[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 207 (Wednesday, October 26, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 66334-66336]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-27685]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[NRC-2009-0435]
Final Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant
Impact for the Proposed License Renewal for Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc.
in Erwin, TN
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Notice of Availability of Final Environmental Assessment and
Finding of No Significant Impact.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) is issuing a final environmental assessment (EA)
regarding the proposed renewal of NRC special nuclear material license
SNM-124 (License SNM-124), which authorizes operations at the Nuclear
Fuel Services, Inc. (NFS) fuel fabrication facility in Erwin,
Tennessee. On June 30, 2009, NFS submitted to the NRC an application
requesting that License SNM-124 be renewed for a 40-year period. The EA
makes a finding of no significant impact (FONSI) regarding the proposed
action.
ADDRESSES: You can access publicly available documents related to this
document using the following methods:
NRC's Public Document Room (PDR): The public may examine
and have copied, for a fee, publicly available documents related to the
NFS facility and license renewal at the NRC's PDR, located at One White
Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland
20852. Members of the public can contact the NRC's PDR reference staff
by calling 1-800-397-4209, by faxing a request to 301-415-3548, or by
e-mail to [email protected]. Hard copies of the documents are
available from the PDR for a fee.
NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System
(ADAMS): Publicly available documents created or received at the NRC
are available online in the NRC Library at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. From this page, the public can gain entry into ADAMS,
which provides text and image files of the NRC's public documents. From
this Web site, the following documents related to the NRC's
environmental review can be obtained by entering the accession numbers
provided:
The NFS license renewal application (ADAMS Accession Number:
ML091880040) and the accompanying environmental report (ADAMS Accession
Number: ML091900072);
The NRC request for additional information (ADAMS Accession Number:
ML100680426);
The NFS response providing additional information (ADAMS Accession
Number: ML101590160); and
The NRC Final EA (ADAMS Accession Number: ML112560265).
Additionally, copies of the EA will be available at the following
public libraries:
Unicoi County Public Library, 201 Nolichucky Avenue, Erwin, Tennessee
37650-1239. 423-743-6533.
Jonesborough Branch, Washington County Library, 200 Sabin Drive,
Jonesborough, Tennessee 37659-1306. 423-753-1800.
Greeneville/Green County Public Library, 210 North Main Street,
Greeneville, Tennessee 37745-3816. 423-638-5034.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information about the EA or the
environmental review process, please contact James Park, telephone:
301-415-6935; e-mail: [email protected]. For general or technical
information associated with the ongoing safety review of the NFS
license renewal application, please contact Kevin Ramsey, telephone:
301-492-3123; e-mail: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On June 30, 2009, NFS submitted its license
renewal application and accompanying environmental report (ER) to the
NRC. On October 6, 2009, the NRC provided notice in the Federal
Register (74 FR 51323) of its receipt of the license renewal
application and also noticed an opportunity to request a hearing on the
application. No requests for a hearing were received. Under the
conditions of License SNM-124, NFS operates a nuclear fuel fabrication
facility located in Erwin, Tennessee. If granted as requested, the
renewed license would allow NFS to continue operations and activities
at the site for a 40-year period that would begin with issuance of the
renewed license.
The NRC staff's environmental review of the proposed 40-year
license renewal is documented in the EA, in accordance with NRC
regulations at Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR)
part 51, which implement the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969,
as amended (NEPA). The EA also follows NRC staff guidance in NUREG-
1748, ``Environmental Review Guidance for Licensing Actions Associated
with NMSS Programs.'' The EA identifies and evaluates the potential
environmental impacts of the proposed action, and reasonable
alternatives. The NRC staff has determined that renewal of License SNM-
124 for a 40-year period would not significantly affect the quality of
the human environment, and the EA thus makes a FONSI. The NRC staff
further finds that preparation of an environmental impact statement
(EIS) for the proposed action is not warranted.
The NRC staff published for public comment a draft EA for the
proposed action on October 15, 2010 (75 FR 63519). The NRC staff
accepted comments on the draft EA until December 31, 2010, and hosted a
meeting in Erwin, Tennessee on October 26, 2010, to accept oral and
written public comments. Comments were identified from the transcript
of statements made at the public meeting, and from letters and e-mails
submitted by members of the public. Appendix B of the Final EA includes
summaries of
[[Page 66335]]
the approximately 375 individual comments identified, and the NRC
staff's responses to those comments. The NRC staff revised the draft EA
in response to some of the comments.
Preparation of the EA is part of the NRC's process to decide
whether to renew the NFS license, pursuant to 10 CFR parts 20 and 70,
and thus authorize continued operations at the NFS facility. In
accordance with the provisions of 10 CFR part 70, the current license
authorizes NFS to receive, possess, store, use, and ship special
nuclear material enriched up to 100 percent. Under the proposed action,
NFS would continue production of reactor fuel for the U.S. Navy, and
for commercial domestic operations.
In addition to the NFS proposed action to renew its license for 40
years, the NRC staff analyzed two alternatives: (1) The no-action
alternative; and (2) renewing the NFS license for 10 years. Under the
no-action alternative, NRC would not renew License SNM-124, and
operations at the NFS site would no longer be authorized. NFS then
would be required under 10 CFR 70.38 to submit a detailed site-wide
decommissioning plan, and facility decommissioning would begin upon NRC
approval of that plan.
Regarding the 10-year license renewal alternative, the potential
transportation and waste management impacts of this alternative to the
proposed action are addressed in the EA. The magnitude of these
expected impacts are one-fourth of those projected over the proposed
40-year license renewal period. As shown in the first table below, the
local transportation impacts are rated as moderate and the overall
transportation impacts are rated as small for both the 10-year and the
40-year proposed license renewal periods. The potential waste
management impacts are rated as small for both the 10-year and the 40-
year proposed license renewal periods.
The NRC staff did not separately address the 10-year alternative
for the other resource areas evaluated in the EA, because the staff
determined that the types of potential environmental impacts associated
with site operations during the proposed 40-year license renewal period
would be the same as those during a 10-year license renewal period.
Additionally, for the 10-year alternative, the NRC staff does not
consider the potential impacts from NFS discharges of effluents that
are in compliance with 10 CFR part 20 annual regulatory limits (and
discharges that are in compliance with the permit conditions issued by
other Federal, State, or local agencies) to differ either in type or in
magnitude with the potential impacts for the requested 40-year period.
The annual regulatory limits in 10 CFR part 20 and the respective
permit conditions are protective of public health and safety and the
environment. Discharges in compliance with those limits and conditions
would thus not be expected to pose undue cumulative risks to human
health and the environment.
In response to comments on the draft EA, impacts from site
decommissioning are evaluated in the final EA for the proposed action
and the 10-year alternative, in addition to the no-action alternative.
In doing so, the NRC staff recognizes that site decommissioning will be
a reasonably foreseeable future action for the NFS facility and site.
In conducting its evaluation, the staff also recognized that continued
operations over 40 years or 10 years has the potential for increased
site contamination that would need to be addressed in the detailed site
decommissioning plan that NFS will be required to submit for NRC review
when NFS decides to permanently cease its licensed operations. In
further response to comments, the issue of cancer risk is discussed in
the final EA's section on potential public health impacts.
The tables below list the resource areas evaluated in the EA, and
provide the findings regarding the potential environmental impacts for
each of the three alternatives. In accordance with Council of
Environmental Quality regulations (40 CFR 1508.27), the significance of
potential impacts of the proposed action have been determined by
examining their context and intensity. Context is related to the
affected region, the affected interests, and the locality, while
intensity refers to the severity of the impact, which is based on a
number of considerations. In evaluating the significance of potential
impacts, the NRC staff in the EA used the following significance levels
identified in NUREG-1748, which account for context and intensity:
Small--environmental effects are not detectable or are so
minor that they will neither destabilize nor noticeably alter any
important attribute of the resource;
Moderate--environmental effects are sufficient to alter
noticeably, but not to destabilize, important attributes of the
resource; or
Large--environmental effects are clearly noticeable and
are sufficient to destabilize important attributes of the resource.
Summary of Potential Environmental Impacts From Operations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resource area Proposed action 10-Year renewal No-action
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Land Use............................. SMALL to MODERATE...... SMALL to MODERATE...... SMALL.
Transportation....................... SMALL (overall) SMALL (overall) SMALL.
MODERATE (local). MODERATE (local).
Socioeconomics....................... SMALL.................. SMALL.................. SMALL to MODERATE.
Air Quality.......................... SMALL.................. SMALL.................. SMALL.
Water Resources--Surface Water....... SMALL.................. SMALL.................. SMALL.
Water Resources--Groundwater......... SMALL to MODERATE...... SMALL to MODERATE...... SMALL.
Geology & Soils...................... SMALL (geology) SMALL SMALL (geology) SMALL SMALL (geology) SMALL
to MODERATE (soils). to MODERATE (soils). to MODERATE (soils).
Ecology.............................. SMALL.................. SMALL.................. SMALL.
Noise................................ SMALL.................. SMALL.................. SMALL.
Historic & Cultural.................. SMALL.................. SMALL.................. SMALL.
Scenic & Visual...................... SMALL.................. SMALL.................. SMALL.
Public & Occupational Health......... SMALL.................. SMALL.................. SMALL.
Public & Occupational Health-- MODERATE............... MODERATE............... SMALL.
Accidents.
Waste Management..................... SMALL.................. SMALL.................. SMALL.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 66336]]
Summary of Potential Environmental Impacts From Decommissioning
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resource area Proposed action 10-Year renewal No-action
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Land Use............................. MODERATE............... MODERATE............... MODERATE.
Transportation....................... SMALL (overall) SMALL (overall) SMALL (overall)
MODERATE (local). MODERATE (local). MODERATE (local).
Socioeconomics....................... SMALL to MODERATE...... SMALL to MODERATE...... SMALL to MODERATE.
Air Quality.......................... SMALL.................. SMALL.................. SMALL.
Water Resources--Surface Water....... SMALL to MODERATE...... SMALL to MODERATE...... SMALL to MODERATE.
Water Resources--Groundwater......... SMALL to MODERATE...... SMALL to MODERATE...... SMALL to MODERATE.
Geology & Soils...................... SMALL (geology) SMALL SMALL (geology) SMALL SMALL (geology) SMALL
to MODERATE (soils). to MODERATE (soils). to MODERATE (soils).
Ecology.............................. SMALL to MODERATE...... SMALL to MODERATE...... SMALL to MODERATE.
Noise................................ SMALL to MODERATE...... SMALL to MODERATE...... SMALL to MODERATE.
Historic & Cultural.................. SMALL.................. SMALL.................. SMALL.
Scenic & Visual...................... MODERATE............... MODERATE............... MODERATE.
Public & Occupational Health......... SMALL.................. SMALL.................. SMALL.
Public & Occupational Health-- SMALL to MODERATE...... SMALL to MODERATE...... SMALL to MODERATE.
Accidents.
Waste Management..................... MODERATE............... MODERATE............... MODERATE.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on its review of the proposed action relative to the
requirements set forth in 10 CFR part 51, the NRC staff has determined
that renewal of License SNM-124, for a period of 40 years would not
significantly affect the quality of the human environment. In its
license renewal request, NFS is proposing no changes in how it
processes enriched uranium, and no significant changes in NFS'
authorized operations are planned during the proposed license renewal
period. The impacts of ongoing and planned construction actions--
including those related to the physical protection and safeguarding of
licensed materials--are not expected to significantly affect the
quality of the human environment. Gaseous emissions and liquid
effluents generated by the NFS facility are presently controlled and
monitored by permit, and would continue to be required to meet
regulatory limits for non-radiological and radiological components.
Public and occupational radiological dose exposures that would be
generated by continued NFS facility operations would continue to be
required to meet 10 CFR part 20 regulatory limits. Pursuant to 10 CFR
51.31 and 51.32, the NRC staff concludes that a FONSI is appropriate,
and that preparation of an EIS is not warranted for the proposed
action.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 20th day of October, 2011.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Christepher McKenney,
Acting Deputy Director, Environmental Protection and Performance
Assessment Directorate, Division of Waste Management and Environmental
Protection, Office of Federal and State Materials and Environmental
Management Programs.
[FR Doc. 2011-27685 Filed 10-25-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P