[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 232 (Monday, December 5, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 74450-74455]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-26387]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50-498 and 50-499; NRC-2022-0206]
STP Nuclear Operating Company; South Texas Project, Units 1 and 2
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact;
issuance.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is issuing an
environmental assessment (EA) and finding of no significant impact
(FONSI) under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) and
NRC's regulations. This EA summarizes the results of the NRC staff's
environmental review, which evaluates the potential environmental
impacts of approving an alternate disposal request in response to a
request from STP Nuclear Operating Company (STPNOC) for Renewed
Facility Operating Licenses NPF-76 and NPF-80 for South Texas Project,
Units 1 and 2 (STP). Specifically, the alternate disposal request, if
approved, would allow the licensee to dispose of very-low-level waste
(VLLW) generated during day-to-day operations at the STP reactor site
at Texas Class 1 or Class 2 industrial landfills.
DATES: The EA and FONSI referenced in this document are available on
December 5, 2022.
ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2022-0206 when contacting the
NRC about the availability of information regarding this document. You
may obtain publicly available information related to this document
using any of the following methods:
Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2022-0206. Address
questions about Docket IDs in Regulations.gov to Stacy Schumann;
telephone: 301-415-0624; email: [email protected]. For technical
questions, contact the individual listed in the For Further Information
Contact section of this document.
NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System
(ADAMS): You may obtain publicly available documents online in the
ADAMS Public Documents collection at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select ``Begin Web-based ADAMS
Search.'' For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRC's Public
Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or
by email to [email protected]. For the convenience of the reader,
instructions about obtaining materials referenced in this document are
provide in the ``Availability of Documents'' section.
NRC's PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public
documents, by appointment, at the NRC's PDR, Room P1 B35, One White
Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. To make
an appointment to visit the PDR, please send an email to
[email protected] or call 1-800-397-4209 or 301-415-4737, between
8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. Eastern Time (ET), Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dennis Galvin, Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC
20555-0001, telephone: 301-415-6256, email: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Introduction
The NRC is considering the approval of an alternate disposal
request, dated November 4, 2021, as supplemented by letters dated
December 3, 2021, August 19, 2022, and November 22, 2022, from STPNOC
for waste material containing VLLW generated during day-to-day
operations at the STP reactor site, located in Matagorda County, Texas,
for ultimate disposal at Texas Class 1 or Class 2 industrial
landfills.\1\ The August 19, 2022, STPNOC letter was in response to the
NRC request for information, dated July 20, 2022. The term ``VLLW'' is
generally understood as material created during the conduct of NRC- or
Agreement State-licensed activities that contains some residual
radioactivity, including naturally occurring radionuclides, that may be
safely disposed in hazardous or municipal solid waste landfills. VLLW
represents a small fraction of the hazard of waste at the Class A
limits in Part 61 of title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10
CFR), ``Licensing Requirements for Land Disposal of Radioactive
Waste.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Texas Class 1 or Class 2 industrial landfills refer to
landfills permitted to accept Class 1 or Class 2 waste as defined by
Texas regulations in 30 Texas Administrative Code 335 Subchapter R.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NUREG-1437, ``Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License
Renewal of Nuclear Plants'' dated June 2013 (hereafter, the Generic
Environmental Impact Statement or GEIS), Section 3.1.4.3, ``Solid
Radioactive Waste,'' addresses solid low-level waste (LLW) as follows:
Solid [LLW] from nuclear power plants is generated from the
removal of radionuclides from liquid waste streams, filtration of
airborne gaseous emissions, and removal of contaminated material
from various reactor areas. Liquid contaminated with radionuclides
comes from primary and secondary coolant systems, spent fuel pools,
decontaminated wastewater, and laboratory operations.
Solid waste is packaged in containers to meet the applicable
requirements of [Department of Transportation's regulations at] 49
CFR parts 171 through 177. Disposal and transportation are performed
in accordance with the NRC's applicable requirements of 10 CFR part
61 and 10 CFR part 71, respectively.
Solid radioactive waste generated during operations is shipped
to a LLW processor or directly to a [10 CFR part 61] LLW disposal
site.
As noted in Supplement 48 to NUREG-1437, ``Generic Environmental
Impact State for License Renewal, Supplement 48: Regarding South Texas
Project, Units 1 and 2'' dated November 2013 (hereafter, the
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement or SEIS), the SEIS
generated as part of the STP license renewal process,\2\ a solid waste
processing system is maintained onsite at STP designed to process,
package, and store solid radioactive wastes generated by plant
operations until they are shipped offsite to a vendor for further
processing or for permanent disposal at a 10 CFR part 61 LLW disposal
facility.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The license was renewed on September 28, 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The waste being considered in the licensee's alternate disposal
request includes dewatered sewage sludge, ion exchange media,
desiccant, ventilation filtration media, and soil that originated from
the secondary side of plant operations. Rather than disposal at a 10
CFR part 61 LLW disposal site, the licensee is requesting approval to
dispose of the waste at Texas Class 1 or
[[Page 74451]]
Class 2 industrial landfills in accordance with 10 CFR 20.2002,
``Method for obtaining approval of proposed disposal procedures.''
In accordance with NRC guidance outlined in All Agreement States
letter Office of Federal and State Materials and Environmental
Management Programs (FSME)-12-025, ``Clarification of the Authorization
for Alternate Disposal of Material Issued Under 10 CFR 20.2002 and
Exemption Provisions In 10 CFR,'' dated March 13, 2012, and Regulatory
Information Summary-2016-11, ``Requests to Dispose of Very Low-Level
Radioactive Waste Pursuant to 10 CFR 20.2002,'' dated November 13,
2016, approval of the requested action requires authorization from both
the NRC and the State of Texas. In order to release the waste from the
NRC license and allow it to be disposed in accordance with the request,
a review must be performed by the NRC as the regulatory agency that
issued the license. Texas, which is an NRC Agreement State, maintains
the regulatory authority over the Class 1 and Class 2 industrial
landfills being considered for the disposal of the waste in question
and, thus, maintains responsibility for approving the disposal of the
requested waste and ensuring that the disposal actions are performed in
accordance with regulations described in the Texas Administrative Code
(TAC).\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Specific regulations can be found at: https://www.sos.state.tx.us/tac/index.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The requested action of releasing the waste from the licensee's
authority is a licensing action and, per NRC requirements in 10 CFR
part 51, ``Environmental Protection Regulations for Domestic Licensing
and Related Regulatory Functions,'' this action requires an evaluation
of environmental impacts associated with the requested action. The NRC
staff has prepared this EA \4\ in accordance with NRC requirements in
10 CFR 51.21, ``Criteria for and identification of licensing and
regulatory actions requiring environmental assessments,'' and 51.30,
``Environmental assessment,'' and with the associated guidance in
NUREG-1748, ``Environmental Review Guidance for Licensing Actions
Associated with NMSS [the Office of Nuclear Material Safety and
Safeguards] Programs,'' dated August 2003, and the Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation (NRR) Office Instruction LIC-203, ``Procedural
Guidance for Categorical Exclusions, Environmental Assessments, and
Considering Environmental Issues,'' dated July 2020. This EA evaluates
the licensee's requested action of releasing the waste which is
regulated by the NRC and the connected action \5\ of transporting the
waste for disposal at an industrial landfill, which is regulated by
Texas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ In 10 CFR 51.14, ``Definitions,'' an EA is defined as ``a
concise public document for which the Commission is responsible that
serves to: (1) [b]riefly provide sufficient evidence and analysis
for determining whether to prepare an environmental impact statement
or a finding of no significant impact; (2) [a]id the Commission's
compliance with NEPA when no environmental impact statement is
necessary; and (3) [f]acilitate preparation of an environmental
impact statement when one is necessary.''
\5\ Connected actions are actions that are closely related and
therefore should be discussed in the same assessment. Actions are
connected if they: (i) Automatically trigger other actions that may
require environmental impact statements; (ii) Cannot or will not
proceed unless other actions are taken previously or simultaneously;
or (iii) Are interdependent parts of a larger action and depend on
the larger action for their justification.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Environmental Assessment
Description of the Proposed Action
The proposed action consists of the licensee's 10 CFR 20.2002
alternate disposal request to release the VLLW waste generated from STP
waste management operational activities and disposing of it at an
existing Texas Class 1 or Class 2 industrial landfill. Per established
procedures and in compliance with NRC regulations, the licensee would
continue onsite operations related to the processing, packaging, and
shipping of the VLLW offsite, which are described in Section 11.4,
``Solid Waste Management System,'' of the STP Updated Final Safety
Analysis Report. For example, waste is held, pending transport, in the
STP Environmental Yard as described in plant procedures for packaging
and shipment of waste materials, as discussed in the STPNOC letter,
dated December 3, 2021. No additional construction activities or
operational changes at STP are required to prepare the waste onsite for
transportation and for ultimate disposal, as discussed in the STPNOC
letter, dated August 19, 2022.
The proposed action, which involves annual shipments of
approximately 51 cubic meters (m\3\) per year of material, results in
individual shipping volumes ranging from 4.25 m\3\ to 10.2 m\3\ per
shipment depending on the number of shipments. These volumes are
minimal relative to annual volumes being disposed at Texas Class 1 or
Class 2 industrial landfills. For example, according to the STPNOC 2020
annual radioactive effluent release report, the licensee disposed of a
total of 59.6 m\3\ of VLLW at the Blue Ridge Landfill. A review of the
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) reports, ``Municipal
Solid Waste in Texas: A Year in Review, 2019 Data Summary and
Analysis'' and ``Municipal Solid Waste in Texas: A Year in Review, 2020
Data Summary and Analysis,'' indicated that the Blue Ridge Landfill
received and disposed of approximately 1,300,000 m\3\ of similar
material in the 2020 reporting year.
The waste would be transported per Department of Transportation
regulations to Texas Class 1 or Class 2 industrial landfills authorized
to accept the material. The material being considered for disposal in
the requested action will be shipped from STP to the industrial
landfill in B-25 boxes or 55-gallon drums on trucks or, in some cases,
vacuum trucks. Upon arrival at the landfill, disposal actions will be
performed in accordance with established procedures and consistent with
Texas regulations. Texas would maintain oversight and regulatory
authority of the disposal actions related to the proposed action.
Need for the Proposed Action
The purpose and need for the proposed action are to authorize a
safe and appropriate method for disposing of material containing VLLW
generated during operations at STP. The proposed action would expand
the licensee's options for dispositioning this VLLW, allowing disposal
at Texas Class 1 or Class 2 industrial landfills, as well as at a 10
CFR part 61 LLW disposal site. Approval of the proposed action would
allow the specified waste generated during operations to be sent to
industrial landfills permitted by Texas to receive the waste for
disposal and allow STP to continue operation. The proposed action would
also satisfy the regulatory requirements regarding the disposal of VLLW
in accordance with NRC regulations as noted in the NRC's letter to
STPNOC, dated August 10, 2021.
Alternatives to the Proposed Action
As an alternative to the proposed action, the NRC staff considered
the no-action alternative in which the NRC staff would deny the
disposal request. Denial of the request would require STP to dispose of
the VLLW at a 10 CFR part 61 LLW disposal site or submit an alternate
disposal request that considers another option for disposing of the
material.
Affected Environment Including Environmental Characteristics
The affected environment of the facilities and processes associated
with the onsite waste management activities
[[Page 74452]]
at STP is described in Chapter 2, ``Affected Environment,'' of the
SEIS.
The environmental characteristics would be expected to vary among
approved Texas Class 1 or Class 2 industrial landfills due to their
locations and modes of operation. Texas is responsible for approving
the construction of landfills within the state and overseeing their
operations. Specifically, Texas regulations in TAC Title 30 Chapter
330, ``Municipal Solid Waste,'' which address siting, construction, and
operations of specific landfills, consider the environmental
characteristics of individual landfills at the time of permitting.
Ideally for the licensee, due to increase cost for transportation
and radiological risk, the landfill selected for disposal would be
close to the STP site in Matagorda County, Texas. Therefore, the
affected environment described for the STP SEIS, specifically Chapter
2, ``Affected Environment,'' could be similar to the selected landfill
affected environment. In addition, the NRC staff considered the
affected environment for a landfill (1) located close to the STP site
in Matagorda County, (2) known to have been used previously by STP
(i.e., Blue Ridge Landfill), and (3) located outside of Matagorda
County.
If the licensee chooses a landfill that is outside of Matagorda
County, it makes sense that the selected landfill would be a short
distance from STP in order to minimize potential transportation and
radiological impacts. In the past, STP has disposed of waste at Blue
Ridge Landfill located in Fresno, Texas (Fort Bend County). In
addition, several neighboring counties surrounding Matagorda County
have operating landfills (e.g., Fort Bend, Brazoria, Wharton, and
Jackson).
Several Federal and State agencies have prepared environmental
impact statements (EISs) for their proposed actions, which include a
description of the affected environment in these counties, including
``U.S. Department of Energy W.A. Parish Post-Combustion CO2
Capture and Sequestration Project Final Environmental Impact
Statement.'' The W.A. Parish EIS describes the affected environment of
Fort Bend County (which is where the Blue Ridge Landfill is located)
covering the resource areas of air quality and climate (Section 3.2);
geology, soils, and land use (Sections 3.4, 3.5 and 3.11); water
resources (Sections 3.6, 3.7 and 3.8); ecological resources (Section
3.9); cultural resources (Section 3.10); traffic and transportation
(Section 3.12); and socioeconomics (Section 3.18).
Should STP choose a landfill besides Blue Ridge Landfill which is
located outside of Matagorda County, the W.A. Parish EIS also describes
the previously mentioned affected resources areas in Jackson County,
Brazoria, or Wharton Counties.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action
This section identifies and evaluates the anticipated environmental
impacts associated with implementing the proposed action. This includes
consideration of the actions performed at STP, the transportation of
the material to the selected Texas Class 1 or Class 2 industrial
landfill, and impacts related to the actions performed at the
industrial landfill.
The first part of the proposed action considered waste management
operational tasks previously evaluated and approved by the NRC as part
of the STP license renewal. Impacts to STP from these waste management
operational tasks are documented in Chapter 2, ``Alternatives Including
the Proposed Action,'' of the GEIS and Chapter 4.0, ``Environmental
Impacts of Operation,'' and Chapter 6.0, ``Environmental Impacts of the
Uranium Fuel Cycle, Waste Management, and Greenhouse Gas Emissions,''
of the SEIS. Specially, these specific sections discuss impacts of STP
operational activities, including waste management, which impact the
affected environment:
Sections 4.1 and 4.11 of the SEIS evaluate impacts to land
use, geology, and soils. The impacts would be small.
Sections 4.3 and 4.4 of the SEIS evaluate impacts to water
resources. The impacts would be small.
Sections 4.5-4.7 of the SEIS evaluate impacts to
ecological resources. The impacts would be small.
Section 4.2 of the SEIS evaluates impacts to air quality.
The impacts would be small.
Section 4.9 of the SEIS evaluates impacts to socioeconomic
issues including to noise and visual aesthetics, housing, public
services, and historical and archeological resources. The impacts would
be small.
Section 4.9.7 of the SEIS addresses environmental justice.
The NRC staff has determined that there would be no disproportionately
high and adverse impacts to these populations from the continued
operation of STP during the license renewal period.
Section 4.8 of the SEIS evaluates license renewal impacts
to overall human health and concludes that the impacts would be small
to moderate. However, as noted in the following bullet, specific
impacts related to waste management activities were identified as being
small.
Section 4.11.1.1 of the GEIS and Section 6.1 of the SEIS
evaluate waste management activities. The impacts from LLW storage and
disposal would be small.
The NRC staff did not identify any new or significant information
related to waste management operational activities being performed at
STP if the alternate disposal request is approved, which were not
considered in the GEIS and SEIS and which would result in changes to
the findings or conclusions of their impact analysis.
Transportation of the waste for disposal was evaluated as part of
the STP renewal in Section 4.11.1.1 of the GEIS. In the GEIS, the
impact of LLW storage and disposal is considered small. The waste in
the GEIS is transported from the nuclear power plant to a 10 CFR part
61 LLW disposal site. In this case, the nearest 10 CFR part 61 LLW
disposal site would be over 500 miles away. Therefore, the impact
assessment of the GEIS would bound the analysis of transporting from
the STP site to a local landfill in one of the surrounding counties
(i.e., the landfill would be less than 500 miles). The Department of
Transportation regulations govern the transport of radioactive material
by truck on public highways. The NRC staff evaluated the risk to human
health from the transportation of all radioactive material in the U.S.
in NUREG-0170, ``Final Environmental Statement on the Transportation of
Radioactive Materials by Air and Other Modes,'' December 1977). The
principal radiological environmental impact during normal
transportation by trucks is direct radiation exposure to transport
workers and nearby persons from radioactive material in the package.
The average annual individual dose from all radioactive material
transportation in the U.S. was calculated as approximately 0.005
millisievert (mSv) per year (0.5 millirem (mrem) per year), well below
the 10 CFR 20.1301, ``Dose limits for individual members of the
public,'' limit of 1 mSv per year (100 mrem per year) for a member of
the public.
Regarding the second part of the proposed action (i.e., disposal at
Texas Class 1 or Class 2 industrial landfills), Texas regulations
permit Class 1 and Class 2 industrial landfills to accept waste exempt
by rule for disposal. The exempt waste is defined as waste with
radionuclide content that meets the concentration or activity limits in
25 TAC 289.251(l)(1) and 25 TAC 289.251(l)(2), respectively, in
accordance with 25 TAC Sec. 289.251(e)(1) and 25 TAC Sec.
289.251(e)(2). Since the
[[Page 74453]]
permit provided by Texas for the construction of landfills requires a
discussion of the total amount of material that will be disposed of at
the landfill and consideration of the construction of cells or
facilities, there would be no additional environmental impacts or
significant operational changes when accepting exempted waste. The
proposed action would be part of Texas permitted waste management
operational activities at the landfill and if the disposal operator
complies with the Texas regulations, there would be minimal impacts
from the proposed action. Specific impacts related to the disposal of
5-12 shipments of VLLW from STP at Texas Class 1 or Class 2 industrial
landfills are addressed in the following subsections.
Land Use, Geology, and Soils
Regulatory requirements related to potential impacts to these
resource areas are overseen by TCEQ in accordance with Texas
regulations, including TAC Title 30 Rule 330.61(g), ``Land-use map,''
TAC Title 30 Rule 330.61(h), ``Impact on surrounding area,'' and TAC
Title 30 Rule 330.61(j), ``General geology and soils statement.'' These
regulations discuss specific details an owner or operator requesting a
permit for a landfill must include in their application in order to
identify potential land use, geology, and soils impacts, as well as how
the landfill may impact surrounding cities, communities, groups, and
individuals. Provided the landfill permit is approved in accordance
with these regulations and the landfill remains in compliance with the
operational regulations in TAC Title 30 Chapter 30 Subchapter D,
``Operational Standards for Municipal Solid Waste Landfill
Facilities,'' the NRC staff does not expect the proposed action to
significantly impact land use, geology, or soils.
Transportation
Offsite transportation impacts from the shipment of VLLW to Texas
Class 1 or Class 2 industrial landfills may vary due to distances and
routes travelled. Transportation of VLLW would be in accordance with
Department of Transportation's regulations. Any onsite transportation
of VLLW at the landfill is expected to be in accordance with Texas
regulations. Considering the number of shipments (i.e., 5-12 per year),
the proposed action would have no significant transportation impacts.
Water Resources
Regulatory requirements related to potential impacts to water
resources, including surface water and groundwater at industrial
landfills are overseen by TCEQ in accordance with TAC Title 30 Chapter
330. These include the regulation of drainage options, liner system
design and operation, groundwater sampling and monitoring, as well as
closure and post-closure requirements. Therefore, provided that the
landfill remains in compliance with Texas regulations, the NRC staff
does not expect the proposed action to significantly impact water
resources on and around the site.
Ecological Resources
Potential impacts to ecological resources from the proposed action
at Texas Class 1 or Class 2 industrial landfills and associated lands
are site-specific as disposal site locations range from urban to rural
landscapes. Texas permitting requirements, including TAC Title 30 Rule
330.157, ``Endangered Species Protection''; TAC Title 30 Rule
330.61(n), ``Endangered or Threatened Species''; TAC Title 30 Rule
330.23, ``Relationships with other Governmental Entities,'' (h),
``Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (TPWD)''; and TAC Title 30 Rule
330.61(m), ``Floodplains and wetlands statement,'' are considered by
Texas when approving the use of land for a landfill. Therefore,
provided that the landfill remains in compliance with Texas
regulations, the NRC staff does not expect the proposed action to
significantly impact the ecological resources on and around the site.
The proposed action does not involve the development or disturbance of
additional land. Hence, the NRC staff has determined that the proposed
action will not affect listed endangered or threatened species or their
critical habitat.
Air Quality
Regulatory requirements and oversight of potential impacts from the
proposed action at the landfill are overseen by Texas in accordance
with multiple rules identified in TAC Title 30 Chapter 330. Considering
the number of shipments and small volumes associated with the proposed
action and provided that the landfill remains in compliance with Texas
regulations, the NRC staff does not expect the proposed action to
significantly impact the air quality on and around the site.
Socioeconomics
The regulations discussed in TAC Title 30 Rule 330.57(d),
``Required Information,'' ensure that the operation of disposal sites
permitted by Texas pose no reasonable probability of adversely
affecting the health, welfare, environment, or physical property of
nearby residents and property owners. In addition, Texas regulations in
TAC Title 30 Rule 330.61 require that applicants requesting a permit
for a municipal solid waste landfill include documentation of
surrounding historical structures and sites that may be impacted by the
existence of the landfill or disposal operations that would occur on
the site. Considering the number of shipments and small volume of VLLW,
the proposed action would have no significant socioeconomic impact.
Waste Management
Waste management activities at Texas Class 1 or Class 2 industrial
landfills are conducted in compliance with TAC Title 30 Chapter 330.
Therefore, considering the number of shipments and small volume of
VLLW, the proposed action would not significantly impact waste
management activities at the landfills.
Public and Occupational Human Health
The NRC staff does not expect the proposed action to significantly
impact public and occupational health on or near landfills. Texas
landfill regulatory requirements were established to minimize exposures
to workers and members of the public. Doses calculated using the
proposed STP Administrative Concentration Limits provided by the
licensee confirmed that doses associated with the transport and
disposal would be less than 2 mrem per year. Therefore, the proposed
action would not significantly impact public and occupational health.
Environmental Justice
Existing Texas Class 1 and Class 2 industrial landfills are located
in a variety of environmental settings, including urban, suburban, and
rural locations. As previously noted, Texas permitting regulations, TAC
Title 30 Rule 330.61(h) require information regarding how a landfill
may impact surrounding cities, communities, groups, and individuals. In
accordance with this regulation, the NRC staff does not expect the
proposed action to have a noticeable effect on populations near Texas
Class 1 or Class 2 industrial landfills. Thus, because the Texas
regulations aim to minimize impacts to human health and environment and
considering the number of shipments (i.e., 5-12 per year), the proposed
action is not expected to result in disproportionately high and adverse
human health and environmental effects on minority or low-income
populations near these landfills.
[[Page 74454]]
Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives to the Proposed Action
As an alternative to the proposed action, the NRC staff considered
the no-action alternative in which the NRC would deny the alternate
disposal request. The portion of the proposed action performed at STP
is part of the current waste management operational activities and
thus, would not be impacted by denying the alternate disposal request.
As previously noted, since STP does not maintain the ability to store
this material onsite for a long period of time and Texas does not have
the authority to approve the disposal of material outside of their
state, denial of the request would require the licensee to transport
the material to a 10 CFR part 61 LLW disposal site (e.g., Waste Control
Specialists LLC).
Multiple Class 1 and Class 2 industrial landfills are located in
the counties surrounding the STP site while the nearest 10 CFR part 61
LLW disposal site is located more than 500 miles from the site. Thus,
pursuing this alternative would change the location in which the
material is disposed, while other factors related to the disposal of
the material would be expected to be similar to the proposed action.
Cumulative Impacts
Section 4.13.11 of the GEIS evaluated the cumulative impacts from
STP waste management operational activities and found the impacts to be
minimal. Regarding disposal at the landfills, given the occasional
nature of these activities, the small amounts of waste to be disposed,
and the expected limited number of workers needed to perform the
disposal actions, the NRC staff considers the cumulative impacts of
landfill activities, when added to existing activities, to be minimal.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
On November 17, 2022, the NRC staff consulted with the TCEQ by
providing a draft of the EA for review and comment. By email dated
November 28, 2022, TCEQ provided comments regarding the use of VLLW
versus waste that has been exempt by rule when defining the waste being
considered as well as the NRC's performance of dose calculations when
assessing impacts related to the transportation and disposal of the
waste being considered in the requested action. NRC staff acknowledge
the difference between the two terms and modified the section in the
``Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action'' to clarify the type of
material being discussed. Regarding the comments related to dose
calculations, although an evaluation of doses to members of the public
is not required by TAC regulations for exempted waste it is the NRC's
policy to consider doses associated with these exposure scenarios when
evaluating alternate disposal requests.
As previously noted, the NRC has determined that the proposed
action will not affect listed endangered or threatened species or their
critical habitat. Therefore, no further consultation is required under
Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act. Likewise, the NRC staff has
determined that the proposed action does not have the potential to
adversely affect cultural resources because no ground disturbing
activities are associated with the proposed action. Therefore, no
consultation is required under Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act.
III. Finding of No Significant Impact
Based on the findings in this EA, the NRC staff has concluded that
the proposed action would have no significant environmental impacts and
that this request does not require the preparation of an EIS.
Accordingly, the NRC staff has determined that a FONSI is appropriate.
IV. Availability of Documents
The documents identified in the following table are available to
interested persons through one or more of the following methods, as
indicated.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Document description ADAMS accession No./website
------------------------------------------------------------------------
STP Nuclear Operating Company, ``Response ML21308A603.
to End of Enforcement Discretion and
Request for Approval of Alternate Disposal
Procedures for Very Low-Level Radioactive
Material,'' dated November 4, 2021.
STP Nuclear Operating Company, ``Revised ML21337A126.
Response to End of Enforcement Discretion
and Request for Approval of Alternate
Disposal Procedures for Very Low-Level
Radioactive Material (EPID: L-2021-LLL-
0022),'' dated December 3, 2021.
STP Nuclear Operating Company, ``STPNOC ML22231A469.
Response to Request for Additional
Information Regarding Request for Approval
of Alternate Disposal Procedures for Very
Low-Level Radioactive Material (EPID: L
2021-LLL-0022),'' dated August 19, 2022.
STP Nuclear Operating Company, ML22326A296.
``Clarification on STPNOC Response to
Request for Additional Information
Regarding Request for Approval of
Alternate Disposal Procedures for Very Low-
Level Radioactive Material (EPID: L 2021-
LLL-0022),'' dated November 22, 2022.
STP Nuclear Operating Company, ``Updated ML20133J932 (Package).
Final Safety Analysis Report, Revision
20,'' dated April 29, 2020.
STP Nuclear Operating Company, ``2020 ML21110A153.
Radioactive Effluent Release Report,''
dated April 19, 2021.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ``South ML22206A014.
Texas Project--Request for Additional
Information--10 CFR 20.2002 Alternate
Disposal Request (EPID: L-2021-LLL-
0022),'' email dated July 20, 2022.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ``South ML21180A195.
Texas Project, Units 1 and 2--End of
Enforcement Discretion Related to
Alternate Disposal Procedures for Very Low-
Level Radioactive Waste,'' dated August
10, 2021.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, NUREG- ML13106A241.
1437, ``Generic Environmental Impact
Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear
Plants: Main Report,'' Volume 1, Revision
1, dated June 2013.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ML13322A890.
Supplement 48 to NUREG-1437, ``Generic
Environmental Impact State for License
Renewal, Supplement 48: Regarding South
Texas Project, Units 1 and 2,'' Final
Report, dated November 2013.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, All ML12065A038.
Agreement States Letter, ``Clarification
of the Authorization for Alternate
Disposal of Material Issued Under 10 CFR
20.2002 and Exemption Provisions In 10 CFR
(FSME 12-025),'' dated March 13, 2012.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ML16007A488.
Regulatory Information Summary 2016-11,
``Requests to Dispose of Very Low-Level
Radioactive Waste Pursuant to 10 CFR
20.2002,'' dated November 13, 2016.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, NUREG- ML032450279.
1748, ``Environmental Review Guidance for
Licensing Actions Associated with NMSS
Programs,'' Final Report, dated August
2003.
[[Page 74455]]
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Office ML20016A379.
of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Office
Instruction LIC-203, Revision 4
``Procedural Guidance for Categorical
Exclusions, Environmental Assessments, and
Considering Environmental Issues,'' dated
July 7, 2020.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, NUREG- ML022590355 (Package).
0170, ``Final Environmental Statement on
the Transportation of Radioactive
Materials by Air and Other Modes,'' Volume
1, dated December 1977.
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, https://www.tceq.texas.gov/
Annual Summaries, FY2020 ``Municipal Solid permitting/waste_permits/
Waste in Texas: A Year in Review, 2020 waste_planning/
Data Summary and Analysis,'' dated wp_swasteplan.html.
September 2021. Retrieved September 30,
2022.
U.S. Department of Energy, ``U.S. https://www.energy.gov/nepa/
Department of Energy W.A. Parish Post- downloads/eis-0473-final-
Combustion CO\2\ Capture and Sequestration environmental-impact-
Project Final Environmental Impact statement.
Statement.'' Dated February 2013. Retrieved September 30,
2022.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dated: November 30, 2022.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Dennis J. Galvin,
Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch IV, Division of Operating
Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2022-26387 Filed 12-2-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P