[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 59 (Monday, March 28, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page ]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-7209]
[Federal Register: March 28, 1994]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket 70-36]
Environmental Statements; Availability, etc.: Combustion
Engineering, Inc.
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission is considering the renewal
of Special Nuclear Material License SNM-33 for the continued operation
of the Combustion Engineering, Inc. (CE), Hematite Nuclear Fuel
Manufacturing Facility, for 10 years.
Summary of the Environmental Assessment
Identification of the Proposed Action
The proposed action is the renewal of License SNM-33, allowing CE
to continue manufacturing low-enriched nuclear fuel for 10 years. The
current license authorizes CE to receive, possess, use, and transfer
special nuclear material in accordance with 10 CFR part 70 and source
material in accordance with 10 CFR part 40. This license also allows CE
to delivery radioactive material to a carrier for transportation in
accordance with 10 CFR part 71. CE produces low-enriched (5
percent U-235) ceramic nuclear fuel for light-water cooled reactors.
The Need for the Proposed Action
The proposed action is needed for CE to continue to produce low-
enriched nuclear fuel pellets which will ultimately be used by
commercial nuclear power plants to produce electricity. Since CE is one
of only a few facilities that manufacture nuclear fuel in this country,
there remains a need for the fuel by the nuclear power industry.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action
Airborne effluents from process areas and process equipment
involving uranium in a dispersible form are subject to air filtering,
prior to release to the atmosphere. Effluents from the process areas
are continuously collected on a particulate filter and are analyzed for
gross alpha activity. The monitoring data for 1982 through September
1993 demonstrates that the levels of gross alpha activity released from
the site do not exceed the limits specified in 10 CFR part 20, Appendix
B, Table II, Column 1.
There are no planned releases of radioactive liquid wastes from
routine production processes. Liquids with low-uranium content, such as
mop water, cleanup water, and grinder coolant water, are collected and
then evaporated to recover the uranium. Liquids with higher uranium
content are processed to recover the uranium, usually by precipitation
and filtration. Process filtrates, including wet recovery system
filtrate and spent scrubber solutions, are routed to a calibrated tank,
mixed, sampled, and the filtrates are then evaporated, solidified with
concrete, and packaged for shipment to a licensed burial site.
A potential source of radioactive liquid waste is from the laundry,
sink and shower areas, and the chemistry laboratory. The laundry water
is filtered and sampled prior to discharge to the sanitary sewer
system. The water from change room sinks and showers is also discharged
through the sanitary waste system. Effluents from the sanitary waste
system enter the site creek immediately below the site pond dam. A grab
sample of the water is taken each week and analyzed for gross alpha and
beta activities. The chemistry laboratory discharges to the storm drain
system. While analytical residues are recycled to recover the uranium
and therefore do not contribute to the effluents, when the laboratory
glassware is cleaned, small amounts of liquids wash down the sinks and
are discharged to the storm drain system. The storm drain system
discharges into the site pond which overflows to form the site creek.
The overflow is sampled weekly and analyzed for gross alpha and beta.
Liquid effluent sample data for 1982 through September 1993 was
reviewed and indicates that the results are a small fraction of the
values set forth in 10 CFR part 20, Appendix B, Table II, Column 2.
CE conducts an environmental sampling program to determine if site
operations are impacting the environment. Air, soil, vegetation,
surface water, and ground water samples are collected from various
locations on or near the plant site. Review of the data for 1982
through September 1993 indicates there is no significant impact to the
environment from manufacturing operations.
A dose assessment was performed to evaluate the impact from site
operations to the maximally exposed individual who would be the nearest
resident. The maximally exposed individual is located 950 feet (290 m),
west-northwest of the plant site. The effective whole body dose for the
maximally exposed individual is 3.31E-02 mrem/year. The critical organ
for this exposure would be the lungs, with a dose of 1.90E-01 mrem/
year. The annual dose received by the nearest resident is below the
federal dose limits set forth in 10 CFR part 20 and 40 CFR part 190,
500 mrem/year and 25 mrem/year, respectively.
Conclusion
Liquid and airborne effluents released to the environment are well
below all regulatory limits. Results of the environmental monitoring
program have shown that environmental radiation levels are not
increasing as a result of site operations. The total whole body dose
received by the maximally exposed individual from site operations is
well below federal limits. Therefore, the staff concludes that the
impact to the environment and to human health and safety from
manufacturing nuclear fuel at this site has been minimal.
Alternatives to the Proposed Action
The alternative to the proposed action would be to deny the license
renewal. Not renewing the operating license would cause CE to cease
operations and begin decontamination and decommissioning activities at
the site. While terminating licensed activities at CE may create a
minimal positive effect on the immediate environment, the socioeconomic
impact of denying the license would adversely affect the area because
CE is one of the largest employers in the area. This alternative would
be considered if there were public health and safety issues that could
not be resolved to the satisfaction of the NRC.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
Staff utilized the application dated November 22, 1989, and
additional information dated October 11, and December 16, 1991, and
December 10, 1993. Staff toured the CE facility on August 18 and 19,
1990. The region III inspector and CE staff were consulted in preparing
this document. The staff also contacted personnel from the State of
Missouri, Department of Natural Resources, Air Pollution Control
Program.
Finding of No Significant Impact
The Commission has prepared an Environmental Assessment related to
the renewal of Special Nuclear Material License SNM-33. On the basis of
the assessment, the Commission has concluded that environmental impacts
that would be created by the proposed licensing action would not be
significant and do not warrant the preparation of an Environmental
Impact Statement. Accordingly, it has been determined that a Finding of
No Significant Impact is appropriate.
The Environmental Assessment and the above documents related to
this proposed action are available for public inspection and copying at
the Commission's Public Document Room at the Gelman Building, 2120 L
Street NW., Washington, DC, and the Local Public Document Room located
at the Jefferson College Library, 1000 Viking Drive, Hillsboro, MO.
Opportunity for a Hearing
Any person whose interest may be affected by the issuance of this
renewal may file a request for a hearing. Any request for hearing must
be filed with the Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555, within 30 days of the publication of
this notice in the Federal Register; be served on the NRC staff
(Executive Director for Operations, One White Flint North, 11555
Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852), and on the licensee (Combustion
Engineering, Inc., P.O. Box 107, Hematite, Missouri, 63047); and must
comply with the requirements for requesting a hearing set forth in the
Commission's regulation, 10 CFR part 2, Subpart L, ``Informal Hearing
Procedures for Adjudications in Materials Licensing Proceedings.''
These requirements, which the requestor must address in detail,
are:
1. The interest of the requestor in the proceeding;
2. How that interest may be affected by the results of the proceeding,
including the reasons why the requestor should be permitted a hearing;
3. The requestor's areas of concern about the licensing activity that
is the subject matter of the proceeding; and
4. The circumstances establishing that the request for hearing is
timely, that is, filed within 30 days of the date of this notice.
In addressing how the requestor's interest may be affected by the
proceeding, the request should describe the nature of the requestor's
right under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, to be made a
party to the proceeding; the nature and extent of the requestor's
property, financial, or other (i.e., health, safety) interest in the
proceeding; and the possible effect of any order that may be entered in
the proceeding upon the requestor's interest.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 17th day of March 1994.
Robert C. Pierson,
Chief, Licensing Branch, Division of Fuel Cycle Safety and Safeguards,
NMSS.
[FR Doc. 94-7209 Filed 3-25-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-M
