[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 248 (Thursday, December 27, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 66947-66948]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-31804]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket 72-20]
U.S. Department of Energy Three Mile Island 2 Independent Spent
Fuel Storage Installation, Materials License No. SNM-2508; Issuance of
Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or Commission) is
considering issuance of an exemption, pursuant to 10 CFR 72.7, from a
specific provision of 10 CFR 72.32(a)(12) to the U.S. Department of
Energy (DOE) for the Three Mile Island 2 (TMI-2) Independent Spent Fuel
Storage Installation (ISFSI) located in Idaho. The requested exemption
would allow DOE to deviate from the requirement of 10 CFR 72.32(a)(12)
for a biennial onsite emergency preparedness (EP) exercise. The
requested exemption would allow the onsite exercise to be performed
prior to June 30, 2002, instead of prior to December 31, 2001, which is
the expiration of the biennial period for the conduct of an EP exercise
at the TMI-2 ISFSI.
Environmental Assessment (EA)
Identification of Proposed Action: By letter dated November 21,
2001, DOE requested an extension of time in which to perform the next
onsite biennial EP exercise required by 10 CFR 72.32(a)(12)(i). Staff
has considered an exemption from this provision of 10 CFR 72.32(a)(12).
DOE holds Materials License No. SNM-2508, issued March 19, 1999, for
operation of the TMI-2 ISFSI located within the Idaho National
Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL).
On March 16, 1999, DOE performed the first onsite EP exercise for
the TMI-2 ISFSI. The requirement of 10 CFR 72.32(a)(12) is that onsite
EP exercises be conducted biennially, that is every other calendar
year. With the last performance of the TMI-2 ISFSI EP exercise on March
16, 1999, the next required performance of the exercise would be prior
to December 31, 2001. DOE had scheduled its next biennial exercise for
September 12, 2001. However, due to the tragic events of September 11,
2001, the exercise was postponed.
By exempting DOE from the provision of 10 CFR 72.32(a)(12)
requiring a biennial exercise, DOE will be authorized to delay
performance of the biennial onsite EP exercise at the TMI-2 ISFSI until
June 30, 2002. The proposed action before the Commission is whether to
grant this exemption under 10 CFR 72.7.
Need for the Proposed Action: Conduct of an exercise of an ISFSI's
onsite emergency plan every 2 years is required by 10 CFR 72.32(a)(12).
The licensee had initially planned to conduct an exercise of its onsite
emergency plan on September 12, 2001, within the required 2-year
interval. However, due to heavy demands on INEEL security and emergency
preparedness resources pursuant to the tragic events of September 11,
2001, and the prospect of continued terrorist threats against the
United States, and the need for those resources to remain focused on
assessing the security and emergency preparedness/response posture at
INEEL, the licensee decided to postpone the exercise.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action: The proposed action
involves an administrative activity (a scheduler change in conducting
an exercise) unrelated to ISFSI operations.
The last EP exercise was conducted on March 16, 1999. NRC reviews
and inspections since the 1999 exercise have not identified a decline
in the effectiveness of DOE's emergency response capability. The
postponement should have no impact on the effectiveness of DOE's
emergency response capability. Moreover, as DOE points out, the re-
scheduled exercise may be of more value after any additional security
and/or emergency response measures are put into effect in light of the
tragic events of September 11, 2001.
The proposed action will not increase the probability or
consequences of accidents, no changes are being made in the amounts or
types of any effluents that may be released offsite, and there is no
increase in occupational or public radiation exposure. Therefore, there
are no significant radiological environmental impacts associated with
the proposed action.
With regard to potential non-radiological impacts, the proposed
action does not affect non-radiological effluents and has no other
environmental impact. Therefore, there are no significant non-
radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.
Accordingly, the Commission concludes that there are no significant
environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.
Alternative to the Proposed Action: As an alternative to the
proposed action, the staff considered denial of the proposed action
(i.e., the ``no-action'' alternative). Denial of the application would
result in no change in current environmental impacts. The environmental
impacts of the proposed action and the alternative action are the same.
Agencies and Persons Consulted: On December 19, 2001, Mr. Doug
Walker and Ms. Kathleen Trever of the State of Idaho, INEEL Oversight
Program, were contacted about the Environmental Assessment for the
proposed action. The state officials had no comments related to the
appropriateness of issuance of the exemption, or the Staff's basis for
issuance of the exemption. The state officials discussed several
comments related to additional information in DOE's letter request
dated November 21, 2001, that were unrelated to the Staff's basis for
issuance of the exemption. The state officials mentioned they will
follow up on those concerns with a letter to DOE, and will provide a
copy of that letter to the NRC. However, the state officials agreed
that issuance of the exemption need not be delayed due to the unrelated
concerns.
Finding of No Significant Impact
On the basis of the environmental assessment, the Commission
concludes that the proposed action will not have a significant effect
on the quality of the human environment. Accordingly, the Commission
has determined not to prepare an environmental impact statement for the
proposed action.
[[Page 66948]]
The licensee's letter was docketed under 10 CFR part 72, Docket 72-
20. For further details with respect to this action, see DOE's request
dated November 21, 2001. The NRC maintains an Agencywide Documents
Access and Management System (ADAMS), which provides text and image
files of NRC's public documents. These documents may be accessed
through the NRC's Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at
http://www.nrc.gov/NRC/ADAMS/index.html. 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 email to [email protected].
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 19th day of December, 2001.
Charles L. Miller,
Acting Director, Spent Fuel Project Office, Office of Nuclear Material
Safety and Safeguards.
[FR Doc. 01-31804 Filed 12-26-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P