[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 54 (Monday, March 22, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13829-13830]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-6911]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 72-20]
Department of Energy, Idaho Operations Office; Issuance of
Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact Regarding
the Proposed Exemptions From Certain Regulatory Requirements of 10 CFR
Part 10
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or Commission) is
considering issuance of an exemption, pursuant to 10 CFR 20.2301, from
the requirements of 10 CFR 20.1501(c) to the U.S. Department of Energy,
Idaho Operations Office (DOE-ID or applicant). Exemption from 10 CFR
20.1501(c) would allow DOE-ID to use a DOE Laboratory Accreditation
Program process for personnel dosimetry at its proposed Independent
Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI). The proposed ISFSI is to be
located at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory
(INEEL), within the Idaho Nuclear Technology Engineering Center (INTEC)
site in Scoville, Idaho. The proposed ISFSI would store the spent
nuclear fuel debris created as a result of the Three Mile Island Unit 2
(TMI-2) accident.
Environmental Assessment (EA)
Identification of Proposed Action: The applicant is seeking
Commission approval to construct and operate an ISFSI at INTEC. INTEC
is an existing facility initially constructed to both store and
reprocess spent fuel and high-level waste processed by DOE. Pursuant to
10 CFR Part 72, DOE-ID submitted an application, including a Safety
Analysis Report (SAR), for the ISFSI by letter dated October 31, 1996,
as supplemented. NRC staff is currently performing a review of that
application. On December 18, 1998, DOE-ID
[[Page 13830]]
requested an exemption from the requirements of 10 CFR 20.1501(c) which
state in part that ``All personnel dosimeters * * * that require
processing * * * must be processed and evaluated by a dosimetry
processor * * * (1) Holding current personnel dosimetry accreditation
from the National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program (NVLAP) of
the National Institute of Standards and Technology * * *''
Specifically, the applicant proposes allowing the DOE Laboratory
Accreditation Program (DOELAP) as an approved alternative.
Need for the Proposed Action: The applicant is preparing to build
and operate the TMI-2 ISFSI as described in its application and SAR,
subject to approval of the pending license application. The applicant
is implementing programs and procedures necessary to operate the ISFSI
and seeks to have those programs make efficient use of resources. One
of the programs developed by DOE is the capability to monitor personnel
occupational radioactive dose for routine and non-routine activities at
the TMI-2 ISFSI. Personnel dosimetry requires processing by a qualified
processing facility. DOE prefers to use a processing organization that
currently processes dosimetry for the INEEL. That processor is
accredited under the DOELAP, rather than under the NVLAP. To support
the efficient use of resources, DOE has requested to use the DOELAP for
processing personnel dosimetry associated with the TMI-2 ISFSI.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action The staff has examined
both the NVLAP and DOELAP processes and standards. Both the NVLAP and
DOELAP have similar requirements in that they incorporate similar test
categories (type of radiation and energy levels), tolerance levels,
bias, and performance criteria. The staff concludes that the DOELAP
process is at least as stringent as the NVLAP process and further
concludes that, for the TMI-2 ISFSI, the DOELAP process is an
acceptable alternative to the NVLAP process required by 10 CFR
20.1501(c). The ``Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) for the
Construction and Operation of the TMI-2 Independent Spent Fuel Storage
Installation,'' NUREG-1626 (March 1998), considered the potential
environmental impacts of licensing this facility. The proposed action
now under consideration would not change the potential environmental
effects assessed in the FEIS. Specifically, there are no environmental
impacts associated with the accreditation.
Alternative to the Proposed Action: Since there are no significant
environmental impacts associated with the proposed action, any
alternatives with equal or greater environmental impacts are not
evaluated. The alternative to the proposed action would be to deny
approval of the 10 CFR 20.1501(c) exemption and, therefore, not allow
use of the DOELAP. This alternative would have no significant
environmental impact as well.
Agencies and Persons Consulted: On March 1, 1999, Mr. Alan Merritt
of the State of Idaho, INEEL Oversight Program, was contacted about the
EA for the proposed action and had no concerns.
Finding of No Significant Impact
The environmental impacts of the proposed action have been reviewed
in accordance with the requirements set forth in 10 CFR part 51. Based
upon the foregoing EA, the Commission finds that the proposed action of
granting an exemption from 10 CFR 20.1501(c) so that DOE-ID may use the
DOELAP, rather than the NVLAP, as required by existing regulations,
will not significantly impact the quality of the human environment.
Accordingly, the Commission has determined not to prepare an
environmental impact statement for the proposed exemption.
This application was docketed under 10 CFR part 72, Docket 72-20.
For further details with respect to this action, see the application
for an ISFSI license dated October 31, 1996, and the request for
exemption dated December 18, 1998, which are available for public
inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, 2120 L Street, NW,
Washington, DC 20555 and the Local Public Document Room at the INEEL
Technical Library, 1776 Science Center Drive, Idaho Falls, ID 83402.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 13th day of March 1999.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
E. William Brach,
Director, Spent Fuel Project Office, Office of Nuclear Material Safety
and Safeguards.
[FR Doc. 99-6911 Filed 3-19-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
