[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 40 (Wednesday, February 29, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12333-12335]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-4823]



[[Page 12333]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 70-3103; NRC-2010-0264]


Special Nuclear Material License Amendment From Louisiana Energy 
Services, LLC, for the National Enrichment Facility, Hobbs, NM

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Publication of environmental assessment and finding of no 
significant impact.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mary T. Adams, Office of Nuclear 
Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 
Washington, DC 20555; telephone: 301-492-3113; email: 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#6b260a1912452a0f0a06182b051908450c041d"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="ca87abb8b3e48baeaba7b98aa4b8a9e4ada5bc">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Introduction

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or the Commission) is 
considering a request to amend special nuclear material license SNM-
2010, held by Louisiana Energy Services, LLC, (LES), under which LES 
operates a uranium enrichment facility in Eunice, New Mexico. On May 6, 
2011, in accordance with Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations 
(10 CFR) Section 70.34, LES requested an amendment to SNM-2010 that 
would extend the license expiration date to recapture the 48 months 
that elapsed from the 2006 license issuance date to when authorization 
to introduce uranium hexafluoride (UF<INF>6</INF>) into Cascade 1 was 
granted on June 10, 2010 (ML11131A048). During this 48-month period, 
construction, preoperational testing, and an operational readiness 
review were ongoing. The proposed action would extend the expiration 
date of SNM-2010 from June 22, 2036, to June 9, 2040. In response to 
agency questions about the changed operational schedule, LES provided a 
clarification of the license amendment request, dated November 23, 2011 
(ML11329A080).

II. Background

    On June 23, 2006, the NRC issued SNM-2010 to LES authorizing the 
construction and operation of the National Enrichment Facility (NEF) in 
New Mexico. License Condition 13 of SNM-2010 states that the license 
will expire 30 years after the date of license issuance. In June 2005, 
to support the issuance of SNM-2010, the NRC issued a final 
environmental impact statement (EIS) for the NEF (NUREG-1790) 
(ML051730238 and ML051730292) in accordance with 10 CFR Part 51 
(Environmental Protection Regulations for Domestic Licensing and 
Related Regulatory Functions), which implements the National 
Environmental Policy Act. The EIS concluded that operation of the NEF 
for 30 years will generally have small to moderate effects on the 
public and the environment.

III. Environmental Assessment

    In support of the proposed action, the NRC has prepared an 
environmental assessment (EA), set forth below. Based on the EA, the 
NRC has concluded that a Finding of No Significant Impact is 
appropriate regarding the proposed action.

Description of the Proposed Action

    The proposed action is to revise the expiration date of SNM-2010 
from June 22, 2036, to June 9, 2040. Table 2-1 of the 2005 EIS (NUREG-
1790) set forth an operation schedule for the NEF as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                        Task                              Start date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Submit license application to NRC...................             12/2003
Begin construction of facility......................              8/2006
Begin operation of first cascade....................             10/2008
Achieve full production output......................             10/2013
Operate at full capacity............................     10/2013-10/2027
Submit decommissioning plan to NRC..................              4/2025
Complete construction of decontamination and                      4/2027
 decommissioning facility...........................
Cease all operation of cascades.....................              4/2033
Complete decommissioning of facility................              4/2036
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the license amendment request, LES provided an updated schedule 
of major steps associated with the proposed action, shown on the 
following table:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Milestone                  Estimated date (actual date)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Submit Facility License Application.  December 2003
                                      (December 12, 2003)
Initiate Facility Construction......  August 2006
                                      (August 2006)
Start First Cascade.................  October 2008
                                      (June 10, 2010)
Achieve Full Nominal Production       May 2014
 Output.
Submit License Termination Plan to    April 2029
 NRC.
Complete Construction of D&D          April 2031
 Facility.
D&D Completed.......................  April 2040
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Need for the Proposed Action

    In the license amendment request, LES noted that because 48 months 
of the original license had elapsed before the facility actually began 
its operations, the facility's operational period would be shorter than 
the 30 years authorized by the license. LES needs the proposed license 
expiration date extension to operate the facility for 30 years.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    The 2005 EIS (NUREG-1790) determined that the environmental impacts 
of the license issuance that

[[Page 12334]]

would authorize operation for 30 years were small to moderate. These 
findings were summarized in Table 2-9 of the EIS. The license extension 
would shift the operating period by four years (i.e., changing it from 
2006-2036 to 2010-2040). Because the facility will still operate for 30 
years as originally envisioned in the EIS, environmental impacts 
relating to the construction of the facility or its duration of 
operations will not be significantly different from those documented in 
the EIS. An assessment of each of the environmental impacts examined in 
Chapter 4 of the EIS is discussed below:
    Land use impacts are described in EIS Section 4.2.1. Because the 
footprint of the LES facility and the duration of its operations will 
be unchanged by the license extension, there is no impact on land use 
beyond those previously evaluated in the EIS.
    Historical and cultural resource impacts are described in EIS 
Section 4.2.2. Based on the successful completion of the identification 
of historic and archaeological sites, National Register of Historic 
Places evaluations, and effective treatment of potential adverse 
effects to historic properties, along with the existence of written 
procedures to provide immediate notification in the event of 
inadvertent discovery of cultural resources, the potential impacts on 
historical and cultural resources at the proposed NEF site were 
expected to be small. No additional impacts will occur due to the 
license extension because LES will continue to follow the written 
procedures in the event of an inadvertent discovery of cultural 
resources.
    Visual and scenic resource impacts are described in EIS Section 
4.2.3. A delay in decommissioning the LES facility allowed by the 
license extension would extend the visual impact by 4 years; however, 
the visual impact of the construction and operation of the facility was 
initially determined to be small, and will not be significantly changed 
by the brief license extension.
    Air quality impacts are described in EIS Section 4.2.4. A change in 
the years of enrichment operations will not change the facility's 
impact on air quality. Air quality impacts are evaluated on an annual 
basis, and the license extension will only shift the years in which the 
effluents are released to a later period, but will not change the 
amount of annual effluents.
    Impacts on geology and soils are described in EIS Section 4.2.5. 
Most impacts on geology and soils occurred during construction, and 
were determined to be small. Regarding impacts from operations, 
accumulation of uranium and fluoride in the Treated Effluent 
Evaporative Basin was evaluated over an operating period of 30 years 
(EIS Section 4.2.12.2), and since the license amendment will not 
increase the operating period above 30 years, this accumulation will 
not change as a result of the license extension.
    Impacts on water resources are described in EIS Section 4.2.6. LES 
will obtain its water from the Eunice and Hobbs city water supplies. 
Eunice and Hobbs obtain the water from the Ogallala aquifer. LES 
estimates a peak use of 23.1 million gallons per year, approximately 
695 million gallons over the 30-year life of the facility. The EIS 
adequately evaluated the water use impacts of 30 years of plant 
operations, and the brief proposed license extension only changes which 
years the plant will operate, but not the duration of plant operations.
    Impacts on ecological resources during operations are described in 
EIS Section 4.2.7, and were determined to be small because no 
additional lands will be disturbed beyond those utilized during 
construction and LES will implement wildlife management practices. The 
license extension will not change the impact on ecological resources 
because LES will continue to implement its wildlife management 
practices during the period of the license extension.
    Socioeconomic impacts during plant operation are described in EIS 
Section 4.2.8. The plant payroll during operations is projected to be 
approximately $10.9 million in 2004 dollars per year of operation. 
Therefore, extension of the license operating term will extend this 
moderate annual impact on local employment for four more years.
    Environmental justice impacts are described in EIS Section 4.2.9. 
It was determined that there were no disproportionately high and 
adverse impacts to minority or low-income populations from either 
construction or normal operations, rather, all impacts were small. 
Shifting the period of operations by four years will not change the 
impact on these populations.
    Noise impacts are described in EIS Section 4.2.10. They were 
determined to be small for construction and operations because the 
nearest resident is approximately 2.6 miles from the facility. The 
proposed license extension will not significantly change noise impacts 
because the plant will still operate for 30 years as envisioned in the 
EIS.
    Transportation impacts are described in EIS Section 4.2.11. Impacts 
during post-construction normal operations were found to be small. The 
likelihood of transportation accidents with chemical or radiological 
consequences were evaluated on an annual basis and the impacts were 
found to be small to moderate. Shifting the plant's period of operation 
by four years will not change the annual likelihood or the consequences 
of transportation accidents.
    Public and occupational health impacts are described in EIS Section 
4.2.12. The radiological and non-radiological impacts of normal 
operations were evaluated on an annual basis, found to be small, and 
during the brief license extension, annual exposure to both workers and 
the public will remain the same as previously evaluated in the EIS.
    EIS Section 4.2.13 describes public and occupational impacts from 
accidents during operations. These impacts were determined to be small 
to moderate, and will not significantly change during the period of 
license extension. The impacts of industrial accidents, including 
rupture of an overfilled and/or overheated cylinder, were determined to 
be small to moderate. The likelihood of accidents is significantly 
reduced by specified design features and will not significantly change 
during the period of the license extension.
    EIS Section 4.2.14 describes waste management impacts. The impacts 
of solid wastes on local land disposal capacity were evaluated on an 
annual basis, were determined to be small, and will not be increased by 
the license extension because the previously evaluated annual volume of 
solid wastes is a small fraction of the Lea County landfill capacity 
and will not change. The impacts of DUF<INF>6</INF> waste management 
were determined to be small to moderate, and will not be changed by the 
license extension because the plant will not generate any more 
DUF<INF>6</INF> than was originally evaluated in the EIS.
    The EIS considered cumulative impacts in Section 4.4. The license 
extension would not increase any cumulative environmental impacts 
because the EIS previously evaluated cumulative impacts for a full 30 
years of facility operations.

Environmental Impacts of Alternatives to the Proposed Action

    An alternative to the proposed action is for the NRC to deny the 
request for the license extension. If this ``no-action'' alternative 
were adopted, LES would need to cease operations after 26 years in 
accordance with the original license expiration date (i.e., in 2036). 
Although

[[Page 12335]]

the environmental impacts that would be caused by 26 years of operation 
would be slightly less than those that would be caused by the full 30 
years of operation previously evaluated in the EIS, the difference is 
not significant. Therefore, denial of the amendment request would 
result in no significant change in the environmental impacts previously 
evaluated in the EIS.

Alternative Use of Resources

    The proposed action does not involve the use of any different 
resources than those considered in the EIS for NEF (NUREG-1790).

List of Agencies and Persons Consulted and Identification of Sources 
Used

    The NRC staff consulted the New Mexico Environment Department 
(NMED) in December 2011 for their review and comment on the draft EA/
FONSI. In an email response dated December 28, 2011 (ML120370017), the 
NMED indicated that it had no comments on the EA and supported approval 
of the license amendment.
    The NRC staff has determined that consultation with the U.S. Fish 
and Wildlife Service for compliance with Section 7 of the Endangered 
Species Act is not necessary because the proposed action does not have 
the potential to affect listed species or critical habitat.
    The NRC staff has determined that the proposed extension of the 
license expiration date is not a type of activity that has potential to 
cause effects on historic properties because it will not authorize any 
additional activities that were not previously evaluated in the final 
EIS for NEF (NUREG-1790) in Section 4.2.2, and because, as noted above, 
LES will continue to follow the written procedures in the event of an 
inadvertent discovery of cultural resources. Therefore, no further 
consultation is required under Section 106 of the National Historic 
Preservation Act.

Finding of No Significant Impact

    The NRC reviewed LES's license amendment request to revise license 
condition 13 to extend the expiration date from 2036 to 2040, and found 
no significant environmental impacts from the shift in enrichment 
operation dates. On the basis of this EA, the NRC concludes that the 
proposed action will not have a significant effect on the quality of 
the human environment. Accordingly, the NRC has determined not to 
prepare an EIS for the proposed action.

IV. Further Information

    Documents related to this action, including the application for 
license amendment and supporting documentation are available online in 
the NRC Library at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. From this 
site, you can access the NRC's Agencywide Documents 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:

ML11329A080.......................  Clarification of License Amendment
                                     Request 10-13, November 23, 2011.
ML051730238.......................  2005/06/30-NUREG-1790, Vol. 1,
                                     ``Environmental Impact Statement
                                     for the Proposed National
                                     Enrichment Facility in Lea County,
                                     New Mexico, Chapters 1 through 10
                                     and Appendices A through G. Final
                                     Report.''
ML051730292.......................  2005/06/30-NUREG-1790, Vol. 2,
                                     ``Environmental Impact Statement
                                     for the Proposed National
                                     Enrichment Facility in Lea County,
                                     New Mexico, Appendices H through J.
                                     Final Report.''
ML120370017.......................  Email from Butch Tongate, New Mexico
                                     Environment Department, December
                                     28, 2011.
 

    If you do not have access to ADAMS or if there are problems in 
accessing the documents located in ADAMS, contact the NRC Public 
Document Room (PDR) Reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737 or 
by email to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#fb8b9f89d5899e88948e89989ebb958998d59c948d"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="225246500c5047514d57504147624c50410c454d54">[email protected]</span></a>. These documents may also be viewed 
electronically on the public computers located at the NRC's PDR, O1F21, 
One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. The 
PDR reproduction contractor will copy documents for a fee.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 10th day of February 2012.
Brian W. Smith,
Chief, Uranium Enrichment Branch, Division of Fuel Cycle Safety and 
Safeguards, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
[FR Doc. 2012-4823 Filed 2-28-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>