[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 88 (Wednesday, May 7, 2003)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24521-24524]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-11303]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 70-143]
Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact of
License Amendment for Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc.
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Amendment of Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc., Materials License
SNM-124 to include source reduction measures as authorized
decommissioning-related activities.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Environmental Assessment
Introduction
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering the
amendment of Special Nuclear Material License SNM-124. The proposed
amendment will allow the licensee to reduce the source term at the site
through removal of contaminated soil from the Nuclear Fuel Services
(NFS) site in Erwin, Tennessee. The NRC has prepared an Environmental
Assessment (EA) in support of NFS' amendment request, in accordance
with 10 CFR part 51. The conclusion of the EA is a Finding of No
Significant Impact (FONSI) for the proposed licensing action.
Background
By request for license amendment dated April 3, 2002, NFS applied
for approval to reduce the source term at the site by removal of
contaminated soil to levels at or below those protective of worker
health as defined in 10 CFR 20.1201 (Ref. 1).
NFS began operations at the Erwin, Tennessee facility in 1957.
Through the years, portions of the site became contaminated with
radioactive material. From 1957 until 1981, portions of the site were
used for disposal, through burial, of radioactive waste in accordance
with 10 CFR 20.304, which allowed for this type of disposal. The
regulations in 10 CFR part 20 have since been revised and Sec. 20.304
no longer exists and burial disposal is no longer allowed. The soil in
the area of the disposal site is now considered to be contaminated.
Soils in other portions of the site are also contaminated due to
accidental spills of licensed material and from inadvertent leaks from
process equipment.
Review Scope
In accordance with 10 CFR part 51, this EA serves to (1) present
information and analysis for determining whether to
[[Page 24522]]
issue a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) or to prepare an
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS); (2) fufill the NRC's compliance
with the National Environmental Policy Act when no EIS is necessary;
and (3) facilitate preparation of an EIS when one is necessary. Should
the NRC issue a FONSI, no EIS would be prepared and the license
amendment would be granted.
This document serves to evaluate and document the impacts of the
proposed action. Other activities on the site have previously been
evaluated and documented in the 1999 EA for the Renewal of the NRC
license for NFS (Ref. 2). The 1999 document is referenced when no
significant changes have occurred. Besides the proposed licensing
action, operations will continue to remain limited to those authorized
by the license.
Proposed Action
The proposed action is to reduce the source term at the site by
removal of contaminated soil to levels at or below those protective of
worker health as defined in 10 CFR 20.1201. The licensee's current
remediation efforts are being performed under existing license
conditions so that activities will be protective of worker health.
Need for Proposed Action
The current license conditions do not authorize removal of
contaminated soil, thus the licensee needs approval from the NRC to do
so. The proposed action is consistent with the requirements in 10 CFR
70.38 and 10 CFR part 20. At the time of license termination for the
entire NFS site, the results of soil removal would be reassessed in
order to incude any possible contribution from the remediated area in
the dose assessment for the entire site.
The proposed action would allow NFS to remove contaminated material
and soil until the residual concentrations of radionuclides are at or
below levels protective of human health. The major activities include
the following:
[sbull] Remove buildings, surrounding tanks, utilities, and
structures,
[sbull] Remove contaminated soil and dispose of it in accordance
with regulations controlling material of the concentration in the soil,
and
[sbull] Backfill the area with clean soil.
NFS will stockpile and cover contaminated soil that exceeds the
applicable criteria as appropriate, transport it to a processing area,
or load it directly into containers. This material will be disposed of
in a licensed facility.
The soil remediation activities proposed are essentially the same
as those NFS is currently using in the North Site area. NRC has
evaluated these in detail and found that the activities were acceptable
in the EA for the North Site remediation (66 FR 27168) (Ref. 3). An
existing license condition authorizes building deconstruction; NRC has
evaluated this and found all licensed activities to be acceptable
during the licensing process. The addition of the relatively small
volume of contaminated waste from the contaminated portions of the
facility ([sim] 68,000 cubic ft), to that of the North Site Area ([sim]
1 million cubic feet), will not have a measurable impact, either
locally, in transit to disposal, or at the disposal sites.
Ground water remediation is not a specific goal of this activity.
If, however, contaminated ground water is encountered during soil
excavation, it will be processed at either the licensee's Wastewater or
Ground Water Treatment Facilities.
Alternatives to the Proposed Action
NRC considered two alternatives to the proposed action. These are
described below.
Alternative 1--No action.
This alternative is to leave the site in its current, contaminated
condition. Leaving the site in this condition would not comply with NRC
regulations that require remediation of unused outdoor areas.
Therefore, this alternative is not acceptable.
Alternative 2--Require remediation of both groundwater and soil to
levels such that doses from all pathways meet criteria for unrestricted
use.
This alternative would require calculation of doses from existing
contamination both in soil and in water-borne sources. NFS would have
to calculate residual contamination limits in both media. NFS would
then have to reduce the residual concentration in both media to levels
that would limit the all-pathways-dose to 25 mrem/yr as specified in 10
CFR 20.1402.
NRC has concluded that this alternative is not appropriate for the
following reasons:
[sbull] The active use area of the facility will not be released
from the license at this time, therefore it is not available for
unrestricted use; and
[sbull] The licensee is obligated to remediate affected areas to
comply with limits in the License Termination Rule at the time of
license termination.
Affected Environment
The affected environment for the proposed action and all of the
alternatives is the NFS site. A full description of the site and its
characteristics is given in the 1999 Environmental Assessment (EA) for
the Renewal of the NRC license for NFS (Ref. 2).
Facility Operations
Before NFS operations, the area was a farm, as was much of the
surrounding area. The area being remediated is inside the plant
protected area that is defined by a double security fence. Within the
protected area are Banner Spring Branch, a small marsh, open grass-
covered grounds, the three surface impoundments, and Pond 4. Banner
Spring Branch runs through the property originating in the east just
outside the security fence and discharging into Martin Creek to the
north. The grounds outside the plant protected area, but inside the
outer access control fence (the perimeter fence), include grass-covered
fields, wooded areas, and a marsh. Also present are a burial ground and
a demolition landfill. Trees cover most of the grounds outside the
perimeter fence.
Radiological Status of Surface and Subsurface Soils
The primary radioactive contaminants in the contaminated soils are
uranium (U-234, U-235, and U-238), thorium (Th-228, Th-230, and Th-
232), plutonium (Pu-238, Pu-239/240, Pu-241, and Pu-242), americium
241, and technetium 99. Levels of radioactive contamination currently
exceed the release criteria in soil and sediment across much of the
site inside the plant protected area. Contamination is present down to
the level of auger refusal in much of the protected area. Contamination
also exists between the cobbles.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action
Radiological Impacts
NFS will ship excavated material to a licensed disposal facility.
The licensee's radiological protection program requires use of
hazardous work permits that will limit dose to workers to less than or
equal to the limits in 10 CFR part 20.
Minor spills and releases may occur as contaminated soil is being
prepared for shipment or during transport to an offsite disposal
facility. Spills and releases of dirt would pose only negligible impact
to human health and the environment. In case of a spill of this nature,
decontamination efforts and any required notification would be
performed in accordance with NFS procedures.
[[Page 24523]]
Non-Radiological Impacts
Portions of the site, primarily the ground water, are contaminated
with solvents (perchloroethylene (PCE) and trichloroethylene (TCE))
from NFS activities. These materials are the subject of an U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Tennessee Department of
Environment and Conservation (TDEC) Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA)/Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) Permit requiring
investigation and remediation in a timeframe agreed upon between, EPA,
TDEC and NFS. Separate from the proposed action, however, NFS has
recently implemented a pilot groundwater remediation study to
accommodate all groundwater contaminants; i.e., radioactive and non-
radioactive. These activities were reviewed in the North Site EA by the
NRC, TDEC and EPA, and are not specifically addressed herein (Ref. 3).
Historical and Archaeological Resources
The Tennessee Historic Preservation Officer reviewed the site for
historic structures during the EA for the North Site decommissioning
and determined `` that there is no national register of historic places
listed or eligible properties affected by this undertaking.'' This
activity is in the same general area as the North Site decommissioning
activities (Ref. 4), therefore, the Historic Preservation Office was
not consulted for this EA.
Biota
In the consultations for the EA on the North Site area, the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) determined that there are two Federally
endangered mollusks (Epioblasma torulosa torulose and Alasmidonta
reveneliana) in the Nolichucky River upstream of the NFS site; these
will not be affected by the planned operation. There is also a
Federally threatened plant in the vicinity of the NFS site: Virginia
spiraea (Spiraea virginiana). These evaluations collectively considered
the entire NFS site area, and concluded that because of the industrial
nature of the NFS site and surrounding area, there is no suitable
habitat for these species at the site. The FWS confirmed that these are
the only listed species in Unicoi County (Ref. 5).
Water Resources
Ground water remediation is not a specific part of the proposed
alternative. The contamination, except that encountered during soil
excavation, will remain in the alluvial groundwater. However, as
previously discussed in the North Site decommissioning plan (Ref. 3),
this groundwater will not be used as a water supply, therefore it will
not contribute to a dose to members of the public.
Surface water is not expected to be impacted from approval of this
amendment application. There will be no direct effluent discharges to
surface water as a result of the proposed activity. Surface water is
expected to continue to be protected from site activities through
release limits and monitoring programs, as required by the National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit, which is
regulated by the TDEC.
Construction Impacts
No building destruction will occur as part of this action; removal
of buildings was previously authorized and evaluated by license
condition. Soil excavation will be done in the same manner as for the
North Site that NRC previously evaluated and authorized (Ref. 6). No
adverse effects will occur in the environment from this activity.
Impacts to Aesthetic, Economic, Cultural, Social, Air Quality, Noise
Resources and Habitat Destruction
There will be no discernable impacts on aesthetics, socio-economics
or cultural resources because the work is being done by existing staff
and the physical configuration of the facility will remain the same.
There may be minor, temporary impacts on air quality and noise
during remediation activities. NFS has dust-control measures in place
for excavation activities, and the use of equipment will not
significantly change from the current industrial environment.
Environmental Monitoring
NFS conducts a sampling program of ambient soil, vegetation,
surface water, and sediment to monitor impacts from the Erwin Plant to
the surrounding area. Details of the monitoring program are described
in the Renewal EA (Ref. 2). Also, environmental dosimeters are at
onsite and offsite locations to monitor ambient external dose rates and
to assist with the assessment of potential accidents.
The areas to be remediated will remain within licensee control and
will be monitored according to the pertinent provisions of the license
for operational and environmental monitoring.
Agencies and Individuals Consulted, and Sources Used
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IV
EPA Region IV has reviewed the proposed action and concludes that:
[sbull] The RCRA/HSWA Permit issued to NFS will be used to enforce
appropriate groundwater pilot studies and necessary groundwater
remediation of all contaminated groundwater; and
[sbull] The RCRA/HSWA Permit issued to NFS will be used to enforce
appropriate and necessary layered institutional controls (ICs).
[sbull] EPA Region IV has no objection to the proposed activity
(Ref. 7).
Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC)
TDEC has no objections to the proposed action (Ref. 8).
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS)
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service was consulted for North Site
decommissioning (Ref. 5). Its evaluations collectively considered the
entire NFS site area, and concluded that because of the industrial
nature of the NFS site and surrounding area, there is currently no
suitable habitat for the three local endangered/threatened species at
the site. FWS was contacted to confirm that there are still only three
listed species in Unicoi County, TN.
Finding of No Significant Impact
Based upon the environmental assessment, the Commission has
concluded that the proposed action will not have a significant effect
on the quality of the human environment. Accordingly, the Commission
has concluded that environmental impacts associated with the proposed
action would do not warrant the preparation of an Environmental Impact
Statement. It has been determined that a Finding of No Significant
Impact is appropriate.
References
1. B. Marie Moore, April 3, 2002. License Amendment Request to
Include Source Reduction Measures as Authorized Decommissioning-Related
Activities. (ADAMS accession number ML021010075).
2. T. Cox, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Letter to T.S. Baer,
Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc., ``Finding of No Significant Impact and
Environmental Assessment (TAC NO. L30873),'' January 29, 1999.
3. Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc. (NFS). 1999. North Site
Characterization Report for Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc., Erwin,
Tennessee, Revision 1.
4. Tennessee Historical Commission May 22, 2002. Personal
communications between Jennifer Bartlett and Julie Olivier.
5. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services, Tennessee Field Office,
November 12,
[[Page 24524]]
2002. Personal communications between Jim Widlak and Julie Olivier.
6. NFS North Site Decommissioning Plan, Revision 1, July, 1999.
7. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, September 18,
2002. Personal communications between Leo J. Romanowski, Jr. to James
Shepherd.
8. Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation 2002.
Communication, Debra Shults, TDEC and J. C. Shepherd. October 18, 2002.
The references with ADAMS accession numbers may also be viewed in
the NRC's Electronic Public Document Reading Room at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. Any questions with respect to his
action should be referred to Ms. Mary Adams, Fuel Cycle Facilities
Branch, Division of Fuel Cycle Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Mail Stop T-8 A33, Washington, DC 20555-0001.
Telephone 301-415-7249.
Dated in Rockville, MD, this 24th day of April, 2003.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Susan M. Frant,
Chief, Fuel Cycle Facilities Branch, Division of Fuel Cycle Safety and
Safeguards, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.
[FR Doc. 03-11303 Filed 5-6-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P