Source: https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2001/05/16/01-11755/environmental-assessment-and-finding-of-no-significant-impact-of-license-amendment-for-nuclear-fuel
Timestamp: 2014-04-24 09:52:02
Document Index: 155001437

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 20', '§ 3', 'art 20', '§ 6', '§ 16', 'art 2', '§ 2', '§ 2', '§ 2', '§ 2']

Federal Register | Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact of License Amendment for Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc., and Notice of Opportunity To Request a Hearing
Action: Amendment of Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc., Materials License SNM-124 to Approve Partial Site Decommissioning Plan.
-27174 (7 pages)
Document Number: 01-11755
Shorter URL: https://federalregister.gov/a/01-11755 Action
Amendment Of Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc., Materials License Snm 124 To Approve Partial Site Decommissioning Plan.
1.2Geographic and Temporal Boundaries of the Environmental Assessment (EA)
2Purpose and Need for Proposed Action
3Description of Proposed Action
3.1Proposed Action: Release for Unrestricted Use
3.2Analyses
4Decommissioning Alternatives
4.1No Action
4.2Alternative Actions Considered and Decision Rationale
4.2.1Approval of the amendment request, but with additional conditions restricting use of the site to industrial development only with no groundwater use.
4.2.2Approval of the amendment request, but with additional conditions imposing legally enforceable restrictions prohibiting use of groundwater.
4.3Alternatives Considered and Rejected.
5Affected Environment
5.1.1Climate
5.1.2Surface Water
5.1.3Geology and Groundwater
5.2Facility Operations
5.3Radiological Status of the Facility
5.3.1Radiological status of structures and equipment
5.3.2Radiological Status of Surface and Subsurface Soils
5.3.3Radiological Status of Ground and Surface Water
6Environmental Impacts
6.1Adverse Impacts
6.1.1Radiological Impacts to the Public and Workers
6.1.2Non-Radiological Impacts
6.1.3Historical and Archaeological Resources
6.1.4Terrestrial Biota
6.1.5Aquatic Biota
6.1.6Wetlands
6.1.7Water Resources
6.1.8Construction Impacts
6.2Impacts to Aesthetic, Economic, Cultural, Social, Air Quality, Noise Resources and Habitat Destruction
7Planned Monitoring
8Agencies and Individuals Consulted, and Sources Used
8.1Environmental Protection Agency
8.2Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation
8.3Tennessee State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO)
8.4U.S. Fish and Wildlife (US FWS)
Table 1—Soil/Sediment DCGLs1
Ci/g)
for North Site Decommissioning
1Introduction Back to Top
Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc. (NFS) began operations at the Erwin, Tennessee facility in 1957. From then until 1981, portions of the North Site (NS) area were used for disposal of radioactive waste in accordance with 10 CFR 20.304. Since that time, the area has not been used for licensed operations. In 1991, NFS began partial remediation of the NS. These activities included removing the sludges from Ponds 1, 2, and 3, and removal of accessible waste in the Pond 4 area under authorization from the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). Excavation of the (§ 20.304) burial area began in 1997. All previous work is authorized by license amendment and is not the subject of this environmental assessment. By request for license amendment dated July 30, 1999 (NFS North Site Decommissioning Plan, Rev. 1), NFS requested authorization to use the land use scenarios and residual radioactive concentrations described below to meet the requirements of suitability for release for unrestricted use as defined in NRC regulations. NFS has no plans at this time to release the NS area from their NRC license.
2Purpose and Need for Proposed Action Back to Top
3Description of Proposed Action Back to Top
Approval of the license amendment request will authorize decommissioning of the North Site by removal of contaminated soil to levels at or below the proposed derived concentration guideline levels (DCGLs) presented in Table 1. These levels were calculated using the RESRAD computer code so that the indicated concentration of a single isotope would comply with a dose limit of 25 mrem/yr specified in 10 CFR 20.1402. If multiple isotopes are present, the individual concentration limits will be reduced to comply with the dose limit. Meeting these levels will permit release of the property for unrestricted use. Groundwater encountered during soil excavation will be pumped and treated at either the Wastewater or Groundwater Treatment Facilities. Upon completion of soil remediation, a final status survey of the North Site will be performed. Backfill of remediated areas with clean soil will begin after the final status survey demonstrates the area has been sufficiently decommissioned. Groundwater will be monitored for several years after excavation to determine uranium levels once residual radioactivity in soil is reduced to acceptable levels.
Remove Building 400, surrounding tanks, utilities, and structures.
Decontaminate and Decommission (D D)
area north of Banner Spring working east to west. The excavation area is bounded by Banner Spring Branch and the security zone.
DD Banner Spring Branch streambed and Ponds 1 and 2.
DD Banner Spring Branch outside the protected area.
DD security zone areas.
DD northwest area.
Remove 205 Substation and the guard tower and DD area.
Remove Building 410 and DD area.
DCGL 2,3
1Values are for single nuclides; actual residual concentrations will be calculated using unity rule.
2Ingrowth of daughters radionuclides are taken into account in these DCGLs.
3DCGLs derived using RESRAD pathway analysis model.
4DCGL for U233/234 is collectively proposed.
U-233/2344
A dose assessment was performed by NFS for both industrial or suburban residential use of the land after license termination. The licensee selected radionuclide-specific DCGLs for the soil from this dose assessment and selected the most restrictive limit for the radionuclide from the set of scenarios.
These DCGLs are listed in Table 1 above. Because the limits are radionuclide-specific, the licensee would then use the sum of fractions to verify that the final concentrations result in a dose equal to or less than 0.25 mSv/y (25 mrem/y).
4Decommissioning Alternatives Back to Top
A dose assessment was performed by NFS for both the postulated industrial land-use scenario and a construction scenario. Results of this dose assessment were used to determine radionuclide- specific dose-to-source factors (mrem/y per pCi/g in soil) for site contaminants. These are presented in the NFS report “Potential Dose Due to Radioactive Contamination in Soil and Groundwater in the North NFS Plant Site, Revision 1”. Based on TEDE dose limits of 25 mrem/y to the average member of the critical group (industrial worker and/or construction worker) and 100 mrem/y if controls failed, these dose-to-source factors were used to derive a set of restricted release soil concentration guideline levels (CGLs). Site characterization results were compared (on a sum-of-fractions basis) to the set of restricted-release DCGLs to estimate the volume of soil that would need to be removed from the site to meet the DCGLs. Approximately 864,000 ft 3 of material (including an estimated 500,000 ft 3 of debris and soil from the North Site burial trenches) was determined to require removal to achieve the set of restricted-release DCGLs. This alternative was rejected by NFS because it does not meet the goal of unrestricted release at license termination.
This alternative is similar to 4.3, but does not limit land use to industrial activities. It would add a prohibition against the use of groundwater from the shallow alluvial formation. The remediation activities are the same as those in the proposed alternative. NFS has presented data on current use of land and groundwater that demonstrates that there is no anticipated use of the groundwater in the alluvial formation because it is of poor quality and because of the availability of inexpensive, high quality water from the City of Erwin (see § 3.2). Current zoning in the area is for industrial use and the immediate surrounding area is classified as suburban residential. Therefore, subsistence farming is not likely to occur in the area, and City water will be used for all activities requiring water, such as consumption, bathing, watering lawns, etc. This alternative is rejected because the addition of institutional controls is deemed not to provide significant benefit, and to add to the cost of decommissioning because of the provision to 10 CFR 20.1403(e) requiring funds in perpetuity for a third party to implement the controls. Furthermore, it is not necessary for NRC to establish requirements prohibiting use of ground water, as EPA and TDEC are requiring remediation to drinking water standards (see Section 3.0 above).
This alternative is rejected for the following reasons: (a) The water in the shallow aquifer is of lower quality, in contact with a marsh, and contaminated above EPA limits for drinking water with pollutants not related to operations at the site; (b) there are readily available sources of inexpensive, clean water at the site; (c) based on current practices and water-well regulations in the region, a new well would not tap the shallow, unconsolidated aquifer in the North Site area, which is located within a 100-year flood plain; (d) only a small portion of the shallow aquifer of the North Site is contaminated at levels that would cause drinking water dose above NRC's regulatory limit; and (e) The licensee is committed to implementing appropriate remediation of contaminated groundwater under the continued authority of the EPA and TDEC RCRA/HSWA permit. Further, there would be large additional cost to ship more than 300,000 ft 3 of moderately contaminated soil to a licensed disposal facility.
5Affected Environment Back to Top
The NFS facility is located immediately south of Erwin, Tennessee. Erwin is a town of about 6,000 people located in Unicoi County, about 15 mi (24 km) south of Johnson City and 120 mi (190 km) east of Knoxville, TN. Unicoi County is 200 mi 2 (520 km 2) in NE Tennessee and has a population of about 20,000. The area surrounding Erwin is mostly within the Cherokee National Forest. The facility comprises about 62 acres (25 ha), of which about 24 acres (9.7 ha) are designated as the North Site area. The site is situated in a valley that parallels the Nolichucky River, running roughly NE-SW. To the southeast, the land rises up Banner Hill and on to the Unaka mountains; to the west across the Nolichucky River is Looking Glass Mountain.
Nolichucky River: The Nolichucky River originates in the North Carolina mountains to the southeast and has an average flow rate of 450,000 gallons/ minute. In the vicinity of NFS, the river follows a relatively straight course parallel to the long axis of the facility (southwest to northeast) and is generally located from 800 to 1,000 feet to the facility's northwest. The nearest public water supply on the Nolichucky River, downstream of the plant site, is the town of Jonesborough, Tennessee, located approximately eight miles northwest of Erwin.
The area being decommissioned is located both inside and outside of the plant protected area which is defined by a double security fence. Within the protected area are Banner Spring Branch, a small marsh, open grass-covered grounds, the three surface impoundments, and Pond 4. Banner Spring Branch runs through the property originating in the east just outside the security fence and discharging into Martin Creek to the north. The grounds outside the plant protected area, but inside the outer access control fence (the perimeter fence), include grass-covered fields, wooded areas, and a marsh. Also present are a burial ground and a demolition landfill. Trees cover most of the grounds outside the perimeter fence. Temporary buildings located in the area to be decommissioned include steel frame, metal buildings. These buildings are currently used in support of remediation activities. Five trailers located in the area provide offices, break area, showers and storage. Four small (less than 100 ft 2 sheds located in the characterization area house analytical equipment environmental sampling equipment (Banner Spring Branch Sampling Station and Sanitary Sewer Sampling Station), water control equipment (Backflow Preventer Bldg.), and vehicle cover. Other structures include a locked guard tower, a series of abandoned, partially intact residences located in the woods in the northeast area of the site, concrete pads for support of remediation equipment, fencing, light poles, electrical distribution facilities, pipes and conduits, a concrete drainage ditch, enclosed culverts, and miscellaneous equipment (e.g., knockout tank, bladder tanks).
Banner Spring Branch and Martin Creek contain contamination below effluent concentration limits in Appendix B to 10 CFR part 20. Groundwater throughout the North Site Area is contaminated to varying levels ranging from a few ρCi/l, below release limits, to more than 600 ρCi/l. The primary contaminants are isotopes of uranium and technetium-99. Tc-99 is present in off-site wells to the west of the site boundary in concentrations above background, but a small fraction (∼1%) of EPA limits. Uranium has not yet been detected off-site. Based on no ground water remediation, NFS projections calculate concentrations exceeding 30 ρCi/l in the alluvial ground water migrating beyond the site boundary as early as 2003; migration in the deeper levels—cobbles and shallow bedrock—occurs at a slower rate, but is calculated to exceed 30 ρCi/l beyond the site boundary within 1,000 years. (Geraghty Miller, 1996) 6Environmental Impacts Back to Top
Banner Spring Branch will be relocated during remediation activities as discussed in § 6.1.6 above.
7Planned Monitoring Back to Top
8Agencies and Individuals Consulted, and Sources Used Back to Top
Maintain that the RCRA/HSWA Permit issued to NFS will be used to enforce appropriate groundwater pilot studies and necessary groundwater remediation of all contaminated groundwater according to the most recent “Handbook of Groundwater Policies for RCRA Corrective Action” (EPA 530-D-00-001, updated 4/40/2000). See http://www.epa.gov/correctiveaction
9References Back to Top
International Commission on Radiological Protection. 1990. ICRP 60 § 16.
Final Report: Groundwater and Constituent Transport modeling at the Nuclear Fuel Services Facility; Geraghty Miller, Inc. 4/99.
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the NRC's “Rules of Practice,” the Environmental Assessment and the documents related to this proposed action will be available electronically for public inspection from the Publicly Available Records (PARS) component of NRC's document system (ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible from the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/NRC/ADAMS/index.html (the Public Electronic Reading Room).
Based on the EA and accompanying safety evaluation, NRC is preparing to amend License SNM-124. The NRC hereby provides that this is a proceeding on an application for amendment of a license falling within the scope of Subpart L, “Informal Hearing Procedures for Adjudication in Materials Licensing Proceedings,” of NRC's rules and practice for domestic licensing proceedings in 10 CFR Part 2. Pursuant to § 2.1205(a), any person whose interest may be affected by this proceeding may file a request for a hearing in accordance with § 2.1205(d). A request for a hearing must be filed within thirty (30) days of the date of publication of this Federal Register notice.
2. How that interest may be affected by the results of the proceeding, including the reasons why the requestor should be permitted a hearing, with particular reference to the factors set out in § 2.1205(h).
In accordance with 10 CFR § 2.1205(f), each request for a hearing must also be served, by delivering it personally or by mail to:
2. The NRC staff, by delivering to the Executive Director for Operations, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852, or by mail, addressed to the Executive Director for Operations, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555. The NRC contact for this licensing action is Mary T. Adams, who may be contacted at (301) 415-7249 or by e-mail at mta@nrc.gov for more information about the licensing action.
2. DD of the area includes excavating contaminated soil, conducting a final survey of the area, and backfilling the excavation. DD of some areas may be performed concurrently (i.e., excavation of one area may begin before backfilling of another area is completed).