Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 20, 2004 / Notices 61697

Office of the Secretary of the 

Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission, Washington, DC 20555–

0001, Attention: Rulemaking and 

Adjudications Staff; (2) courier, express 

mail, and expedited delivery services: 

Office of the Secretary, Sixteenth Floor, 

One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville 

Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852, 

Attention: Rulemaking and 

Adjudications Staff; (3) e-mail 

addressed to the Office of the Secretary, 

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 

hearingdocket@nrc.gov; or (4) facsimile 

transmission addressed to the Office of 

the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission, Washington, DC, 

Attention: Rulemakings and 

Adjudications Staff at (301) 415–1101, 

verification number is (301) 415–1966. 

A copy of the request for hearing and 

petition for leave to intervene should 

also be sent to the Office of the General 

Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission, Washington, DC 20555–

0001, and it is requested that copies be 

transmitted either by means of facsimile 

transmission to (301) 415–3725 or by email to OGCMailCenter@nrc.gov. A copy 

of the request for hearing and petition 

for leave to intervene should also be 

sent to the J. M. Fulton, Esquire, 

Assistant General Counsel, Pilgrim 

Nuclear Power Station, 600 Rocky Hill 

Road, Plymouth, Massachusetts 02360–

5599, attorney for the licensee. 

For further details with respect to this 

action, see the application for 

amendment dated October 12, 2004, 

which is available for public inspection 

at the Commission’s PDR, located at 

One White Flint North, File Public Area 

O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first 

floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly 

available records will be accessible from 

the Agencywide Documents Access and 

Management System’s (ADAMS) Public 

Electronic Reading Room on the Internet 

at the NRC Web site, http://

www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html.

Persons who do not have access to 

ADAMS or who encounter problems in 

accessing the documents located in 

ADAMS, should contact the NRC PDR 

Reference staff by telephone at 1–800–

397–4209, (301) 415–4737, or by e-mail 

to pdr@nrc.gov.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 14th day 

of October, 2004.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

George F. Wunder, 

Project Manager, Section 2, Project 

Directorate I, Division of Licensing Project 

Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor 

Regulation.

[FR Doc. 04–23427 Filed 10–19–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

[Docket No. 70–7005] 

Issuance of Environmental 

Assessment and Finding of No 

Significant Impact for Modification of 

Exemption From Certain NRC 

Licensing Requirements for Special 

Nuclear Material for Waste Control 

Specialists, LLC., Andrews County, TX

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission.

ACTION: Environmental assessment and 

finding of no significant impact. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

James R. Park, Project Manager, 

Environmental and Performance 

Assessment Directorate, Division of 

Waste Management and Environmental 

Protection, Office of Nuclear Material 

Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission, Washington, 

DC 20555. Telephone: (301) 415–5835; 

Fax number: (301) 415–5397; E-mail: 

jrp@nrc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Introduction 

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC) is considering 

issuance of an Order pursuant to 

Section 274f of the Atomic Energy Act 

that would modify an Order transmitted 

to Waste Control Specialists, LLC (WCS) 

on November 21, 2001. The Order was 

published in the Federal Register on 

November 15, 2001 (66 FR 57489). The 

2001 Order exempted WCS from certain 

NRC regulations and permitted WCS, 

under specified conditions, to possess 

waste containing special nuclear 

material (SNM), in greater quantities 

than specified in 10 CFR part 150, at 

WCS’s facility located in Andrews 

County, Texas, without obtaining an 

NRC license pursuant to 10 CFR part 70. 

The current action is in response to a 

request by WCS dated August 6, 2003, 

as modified by letter dated March 15, 

2004. NRC has prepared an 

Environmental Assessment (EA) in 

accordance with the requirements of 10 

CFR part 51. Based on the EA, the NRC 

has concluded that a Finding of No 

Significant Impact (FONSI) is 

appropriate for the proposed action as 

modified with additional conditions. 

The modified Order that incorporates 

the results of the NRC staff’s evaluation 

will be issued following the publication 

of this Notice. 

II. Environmental Assessment 

Background 

As stated above, the 2001 Order 

exempted WCS from certain NRC 

regulations and permitted WCS, under 

specified conditions, to possess waste 

containing SNM, in greater quantities 

than specified in 10 CFR part 150, at 

WCS’s facility located in Andrews 

County, Texas, without obtaining an 

NRC license pursuant to 10 CFR part 70. 

The 2001 Order permits WCS to possess 

SNM without regard for mass. Rather 

than relying on mass to ensure 

criticality safety, concentration-based 

limits are being applied, such that 

accumulations of SNM at or below these 

concentration limits would not pose a 

criticality safety concern. The 

methodology used to establish these 

limits is discussed in the 2001 Safety 

Evaluation Report (SER) that supported 

the 2001 Order. 

The WCS facility is licensed by the 

State of Texas, an NRC Agreement State, 

under a 10 CFR part 30 equivalent 

radioactive materials license. The 

facility also is licensed by the Texas 

Commission on Environmental Quality 

to treat and dispose of hazardous waste. 

In 1997, WCS began accepting Resource 

Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) 

and Toxic Substance Control Act 

(TSCA) wastes for treatment, storage, 

and disposal. Later that year, WCS 

received a license from the Texas 

Department of Health for treatment and 

storage of mixed waste and low-level 

waste. The mixed waste and low-level 

waste streams may contain quantities of 

SNM. 

By letter dated August 6, 2003, WCS 

requested that the list of reagents 

identified in Condition 5 of the 2001 

Order be modified to include an 

additional 18 reagents. WCS uses 

reagents in chemically stabilizing mixed 

waste that contains SNM. In response to 

an NRC staff request for additional 

information dated September 30, 2003, 

WCS submitted a modified request by 

letter dated March 15, 2004. 

Review Scope 

The purpose of this EA is to assess the 

environmental impacts of WCS’s 

requested modification to its 2001 

Order. This EA does not approve or 

deny the requested action. A separate 

Safety Evaluation Report (SER) also will 

be issued in support of the approval or 

denial of the requested action. This EA 

will determine whether to issue or 

prepare an Environmental Impact 

Statement (EIS). Should the NRC issue 

a FONSI, no EIS will be prepared. 

61698 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 20, 2004 / Notices 

Proposed Action 

The proposed action is to grant WCS’s 

March 15, 2004, request to add 22 

specified stabilization and oxidationreduction reagents to Condition 5 of the 

2001 Order. These reagents would be 

used in WCS’s stabilization of mixed 

waste that contains SNM. 

Purpose and Need for Proposed Action 

WCS is making this request so that it 

can treat incoming mixed waste that 

contains SNM using appropriate 

reagents. In seeking NRC approval of the 

reagents specified in its request, WCS 

hopes to avoid making multiple requests 

for NRC approval of stabilization 

reagents.

Alternatives 

In addition to the proposed action, the 

NRC staff considered two alternatives. 

One alternative was to deny WCS’s 

request and thus not revise the Order 

(i.e., the no-action alternative). The 

second alternative was to revise the 

Order to remove the specific chemical 

names from Condition 5 and instead to 

add a per-batch, mass limit for 

stabilization not to exceed the 

concentration limits in Condition 1 of 

the Order times 600 kilograms (kg) of 

waste. 

Environmental Impacts of No Action 

Alternative 

For the no-action alternative, the 

environmental impacts would be the 

same as those evaluated in the EA that 

supports the 2001 Order. The 

regulations regarding SNM possession 

in 10 CFR part 150 set mass limits 

whereby a licensee is exempted from 

the licensing requirements of 10 CFR 

part 70 and can be regulated by an 

Agreement State. The licensing 

requirements in 10 CFR part 70 apply to 

persons possessing greater than critical 

mass quantities (as defined in 10 CFR 

150.11). The principal emphasis of 10 

CFR part 70 is criticality safety and 

safeguarding SNM against diversion or 

sabotage. Based on previous modeling 

and past experience, the NRC staff 

considers that criticality safety can be 

maintained by relying on concentration 

limits, under the specified conditions. 

These concentration limits are 

considered an alternative definition of 

quantities not sufficient to form a 

critical mass to the weight limits in 10 

CFR 150.11; thereby, assuring the same 

level of protection. The 2001 EA 

concluded that the 2001 Order would 

have no significant radiological or nonradiological environmental impacts. 

Environmental Impacts of Proposed 

Action 

By letter dated March 15, 2004, WCS 

discussed its use of chemical reagents 

and requested that the list of reagents 

identified in Condition 5 of the Order be 

modified to include an additional 22 

reagents. In reviewing WCS’s request, 

the NRC staff identified four reagents 

(potassium permanganate, sulfuric acid, 

phosphoric acid, and hydrochloric acid) 

that could change the solubility of the 

SNM in the mixed waste being treated, 

thus potentially changing its 

concentration. As discussed previously, 

the principal emphasis of 10 CFR part 

70 is criticality safety and safeguarding 

SNM against diversion or sabotage. The 

addition of reagents that could increase 

the concentration of SNM poses a 

criticality concern. 

The proposed action could allow for 

more SNM to be stored on site. In 

addition, the NRC staff has identified a 

criticality safety concern. Effluent 

releases and potential doses to workers 

and to the public could increase as a 

result of WCS’s use of specific reagents 

in treating mixed waste containing 

SNM. These releases and doses are 

regulated by the State of Texas. 

The proposed action is not expected 

to result in any changes to the 

transportation impacts identified in the 

2001 EA. While WCS’s request concerns 

mixed waste containing SNM that 

currently is or will be treated at its 

facility, WCS believes that approval of 

its request will not result in any change 

in its market opportunities for treating 

various waste streams. 

Environmental Impacts of Proposed 

Action With Additional Conditions 

As indicated previously, the NRC staff 

identified criticality safety concerns 

with WCS’s proposed action. Therefore, 

under the proposed action as modified 

with additional conditions, NRC would 

modify Condition 5 of the Order to 

remove the names of specific reagents 

and instead require that WCS, in 

treating each container of mixed waste 

containing SNM, meet a mass limit for 

stabilization. Currently, Condition 1 sets 

concentration limits for SNM in 

individual containers and/or during 

processing. The amended Condition 5 

would set the mass limit for batches of 

greater than 600 kg of waste at the 

concentration limits in Condition 1 

times 600 kg of waste. Condition 1 

concentration limits would continue to 

apply to batches of 600 kg of waste or 

less. Use of the mass limit in Condition 

1 for contiguous masses of waste of 

greater than 600 kg reduces criticality 

safety concerns since accumulations of 

SNM at this concentration limit would 

not pose a criticality safety concern. 

In an electronic mail message (email) 

to WCS dated April 26, 2004, the NRC 

staff documented telephone discussions 

with WCS concerning the proposed 

action with additional conditions. By a 

response email dated April 27, 2004, 

WCS agreed to the NRC staff’s proposed 

revision to Condition 5 of the Order. 

This modification would allow WCS 

to use the chemical reagents identified 

in its submittals, as well as other 

reagents, so long as the applicable mass 

limit for stabilization was met. WCS 

would continue to be restricted from 

using magnesium oxide in the 

treatment, per Condition 2 of the 2001 

Order. 

In addition, the amended Condition 5 

would continue to allow WCS to use 

reagents as part of its currently 

approved stabilization process, which 

includes oxidation-reduction, pH 

adjustment, and bulking. This 

understanding was clarified in a series 

of emails dated August 3, 10, and 13, 

2004, between the NRC staff and WCS. 

Other conditions of the Order would 

remain unchanged. Currently, WCS is 

permitted to possess SNM without 

regard for mass. Instead, to insure 

criticality safety, a concentration limit is 

applied, such that accumulations of 

SNM at or below this concentration 

limit would not pose a criticality safety 

concern. 

Effluent releases and potential doses 

to the public are regulated by the State 

of Texas and are not anticipated to 

change as a result of this action. WCS 

will continue to conduct its radiation 

protection program with an emphasis on 

maintaining doses as low as reasonably 

achievable. Occupational exposure are 

expected to remain within regulatory 

limits. 

The proposed action would not result 

in any changes in the transportation 

impacts identified in the 2001 EA. 

While WCS’s request concerns mixed 

waste containing SNM that currently is 

or will be treated at its facility, WCS 

believes that approval of its request will 

not result in any change in its market 

opportunities for treating various waste 

streams. 

All other environmental impacts 

would be the same as evaluated in the 

EA that support the 2001 Order. 

Conclusion 

Based on its review, the staff 

concluded in the SER for this exemption 

request that the proposed action (i.e., 

revise the exemption as requested by 

WCS without additional conditions) 

would not provide sufficient protection 

of health, safety, and the environment. 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 20, 2004 / Notices 61699

1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).

Therefore, staff’s preferred alternative is 

to revise the 2001 Order with additional 

conditions. These include adding a perbatch, mass limit for stabilization not to 

exceed the concentration limits in 

Condition 1 of the exemption times 600 

kg of waste and continuing to restrict 

WCS from using magnesium oxide in 

stabilization, per Condition 2 of the 

exemption. The staff has concluded 

that, with these revised conditions, the 

conclusion in the 2001 EA associated 

with the 2001 Order remains valid. 

Agencies and Persons Consulted 

A draft copy of this EA was provided 

to officials from the State of Texas 

Department of Health (TDH). By an email dated August 11, 2004, the TDH 

recommended certain editorial changes. 

The NRC staff has modified the EA to 

address the TDH comments. 

III. Finding of No Significant Impact 

On the basis of the EA, NRC has 

concluded that there are no significant 

environmental impacts from the 

proposed amendment and has 

determined not to prepare an 

environmental impact statement. 

IV. Further Information 

Documents related to this action, 

including the application for 

amendment and supporting 

documentation, are available 

electronically at the NRC’s Electronic 

Reading Room at http://www.nrc.gov/

reading-rm/adams.html. From this site, 

you can access the NRC’s Agencywide 

Document Access and Management 

System (ADAMS), which provides text 

and image files of NRC’s public 

documents. The ADAMS accession 

numbers for the documents related to 

this notice are:

Document description Accession No. 

August 6, 2003, WCS initial 

request.

ML032590937 

September 30, 2003, NRC 

request for additional information.

ML032731010 

March 15, 2004, WCS modified request.ML041350224 

September 2004 NRC SER ML042250362 

April 26 and 27, 2004, NRC 

and WCS email messages.

ML042450534 

August 11, 2004, TDH email 

message.

ML042450520 

August 3, 10 and 13, 2004 

NRC and WCS email messages.

ML042450511 

November 21, 2001, NRC 

EA, SER, and Order.

ML030130085 

If you do not have access to ADAMS 

or if there are problems in accessing the 

documents located in ADAMS, contact 

the NRC’s Public Document Room (PDR) 

Reference staff at 1–800–397–4209, 301–

415–4737, or by email to pdr@nrc.gov.

These documents may also be viewed 

electronically on the public computers 

located at the NRC’s PDR, O 1 F21, One 

White Flint North, 11555 Rockville 

Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. The PDR 

reproduction contractor will copy 

documents for a fee.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 14th day 

of October 2004.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

Mark Thaggard, 

Section Chief, Environmental & Performance 

Assessment Directorate, Division of Waste 

Management and Environmental Protection, 

Office of Nuclear Material Safety and 

Safeguards.

[FR Doc. 04–23428 Filed 10–19–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

Advisory Committee on Reactor 

Safeguards; Meeting of the ACRS 

Subcommittee on Regulatory Policies 

and Practices; Notice of Meeting 

The ACRS Subcommittee on 

Regulatory Policies and Practices will 

hold a meeting on October 28 and 29, 

2004, Room T–2B3, 11545 Rockville 

Pike, Rockville, Maryland. 

The entire meeting will be open to 

public attendance. 

The agenda for the subject meeting 

shall be as follows:

Thursday, October 28, 2004—8:30 a.m. 

until the conclusion of business

Friday, October 29, 2004—8:30 a.m. 

until the conclusion of business

The purpose of this meeting is to 

review the proposed rule package for 

risk-informing 50.46. The Subcommittee 

will hear presentations by and hold 

discussions with representatives of the 

NRC staff and other interested persons 

regarding this matter. The 

Subcommittee will gather information, 

analyze relevant issues and facts, and 

formulate proposed positions and 

actions, as appropriate, for deliberation 

by the full Committee. 

Members of the public desiring to 

provide oral statements and/or written 

comments should notify the Designated 

Federal Official, Mr. Michael R. 

Snodderly (Telephone: 301–415–6927) 

five days prior to the meeting, if 

possible, so that appropriate 

arrangements can be made. Electronic 

recordings will be permitted during the 

meeting. 

Further information regarding this 

meeting can be obtained by contacting 

the Designated Federal Officials 

between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. (ET). 

Persons planning to attend this meeting 

are urged to contact the above named 

individual at least two working days 

prior to the meeting to be advised of any 

potential changes to the agenda.

Dated: October 14, 2004. 

John H. Flack, 

Acting Branch Chief, ACRS/ACNW.

[FR Doc. 04–23429 Filed 10–19–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[Release No. 34–50536; File No. SR–FICC–

2004–07] 

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Fixed 

Income Clearing Corporation; Notice of 

Filing of a Proposed Rule Change To 

Amend the Fixed Income Clearing 

Corporation’s Rules To Eliminate the 

‘‘Mortgage Banker’’ Category of 

Membership in its Mortgage-Backed 

Securities Division 

October 13, 2004. 

Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the 

Securities Exchange Act of 1934 

(‘‘Act’’) 1, notice is hereby given that on 

March 25, 2004, the Fixed Income 

Clearing Corporation (‘‘FICC’’) filed 

with the Securities and Exchange 

Commission (‘‘Commission’’) and on 

June 21, 2004 and October 14, 2004, 

amended the proposed rule change 

described in Items I, II, and III below, 

which items have been prepared 

primarily by FICC. The Commission is 

publishing this notice to solicit 

comments on the proposed rule change 

from interested parties.

I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement of the Terms of Substance of 

the Proposed Rule Change 

FICC is seeking to amend the rules of 

its Mortgage-Backed Securities Division 

(‘‘MBSD’’) to eliminate the ‘‘mortgage 

banker’’ category of membership. 

II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s 

Statement of the Purpose of, and 

Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule 

Change 

In its filing with the Commission, 

FICC included statements concerning 

the purpose of and basis for the 

proposed rule change and discussed any 

comments it received on the proposed 

rule change. The text of these statements 

may be examined at the places specified 

in Item IV below. FICC has prepared 

summaries, set forth in sections (A), (B),