Notice of Availability of Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact for License Amendment for Framatome ANP, Inc., Lynchburg, VA, 3342-3344 [E6-613]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
3342
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 13 / Friday, January 20, 2006 / Notices
of Handicap regulation, 45 CFR part
1624.
a. Staff report.
b. Public comment.
6. Consider and act on Legal Action of
Wisconsin’s Petition for
Rulemaking on LSC’s Private
Attorney Involvement regulation,
45 CFR part 1614.
a. Staff report.
b. Comments by Robert Henderson,
Managing Attorney, LaCrosse
Office, Legal Action of Wisconsin.
c. Public Comment.
7. Consider and act on other business.
8. Other public comment.
Closed Session
9. Consider and act on the General
Counsel’s report on pending
litigation regarding LSC’s program
integrity regulation, 45 CFR part
1610.
10. Consider and act on adjournment of
meeting.
Closed Session
19. Consider and act on General
Counsel’s report on potential and
pending litigation involving LSC.
20. Discussion of internal procedures
with OIG.
21. IG report to the Board.
22. Consider and act on the report of the
Performance Reviews Committee.
23. Consider and act on motion to
adjourn meeting.
CONTACT PERSON FOR INFORMATION:
Patricia D. Batie, Manager of Board
Operations, at (202) 295–1500.
Special Needs: Upon request, meeting
notices will be made available in
alternate formats to accommodate visual
and hearing impairments. Individuals
who have a disability and need an
accommodation to attend the meeting
may notify Patricia D. Batie, at (202)
295–1500.
Board of Directors
Dated: January 17, 2006.
Victor M. Fortuno,
Vice President for Legal Affairs, General
Counsel & Corporate Secretary.
[FR Doc. 06–549 Filed 1–17–06; 4:19 pm]
Agenda
BILLING CODE 7050–01–P
Saturday, January 28, 2006
wwhite on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Open Session
1. Approval of agenda.
2. Approval of minutes of the Board’s
meeting of October 29, 2005.
3. Approval of minutes of the Executive
Session of the Board’s meeting of
October 29, 2005.
4. Approval of minutes of the Board’s
Open Session Telephonic meeting
of November 28, 2005.
5. Consider and act on nominations for
the Chairman of the Board of
Directors.
6. Consider and act on nominations for
the Vice Chairman of the Board of
Directors.
7. Consider and act on delegation to
Chairman of authority to make
Committee assignments.
8. Consider and act on Strategic
Directions for 2006–2010.
9. Chairman’s Report.
10. Members’ Reports.
11. President’s Report.
12. Inspector General’s Report.
13. Consider and act on the report of the
Provision for the Delivery of Legal
Services Committee.
14. Consider and act on the report of the
Finance Committee.
15. Consider and act on the report of the
Operations & Regulations
Committee.
16. Consider and act on other business.
17. Public comment.
18. Consider and act on whether to
authorize an executive session of
the Board to address items listed
below under Closed Session.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:16 Jan 19, 2006
Jkt 208001
NATIONAL CREDIT UNION
ADMINISTRATION
Notice of Change in Subject of Meeting
The National Credit Union
Administration Board determined that
its business required the deletion of the
following item from the previously
announced closed meeting Federal
Register, Vol. 71, No. 10, p. 2571,
January 17, 2006) scheduled for
Thursday, January 19, 2006.
1. Administrative Action under
section 206(h)(1)(A) of the Federal
Credit Union Act. Closed pursuant to
Exemptions (8), (9)(A)(ii), and (9)(B).
The Board voted unanimously that
agency business required that this item
be removed from the closed agenda.
Earlier announcement of this change
was not possible.
The previously announced items
were:
1. Administrative Action under
section 206(h)(1)(A) of the Federal
Credit Union Act. Closed pursuant to
Exemptions (8), (9)(A)(ii), and (9)(B).
2. One (1) Insurance Appeal. Closed
pursuant to Exemption (6).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mary Rupp, Secretary of the Board,
Telephone: 703–518–6304.
Mary Rupp,
Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 06–608 Filed 1–18–06; 3:59 pm]
BILLING CODE 735–01–M
PO 00000
Frm 00087
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket No. 70–1201]
Notice of Availability of Environmental
Assessment and Finding of No
Significant Impact for License
Amendment for Framatome ANP, Inc.,
Lynchburg, VA
Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Notice of availability.
AGENCY:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Billy Gleaves, Project Manager, Fuel
Cycle Facilities Branch, Division of Fuel
Cycle Safety and Safeguards, Office of
Nuclear Materials Safety and
Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Rockville, MD, 20555–
0001. Telephone: (301) 415–5848; fax
number: (301) 415–5955; e-mail:
bcg@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Introduction
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(NRC) staff has received a license
amendment request from Framatome
ANP, Inc., Lynchburg, VA (FANP
Lynchburg) dated September 1, 2005
(Ref. 1, 2), to amend Special Nuclear
Material License (SNM)–1168 (Ref. 3) to
use the International Commission on
Radiation Protection (ICRP) Publication
68 for Derived Air Concentration (DAC)
and the Annual Limit on Intake (ALI)
determinations (Ref. 4). In accordance
with the requirements of 10 CFR part
51, an Environmental Assessment (EA)
was performed by the NRC staff in
support of its review of FANP
Lynchburg’s license amendment
request. The conclusion of the EA is a
Finding of No Significant Impact
(FONSI) for the proposed licensing
action. The amendment will be issued
following the publication of this notice.
II. Environmental Assessment
Background
The FANP Lynchburg facility is
authorized, under Materials License
SNM–1168, to possess nuclear materials
for the fabrication and assembly of
nuclear power fuel components.
Principal activities in the fabrication
facility include the processing of lowenriched uranium (< 5.1%), received as
UO2 pellets. Uranium pellets are
received and then transported to a pellet
vault after the receipt inspection process
is completed. The fuel pellets are then
inserted into rods, which are then
assembled into fuel bundles. Finished
fuel bundles are then packaged and
loaded onto truck transport for delivery
E:\FR\FM\20JAN1.SGM
20JAN1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 13 / Friday, January 20, 2006 / Notices
wwhite on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
to the receiving utility. Other activities
conducted in conjunction with nuclear
fuel fabrication include: Fabrication of
poison rods; download of finished fuel
bundles and rods; repair of returned fuel
assemblies; laboratory operations; and
waste disposal operations.
Inhalation of dust in radiologically
controlled areas poses an internal
radiation hazard, and the NRC
regulations in 10 CFR part 20 require
licensees to implement certain
protective measures to minimize that
hazard. These measures include taking
a variety of air samples, using
respirators in certain work areas,
posting airborne radioactivity warning
signs outside the work areas, and
putting the potentially exposed workers
on a routine bioassay program to assess
their intakes and verify the effectiveness
of the protection program. Many of
these protective measures are triggered
when the air concentrations in the
workplace reach specified fractions of
the air concentrations tabulated in 10
CFR part 20, Appendix B.
FANP Lynchburg has requested to
amend its license to permit the use of
values other than those tabulated in 10
CFR part 20 as the basis for triggering
protective measures, and for assessing
the internal dose to its workers. The
basis for the amendment request is the
recommendations in ICRP 68. In the
amendment application, FANP
Lynchburg maintains that the
assessment of the radiological hazard
based on 10 CFR part 20, Appendix B,
requires it to implement monitoring and
protection programs at levels that are
out of proportion with the true level of
hazard, and do not significantly add to
worker protection. FANP Lynchburg
believes that granting the exemption
would enable it to reduce the size of its
internal exposure program while, at the
same time, providing a level of
protection proportional to the actual
hazard. FANP Lynchburg references an
NRC staff requirements memorandum
(SECY–99–077) (Ref. 5), which directs
the staff to grant exemptions to 10 CFR
part 20 on this modeling issue on a caseby-case basis.
Review Scope
In accordance with 10 CFR part 51,
this EA serves to: (1) Present
information and analysis for
determining whether to issue a FONSI
or to prepare an Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS); (2) fulfill the NRC’s
compliance with the National
Environmental Policy Act when no EIS
is necessary; and (3) facilitate
preparation of an EIS when one is
necessary. Should the NRC issue a
FONSI, no EIS would be prepared and
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:16 Jan 19, 2006
Jkt 208001
the license amendment would be
granted.
The EA serves to evaluate and
document the impacts of the proposed
amendment. Activities beyond the
proposed changes have previously been
evaluated and documented in the 2003
EA as part of the FANP Lynchburg
license renewal (Ref. 6). The 2003
document remains the most current EA
for activities outside the scope of the
proposed amendment.
Proposed Action
The proposed action is to amend the
NRC Materials License SNM–1168 to
authorize the use of DAC and ALI
values based on ICRP 68, entitled Dose
Coefficients for Intake of Radionuclides
by Worker (Ref. 4).
Affected Environment
The affected environment for the
proposed activity is the FANP
Lynchburg site. A full description of the
site and its characteristics are given in
the 2003 EA for the renewal of the NRC
license for FANP Lynchburg (Ref. 6).
Effluent Releases and Monitoring
A full description of the effluent
monitoring program at the site is
provided in the 2003 EA for the renewal
of the NRC license for FANP Lynchburg
(Ref. 6). Monitoring programs at the
FANP Lynchburg facility comprise
effluent monitoring of air and water and
environmental monitoring of various
media (air, soil, vegetation, and
groundwater). This program provides a
basis for evaluation of public health and
safety impacts, for establishing
compliance with environmental
regulations, and for development of
mitigation measures if necessary. The
monitoring program is not expected to
change as a result of the proposed
action. In the 2003 renewal, the NRC
reviewed the location of the
environmental monitoring program
sampling points, the frequency of
sample collection, and the trends in the
sampling program results. The data,
taken in conjunction with the
environmental pathway and exposure
analysis, leads the NRC to conclude that
the monitoring program provides
adequate protection of public health and
safety.
Environmental Impacts of Proposed
Action
Radiological Impacts
The basic limits on radiation
exposures, as well as the minimum
radiation protection practices required
of any NRC licensee, are specified in 10
CFR part 20, ‘‘Standards for Protection
Against Radiation’’ (Ref. 7). The models
PO 00000
Frm 00088
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
3343
used in 10 CFR part 20 to regulate
internal doses are those described in the
ICRP Publications 26 and 30, adopted
by the ICRP in 1977 and 1978,
respectively (Ref. 8, 9). Much of the
basic structure of these models were
developed in 1966. However, some of its
components and parameters were
altered somewhat between 1966 and
their formal adoption by the ICRP in
1978. In the same year that the
Commission approved the final 10 CFR
part 20 rule (1991), the ICRP published
a major revision of its radiation
protection recommendations, ICRP 60
(Ref. 10). During the several years
following this revision, the ICRP
published a series of reports in which it
described the components of an
extensively updated and revised
internal dosimetry model. Due to the
restrictions in 10 CFR part 20, the NRC
licensees are not permitted to use the
revised and updated internal dosimetry
models without receiving an exemption
to the regulations.
Although the dose per unit intake
calculated, using the new models, does
not differ by more than a factor of about
two from the values in 10 CFR part 20
for most radionuclides, the differences
are substantial for some, particularly for
the isotopes of thorium, uranium, and
some of the transuranic radionuclides.
For example, for inhalation of insoluble
thorium-232 (232Th), the dose per unit
intake calculated using the revised ICRP
lung model, is a factor of about 15 times
lower than that in 10 CFR part 20.
Because protective measures are based
on the hazard, and since the hazard is
proportional to dose, 10 CFR part 20
requires significantly more protective
measures when using 232Th than would
be warranted based on the revised
models.
Using the updated ICRP 68 standard
would enable FANP Lynchburg to
reduce the size of its internal exposure
program while, at the same time,
providing a level of protection
proportional to the actual hazard. This
is FANP Lynchburg’s primary concern,
and it has requested to be allowed to use
DAC and ALI values based on the dose
coefficients listed in ICRP 68. The NRC
staff concluded that FANP Lynchburg
has historically maintained worker
doses as low as reasonably achievable
and is qualified to utilize the ICRP 68
in a manner equivalent to 10 CFR
20.1201(d), (i.e. doses at a level lower
than the NRC’s regulatory limit of 5 rem,
in its Radiation Safety Program).
Therefore, FANP Lynchburg’s request
for an exemption under 10 CFR 20.2301
is acceptable, because it gives its
workers equivalent radiological
protection as required by 10 CFR part
E:\FR\FM\20JAN1.SGM
20JAN1
3344
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 13 / Friday, January 20, 2006 / Notices
20. Thus, the exemption is authorized
by law and will not result in an undue
hazard to life or property.
Nonradiological Impacts
The NRC determined that there are no
non-radiological impacts associated
with the proposed action.
Cumulative Impacts
The NRC determined that there are no
cumulative impacts associated with the
proposed action.
Alternatives to the Proposed Action
The NRC considered one alternative
to the proposed action, which was to
deny the amendment request. This
alternative was rejected because the
impacts of the proposed action on the
health and safety of the workers, the
public, and the environment were
determined to be insignificant. In
addition, the licensee will be able to
save time and resources using the
updated ICRP 68 models. The new
models will maintain doses within the
regulatory limit, while allowing the
licensee to remove unwarranted
protective measures required by the old
models.
Agencies and Persons Contacted
The NRC contacted the Virginia
Department of Environmental Quality
(VDEQ) concerning this request. There
were no comments, concerns or
objections from VDEQ.
Because the proposed action is
entirely within existing facilities, and
does not involve new or increased
effluents or accident scenarios, the NRC
has concluded that there is no potential
to affect endangered species or historic
resources, and therefore consultation
with the State Historic Preservation
Society and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service was not performed.
wwhite on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
III. Finding of No Significant Impact
Based on the EA, the staff concludes
that the proposed action will not have
a significant effect on the quality of the
human environment. Accordingly, the
staff has determined that preparation of
an EIS is not warranted.
IV. Further Information
The following documents are related
to the proposed action:
1. C.F. Holman, Framatome ANP, Inc.,
letter to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, ‘‘Amendment Request to
Use of ICRP 68 for ALI and DAC
Values,’’ September 1, 2005
(ML052550120).
2. The NRC administrative review,
documented in a letter to Framatome
ANP, Inc. dated September 23, 2005
(ML052640365).
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:16 Jan 19, 2006
Jkt 208001
3. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Special Nuclear Material
License SNM–1168 Amendment 7,
October 3, 2005 (ML052840071).
4. International Commission on
Radiological Protection, ‘‘Dose
Coefficients for Intake of Radionuclides
by Worker,’’ Publication 68, Elsevier
Science, 1995.
5. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, ‘‘SRM–SECY–99–0077—
To Request Commission Approval to
Grant Exemptions from Portions of 10
CFR Part 20,’’ April 21, 1999
(ML042750086).
6. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, ‘‘Environmental
Assessment for the Renewal Framatome
ANP, Inc., Lynchburg, Virginia,’’ April
2, 2003 (ML030940720).
7. U.S. Code of Federal Regulations,
‘‘Standards for Protection Against
Radiation,’’ Part 20, Chapter 1, Title 10,
Energy.
8. International Commission on
Radiological Protection,
‘‘Recommendations of the International
Commission on Radiological
Protection,’’ Publication 26, Elsevier
Science, 1977.
9. International Commission on
Radiological Protection, ‘‘Limits for the
Intake of Radionuclides by Workers,’’
Publication 30, Elsevier Science, 1978.
10. International Commission on
Radiological Protection, ‘‘1990
Recommendations of the International
Commission on Radiological
Protection,’’ Publication 60, Elsevier
Science, 1991.
The NRC documents related to this
action, including the application for
amendment and supporting
documentation, are available
electronically at the NRC’s Electronic
Reading Room at https://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 accession numbers for
documents contained in ADAMS are
provided with the reference. 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 via e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov.
The documents in ADAMS may also
be viewed electronically on the public
computers located at the NRC’s PDR, O1
F21, One White Flint North, 11555
Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852.
The PDR reproduction contractor will
copy documents for a fee.
Dated at Rockville, MD this 13th day of
January, 2006.
PO 00000
Frm 00089
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
William C. Gleaves,
Project Manager, Fuel Cycle Facilities Branch,
Division of Fuel Cycle Safety and Safeguards,
Office of Nuclear Materials Safety and
Safeguards.
[FR Doc. E6–613 Filed 1–19–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
Nuclear Information and Resource
Service All Nuclear Power Plants That
Use Hemyc/MT Fire Barriers Notice of
Issuance of Director’s Decision Under
10 CFR 2.206
Notice is hereby given that the
Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation, has issued a Director’s
Decision with regard to a petition dated
May 12, 2005, filed by Paul Gunter on
behalf of the Nuclear Information and
Resource Service, Citizens Awareness
Network, Indian Point Safe Coalition,
North Carolina Waste Awareness and
Reduction Network, Alliance for
Affordable Energy, and Blue Ridge
Environmental Defense League,
hereinafter referred to as the
‘‘petitioners.’’ The petition was
supplemented on June 1, 2005. The
petition concerns the operation of all
nuclear power plants that use Hemyc/
MT fire barriers.
The petition requested that the U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)
engage in enforcement actions to modify
and/or suspend operating licenses for
Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Station
Unit 1, H. B. Robinson Unit 2, McGuire
Units 1 and 2, Catawba Units 1 and 2,
Ginna, James A. Fitzpatrick, Indian
Point Units 2 and 3, Vermont Yankee,
Waterford Unit 3, and Arkansas Nuclear
One Units 1 and 2.
As the basis for the requests, the
petitioners cited a meeting on April 29,
2005, held by NRC with all stakeholders
to discuss the performance of 1-hour
(Hemyc) and 3-hour (MT) fire barriers
for Electrical Raceways during full scale
fire testing. In that meeting the NRC
staff informed all stakeholders that the
Hemyc/MT electrical raceway fire
barrier system (ERFBS) failed to protect
electrical cables for 1 hour/3 hours in
fire tests that were performed to the
American Society of Testing and
Materials (ASTM) Standard E119. The
petitioners’ request was also based on
the following conclusions made by the
petitioners: (1) The same Hemyc/MT
fire barrier wrap systems as installed in
the above nuclear plants fail to assure
the protection of the control room
operations for achieving safe shutdown
E:\FR\FM\20JAN1.SGM
20JAN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 13 (Friday, January 20, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 3342-3344]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-613]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 70-1201]
Notice of Availability of Environmental Assessment and Finding of
No Significant Impact for License Amendment for Framatome ANP, Inc.,
Lynchburg, VA
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Notice of availability.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Billy Gleaves, Project Manager, Fuel
Cycle Facilities Branch, Division of Fuel Cycle Safety and Safeguards,
Office of Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Rockville, MD, 20555-0001. Telephone: (301) 415-
5848; fax number: (301) 415-5955; e-mail: bcg@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Introduction
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff has received a
license amendment request from Framatome ANP, Inc., Lynchburg, VA (FANP
Lynchburg) dated September 1, 2005 (Ref. 1, 2), to amend Special
Nuclear Material License (SNM)-1168 (Ref. 3) to use the International
Commission on Radiation Protection (ICRP) Publication 68 for Derived
Air Concentration (DAC) and the Annual Limit on Intake (ALI)
determinations (Ref. 4). In accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR
part 51, an Environmental Assessment (EA) was performed by the NRC
staff in support of its review of FANP Lynchburg's license amendment
request. The conclusion of the EA is a Finding of No Significant Impact
(FONSI) for the proposed licensing action. The amendment will be issued
following the publication of this notice.
II. Environmental Assessment
Background
The FANP Lynchburg facility is authorized, under Materials License
SNM-1168, to possess nuclear materials for the fabrication and assembly
of nuclear power fuel components. Principal activities in the
fabrication facility include the processing of low-enriched uranium (<
5.1%), received as UO2 pellets. Uranium pellets are received
and then transported to a pellet vault after the receipt inspection
process is completed. The fuel pellets are then inserted into rods,
which are then assembled into fuel bundles. Finished fuel bundles are
then packaged and loaded onto truck transport for delivery
[[Page 3343]]
to the receiving utility. Other activities conducted in conjunction
with nuclear fuel fabrication include: Fabrication of poison rods;
download of finished fuel bundles and rods; repair of returned fuel
assemblies; laboratory operations; and waste disposal operations.
Inhalation of dust in radiologically controlled areas poses an
internal radiation hazard, and the NRC regulations in 10 CFR part 20
require licensees to implement certain protective measures to minimize
that hazard. These measures include taking a variety of air samples,
using respirators in certain work areas, posting airborne radioactivity
warning signs outside the work areas, and putting the potentially
exposed workers on a routine bioassay program to assess their intakes
and verify the effectiveness of the protection program. Many of these
protective measures are triggered when the air concentrations in the
workplace reach specified fractions of the air concentrations tabulated
in 10 CFR part 20, Appendix B.
FANP Lynchburg has requested to amend its license to permit the use
of values other than those tabulated in 10 CFR part 20 as the basis for
triggering protective measures, and for assessing the internal dose to
its workers. The basis for the amendment request is the recommendations
in ICRP 68. In the amendment application, FANP Lynchburg maintains that
the assessment of the radiological hazard based on 10 CFR part 20,
Appendix B, requires it to implement monitoring and protection programs
at levels that are out of proportion with the true level of hazard, and
do not significantly add to worker protection. FANP Lynchburg believes
that granting the exemption would enable it to reduce the size of its
internal exposure program while, at the same time, providing a level of
protection proportional to the actual hazard. FANP Lynchburg references
an NRC staff requirements memorandum (SECY-99-077) (Ref. 5), which
directs the staff to grant exemptions to 10 CFR part 20 on this
modeling issue on a case-by-case basis.
Review Scope
In accordance with 10 CFR part 51, this EA serves to: (1) Present
information and analysis for determining whether to issue a FONSI or to
prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS); (2) fulfill the NRC's
compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act when no EIS is
necessary; and (3) facilitate preparation of an EIS when one is
necessary. Should the NRC issue a FONSI, no EIS would be prepared and
the license amendment would be granted.
The EA serves to evaluate and document the impacts of the proposed
amendment. Activities beyond the proposed changes have previously been
evaluated and documented in the 2003 EA as part of the FANP Lynchburg
license renewal (Ref. 6). The 2003 document remains the most current EA
for activities outside the scope of the proposed amendment.
Proposed Action
The proposed action is to amend the NRC Materials License SNM-1168
to authorize the use of DAC and ALI values based on ICRP 68, entitled
Dose Coefficients for Intake of Radionuclides by Worker (Ref. 4).
Affected Environment
The affected environment for the proposed activity is the FANP
Lynchburg site. A full description of the site and its characteristics
are given in the 2003 EA for the renewal of the NRC license for FANP
Lynchburg (Ref. 6).
Effluent Releases and Monitoring
A full description of the effluent monitoring program at the site
is provided in the 2003 EA for the renewal of the NRC license for FANP
Lynchburg (Ref. 6). Monitoring programs at the FANP Lynchburg facility
comprise effluent monitoring of air and water and environmental
monitoring of various media (air, soil, vegetation, and groundwater).
This program provides a basis for evaluation of public health and
safety impacts, for establishing compliance with environmental
regulations, and for development of mitigation measures if necessary.
The monitoring program is not expected to change as a result of the
proposed action. In the 2003 renewal, the NRC reviewed the location of
the environmental monitoring program sampling points, the frequency of
sample collection, and the trends in the sampling program results. The
data, taken in conjunction with the environmental pathway and exposure
analysis, leads the NRC to conclude that the monitoring program
provides adequate protection of public health and safety.
Environmental Impacts of Proposed Action
Radiological Impacts
The basic limits on radiation exposures, as well as the minimum
radiation protection practices required of any NRC licensee, are
specified in 10 CFR part 20, ``Standards for Protection Against
Radiation'' (Ref. 7). The models used in 10 CFR part 20 to regulate
internal doses are those described in the ICRP Publications 26 and 30,
adopted by the ICRP in 1977 and 1978, respectively (Ref. 8, 9). Much of
the basic structure of these models were developed in 1966. However,
some of its components and parameters were altered somewhat between
1966 and their formal adoption by the ICRP in 1978. In the same year
that the Commission approved the final 10 CFR part 20 rule (1991), the
ICRP published a major revision of its radiation protection
recommendations, ICRP 60 (Ref. 10). During the several years following
this revision, the ICRP published a series of reports in which it
described the components of an extensively updated and revised internal
dosimetry model. Due to the restrictions in 10 CFR part 20, the NRC
licensees are not permitted to use the revised and updated internal
dosimetry models without receiving an exemption to the regulations.
Although the dose per unit intake calculated, using the new models,
does not differ by more than a factor of about two from the values in
10 CFR part 20 for most radionuclides, the differences are substantial
for some, particularly for the isotopes of thorium, uranium, and some
of the transuranic radionuclides. For example, for inhalation of
insoluble thorium-232 (232Th), the dose per unit intake
calculated using the revised ICRP lung model, is a factor of about 15
times lower than that in 10 CFR part 20. Because protective measures
are based on the hazard, and since the hazard is proportional to dose,
10 CFR part 20 requires significantly more protective measures when
using 232Th than would be warranted based on the revised
models.
Using the updated ICRP 68 standard would enable FANP Lynchburg to
reduce the size of its internal exposure program while, at the same
time, providing a level of protection proportional to the actual
hazard. This is FANP Lynchburg's primary concern, and it has requested
to be allowed to use DAC and ALI values based on the dose coefficients
listed in ICRP 68. The NRC staff concluded that FANP Lynchburg has
historically maintained worker doses as low as reasonably achievable
and is qualified to utilize the ICRP 68 in a manner equivalent to 10
CFR 20.1201(d), (i.e. doses at a level lower than the NRC's regulatory
limit of 5 rem, in its Radiation Safety Program). Therefore, FANP
Lynchburg's request for an exemption under 10 CFR 20.2301 is
acceptable, because it gives its workers equivalent radiological
protection as required by 10 CFR part
[[Page 3344]]
20. Thus, the exemption is authorized by law and will not result in an
undue hazard to life or property.
Nonradiological Impacts
The NRC determined that there are no non-radiological impacts
associated with the proposed action.
Cumulative Impacts
The NRC determined that there are no cumulative impacts associated
with the proposed action.
Alternatives to the Proposed Action
The NRC considered one alternative to the proposed action, which
was to deny the amendment request. This alternative was rejected
because the impacts of the proposed action on the health and safety of
the workers, the public, and the environment were determined to be
insignificant. In addition, the licensee will be able to save time and
resources using the updated ICRP 68 models. The new models will
maintain doses within the regulatory limit, while allowing the licensee
to remove unwarranted protective measures required by the old models.
Agencies and Persons Contacted
The NRC contacted the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality
(VDEQ) concerning this request. There were no comments, concerns or
objections from VDEQ.
Because the proposed action is entirely within existing facilities,
and does not involve new or increased effluents or accident scenarios,
the NRC has concluded that there is no potential to affect endangered
species or historic resources, and therefore consultation with the
State Historic Preservation Society and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service was not performed.
III. Finding of No Significant Impact
Based on the EA, the staff concludes that the proposed action will
not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment.
Accordingly, the staff has determined that preparation of an EIS is not
warranted.
IV. Further Information
The following documents are related to the proposed action:
1. C.F. Holman, Framatome ANP, Inc., letter to the U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, ``Amendment Request to Use of ICRP 68 for ALI
and DAC Values,'' September 1, 2005 (ML052550120).
2. The NRC administrative review, documented in a letter to
Framatome ANP, Inc. dated September 23, 2005 (ML052640365).
3. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Special Nuclear Material
License SNM-1168 Amendment 7, October 3, 2005 (ML052840071).
4. International Commission on Radiological Protection, ``Dose
Coefficients for Intake of Radionuclides by Worker,'' Publication 68,
Elsevier Science, 1995.
5. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ``SRM-SECY-99-0077--To
Request Commission Approval to Grant Exemptions from Portions of 10 CFR
Part 20,'' April 21, 1999 (ML042750086).
6. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ``Environmental
Assessment for the Renewal Framatome ANP, Inc., Lynchburg, Virginia,''
April 2, 2003 (ML030940720).
7. U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, ``Standards for Protection
Against Radiation,'' Part 20, Chapter 1, Title 10, Energy.
8. International Commission on Radiological Protection,
``Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological
Protection,'' Publication 26, Elsevier Science, 1977.
9. International Commission on Radiological Protection, ``Limits
for the Intake of Radionuclides by Workers,'' Publication 30, Elsevier
Science, 1978.
10. International Commission on Radiological Protection, ``1990
Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological
Protection,'' Publication 60, Elsevier Science, 1991.
The NRC documents related to this action, including the application
for amendment and supporting documentation, are available
electronically at the NRC's Electronic Reading Room at https://
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 accession
numbers for documents contained in ADAMS are provided with the
reference. 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
via e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov.
The documents in ADAMS may also be viewed electronically on the
public computers located at the NRC's PDR, O1 F21, One White Flint
North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. The PDR reproduction
contractor will copy documents for a fee.
Dated at Rockville, MD this 13th day of January, 2006.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
William C. Gleaves,
Project Manager, Fuel Cycle Facilities Branch, Division of Fuel Cycle
Safety and Safeguards, Office of Nuclear Materials Safety and
Safeguards.
[FR Doc. E6-613 Filed 1-19-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
