Water Remediation Technology, LLC, 54378-54380 [2018-23509]

Download as PDF 54378 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 209 / Monday, October 29, 2018 / Notices research doctorates in 2021 is estimated to be about 59,000; hence, the number of respondents in 2021 is estimated to be 53,690 (59,000 × 0.91). Based on the average Web survey completion time for the 2018 SED (19 minutes) and the extension of a few questions to an additional subset of respondents, NCSES estimates that, on average, 21 minutes per respondent will be required to complete the 2020 or 2021 SED questionnaire. The annual respondent burden for completing the SED is therefore estimated at 18,473 hours in 2020 (52,780 respondents × 21 minutes) and 18,792 hours in 2021 (based on 53,690 respondents). In addition to the actual questionnaire, the SED requires the collection of administrative data from participating academic institutions. The Institutional Coordinator at the institution helps distribute the Web survey link (and paper surveys when necessary), track survey completions, and submit information to the SED survey contractor. Based on focus groups conducted with Institutional Coordinators, it is estimated that the SED demands no more than 1% of the Institutional Coordinator’s time over the course of a year, which computes to 20 hours per year per Institutional Coordinator (40 hours per week × 50 weeks per year × .01). With about 606 programs expected to participate in the SED in 2020 and 2021, the estimated annual burden to Institutional Coordinators of administering the SED is 12,120 hours. Therefore, the total annual information burden for the SED is estimated to be 30,593 (18,473 + 12,120) hours in 2020 and 30,912 (18,792 + 12,120) hours in 2021. Dated: October 24, 2018. Suzanne H. Plimpton, Reports Clearance Officer, National Science Foundation. [FR Doc. 2018–23561 Filed 10–26–18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7555–01–P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket No. 40–9059; NRC–2018–0158] Water Remediation Technology, LLC Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact; issuance. amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1 AGENCY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering renewal of Water Remediation Technology, LLC (WRT) Source SUMMARY: VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:48 Oct 26, 2018 Jkt 247001 Materials License No. SUC–1591, as well as WRT’s request to expand the scope of its licensed activities. License SUC–1591 was originally issued by the NRC on January 25, 2007, and is a performance-based, multisite license that authorizes WRT to use its ion exchange technology to remove uranium from community drinking water systems (CWSs). WRT submitted its request for license renewal and to expand the scope of licensed activities on December 21, 2016, and on January 16, 2018, WRT revised its application to request a 20year renewal term. The final environmental assessment (EA) referenced in this document is available on October 29, 2018. DATES: Please refer to Docket ID NRC–2018–0158 when contacting the NRC about the availability of information regarding this document. You may obtain publicly-available information related to this document using any of the following methods: • Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC–2018–0158. Address questions about docket IDs in Regulations.gov to Jennifer Borges; telephone: 301–287–9127; email: Jennifer.Borges@nrc.gov. For technical questions, contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document. • NRC’s Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS): You may obtain publiclyavailable documents online in the ADAMS Public Documents collection at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/ adams.html. To begin the search, select ‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.’’ For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRC’s Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1–800–397–4209, 301– 415–4737, or by email to pdr.resource@ nrc.gov. The ADAMS accession number for the document referenced (if it is available in ADAMS) is provided the first time that it is mentioned in this document. • NRC’s PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public documents at the NRC’s PDR, Room O1–F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. ADDRESSES: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James Park, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555–0001; telephone: 301–415– 6954, email: James.Park@nrc.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 I. Introduction The NRC is considering the renewal of WRT’s Source Materials License No. SUC–1591 for a 20-year term and amending the license to expand the scope of authorized licensed activities. Therefore, as required by part 51 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), the NRC performed an EA. Based on the results of this EA, the NRC has determined not to prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) for the license renewal and for the expansion of the scope of the authorized licensed activities, and is issuing a finding of no significant impact. License SUC–1591 was originally issued by the NRC on January 25, 2007 (ADAMS Accession No. ML062960463), to R.M.D. Operations, LLC (RMD), the predecessor of WRT. License SUC–1591 is a performance-based, multisite license that authorizes WRT to use its ion exchange technology to remove uranium from CWSs. WRT operates in several NRC ‘‘Agreement States,’’ where WRT’s activities are subject to applicable State law and regulation due to the NRC’s relinquishment of certain categories of its regulatory authority to the Agreement State.1 Currently, WRT does not operate in any non-Agreement States, where its activities would be subject to NRC jurisdiction. II. Summary of Environmental Assessment The NRC staff’s EA is available online in the ADAMS Public Documents collection at https://www.nrc.gov/ reading-rm/adams.html (ADAMS Accession No. ML18255A117). This section is a summary of the EA. Description of the Proposed Action The proposed action is the NRC staff’s approval or disapproval of WRT’s application to renew its license for an additional 20-year term and to expand the scope of licensed activities. The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee’s application dated December 21, 2016 (ADAMS Accession No. ML16358A447), and with its January 16, 2018, request to extend the license renewal term from 10 to 20 years (ADAMS Accession No. ML18016B080). Renewal of its NRC license would allow WRT to continue using its ion exchange 1 Under Section 274 of the Atomic Energy Act, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2021), the NRC is authorized to relinquish certain prescribed categories of its regulatory authority to a State, provided that the State’s governor enter into a duly authorized agreement with the NRC in accordance with Section 274. Presently, there are 38 Agreement States (Wyoming became the 38th Agreement State on September 30, 2018). Of these Agreement States, WRT operates in California, Colorado, Georgia, Nebraska, New Jersey, South Carolina, and Virginia. E:\FR\FM\29OCN1.SGM 29OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 209 / Monday, October 29, 2018 / Notices uranium recovery system (URS) to safely remove and contain uranium from CWS drinking water sources to levels at or below the uranium maximum concentration limit (MCL) set by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and to transfer the uranium to an appropriately licensed facility for either reuse (i.e., mixed uranium oxide [‘‘yellowcake’’] production) or disposal. Expansion of the scope of WRT’s authorized licensed activities would allow WRT to remove uranium from non-drinking water sources (e.g., mine sites, pit lakes, and groundwater remediation sites). If approved by the NRC, these activities would be authorized under a renewed License SUC–1591. amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1 Need for the Proposed Action The current version of License SUC– 1591 authorizes the licensee to install its URS at a CWS, to possess and store the extracted uranium in the URS, and to transfer and properly disposition the extracted uranium. In addition to renewing its license for an additional 20-year term, WRT seeks to expand the scope of its licensed activities to include the use of its URS at customer facilities other than CWSs for the purpose of removing uranium from non-drinking water sources (e.g., mines, pit lakes, and groundwater remediation sites). Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action The NRC staff assessed the environmental impacts of the license renewal and expanded scope of activities and determined there would not be significant impacts to the quality of the human environment. The NRC staff concluded that impacts for most resource areas, namely, land use; geology and soils; transportation; water resources; ecological resources; air quality; noise; visual and scenic resources; socioeconomics; public and occupational health; and waste management were small. With respect to environmental justice, the NRC staff does not expect that the proposed action (to include an expanded scope of licensed activities) would cause noticeable impact on any population. Therefore, the NRC staff has determined that there are no disproportionately high and adverse human health and environmental effects on minority or low-income populations. For historic and cultural resources, the NRC expects that there would be no adverse effects on historic properties from the continued use of WRT’s URS at CWSs and if the request to expand the scope of authorized license activities is VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:48 Oct 26, 2018 Jkt 247001 approved, the NRC similarly expects that there would be no adverse effects on historic properties and cultural resources resulting from the installation and operation of WRT’s URS at nondrinking water sites. As described in the environmental assessment, the renewed SUC–1591 license will include license conditions that sets parameters on the types of locations where WRT can install its URS without prior NRC approval. These license conditions are expected to prevent any adverse effects to historic properties and cultural resources. If WRT seeks to install a URS at a site not meeting these license conditions, WRT would then need to submit a license amendment to the NRC for that specific site and the NRC would then conduct a site-specific environmental review prior to making its decision on whether to approve or disapprove that license amendment request. The NRC has also determined that the proposed action is not likely to adversely affect threatened and endangered species. Similar to historic and cultural resources, the license conditions setting parameters on the types of locations where WRT can install its URS are expected to prevent any impacts to threatened or endangered species and their critical habitat. Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives to the Proposed Action The NRC staff evaluated the no-action alternative, that is denial of WRT’s license renewal request and by default, denial of its expanded scope request— in effect, WRT’s multisite license SUC– 1591 would expire. The NRC staff also evaluated a partial alternative involving approval of WRT’s license renewal request, but not its expanded scope request, such that WRT would only be authorized to continue to use its URS at CWS sites in non-Agreement States under its multisite license. The no-action alternative (i.e., denial of the license renewal request) would have no impact on current WRT operations, as those operations occur exclusively in Agreement States, where WRT is subject to applicable State law and regulation and operates in accordance with its Agreement State licenses. As such, WRT could continue to operate in its current locations as well as in other potential, future Agreement State locations if the NRC denies the license renewal request. Thus, a denial of the license renewal request would only forestall WRT from operating in a non-Agreement State under its multisite license. PO 00000 Frm 00072 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 54379 If the NRC exercises the no-action alternative, WRT could choose to apply to the NRC for a specific license for each potential CWS client. If, however, WRT chose not to apply for such a specific license, then the affected CWS would not be able to utilize WRT’s URS to meet the EPA-mandated uranium MCL for drinking water. The CWS would then have to rely upon other alternative treatment methodologies and technologies to meet the applicable MCL. These other treatment methodologies and technologies were described in the 2006 EA (ADAMS Accession No. ML062490415) that supported the issuance of the 2007 license to RMD; the environmental impacts of these alternative treatment methodologies and technologies would most likely be similar to the use of the WRT URS. In assessing environmental impacts for CWSs under the partial alternative (denial of the expanded scope request), the NRC staff noted that it had evaluated the potential environmental impacts of authorizing WRT to operate at CWS sites in its 2006 EA. The NRC staff’s evaluation of WRT’s performance since 2007 has confirmed the findings and conclusions of the 2006 EA. Therefore, the NRC staff has determined that the partial alternative will present the same environmental impacts that the proposed action would likely have with respect to CWS facilities With respect to non-drinking water sites, under both the no-action alternative and the partial alternative, WRT could choose to apply for a specific license for each potential nondrinking water site. If WRT chose not to submit a specific license application for a given non-drinking water site, then that site would not be impacted by WRT operations. The owners and operators of such a non-drinking water site would then have to consider other alternative treatment methodologies or technologies to reduce uranium levels or would have to forego reducing the uranium levels altogether (non-drinking water sites are not subject to EPA’s Safe Drinking Water Act regulations). Agencies and Persons Consulted By letters dated July 5, 2018 (ADAMS Accession No. ML18131A200), the NRC staff requested comment on a draft of this environmental assessment from a total of seven NRC Agreement States where the NRC staff understood that WRT was currently operating: California, Colorado, Georgia, Nebraska, New Jersey, South Carolina, and Virginia. Responses were received from six of the seven of the Agreement States (Nebraska did not respond), with the EA E:\FR\FM\29OCN1.SGM 29OCN1 54380 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 209 / Monday, October 29, 2018 / Notices revised to address the comments received. III. Finding of No Significant Impact Based on its review of the proposed action, as documented in the EA, the NRC staff concludes that the renewal of License SUC–1591 with an expanded scope of authorized activities will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment. Therefore, the NRC staff has determined not to prepare an EIS for the proposed action and that, pursuant to 10 CFR 51.32, a finding of no significant impact is appropriate. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, on October 23, 2018. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Brian W. Smith, Acting Director, Division of Fuel Cycle Safety, Safeguards and Environmental Review, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards. [FR Doc. 2018–23509 Filed 10–26–18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590–01–P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [NRC–2018–0230] Training and Experience Requirements for Different Categories of Radiopharmaceuticals Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Training and experience requirements; request for comment. AGENCY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is requesting comments on its training and experience (T&E) requirements. Specifically, the NRC would like input on whether it should establish tailored T&E requirements for different categories of radiopharmaceuticals for which a written directive is required in accordance with its regulations. The input will be used to determine whether significant regulatory changes to the NRC’s T&E requirements for authorized users (AUs) are warranted. DATES: Submit comments by January 29, 2019. Comments received after this date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but the NRC is only able to ensure consideration for comments received on or before this date. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any of the following methods: • Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC–2018–0230. Address questions about Docket IDs in Regulations.gov to Jennifer Borges; telephone: 301–287–9127; email: amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1 SUMMARY: VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:48 Oct 26, 2018 Jkt 247001 Jennifer.Borges@nrc.gov. For technical questions, contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document. • Mail comments to: May Ma, Office of Administration, Mail Stop: TWFN–7– A60M, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555– 0001. For additional direction on obtaining information and submitting comments, see ‘‘Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments’’ in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sarah Lopas, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555–0001; telephone: 301–415– 6360, email: Sarah.Lopas@nrc.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments A. Obtaining Information Please refer to Docket ID NRC–2018– 0230 when contacting the NRC about the availability of information for this action. You may obtain publiclyavailable information related to this action by any of the following methods: • Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC–2018–0230. • NRC’s Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS): You may obtain publiclyavailable documents online in the ADAMS Public Documents collection at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/ adams.html. To begin the search, select ‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.’’ For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRC’s Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1–800–397–4209, 301– 415–4737, or by email to pdr.resource@ nrc.gov. The ADAMS accession number for each document referenced is provided the first time that it is mentioned in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section. • NRC’s PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public documents at the NRC’s PDR, Room O1–F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. B. Submitting Comments Please include Docket ID NRC–2018– 0230 in your comment submission. The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact information in comment submissions that you do not want to be publicly disclosed in your comment submission. All comment submissions are posted at https:// www.regulations.gov and entered into PO 00000 Frm 00073 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 ADAMS. Comment submissions are not routinely edited to remove identifying or contact information. If you are requesting or aggregating comments from other persons for submission to the NRC, then you should inform those persons not to include identifying or contact information that they do not want to be publicly disclosed in their comment submission. Your request should state that the NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove such information before making the comment submissions available to the public or entering the comment into ADAMS. II. Background On August 17, 2017, the Commission issued a staff requirements memorandum (SRM), SRM–M170817 (ADAMS Accession No. ML17229B284), approving the final rule revising parts 30, 32, and 35 of title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), ‘‘Medical Use of Byproduct Material—Medical Event Definitions, Training and Experience, and Clarifying Amendments,’’ and directing the staff to evaluate (1) whether it makes sense to establish tailored T&E requirements for different categories of radiopharmaceuticals, (2) how those categories should be determined (such as by risks posed by groups of radionuclides or by delivery method), (3) what the appropriate T&E requirements would be for each category, and (4) whether those requirements should be based on hours of T&E or focused more on competency. In response to the SRM, the NRC staff documented its initial results, status, and next steps related to this evaluation in SECY–18–0084, ‘‘Staff Evaluation of Training and Experience Requirements for Administering Different Categories of Radiopharmaceuticals in Response to SRM–M170817’’ (ADAMS Accession No. ML18135A276). In SECY–18–0084, the staff concluded that additional outreach with the medical community is needed to determine whether and how to tailor the T&E requirements to establish a limited AU status, the specific T&E requirements that should apply, how the T&E requirements should be met (e.g., hours of training, demonstration of competency), and whether a competency-based approach makes sense for the T&E requirements for all the medical uses authorized under 10 CFR 35.300, ‘‘Use of unsealed byproduct material for which a written directive is required.’’ The NRC is interested in obtaining input from as many stakeholders as possible, including members of the Advisory Committee on the Medical E:\FR\FM\29OCN1.SGM 29OCN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 209 (Monday, October 29, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 54378-54380]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-23509]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 40-9059; NRC-2018-0158]


Water Remediation Technology, LLC

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact; 
issuance.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering 
renewal of Water Remediation Technology, LLC (WRT) Source Materials 
License No. SUC-1591, as well as WRT's request to expand the scope of 
its licensed activities. License SUC-1591 was originally issued by the 
NRC on January 25, 2007, and is a performance-based, multisite license 
that authorizes WRT to use its ion exchange technology to remove 
uranium from community drinking water systems (CWSs). WRT submitted its 
request for license renewal and to expand the scope of licensed 
activities on December 21, 2016, and on January 16, 2018, WRT revised 
its application to request a 20-year renewal term.

DATES: The final environmental assessment (EA) referenced in this 
document is available on October 29, 2018.

ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2018-0158 when contacting the 
NRC about the availability of information regarding this document. You 
may obtain publicly-available information related to this document 
using any of the following methods:
     Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2018-0158. Address 
questions about docket IDs in Regulations.gov to Jennifer Borges; 
telephone: 301-287-9127; email: [email protected]. For technical 
questions, contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 
CONTACT section of this document.
     NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System 
(ADAMS): You may obtain publicly-available documents online in the 
ADAMS Public Documents collection at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select ``Begin Web-based ADAMS 
Search.'' For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRC's Public 
Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or 
by email to [email protected]. The ADAMS accession number for the 
document referenced (if it is available in ADAMS) is provided the first 
time that it is mentioned in this document.
     NRC's PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public 
documents at the NRC's PDR, Room O1-F21, One White Flint North, 11555 
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James Park, Office of Nuclear Material 
Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, 
DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-6954, email: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Introduction

    The NRC is considering the renewal of WRT's Source Materials 
License No. SUC-1591 for a 20-year term and amending the license to 
expand the scope of authorized licensed activities. Therefore, as 
required by part 51 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 
CFR), the NRC performed an EA. Based on the results of this EA, the NRC 
has determined not to prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) 
for the license renewal and for the expansion of the scope of the 
authorized licensed activities, and is issuing a finding of no 
significant impact.
    License SUC-1591 was originally issued by the NRC on January 25, 
2007 (ADAMS Accession No. ML062960463), to R.M.D. Operations, LLC 
(RMD), the predecessor of WRT. License SUC-1591 is a performance-based, 
multisite license that authorizes WRT to use its ion exchange 
technology to remove uranium from CWSs. WRT operates in several NRC 
``Agreement States,'' where WRT's activities are subject to applicable 
State law and regulation due to the NRC's relinquishment of certain 
categories of its regulatory authority to the Agreement State.\1\ 
Currently, WRT does not operate in any non-Agreement States, where its 
activities would be subject to NRC jurisdiction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Under Section 274 of the Atomic Energy Act, as amended (42 
U.S.C. 2021), the NRC is authorized to relinquish certain prescribed 
categories of its regulatory authority to a State, provided that the 
State's governor enter into a duly authorized agreement with the NRC 
in accordance with Section 274. Presently, there are 38 Agreement 
States (Wyoming became the 38th Agreement State on September 30, 
2018). Of these Agreement States, WRT operates in California, 
Colorado, Georgia, Nebraska, New Jersey, South Carolina, and 
Virginia.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Summary of Environmental Assessment

    The NRC staff's EA is available online in the ADAMS Public 
Documents collection at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html (ADAMS 
Accession No. ML18255A117). This section is a summary of the EA.

Description of the Proposed Action

    The proposed action is the NRC staff's approval or disapproval of 
WRT's application to renew its license for an additional 20-year term 
and to expand the scope of licensed activities. The proposed action is 
in accordance with the licensee's application dated December 21, 2016 
(ADAMS Accession No. ML16358A447), and with its January 16, 2018, 
request to extend the license renewal term from 10 to 20 years (ADAMS 
Accession No. ML18016B080). Renewal of its NRC license would allow WRT 
to continue using its ion exchange

[[Page 54379]]

uranium recovery system (URS) to safely remove and contain uranium from 
CWS drinking water sources to levels at or below the uranium maximum 
concentration limit (MCL) set by the U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency (EPA), and to transfer the uranium to an appropriately licensed 
facility for either reuse (i.e., mixed uranium oxide [``yellowcake''] 
production) or disposal. Expansion of the scope of WRT's authorized 
licensed activities would allow WRT to remove uranium from non-drinking 
water sources (e.g., mine sites, pit lakes, and groundwater remediation 
sites). If approved by the NRC, these activities would be authorized 
under a renewed License SUC-1591.

Need for the Proposed Action

    The current version of License SUC-1591 authorizes the licensee to 
install its URS at a CWS, to possess and store the extracted uranium in 
the URS, and to transfer and properly disposition the extracted 
uranium.
    In addition to renewing its license for an additional 20-year term, 
WRT seeks to expand the scope of its licensed activities to include the 
use of its URS at customer facilities other than CWSs for the purpose 
of removing uranium from non-drinking water sources (e.g., mines, pit 
lakes, and groundwater remediation sites).

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    The NRC staff assessed the environmental impacts of the license 
renewal and expanded scope of activities and determined there would not 
be significant impacts to the quality of the human environment. The NRC 
staff concluded that impacts for most resource areas, namely, land use; 
geology and soils; transportation; water resources; ecological 
resources; air quality; noise; visual and scenic resources; 
socioeconomics; public and occupational health; and waste management 
were small. With respect to environmental justice, the NRC staff does 
not expect that the proposed action (to include an expanded scope of 
licensed activities) would cause noticeable impact on any population. 
Therefore, the NRC staff has determined that there are no 
disproportionately high and adverse human health and environmental 
effects on minority or low-income populations.
    For historic and cultural resources, the NRC expects that there 
would be no adverse effects on historic properties from the continued 
use of WRT's URS at CWSs and if the request to expand the scope of 
authorized license activities is approved, the NRC similarly expects 
that there would be no adverse effects on historic properties and 
cultural resources resulting from the installation and operation of 
WRT's URS at non-drinking water sites. As described in the 
environmental assessment, the renewed SUC-1591 license will include 
license conditions that sets parameters on the types of locations where 
WRT can install its URS without prior NRC approval. These license 
conditions are expected to prevent any adverse effects to historic 
properties and cultural resources. If WRT seeks to install a URS at a 
site not meeting these license conditions, WRT would then need to 
submit a license amendment to the NRC for that specific site and the 
NRC would then conduct a site-specific environmental review prior to 
making its decision on whether to approve or disapprove that license 
amendment request.
    The NRC has also determined that the proposed action is not likely 
to adversely affect threatened and endangered species. Similar to 
historic and cultural resources, the license conditions setting 
parameters on the types of locations where WRT can install its URS are 
expected to prevent any impacts to threatened or endangered species and 
their critical habitat.

Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives to the Proposed Action

    The NRC staff evaluated the no-action alternative, that is denial 
of WRT's license renewal request and by default, denial of its expanded 
scope request--in effect, WRT's multisite license SUC-1591 would 
expire. The NRC staff also evaluated a partial alternative involving 
approval of WRT's license renewal request, but not its expanded scope 
request, such that WRT would only be authorized to continue to use its 
URS at CWS sites in non-Agreement States under its multisite license.
    The no-action alternative (i.e., denial of the license renewal 
request) would have no impact on current WRT operations, as those 
operations occur exclusively in Agreement States, where WRT is subject 
to applicable State law and regulation and operates in accordance with 
its Agreement State licenses. As such, WRT could continue to operate in 
its current locations as well as in other potential, future Agreement 
State locations if the NRC denies the license renewal request. Thus, a 
denial of the license renewal request would only forestall WRT from 
operating in a non-Agreement State under its multisite license.
    If the NRC exercises the no-action alternative, WRT could choose to 
apply to the NRC for a specific license for each potential CWS client. 
If, however, WRT chose not to apply for such a specific license, then 
the affected CWS would not be able to utilize WRT's URS to meet the 
EPA-mandated uranium MCL for drinking water. The CWS would then have to 
rely upon other alternative treatment methodologies and technologies to 
meet the applicable MCL. These other treatment methodologies and 
technologies were described in the 2006 EA (ADAMS Accession No. 
ML062490415) that supported the issuance of the 2007 license to RMD; 
the environmental impacts of these alternative treatment methodologies 
and technologies would most likely be similar to the use of the WRT 
URS.
    In assessing environmental impacts for CWSs under the partial 
alternative (denial of the expanded scope request), the NRC staff noted 
that it had evaluated the potential environmental impacts of 
authorizing WRT to operate at CWS sites in its 2006 EA. The NRC staff's 
evaluation of WRT's performance since 2007 has confirmed the findings 
and conclusions of the 2006 EA. Therefore, the NRC staff has determined 
that the partial alternative will present the same environmental 
impacts that the proposed action would likely have with respect to CWS 
facilities
    With respect to non-drinking water sites, under both the no-action 
alternative and the partial alternative, WRT could choose to apply for 
a specific license for each potential non-drinking water site. If WRT 
chose not to submit a specific license application for a given non-
drinking water site, then that site would not be impacted by WRT 
operations. The owners and operators of such a non-drinking water site 
would then have to consider other alternative treatment methodologies 
or technologies to reduce uranium levels or would have to forego 
reducing the uranium levels altogether (non-drinking water sites are 
not subject to EPA's Safe Drinking Water Act regulations).

Agencies and Persons Consulted

    By letters dated July 5, 2018 (ADAMS Accession No. ML18131A200), 
the NRC staff requested comment on a draft of this environmental 
assessment from a total of seven NRC Agreement States where the NRC 
staff understood that WRT was currently operating: California, 
Colorado, Georgia, Nebraska, New Jersey, South Carolina, and Virginia. 
Responses were received from six of the seven of the Agreement States 
(Nebraska did not respond), with the EA

[[Page 54380]]

revised to address the comments received.

III. Finding of No Significant Impact

    Based on its review of the proposed action, as documented in the 
EA, the NRC staff concludes that the renewal of License SUC-1591 with 
an expanded scope of authorized activities will not have a significant 
effect on the quality of the human environment. Therefore, the NRC 
staff has determined not to prepare an EIS for the proposed action and 
that, pursuant to 10 CFR 51.32, a finding of no significant impact is 
appropriate.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, on October 23, 2018.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Brian W. Smith,
Acting Director, Division of Fuel Cycle Safety, Safeguards and 
Environmental Review, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.
[FR Doc. 2018-23509 Filed 10-26-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.