Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 240 / Monday, December 15, 1997 / Notices 65717

Finding of No Significant Impact

Based upon 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.

For further details with respect to the

proposed action, see the licensee’s

application dated June 9, 1997, which is

available for public inspection at the

Commission’s Public Document Room,

the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street,

NW., Washington, DC, and at the local

public document room located at the

Plymouth Public Library, 11 North

Street, Plymouth, Massachusetts.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 9th day

of December 1997.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Ronald B. Eaton,

Acting Director, Project Directorate I–3,

Division of Reactor Projects—I/II, Office of

Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 97–32620 Filed 12–12–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket No. 40–7580]

Consideration of License Amendment

Request for the Fansteel, Inc., Facility

in Muskogee, Oklahoma

AGENCY: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission

ACTION: Finding of No Significant

Impact for the Fansteel, Inc., Facility in

Muskogee, Oklahoma.

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission is considering the

amendment of Source Material License

SMB–911 to authorize processing of

waste treatment pond residues at the

Fansteel, Inc., facility located in

Muskogee, Oklahoma.

Summary of the Environmental

Assessment

Identification of the Proposed Action

Fansteel, Inc. is currently authorized

to process residues designated as ‘‘workin-progress’’ (WIP) materials to extract

tantalum, niobium, and scandium for

commercial use. The WIP residues

contain natural uranium, thorium, and

daughter decay products in quantities

sufficient to be classified as source

material by the NRC. Fansteel has

proposed to modify this currently

authorized operation to concurrently

process wastewater treatment residues,

which contain mostly calcium fluoride

(CaF2) and are located in ponds 6, 7, 8,

and 9 at the site. This modification will

result in production of three additional

products: sodium fluoroaluminate,

sodium sulfate, and calcium sulfate. The

proposed action is to amend Fansteel

License SMB–911 to authorize this

modified process.

The Need for the Proposed Action

Fansteel has proposed the modified

process, which includes processing of

the wastewater treatment residues, in

order to chemically improve the input

stream for the operation, produce

additional products for sale, and reduce

the volume of solid waste requiring offsite disposal.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed

Action

Normal Operations

The NRC staff evaluated impacts from

operations at the Fansteel site for both

normal and accident conditions. During

normal operations, small quantities of

radiological and non-radiological

effluents will be released to the

environment. Radionuclides which may

be released to the atmosphere include

uranium-238, uranium-235, thorium232, and their decay daughters, such as

radon-222. Sources of the releases are

the off-gas treatment system, fugitive

dust, and radon emanation from the

WIP ponds (ponds 2, 3, and 5) and the

wastewater treatment ponds (ponds 6, 7,

8, and 9). The majority of the releases

are expected to be in the form of

insoluble oxide chemicals.

The staff performed a dose assessment

to estimate the impact from radiological

releases to the air. Atmospheric release

exposure pathways included inhalation,

ingestion of contaminated crops and

resuspended dirt, and external exposure

to the airborne plume and contaminated

groundwater. For the combined sources

(pond residue processing, fugitive dust,

and pond residue radon), the largest

tissue dose was estimated to be

1.9×10¥5 Sv/yr (1.9 mrem/yr) to the

lungs primarily from inhalation of

radon-222. For the maximally exposed

individual, the committed effective dose

equivalent (CEDE) for combined releases

from processing pond residues and

fugitive dust was estimated as 3.2×10¥7

Sv/yr (0.03 mrem/yr), while the CEDE

for radon release was estimated as

5.4×10¥7 Sv/yr (0.054 mrem/yr).

External doses are a factor of 10,000

times less than internal doses.

For radionuclides released to the

atmosphere other than radon, NRC

regulations specified in 10 CFR

20.1101(d) require that the annual

effective dose equivalent not exceed

1.0×10¥4 Sv (10 mrem). The total

effective dose equivalent (TEDE) from

releases to the atmosphere was

estimated at 8.6×10¥7 Sv/yr (0.086

mrem/yr). This is a small fraction of the

NRC limit.

Liquid effluents containing

radiological contaminants will be

released after treatment to the Arkansas

River and will ultimately flow into the

Mississippi River. Although

downstream residents do not use the

Arkansas River as a drinking water

source, the NRC analysis conservatively

assumes that an individual along the

river and the surrounding population

out to a distance of 80 kilometers (50

miles) uses this potentially

contaminated water. Liquid release

exposure pathways included ingestion

of drinking water, fish, and irrigated

crops and external exposure during

recreational activities.

The largest tissue dose due to

contaminated surface water was

conservatively estimated to be 2.7×10¥5

Sv/yr (2.7 mrem/yr) to the bone surface,

and external doses are a factor of 1000

times smaller than internal doses. The

CEDE for the maximally exposed

individual was estimated as 3.0×10¥6

Sv/yr (0.3 mrem/yr). For both the

maximally exposed individual and

other members of the population, doses

are a small fraction of that from

background sources.

NRC regulations specified in 10 CFR

20.1301 require that the TEDE from all

pathways for members of the public not

exceed 1.0×10¥3 Sv (100 mrem) per

year. For the maximally exposed

individual, the annual TEDE from all

releases from the proposed operation

was estimated as 3.0×10¥6 Sv (0.3

mrem). The largest annual tissue dose

was estimated to be 2.7×10¥5 Sv (2.7

mrem) to the bone surface. Estimated

doses are small fractions of applicable

limits and of the background dose,

which is on the order of 1×10¥3 to

4×10¥3 Sv/yr (100 to 400 mrem/yr).

The NRC staff also assessed impacts

from releases of non-radiological

contaminants to air, surface water, and

groundwater. The most significant nonradiological gaseous effluent from

processing is expected to be hydrogen

fluoride (HF). However, normal

operation of the only stack at the facility

is not expected to have a significant

effect on off-site nonradiological air

quality. Assuming the stack operates 24

hours a day, seven days a week, with an

average fluoride emission rate of 0.008

gram per second (1.5 pounds per day),

the average fluoride concentration at the

nearest site boundary was estimated to

be 0.7 μg/m3. There is no Oklahoma air

standard for HF, but this concentration
65718 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 240 / Monday, December 15, 1997 / Notices

is less than the 24-hour atmospheric HF

limit of 5 μg/m3 applicable in some

states.

Surface water quality is protected by

enforcing release limits and monitoring

programs as required under the National

Pollutant Discharge and Elimination

System (NPDES) permit. Annual average

concentrations of parameters regulated

by the NPDES permit have been below

discharge limits established for the

liquid effluent outfall to the Arkansas

River and are expected to remain below

the discharge limits. Discharges are not

expected to have significant impact on

the surface water quality in the

Arkansas River because of the dilution

volume in the river.

Previous operation of the plant has

resulted in localized chemical and

radiological contamination of

groundwater of the shallow aquifer in

several locations. By license amendment

dated March 25, 1997, Fansteel

committed to operation of a

groundwater collection and treatment

system which will reduce the

concentration of chemical constituents

to levels that can be discharged via the

outfall.

No impacts are expected on land use,

biotic resources, or cultural resources. A

small positive socioeconomic impact is

expected through the employment of 30

people at the site.

Accident Conditions

The handling, processing, and storage

of material containing radioactive

constituents at the Fansteel facility

could result in an uncontrolled release

of radioactive material to the

environment if there was an accident.

However, the relatively small quantities

and low concentrations of the

radioactive constituents are factors

which constrain the impacts of potential

accidents. The NRC staff selected the

following representative accidents

scenarios for evaluation: (1) A spill of

contaminated soil, (2) a large-scale leak

of untreated contaminated groundwater,

and (3) a failure of the pond residue

processing off-gas equipment.

The NRC staff evaluated radiological

impacts for each accident scenario by

determining the CEDE to the maximally

exposed individual. The estimated

CEDE was 1.0×10¥6 Sv (0.1 mrem) for

the spill of contaminated soil, 2.1×10¥10

Sv (2.1×10¥5 mrem) for the spill of

groundwater, and 3.8×10¥6 Sv (0.38

mrem) for the failure of the off-gas

treatment equipment. Therefore, the

potential consequences for each

accident scenario pose an insignificant

risk to the public.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

Several people from the Oklahoma

Department of Environmental Quality

(OKDEQ) were consulted concerning

this proposed amendment, including

Earlon Shirley, Waste Management

Division, Radiation Management

Section; Mark Thomason, Water Quality

Division; and David Dimick, Air Quality

Division.

Conclusion

The NRC has determined that the

issuance of the amendment to allow

Fansteel to process the calcium fluoride

wastewater treatment residues

concurrently with the WIP residues will

not result in significant impact to

human health or the environment.

Finding of No Significant Impact

The Commission has prepared an

Environmental Assessment (EA) related

to the amendment of Source Material

License SNM–911. On the basis of the

assessment, the Commission has

concluded that environmental impacts

that would be created by the proposed

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.

For further details with respect to this

action, the EA, the licensee’s renewed

license dated September 30, 1997, the

amendment application dated July 30,

1997, and related documents are

available for public inspection and

copying at the Commission’s Public

Document Room at the Gelman

Building, 2120 L Street NW,

Washington, DC. Questions should be

referred to NRC’s Project Manager for

the Fansteel, Inc., facility, Susan D.

Chotoo, at (301) 415–8102 or

sdc@nrc.gov.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 9th day

of December 1997.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Walter S. Schwink,

Acting Chief, Licensing Branch, Division of

Fuel Cycle Safety and Safeguards, NMSS.

[FR Doc. 97–32621 Filed 12–12–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

PENSION BENEFIT GUARANTY

CORPORATION

Interest Assumption for Determining

Variable-Rate Premium; Interest

Assumptions for Multiemployer Plan

Valuations Following Mass Withdrawal

AGENCY: Pension Benefit Guaranty

Corporation.

ACTION: Notice of interest rates and

assumptions.

SUMMARY: This notice informs the public

of the interest rates and assumptions to

be used under certain Pension Benefit

Guaranty Corporation regulations. These

rates and assumptions are published

elsewhere (or are derivable from rates

published elsewhere), but are collected

and published in this notice for the

convenience of the public. Interest rates

are also published on the PBGC’s home

page (http://www.pbgc.gov).

DATES: The interest rate for determining

the variable-rate premium under part

4006 applies to premium payment years

beginning in December 1997. The

interest assumptions for performing

multiemployer plan valuations

following mass withdrawal under part

4281 apply to valuation dates occurring

in January 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Harold J. Ashner, Assistant General

Counsel, Office of the General Counsel,

Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation,

1200 K Street, NW., Washington, DC

20005, 202–326–4024. (For TTY and

TDD, call 800–877–8339 and request

connection to 202–326–4024.)

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Variable-Rate Premiums

Section 4006(a)(3)(E)(iii)(II) of the

Employee Retirement Income Security

Act of 1974 (ERISA) and § 4006.4(b)(1)

of the PBGC’s regulation on Premium

Rates (29 CFR part 4006) prescribe use

of an assumed interest rate in

determining a single-employer plan’s

variable-rate premium. The rate is the

‘‘applicable percentage’’ (described in

the statute and the regulation) of the

annual yield on 30-year Treasury

securities for the month preceding the

beginning of the plan year for which

premiums are being paid (the ‘‘premium

payment year’’). The yield figure is

reported in Federal Reserve Statistical

Releases G.13 and H.15.

For plan years beginning before July

1, 1997, the applicable percentage of the

30-year Treasury yield was 80 percent.

The Retirement Protection Act of 1994

(RPA) amended ERISA section

4006(a)(3)(E)(iii)(II) to provide that the

applicable percentage is 85 percent for

plan years beginning on or after July 1,

1997, through (at least) plan years

beginning before January 1, 2000.

However, under section 774(c) of the

RPA, the application of the amendment

is deferred for certain regulated public

utility (RPU) plans for as long as six

months. The applicable percentage for

RPU plans will therefore remain 80

percent for plan years beginning before