Safeguards, Office of Nuclear 
Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 
Mail Stop E-2C40M, Washington, DC 20555-0001, telephone (301) 492-3123 
and e-mail [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Introduction

    The U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff is considering 
a request to amend Materials License SNM-124, issued to Nuclear Fuel 
Services, Inc. (NFS) (the licensee), to authorize an increase in the 
possession limit of high-enriched uranium (HEU). The NRC has prepared 
an

[[Page 62881]]

Environmental Assessment (EA) in support of this action. Based upon 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.

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 HEU with natural uranium and 
manufacture low-enriched nuclear reactor fuel. License SNM-124 limits 
the amount of HEU that NFS may possess for these operations. On May 15, 
2007, NFS requested a license amendment to increase its possession 
limit of HEU (Ref. 5).

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 possession limit increase and any 
cumulative impacts to existing plant operations. The existing 
conditions and operations at 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 the 
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. This assessment presents information and an 
analysis for determining that the issuance of a FONSI is appropriate 
and that an EIS will not be prepared.

Proposed Action

    The proposed action is to amend NRC Materials License SNM-124, to 
authorize an increase in the possession limit for uranium enriched up 
to 100 weight percent in the uranium-235 isotope (Ref. 5). The proposed 
action is limited to possession and storage only. No changes to 
processing operations are requested, and no construction of new 
facilities are requested.

Need for Proposed Action

    The proposed action is being requested because a larger inventory 
of HEU is needed to support NFS operations. Two factors are driving 
this need. One factor is a request from the U.S. Department of Energy 
(DOE) that NFS establish an inventory of HEU that would allow 
continuous operations for six to twelve months of processes that 
support DOE programs. This would allow NFS to continue operating if an 
increased threat level or other incidents required shipments of HEU to 
be interrupted or curtailed. Another factor is the lower-than-planned 
processing rate at the Blended Low-Enriched Uranium Preparation 
Facility (BPF). BPF operations support commercial programs that are 
separate from DOE programs. Difficulties with BPF equipment and 
operations have caused delays and low processing rates. This has 
created a backlog of material in storage because material is being 
received faster than it is being processed.

Alternatives

    The alternatives available to the 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 and the 
alternative is the NFS site. The affected environment is identical to 
the affected environment assessed in the 2002 EA that is 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 NFS facility is located in Unicoi County, 
Tennessee, about 32 km (20 mi) southwest of Johnson City, Tennessee. 
The plant is about 0.8 km (0.5 mi) southwest of the Erwin city limits. 
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.

Effluent Releases and Monitoring

    A full description of the effluent monitoring program at the site 
is provided in the 2002 EA, related to the first amendment for the BLEU 
Project (Ref. 2). Additional information is available in the 1999 EA 
related to the renewal of the NFS license (Ref. 1). The NFS Erwin plant 
conducts effluent and environmental monitoring programs to evaluate 
potential public health impacts and comply with the NRC effluent and 
environmental monitoring requirements. The effluent program monitors 
the airborne, liquid, and solid waste streams produced during operation 
of the NFS plant. The environmental program monitors the air, surface 
water, sediment, soil, groundwater, and vegetation in and around the 
NFS plant.
    Airborne, liquid, and solid effluent streams that contain 
radioactive material are generated at the NFS plant and monitored to 
ensure compliance with the NRC regulations in 10 CFR Part 20. Each 
effluent is monitored at or just before the point of release. The 
results of effluent monitoring are reported to the NRC on a semi-annual 
basis, in accordance with 10 CFR 70.59.
    Airborne and liquid effluents are also monitored for 
nonradiological constituents in accordance with State discharge 
permits. For the purpose of this EA, the State of Tennessee is expected 
to set limits on effluents, under its regulatory control, that are 
protective of health and safety and the local environment.

Impacts of Proposed Action

1. Normal Operations
    The proposed action is limited to increasing the authorized amount 
of HEU in storage. No construction of new facilities is proposed and no 
changes to processing operations have been requested. Based on the 
information provided by NFS, the safety controls to be employed for the 
proposed action, appear to be sufficient to ensure that planned 
operations will have no significant impact on the environment.
    Radiological Impacts: The proposed action involves no changes to 
processing operations. No increase is expected in effluent air 
emissions discharged through stacks at the site. In addition, no 
increase is expected in liquid effluents discharged to the sanitary 
sewer. Therefore, the proposed action will have no impact on the total 
annual dose estimate for the maximally exposed individual from all 
planned

[[Page 62882]]

effluents. The dose to workers may increase slightly because more 
radioactive material will be stored at the site. However, occupational 
dose is monitored and controlled in accordance with applicable NRC 
regulations; therefore, no adverse impacts are expected. Surface water 
quality at the NFS site is currently protected by enforcing release 
limits and monitoring programs. No change in surface water impacts is 
expected. The proposed action will not discharge any effluents to the 
groundwater; therefore, no adverse impacts to groundwater are expected.
    The proposed action involves transportation of radioactive feed 
material to the NFS site, which will lead to transportation of 
radioactive products and waste material from the NFS site. All 
transportation will be conducted in accordance with the applicable NRC 
and U.S. Department of Transportation regulations; therefore, no 
adverse impacts from transportation activities are expected.
    Land Use: The proposed action involves storage of radioactive 
material at existing facilities. No new facilities will be constructed; 
therefore, no adverse impact to land use is expected.
    Cultural Resources: The proposed action involves storage of 
radioactive material at existing facilities. The NRC staff considers 
this a type of activity that does not have the potential to affect 
historic properties. No adverse impact to cultural resources is 
expected.
    Biotic Resources: The proposed action will not change current land 
use or effluents at the site. Therefore, the NRC finds that the 
proposed action will not affect any Federally endangered or threatened 
species.
2. Potential Accidents
    The proposed action will not result in any new or modified accident 
sequences. The Integrated Safety Analysis performed by NFS already 
considers all authorized storage locations to be filled to maximum 
capacity with HEU. The NRC finds that the safety controls to be 
employed in the proposed action are sufficient to ensure planned 
activities will be safe.
3. Cumulative Impacts
    The NRC has considered the impacts of the proposed action together 
with the known impacts of the existing facility. After reviewing the 
information provided, the NRC concludes that the cumulative impacts 
represent an insignificant change to the existing conditions in the 
area surrounding the NFS site.

Impacts of No Action Alternative

    Under the no action alternative, NFS would not be able to increase 
its inventory of HEU to support current operations. This would require 
NFS to stop receiving HEU shipments until enough material has been 
processed and removed from the site before another shipment could be 
received. Failure to fulfill its role in government and commercial 
programs could cause NFS's customers to select other alternatives that 
may be less cost effective and incur greater environmental impacts. If 
NFS is unable to fulfill its contractual obligations, customers may 
transfer work to other facilities.

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. The 
NRC has determined that the proposed action, the approval of the 
license amendment as described, is the appropriate alternative for 
selection. 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 September 21, 2007, the NRC staff contacted the Deputy Director 
of the Division of Radiological Health at the Tennessee Department of 
Environment and Conservation (TDEC) concerning this EA. On October 1, 
2007, the Deputy Director responded that TDEC reviewed the draft EA and 
had no comments (Ref. 6).
    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, ``Amendment Request to Increase the U-
235 Possession Limit for the NFS Site,'' May 15, 2007, ADAMS No. 
ML072550166.
    6. D. Shults, Tennessee Division of Radiological Health, e-mail 
to K. Ramsey, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ``Consultation 
with Tennessee on EA for NFS Possession Limit Increase,'' October 1, 
2007, ADAMS No. ML072760398.

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 
increase the possession limit for the NFS facility. On the basis of 
this assessment, the Commission has concluded that environmental 
impacts associated with the proposed action would not be significant 
and the Commission is making a finding of no significant impact. 
Accordingly, the preparation of an EIS is not warranted.

IV. Further Information

    Documents related to this action, including the application for 
amendment and supporting documentation, are available electronically at 
the NRC's Electronic Reading Room at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. From this site, you can access the NRC's Agencywide 
Document Access and Management System (ADAMS), which provides text and 
image files of NRC's public documents. The ADAMS accession numbers for 
the documents related to this notice are listed in the references 
above. If you do not have access to ADAMS or if there are problems in 
accessing the documents located in ADAMS, contact the NRC Public 
Document Room (PDR) Reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737 or 
by e-mail to [email protected].
    These documents may also be viewed electronically on the public 
computers located at the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), O 1 F21, One 
White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. The PDR 
reproduction contractor will copy documents for a fee.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 25th day of October, 2007.


[[Page 62883]]


    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Peter J. Habighorst,
 Chief, Fuel Manufacturing Branch, Fuel Facility Licensing Directorate, 
Division of Fuel Cycle Safety and Safeguards, Office of Nuclear 
Material Safety and Safeguards.
[FR Doc. E7-21861 Filed 11-6-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P