[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