University of New Mexico; University of New Mexico AGN-201M Reactor; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact, 27372-27375 [2010-11563]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
27372
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 93 / Friday, May 14, 2010 / Notices
availability of interlocutory review by
the Commission of orders ruling on
such NRC staff determinations (whether
granting or denying access) is governed
by 10 CFR 2.311.3
I. The Commission expects that the
NRC staff and presiding officers (and
any other reviewing officers) will
consider and resolve requests for access
to SUNSI, and motions for protective
orders, in a timely fashion in order to
minimize any unnecessary delays in
identifying those petitioners who have
standing and who have propounded
contentions meeting the specificity and
basis requirements in 10 CFR part 2.
Attachment 1 to this Order summarizes
the general target schedule for
processing and resolving requests under
these procedures.
It is so ordered. Dated at Rockville,
Maryland, this 10th day of May, 2010.
For the Commission.
Annette L. Vietti-Cook,
Secretary of the Commission.
Attachment 1—General Target
Schedule for Processing and Resolving
Requests for Access to Sensitive
Unclassified Non-Safeguards
Information in This Proceeding
Day
Event/Activity
0 ........................
Publication of Federal Register notice of hearing and opportunity to petition for leave to intervene, including order with instructions for access requests.
Deadline for submitting requests for access to Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information (SUNSI) with information:
Supporting the standing of a potential party identified by name and address; describing the need for the information in order
for the potential party to participate meaningfully in an adjudicatory proceeding.
Deadline for submitting petition for intervention containing: (i) Demonstration of standing; (ii) all contentions whose formulation
does not require access to SUNSI (+25 Answers to petition for intervention; +7 petitioner/requestor reply).
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff informs the requester of the staff’s determination whether the request for access
provides a reasonable basis to believe standing can be established and shows need for SUNSI. (NRC staff also informs
any party to the proceeding whose interest independent of the proceeding would be harmed by the release of the information.) If NRC staff makes the finding of need for SUNSI and likelihood of standing, NRC staff begins document processing
(preparation of redactions or review of redacted documents).
If NRC staff finds no ‘‘need’’ or no likelihood of standing, the deadline for petitioner/requester to file a motion seeking a ruling
to reverse the NRC staff’s denial of access; NRC staff files copy of access determination with the presiding officer (or Chief
Administrative Judge or other designated officer, as appropriate). If NRC staff finds ‘‘need’’ for SUNSI, the deadline for any
party to the proceeding whose interest independent of the proceeding would be harmed by the release of the information to
file a motion seeking a ruling to reverse the NRC staff’s grant of access.
Deadline for NRC staff reply to motions to reverse NRC staff determination(s).
(Receipt +30) If NRC staff finds standing and need for SUNSI, deadline for NRC staff to complete information processing and
file motion for Protective Order and draft Non-Disclosure Affidavit. Deadline for applicant/licensee to file Non-Disclosure
Agreement for SUNSI.
If access granted: Issuance of presiding officer or other designated officer decision on motion for protective order for access
to sensitive information (including schedule for providing access and submission of contentions) or decision reversing a
final adverse determination by the NRC staff.
Deadline for filing executed Non-Disclosure Affidavits. Access provided to SUNSI consistent with decision issuing the protective order.
Deadline for submission of contentions whose development depends upon access to SUNSI. However, if more than 25 days
remain between the petitioner’s receipt of (or access to) the information and the deadline for filing all other contentions (as
established in the notice of hearing or opportunity for hearing), the petitioner may file its SUNSI contentions by that later
deadline.
(Contention receipt +25) Answers to contentions whose development depends upon access to SUNSI.
(Answer receipt +7) Petitioner/Intervenor reply to answers.
Decision on contention admission.
10 ......................
60 ......................
20 ......................
25 ......................
30 ......................
40 ......................
A .......................
A + 3 .................
A + 28 ...............
A + 53 ...............
A + 60 ...............
>A + 60 .............
continued operation of the University of
New Mexico AGN–201M reactor,
located in Albuquerque, Bernalillo
County, New Mexico. Therefore, as
required by Title 10 of the Code of
Federal Regulations (10 CFR) 51.21, the
NRC is issuing this Environmental
Assessment and Finding of No
Significant Impact.
[FR Doc. 2010–11560 Filed 5–13–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50–252; NRC–2009–0557]
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
University of New Mexico; University
of New Mexico AGN–201M Reactor;
Environmental Assessment and
Finding of No Significant Impact
Environmental Assessment
Identification of the Proposed Action
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC or the Commission)
is considering issuance of a renewed
Facility Operating License No. R–102, to
the University of New Mexico (the
licensee), which would authorize
The proposed action would renew
Facility Operating License No. R–102
for a period of twenty years from the
date of issuance of the renewed license.
The proposed action is in accordance
with the licensee’s application dated
3 Requesters should note that the filing
requirements of the NRC’s E-Filing Rule (72 FR
49139; August 28, 2007) apply to appeals of NRC
staff determinations (because they must be served
on a presiding officer or the Commission, as
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:07 May 13, 2010
Jkt 220001
PO 00000
Frm 00088
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
February 21, 2007, as supplemented by
letter dated November 9, 2009. In
accordance with 10 CFR 2.109, the
existing license remains in effect until
the NRC takes final action on the
renewal application.
Need for the Proposed Action
The proposed action is needed to
allow the continued operation of the
AGN–201M reactor to routinely provide
teaching, research, and services to
numerous institutions for a period of
twenty years.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed
Action
The NRC has completed its safety
evaluation of the proposed action to
applicable), but not to the initial SUNSI request
submitted to the NRC staff under these procedures.
E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM
14MYN1
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 93 / Friday, May 14, 2010 / Notices
issue a renewed Facility Operating
License No. R–102 to allow continued
operation of the AGN–201M reactor and
concludes there is reasonable assurance
that the AGN–201M reactor will
continue to operate safely for the
additional period of time. The details of
the NRC staff’s safety evaluation will be
provided with the renewed license that
will be issued as part of the letter to the
licensee approving its license renewal
application. This document contains the
environmental assessment of the
proposed action.
The University of New Mexico is
located in Albuquerque, New Mexico.
The AGN–201M reactor is housed in the
Nuclear Energy Laboratory (NEL)
located near the southwest corner of the
University campus. The NEL is
primarily surrounded by residential
areas to the west and south and the
University campus to the east and north.
According to the 2000 census, the
population density within a radial
distance of one mile from the NEL is
5,352.9 persons per square mile. The
nearest permanent residence is 160
meters (174 yards) from the site and the
nearest dormitory is 724 meters (792
yards).
The NEL is a one-story concrete
structure with six feet of earth between
one foot thick concrete walls on the
south and west sides. The north and
east walls are poured concrete
approximately one foot thick. The roof
of the building is three feet of earth
between five-inch thick concrete slabs.
A portion of the roof is five feet of earth
between five-inch thick concrete slabs.
The only outside windows in the
building are located in the entrance
doors.
The AGN–201M reactor is a solid,
homogeneous thermal reactor, used for
teaching and training of students. The
reactor is operated in a sealed container
at a maximum licensed power of 5.0
watts. The reactor core uses graphitecoated uranium microspheres enriched
in uranium-235, dispersed in a
polyethylene matrix. The reactor core
consists of nine fuel discs that are
separated at the mid-plane by a thin
aluminum baffle. Because of the small
fissile material content and low
operation power level, the fission
product inventory in the core is
negligible. The core is contained in a
gas-tight aluminum cylindrical tank.
The AGN–201M reactor has two safety
rods, one coarse control rod, and one
fine control rod. The two safety rods
and the coarse control rod are fuelloaded while the loading of the fine
control rod depends on the standard
loading in use at the time. In all cases,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:07 May 13, 2010
Jkt 220001
inserting a rod adds reactivity to the
system.
The licensee has not requested any
changes to the facility design or
operating conditions as part of this
renewal request. Therefore, the
proposed action should not increase the
probability or consequences of
accidents. No changes are being made in
the types of effluents that may be
released off site. There should be no
increase in occupational or public
radiation exposure. Therefore, license
renewal should not change the
environmental impact of facility
operation. Data from the last five years
of operation was assessed to determine
the projected radiological impact of the
facility on the environment during the
period of the renewed license. Based on
this evaluation, the NRC staff concluded
that continued operation of the reactor
should not have a significant
environmental impact.
I. Radiological Impact
No environmental effects should
result from use of this reactor. The
AGN–201M reactor has a dry core of
uranium-impregnated polyethylene,
sealed in an aluminum tank. Because of
the form of the fuel and the lack of
fission product inventory, failure of
equipment or release of the fuel to the
outside environment will not directly or
indirectly endanger the public health
and safety. A probabilistic risk
assessment review of the reactor (ANS
Transactions, Vol. 65, p. 132–133, 1992)
indicated that ‘‘in the unlikely event of
release to the environment, a total
whole body dose rate of 1.61 × 10¥5
mrem/sec in the form of a radioactive
plume has been calculated for persons
located in the vicinity.’’ This indicates
that even the maximum hypothetical
release accident does not endanger the
public health and safety.
The core is surrounded by a 20 cm
thick high density (1.75 gram/cm3)
graphite reflector followed by a 10 cm
thick lead gamma shield. The core and
part of the graphite reflector are sealed
in a fluid-tight aluminum core tank
designed to contain any fission gases
that might leak from the core. A review
of the licensee’s annual reports from
2000–2007, excluding the report for the
period July 2002 through June 2003
which was not available, reveals that
there was no liquid radioactive waste
released from the facility nor was there
any solid waste released. In addition, no
environmental radiation surveys were
required to be performed outside of the
facility.
Personnel exposures received during
the same time period were below 50
mrem per person with the majority of
PO 00000
Frm 00089
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
27373
the personnel receiving below 5 mrem.
No changes in reactor operation that
would lead to an increase in
occupational dose are expected as a
result of license renewal.
Radiation monitoring instrumentation
available to the reactor operators
includes console-mounted meters and a
portable survey meter. There are remote
area monitors with automatic alarms
installed to monitor gamma levels at the
reactor console, checkpoint three (the
south side of the reactor), reactor top,
and in the general lab area (near the east
door). All of the detectors are energycompensated Geiger Mueller tubes.
There will be no changes to the licensed
program that would affect off-site
radiation and contamination levels.
II. Non-Radiological Impact
The AGN–201M reactor is
conductively cooled and requires no
liquid or auxiliary cooling system. The
removable thermal column tank permits
access to the core tank. The thermal
column tank is normally filled with
water to provide shielding. The tank can
be filled with graphite if a thermal
column is desired. The steel thermal
column tank acts as secondary
containment for the core tank and is
fluid tight. The water tank is the third
and outermost of the fluid tight
containers. It is 198 cm in diameter and
made of steel. It holds 1000 gallons of
water and forms the fast neutron shield.
The water in the tank contains
chromium. To date, the water has never
been removed from the tank and there
are no plans to do so. The water will be
drained in the event the reactor is
decommissioned and removal of the
water will be handled by University of
New Mexico Radiation Safety. Finally,
there is a 60 cm concrete block shield
on the front of the reactor tank and 40
cm concrete block shields on the sides
and back. There is no shielding on the
top of the reactor tank.
Release of thermal effluents from the
AGN–201M reactor will not have a
significant effect on the environment.
Environmental Effects of Accidents
Accident scenarios are discussed in
Appendix A of the University of New
Mexico’s Safety Analysis Report. The
maximum hypothetical accident is a
nuclear excursion resulting from a 2%
instantaneous increase of reactivity. The
total radiation dose to a person next to
the reactor would be approximately one
rem; therefore, the worst-case
occupational doses resulting from this
accident would be below the limit of 5
rem or 0.05 Sieverts (Sv) specified in 10
CFR 20.1201. Worst-case doses to
members of the general public would be
E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM
14MYN1
27374
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 93 / Friday, May 14, 2010 / Notices
below the limit of 0.1 rem (1 mSv)
specified in 10 CFR 20.1301. The
proposed action will not increase the
probability or consequences of
accidents.
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) Considerations
I. Endangered Species Act (ESA)
The site occupied by the AGN–201M
reactor does not contain any Federallyor State-protected fauna or flora, nor do
the AGN–201M reactor effluents impact
the habitats of any such fauna or flora.
II. Costal Zone Management Act
(CZMA)
The site occupied by the AGN–201M
reactor is not located within any
managed coastal zones, nor do the
AGN–201M reactor effluents impact any
managed costal zones.
III. National Historical Preservation Act
(NHPA)
The NHPA requires Federal agencies
to consider the effects of their
undertakings on historic properties. The
National Register of Historic Places
(NRHP) lists several historical sites near
the AGN–201M reactor site. The nearest
historical site is Cottage Bakery, located
approximately 0.1 miles from the AGN–
201M reactor site boundary. Given the
distance between the facility and
Cottage Bakery, continued operation of
the AGN–201M reactor will not impact
this historical site.
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
IV. Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act
(FWCA)
The licensee is not planning any
water resource development projects,
including any of the modifications
relating to impounding a body of water,
damming, diverting a stream or river,
deepening a channel, irrigation, or
altering a body of water for navigation
or drainage.
V. Executive Order 12898—
Environmental Justice
The environmental justice impact
analysis evaluates the potential for
disproportionately high and adverse
human health and environmental effects
on minority and low-income
populations that could result from the
relicensing and the continued operation
of the AGN–201M reactor.
Disproportionately high and adverse
human health effects occur when the
risk or rate of exposure to an
environmental hazard for a minority or
low-income population is significant
and exceeds the risk or exposure rate for
the general population or for another
appropriate comparison group.
Disproportionately high environmental
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:07 May 13, 2010
Jkt 220001
effects are impacts or risk of impacts on
the natural or physical environment in
a minority or low-income community
that are significant and appreciably
exceed the environmental impact on the
larger community. Such effects may
include ecological, cultural, economic,
or social impacts. Minority and lowincome populations are subsets of the
general public residing in the vicinity of
the AGN–201M reactor, and all are
exposed to the same health and
environmental effects generated from
activities at the AGN–201M reactor.
Minority Populations in the Vicinity
of the AGN–201M reactor—According to
2000 census data, 51.9 percent of the
population (approximately 748,000
individuals) residing within a 50-mile
radius of the AGN–201M reactor
identified themselves as minority
individuals. The largest minority group
was Hispanic or Latino (310,000 persons
or 41.4 percent), followed by ‘‘Some
other race’’ (141,500 or about 18.9
percent). According to the U.S. Census
Bureau, about 51.7 percent of the
Bernalillo County population identified
themselves as minorities, with persons
of Hispanic or Latino origin comprising
the largest minority group (42.0
percent). According to census data 3year average estimates for 2005–2007,
the minority population of Bernalillo
County, as a percent of total population,
had increased to 55.6 percent.
Low-Income Populations in the
Vicinity of the AGN–201M reactor—
According to 2000 census data,
approximately 19,900 families and
100,800 individuals (approximately 10.4
and 13.5 percent, respectively) residing
within a 50-mile radius of the AGN–
201M reactor were identified as living
below the Federal poverty threshold in
1999. The 1999 Federal poverty
threshold was $17,029 for a family of
four.
According to Census data in the
2005–2007 American Community
Survey 3-Year Estimates, the median
household income for New Mexico was
$41,042, while 18.4 percent of the state
population and 14.2 percent of families
were determined to be living below the
Federal poverty threshold. Bernalillo
County had a higher median household
income average ($45,022) and lower
percentages (14.9 percent) of
individuals and families (11.1 percent)
living below the poverty level,
respectively.
Impact Analysis—Potential impacts to
minority and low-income populations
would mostly consist of radiological
effects; however, radiation doses from
continued operations associated with
the license renewal are expected to
PO 00000
Frm 00090
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
continue at current levels and would be
well below regulatory limits.
Based on this information and the
analysis of human health and
environmental impacts presented in this
environmental assessment, the proposed
relicensing would not have
disproportionately high and adverse
human health and environmental effects
on minority and low-income
populations residing in the vicinity of
the AGN–201M reactor.
Environmental Impacts of the
Alternatives to the Proposed Action
As an alternative to license renewal,
the staff considered denial of the
proposed action. If the Commission
denied the application for license
renewal, facility operations would end
and decommissioning would be
required with no significant impact on
the environment. The environmental
impacts of license renewal and this
alternative action are similar. In
addition, the benefits of teaching,
research, and services provided by
facility operation would be lost.
Alternative Use of Resources
The proposed action does not involve
the use of any different resources or
significant quantities of resources
beyond those previously considered in
the issuance of the original Facility
Operating License R–102 for the
University of New Mexico AGN–201M
dated September, 1966; and the
issuance of Amendment No. 10 to R–
102, which authorized the power uprate
to 5.0 W(t) dated January 18, 1973.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
In accordance with the Commission’s
stated policy, on November 25, 2009,
the staff consulted with the State of New
Mexico’s State Liaison Officer, regarding
the environmental impact of the
proposed action. A copy of the draft
environmental assessment was provided
to the State Liaison Officer for review.
In a memorandum dated December 22,
2009, the Director of the Environmental
Health Division of the State’s
Department of the Environment
responded, expressing the State’s
support for the continued operation of
the facility.
Finding of No Significant Impact
On the basis of the environmental
assessment, 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
environmental impact statement for the
proposed action.
E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM
14MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 93 / Friday, May 14, 2010 / Notices
For further details with respect to the
proposed action, see the licensee’s
application dated February 21, 2007
[ML092170540], as supplemented by the
letter dated November 9, 2009
[ML093410385]. Documents may be
examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the
NRC’s Public Document Room (PDR),
located at One White Flint North, 11555
Rockville Pike (1st Floor), Rockville,
Maryland. Publicly available records
will be accessible electronically from
the Agencywide Documents Access and
Management System (ADAMS) Public
Electronic Reading Room on the NRC
Web site https://www.nrc.gov/readingrm/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 at
1–800–397–4209, or 301–415–4737, or
send an e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 5th day
of May, 2010.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Kathryn M. Brock,
Chief, Research and Test Reactors Licensing
Branch, Division of Policy and Rulemaking,
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2010–11563 Filed 5–13–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. PI2010–3; Order No. 456]
Postal Rate Case Management
Postal Regulatory Commission.
Notice.
AGENCY:
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Commission is seeking
comments relevant to management of an
anticipated exigent postal rate case. It
has scheduled a technical conference for
a public discussion based on the
submissions.
DATES: Comments are due: June 9, 2010;
technical conference will be held: June
16, 2010.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments
electronically via the Commission’s
Filing Online system at https://
www.prc.gov. Commenters who cannot
submit their views electronically should
contact the person identified in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section
by telephone for advice on alternatives
to electronic filing.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Stephen L. Sharfman, General Counsel,
202–789–6820 or
stephen.sharfman@prc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:07 May 13, 2010
Jkt 220001
II. Public Representative
III. Ordering Paragraphs
I. Introduction
On March 2, 2010, Postmaster General
John E. Potter outlined elements of a
business plan designed to close a
projected gap between Postal Service
revenues and costs.1 Included in the
plan was a reference to a possible
‘‘modest exigent rate increase’’ to be
effective in 2011. Id. The term ‘‘exigent
rate increase’’ is commonly used to refer
to rate adjustments that are due to
extraordinary or exceptional
circumstances. Such rate adjustments
are expressly authorized by 39 U.S.C.
3622(d)(1)(E).
Following the issuance of the Postal
Accountability and Enhancement Act
(PAEA), Pub. L. 109–435, 120 Stat. 3218
(2006), the Commission adopted new
rules that establish procedures for
handling exigent rate cases. Docket No.
RM2007–1, October 29, 2007 (Order No.
43). Those new rules (Exigent Rate Case
Rules) are contained in subpart E of part
3010 of the Commission’s regulations.
39 CFR part 3010, subpart E.
If filed, the potential exigent rate case
referred to by the Postmaster General
would be the first exigent rate case
received by the Commission since
passage of the PAEA. While the
Commission is confident that its Exigent
Rate Case Rules will provide an
effective procedural framework for
consideration of the currently
anticipated case, the Commission
believes that it would be prudent to give
all interested parties an opportunity to
explore and discuss procedural
considerations unique to exigent rate
cases before the Postal Service files such
a case. This belief is grounded in part
on the fact that section 3622(d)(1)(E)
requires the Commission to issue a
decision within 90 days after the Postal
Service’s filing. Advance consideration
of the unique procedural aspects of the
proposed exigent rate case may permit
early identification of solutions to any
potential issues that might otherwise
complicate fair and meaningful
participation by interested persons.
In light of the foregoing
considerations, a technical conference is
scheduled for June 16, 2010, beginning
at 10:00 a.m. in the Commission’s
hearing room. The purpose of the
conference is to give interested persons
the opportunity to discuss procedures
for managing the Postal Service’s
currently anticipated exigent rate case.
1 Press Release No. 10–018, United States Postal
Service, Postal Service Outlines 10–Year Plan to
Address Declining Revenues, Volumes (March 2,
2010).
PO 00000
Frm 00091
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
27375
The proceedings will be transcribed,
and a copy of the transcript will be
posted on the Commission’s website.
Further procedures are under
consideration and may be announced by
further public notice. Finally, the
Commission invites interested persons
to file proposed topics for discussion at
the conference not later than June 9,
2010.
II. Public Representative
Section 505 of title 39 requires the
designation of an officer of the
Commission in all public proceedings to
represent the interests of the general
public. The Commission hereby
designates James Waclawski as Public
Representative in this proceeding.
III. Ordering Paragraphs
It is ordered:
1. Docket No. PI2010-3 is established
for the purpose of facilitating discussion
of and obtaining views on, procedural
matters pertaining to rate adjustments
proposed to meet exigent circumstances
under part 3010, subpart E of the
commission’s rules of practice.
2. A technical conference will be held
June 16, 2010, beginning at 10:00 a.m.
in the Commission’s hearing room to
discuss issues related to the matters that
are the subject of this proceeding.
3. Interested persons may sunbmit
proposed topics for discussion on or
before June 9, 2010.
4. James Waclawski is designated as
the Public Representative to represent
the interests of the general public in this
docket.
5. The Secretary shall arrange for
publication of this order in the Federal
Register.
By the Commission.
Shoshana M. Grove,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010–11467 Filed 5–13–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710–FW–S
POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. MC2010–24; Order No. 457]
Review of Nonpostal Services
Language
Postal Regulatory Commission.
Notice.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Commission is
establishing a docket to consider the
Postal Service’s proposed nonpostal
services Mail Classification Schedule
language. It solicits comments to assist
in this task.
DATES: Comments are due: June 4, 2010.
Reply comments are due: June 18, 2010.
E:\FR\FM\14MYN1.SGM
14MYN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 93 (Friday, May 14, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27372-27375]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-11563]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-252; NRC-2009-0557]
University of New Mexico; University of New Mexico AGN-201M
Reactor; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or the Commission) is
considering issuance of a renewed Facility Operating License No. R-102,
to the University of New Mexico (the licensee), which would authorize
continued operation of the University of New Mexico AGN-201M reactor,
located in Albuquerque, Bernalillo County, New Mexico. Therefore, as
required by Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) 51.21,
the NRC is issuing this Environmental Assessment and Finding of No
Significant Impact.
Environmental Assessment
Identification of the Proposed Action
The proposed action would renew Facility Operating License No. R-
102 for a period of twenty years from the date of issuance of the
renewed license. The proposed action is in accordance with the
licensee's application dated February 21, 2007, as supplemented by
letter dated November 9, 2009. In accordance with 10 CFR 2.109, the
existing license remains in effect until the NRC takes final action on
the renewal application.
Need for the Proposed Action
The proposed action is needed to allow the continued operation of
the AGN-201M reactor to routinely provide teaching, research, and
services to numerous institutions for a period of twenty years.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action
The NRC has completed its safety evaluation of the proposed action
to
[[Page 27373]]
issue a renewed Facility Operating License No. R-102 to allow continued
operation of the AGN-201M reactor and concludes there is reasonable
assurance that the AGN-201M reactor will continue to operate safely for
the additional period of time. The details of the NRC staff's safety
evaluation will be provided with the renewed license that will be
issued as part of the letter to the licensee approving its license
renewal application. This document contains the environmental
assessment of the proposed action.
The University of New Mexico is located in Albuquerque, New Mexico.
The AGN-201M reactor is housed in the Nuclear Energy Laboratory (NEL)
located near the southwest corner of the University campus. The NEL is
primarily surrounded by residential areas to the west and south and the
University campus to the east and north. According to the 2000 census,
the population density within a radial distance of one mile from the
NEL is 5,352.9 persons per square mile. The nearest permanent residence
is 160 meters (174 yards) from the site and the nearest dormitory is
724 meters (792 yards).
The NEL is a one-story concrete structure with six feet of earth
between one foot thick concrete walls on the south and west sides. The
north and east walls are poured concrete approximately one foot thick.
The roof of the building is three feet of earth between five-inch thick
concrete slabs. A portion of the roof is five feet of earth between
five-inch thick concrete slabs. The only outside windows in the
building are located in the entrance doors.
The AGN-201M reactor is a solid, homogeneous thermal reactor, used
for teaching and training of students. The reactor is operated in a
sealed container at a maximum licensed power of 5.0 watts. The reactor
core uses graphite-coated uranium microspheres enriched in uranium-235,
dispersed in a polyethylene matrix. The reactor core consists of nine
fuel discs that are separated at the mid-plane by a thin aluminum
baffle. Because of the small fissile material content and low operation
power level, the fission product inventory in the core is negligible.
The core is contained in a gas-tight aluminum cylindrical tank. The
AGN-201M reactor has two safety rods, one coarse control rod, and one
fine control rod. The two safety rods and the coarse control rod are
fuel-loaded while the loading of the fine control rod depends on the
standard loading in use at the time. In all cases, inserting a rod adds
reactivity to the system.
The licensee has not requested any changes to the facility design
or operating conditions as part of this renewal request. Therefore, the
proposed action should not increase the probability or consequences of
accidents. No changes are being made in the types of effluents that may
be released off site. There should be no increase in occupational or
public radiation exposure. Therefore, license renewal should not change
the environmental impact of facility operation. Data from the last five
years of operation was assessed to determine the projected radiological
impact of the facility on the environment during the period of the
renewed license. Based on this evaluation, the NRC staff concluded that
continued operation of the reactor should not have a significant
environmental impact.
I. Radiological Impact
No environmental effects should result from use of this reactor.
The AGN-201M reactor has a dry core of uranium-impregnated
polyethylene, sealed in an aluminum tank. Because of the form of the
fuel and the lack of fission product inventory, failure of equipment or
release of the fuel to the outside environment will not directly or
indirectly endanger the public health and safety. A probabilistic risk
assessment review of the reactor (ANS Transactions, Vol. 65, p. 132-
133, 1992) indicated that ``in the unlikely event of release to the
environment, a total whole body dose rate of 1.61 x 10-5
mrem/sec in the form of a radioactive plume has been calculated for
persons located in the vicinity.'' This indicates that even the maximum
hypothetical release accident does not endanger the public health and
safety.
The core is surrounded by a 20 cm thick high density (1.75 gram/
cm\3\) graphite reflector followed by a 10 cm thick lead gamma shield.
The core and part of the graphite reflector are sealed in a fluid-tight
aluminum core tank designed to contain any fission gases that might
leak from the core. A review of the licensee's annual reports from
2000-2007, excluding the report for the period July 2002 through June
2003 which was not available, reveals that there was no liquid
radioactive waste released from the facility nor was there any solid
waste released. In addition, no environmental radiation surveys were
required to be performed outside of the facility.
Personnel exposures received during the same time period were below
50 mrem per person with the majority of the personnel receiving below 5
mrem. No changes in reactor operation that would lead to an increase in
occupational dose are expected as a result of license renewal.
Radiation monitoring instrumentation available to the reactor
operators includes console-mounted meters and a portable survey meter.
There are remote area monitors with automatic alarms installed to
monitor gamma levels at the reactor console, checkpoint three (the
south side of the reactor), reactor top, and in the general lab area
(near the east door). All of the detectors are energy-compensated
Geiger Mueller tubes. There will be no changes to the licensed program
that would affect off-site radiation and contamination levels.
II. Non-Radiological Impact
The AGN-201M reactor is conductively cooled and requires no liquid
or auxiliary cooling system. The removable thermal column tank permits
access to the core tank. The thermal column tank is normally filled
with water to provide shielding. The tank can be filled with graphite
if a thermal column is desired. The steel thermal column tank acts as
secondary containment for the core tank and is fluid tight. The water
tank is the third and outermost of the fluid tight containers. It is
198 cm in diameter and made of steel. It holds 1000 gallons of water
and forms the fast neutron shield. The water in the tank contains
chromium. To date, the water has never been removed from the tank and
there are no plans to do so. The water will be drained in the event the
reactor is decommissioned and removal of the water will be handled by
University of New Mexico Radiation Safety. Finally, there is a 60 cm
concrete block shield on the front of the reactor tank and 40 cm
concrete block shields on the sides and back. There is no shielding on
the top of the reactor tank.
Release of thermal effluents from the AGN-201M reactor will not
have a significant effect on the environment.
Environmental Effects of Accidents
Accident scenarios are discussed in Appendix A of the University of
New Mexico's Safety Analysis Report. The maximum hypothetical accident
is a nuclear excursion resulting from a 2% instantaneous increase of
reactivity. The total radiation dose to a person next to the reactor
would be approximately one rem; therefore, the worst-case occupational
doses resulting from this accident would be below the limit of 5 rem or
0.05 Sieverts (Sv) specified in 10 CFR 20.1201. Worst-case doses to
members of the general public would be
[[Page 27374]]
below the limit of 0.1 rem (1 mSv) specified in 10 CFR 20.1301. The
proposed action will not increase the probability or consequences of
accidents.
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Considerations
I. Endangered Species Act (ESA)
The site occupied by the AGN-201M reactor does not contain any
Federally- or State-protected fauna or flora, nor do the AGN-201M
reactor effluents impact the habitats of any such fauna or flora.
II. Costal Zone Management Act (CZMA)
The site occupied by the AGN-201M reactor is not located within any
managed coastal zones, nor do the AGN-201M reactor effluents impact any
managed costal zones.
III. National Historical Preservation Act (NHPA)
The NHPA requires Federal agencies to consider the effects of their
undertakings on historic properties. The National Register of Historic
Places (NRHP) lists several historical sites near the AGN-201M reactor
site. The nearest historical site is Cottage Bakery, located
approximately 0.1 miles from the AGN-201M reactor site boundary. Given
the distance between the facility and Cottage Bakery, continued
operation of the AGN-201M reactor will not impact this historical site.
IV. Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA)
The licensee is not planning any water resource development
projects, including any of the modifications relating to impounding a
body of water, damming, diverting a stream or river, deepening a
channel, irrigation, or altering a body of water for navigation or
drainage.
V. Executive Order 12898--Environmental Justice
The environmental justice impact analysis evaluates the potential
for disproportionately high and adverse human health and environmental
effects on minority and low-income populations that could result from
the relicensing and the continued operation of the AGN-201M reactor.
Disproportionately high and adverse human health effects occur when the
risk or rate of exposure to an environmental hazard for a minority or
low-income population is significant and exceeds the risk or exposure
rate for the general population or for another appropriate comparison
group. Disproportionately high environmental effects are impacts or
risk of impacts on the natural or physical environment in a minority or
low-income community that are significant and appreciably exceed the
environmental impact on the larger community. Such effects may include
ecological, cultural, economic, or social impacts. Minority and low-
income populations are subsets of the general public residing in the
vicinity of the AGN-201M reactor, and all are exposed to the same
health and environmental effects generated from activities at the AGN-
201M reactor.
Minority Populations in the Vicinity of the AGN-201M reactor--
According to 2000 census data, 51.9 percent of the population
(approximately 748,000 individuals) residing within a 50-mile radius of
the AGN-201M reactor identified themselves as minority individuals. The
largest minority group was Hispanic or Latino (310,000 persons or 41.4
percent), followed by ``Some other race'' (141,500 or about 18.9
percent). According to the U.S. Census Bureau, about 51.7 percent of
the Bernalillo County population identified themselves as minorities,
with persons of Hispanic or Latino origin comprising the largest
minority group (42.0 percent). According to census data 3-year average
estimates for 2005-2007, the minority population of Bernalillo County,
as a percent of total population, had increased to 55.6 percent.
Low-Income Populations in the Vicinity of the AGN-201M reactor--
According to 2000 census data, approximately 19,900 families and
100,800 individuals (approximately 10.4 and 13.5 percent, respectively)
residing within a 50-mile radius of the AGN-201M reactor were
identified as living below the Federal poverty threshold in 1999. The
1999 Federal poverty threshold was $17,029 for a family of four.
According to Census data in the 2005-2007 American Community Survey
3-Year Estimates, the median household income for New Mexico was
$41,042, while 18.4 percent of the state population and 14.2 percent of
families were determined to be living below the Federal poverty
threshold. Bernalillo County had a higher median household income
average ($45,022) and lower percentages (14.9 percent) of individuals
and families (11.1 percent) living below the poverty level,
respectively.
Impact Analysis--Potential impacts to minority and low-income
populations would mostly consist of radiological effects; however,
radiation doses from continued operations associated with the license
renewal are expected to continue at current levels and would be well
below regulatory limits.
Based on this information and the analysis of human health and
environmental impacts presented in this environmental assessment, the
proposed relicensing would not have disproportionately high and adverse
human health and environmental effects on minority and low-income
populations residing in the vicinity of the AGN-201M reactor.
Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives to the Proposed Action
As an alternative to license renewal, the staff considered denial
of the proposed action. If the Commission denied the application for
license renewal, facility operations would end and decommissioning
would be required with no significant impact on the environment. The
environmental impacts of license renewal and this alternative action
are similar. In addition, the benefits of teaching, research, and
services provided by facility operation would be lost.
Alternative Use of Resources
The proposed action does not involve the use of any different
resources or significant quantities of resources beyond those
previously considered in the issuance of the original Facility
Operating License R-102 for the University of New Mexico AGN-201M dated
September, 1966; and the issuance of Amendment No. 10 to R-102, which
authorized the power uprate to 5.0 W(t) dated January 18, 1973.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
In accordance with the Commission's stated policy, on November 25,
2009, the staff consulted with the State of New Mexico's State Liaison
Officer, regarding the environmental impact of the proposed action. A
copy of the draft environmental assessment was provided to the State
Liaison Officer for review. In a memorandum dated December 22, 2009,
the Director of the Environmental Health Division of the State's
Department of the Environment responded, expressing the State's support
for the continued operation of the facility.
Finding of No Significant Impact
On the basis of the environmental assessment, 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 environmental impact statement for the proposed
action.
[[Page 27375]]
For further details with respect to the proposed action, see the
licensee's application dated February 21, 2007 [ML092170540], as
supplemented by the letter dated November 9, 2009 [ML093410385].
Documents may be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public
Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville
Pike (1st Floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will
be accessible electronically from the Agencywide Documents Access and
Management System (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the NRC Web
site https://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 at 1-800-
397-4209, or 301-415-4737, or send an e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 5th day of May, 2010.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Kathryn M. Brock,
Chief, Research and Test Reactors Licensing Branch, Division of Policy
and Rulemaking, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2010-11563 Filed 5-13-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
