ML23291A150
| ML23291A150 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 07001113 |
| Issue date: | 10/26/2023 |
| From: | Jean Trefethen NRC/NMSS/DREFS/ERMB |
| To: | |
| References | |
| NRC-2023-0179 | |
| Download: ML23291A150 (15) | |
Text
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY AND SAFEGUARDS DIVISION OF FUEL CYCLE SAFETY, SAFEGUARDS, AND ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT OF THE U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION LICENSE NUMBER SNM-1097 FOR THE GLOBAL NUCLEAR FUEL - AMERICAS IN NEW HANOVER COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA DOCKET NO. 70-1113 October 2023
i Contents
1.0 INTRODUCTION
................................................................................................................ 3 1.1 Background.................................................................................................................... 3 1.2 Proposed Action............................................................................................................. 3 1.3 Purpose and Need for the Proposed Action................................................................... 3 1.4 Site Location and Process Description........................................................................... 4 1.5 Scope............................................................................................................................. 7 1.6 Potential Future Actions................................................................................................. 7 2.0 ALTERNATIVE TO THE PROPOSED ACTION................................................................ 7 3.0 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS................................... 8 3.1 Public and Occupational Health and Safety................................................................... 8 3.1.1 Impacts from Normal Operations............................................................................ 9 3.1.2 Impacts From Accidents........................................................................................ 10 3.2 Waste Management..................................................................................................... 11 4.0 Consultation..................................................................................................................... 11 4.1 The Endangered Species Act....................................................................................... 12 4.2 National Historic Preservation Act................................................................................ 12 5.0 Conclusion and FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT.............................................. 13 6.0 LIST OF PREPARERS.................................................................................................... 13 7.0 References....................................................................................................................... 13
ii List of Figures Figure 1.1 Geographical Location of GNF-A (Modified From GNF-A 2007).. 6 Figure 1.2 GNF-A Site Plan (Modified From GNF-A 2022)... 7 Figure 1.3 Fuel Fabrication Process..... 7 Acronyms/Abbreviations ac acre ADAMS Agencywide Documents Access and Management System ALARA as low as reasonably achievable CEQ Council on Environmental Quality CFR Code of Federal Regulations CSA criticality safety analyses EA environmental assessment ESA Endangered Species Act of 1973 FMO Fuel Manufacturing Operation FONSI Finding of No Significant Impact FWS Fish and Wildlife Service GNF-A Global Nuclear Fuel - Americas Ha hectare IROFS Items Relied on For Safety ISA Integrated Safety Analysis km kilometers LAR license amendment request LEU low enriched uranium LEU+
low enriched uranium plus m
meters mi miles mSv mili-sievert NC North Carolina NC DEQ North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality NC SHPO North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office NHPA National Historic Preservation Act NMSS NRC Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards NRC U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission mrem Roentgen equivalent man SER Safety Evaluation Report UF6 uranium hexafluoride U-235 uranium 235 wt weight
3
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
By letter dated June 24, 2022 (GNF-A 2022a), Global Nuclear Fuel-Americas (GNF-A) submitted an application to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to amend special nuclear materials license (SNM)-1097 for its nuclear fuel fabrication facility located near Wilmington, North Carolina (NC). The license amendment requests authorization to fabricate fuel using uranium enriched up to 8 weight (wt) percent uranium 235 (U-235) also referred to as low enriched uranium plus (LEU+). The fuel fabrication facility would be modified as necessary with approved control measures to safely process materials with enrichments up to 8.0 wt percent U-235. GNF-A does not plan to use any new processes, technologies, or control systems due to this amendment (GNF-A 2022a).
Under SNM-1097, GNF-A is authorized to receive and possess nuclear materials enriched up to 5 wt percent U-235 to fabricate and assemble nuclear fuel components under the provision of Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Part 70, Domestic Licensing of SNM. Materials license SNM-1097 was initially issued to GNF-A in 1969. GNF-A license was renewed in 2009 for a 40-year period.
1.2 Proposed Action The proposed action is to authorize GNF-A to fabricate nuclear fuel using higher enriched U-235. Specifically, the license amendment would allow the use of up to 8.0 wt percent U-235, also referred to as LEU+ from the current limit of up to 5 percent. Under this amendment GNF-A could continue to receive, handle and store Model 30B uranium hexafluoride (UF6) cylinders.
The license amendment request (LAR) proposes the reuse of existing buildings and does not involve alteration to the site footprint, nor does it change the operating processes of the existing facility.
In the LAR, GNF-As commits that changes to the policies, procedures, and controls to support the proposed amendment request would be implemented consistent with the existing Material Control and Accounting program (GNF-A 2022a). The request to increase the enrichment to 8 wt percent U-235 would require modifications to select nuclear criticality safety controls. The most significant physical modifications would be to the liquid radwaste effluent treatment systems and decontamination facilities. The existing liquid radwaste effluent treatment system would be replaced by a new system with tanks sized and spaced to meet criticality safety geometry control requirements. The proposed modifications to the decontamination facilities involve size reductions to a floor trench and collection sump that feeds the liquid radwaste effluent treatment systems. The systems functionally remain the same in terms of treatment, filtration, and discharge monitoring (GNF-A 2022b). The NRC technical staff will assess proposed fuel fabrication process and operations to determine the safety of material enrichments up to 8.0 wt.percent U-235 in separate safety and safeguards evaluation report.
1.3 Purpose and Need for the Proposed Action GNF-A is one of several facilities that manufactures fuel assemblies for commercial nuclear power reactors. The use of up to 8 wt percent U-235 in fuel fabrication would provide a domestic source of LEU+ fuel assemblies for possible use in future advanced nuclear reactors. Existing reactors utilize advanced fuel with higher enrichments to permit higher burnup, which corelates
4 to the length of time and the amount of energy produced by the uranium fuel. The use of LEU+ in the manufacture of fuel assemblies could decrease overall fuel fabrication costs and increase the overall fuel cycle length in the existing reactor fleet. Higher burnup and longer fuel cycles would also generate less spent nuclear fuel (GNF-A 2022c).
1.4 Site Location and Process Description The GNF-A facility is located on a 673 hectare (ha) [1,664 acre (ac)] site in an unincorporated part of northwestern New Hanover County approximately 10 kilometers (km) (6 miles [mi]) north of the City of Wilmington, NC (figure 1.1). This is in southeastern portion of NC, and the GNF-A facility is approximately 16 km (10 mi) west and 42.5 km (26.4 mi) north of the Atlantic Ocean, 80 km (50 mi) northeast of the South Carolina border, and 260 km (160 mi) south of the Virginia border. As shown in figure 1.1, Wilmington Bypass I-140 borders about 914 meters (m) (3,000 feet) of the southern site boundary. NC Highway 133, also known as Castle Hayne Road, borders most of the east side of the site. About 9.7 ha (24 ac) of the site resides on the east side of Castle Hayne Road (Highway 133). The area east of Castle Hayne Road contains a truck parking lot and a small recreational park for GNF-A employee use. Immediately north of GNF-A is a 1,647 ha (4,069 ac) parcel owned by Hilton Properties and known as the Sledge Forest. Undeveloped forestlands are located along some of the southern border of the site. The Northeast Cape Fear River borders the sites west side. The source of this river is located 160 km (100 mi) north in Wayne County, and the river empties into the main fork of the Cape Fear River 10 km (6.4 mi) south of GNF-A. Prince George Creek, one of the largest tributaries of the river, is located about 8 km (5 mi) north of the GNF-A site.
About 19 percent or 122 ha (302 ac) of the site are developed (GNF-A 2007). The developed area is located in the eastern portion of the site and consists of five major facilities, they are:
(i) the Aviation facility, which is not part of the nuclear fuel fabrication operation; (ii) the General Electric Services Components Operation facility, where non-radioactive reactor components are manufactured; (iii) the Fuel Components Operation facility, where non-radioactive components for reactor fuel assemblies are manufactured; (iv) the Wilmington Field Services Center, where equipment used at reactor sites, some of which may be radiologically contaminated, is cleaned and refurbished; and (v) the Fuel Manufacturing Operation complex (figure 1.2). The activities NRC regulates under license SNM-1097 are conducted in the fuel manufacturing operation complex. The fuels complex consists of the fuel manufacturing operation buildings, the Dry Conversion Process building, and various supporting facilities. Figure 1.3 illustrates a simplified version of a typical light water reactor fuel fabrication facility.
A power line corridor occupies about 1 percent or 6.5 ha (16 ac) of the site. A network of service roads connects the various onsite facilities, and several unpaved roads provide access to selected areas in the undeveloped portion of the site. The terrain around the site consists of heavily timbered tracts of land on gentle rolling topography with rivers and creeks adjoined by swamps or marshlands. A 73.7 ha (182 ac) tract of land in the southwest portion of the GNF-A site is classified as swamp forest, which is a palustrine, forested, needleleaf, saturated, partly drained wetland. Industrial operations over the 50 plus years at GNF-A have impacted groundwater in several specific locations. These areas of concern have been well documented and are being monitored and/or remediated by programs that have been established in coordination with governing regulatory agencies, including the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NC DEQ).
5 The primary function of the GNF-A facility is to fabricate nuclear fuel assemblies containing low-enrichment (i.e., low concentrations of fissionable U-235) uranium oxide fuel for use in commercial light water cooled nuclear power reactors. GNF-A is also authorized to fabricate powder and pellets containing uranium. For the proposed action, GNF-A requests a license amendment to fabricate nuclear fuel using higher enriched U-235 (up to 8 wt percent).
Figure 1.1 Geographical Location of GNF-A (Modified From GNF-A 2007)
\\*
\\.
\\.
6 Figure 1.2 GNF-A Site Plan (Modified From GNF-A 2022)
Figure 1.3 Typical Light Water Reactor Fuel Fabrication Facility I
7 1.5 Scope The NRC staff has addressed the potential environmental impacts of the proposed action to amend License SNM-1097, as well as the no-action alternative to the proposed action and has documented the results of the assessment in this environmental assessment (EA). The NRC staff performed this review in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR Part 51 and staff guidance found in NUREG-1748 (NRC 2003).
The information contained in the following documents was reviewed and considered in the development of this EA:
- GNF-As LAR, dated June 24, 2022 (GNF-A 2022a),
- GNF-As response to NRCs request for supplemental information (GNF-A 2022b),
- GNF-As pre-application presentation (GNF-A 2022c),
- GNF-As response to NRCs request for additional information (GNF-A 2023a),
- GNF-As Environmental Report (ER), dated April 2, 2007 (GNF-A 2007),
- NRCs EA for the license renewal for GNF-A Wilmington Fuel Fabrication Facility License SNM-1097 (NRC 2009).
This EA evaluates whether changes in the proposed license amendment, to use U-235 enriched up to 8 wt percent, or new information regarding the affected environment would result in any new or significant environmental impacts. In conducting this review, the NRC staff considered the detailed resource descriptions in prior environmental review documents, including the previous GNF-A license renewal EA (NRC 2009).
1.6 Potential Future Actions GNF-A intends to submit an additional application for NRC review for the authorization to possess and use special nuclear material fuel fabrication fuel using uranium enriched up to 20 wt percent U-235 (GNF-A 2021). GNF-A anticipates it will submit this application to the NRC in the 2025 timeframe (GNF-A 2023b). Future proposed actions will require the NRC staffs review, which would include a separate safety and safeguards review and an environmental review, as required by 10 CFR Part 51 and Part 70.
2.0 ALTERNATIVE TO THE PROPOSED ACTION The alternative considered in this EA is the no-action alternative. Under the no-action alternative, the NRC would deny GNF-As request for possession and use of higher enriched U-235 (up to 8 wt percent). GNF-A would continue to be authorized to produce low enriched uranium reactor fuel for the duration of their current license. Additionally, the no-action alternative would not support the national energy goal of 100% carbon-free electricity by the year 2035.
8 3.0 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS This section provides a discussion of the affected environment and describes the region of interest or area for potential impacts and presents its evaluation of the potential environmental impacts from the use of uranium enriched up to 8 wt percent in fuel fabrication operations at the GNF-A facilities in Wilmington, NC. The NRC staff reviewed the ER, LAR, the licensees responses to requests for additional information, and the NRCs previous National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended documents (NRC 1997, 2009) prepared for the licensing of GNF-A facility.
The proposed action is described above in section 1.2. If the LAR were granted, the licensee would continue to perform fuel fabrication activities inside the fuel manufacturing operation complex, and no activities involving land disturbance are planned. Additionally, there are no changes to the level of staffing, or in the number of shipments of special nuclear material or quantity of waste generated at the site, and effluents, both liquid and air are anticipated to remain below regulatory limits in 10 CFR Part 20. Therefore, the NRC staff finds the proposed action would not impact the following resources areas: land use, geology and soils, water resources, ecology, meteorology, climate, air quality, noise, transportation, visual and scenic resources, and socioeconomic resources. Therefore, these resource areas are not discussed below. As described in the EA sections below, the environmental impacts of the proposed LAR for the GNF-A fuel fabrication facility would not be significant.
For each environmental resource the NRC staff independently evaluated new information regarding the affected environment as well as changes in the proposed license amendment that could result in new or significant environmental impacts from the proposed action on the various resources of the affected environment. The NRC staff used the guidelines outlined in NUREG-1748 (NRC 2003) in its evaluation of the environmental impacts from the proposed action on each resource. The NRC staff assessed whether the impact on resource areas from the changes in the proposed license amendment or new information regarding the affected environment is significant or not significant (NRC 2019).
3.1 Public and Occupational Health and Safety The Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, requires the NRC to promulgate, inspect, and enforce standards that provide an adequate level of protection for public health and safety and the environment. The NRC has established multiple layers of radiation protection limits to protect the public against potential health risks from exposure to effluent discharges from nuclear facility operations. The activities authorized under the GNF-A license must comply with the license conditions and with NRCs regulations, including 10 CFR 20, subpart C, Occupational Dose Limits for Adults, and 10 CFR 20, subpart D, Radiation Dose Limits for Individual Members of the Public. The Division of Air Quality at NC DEQ regulates GNF-A non-radiological airborne emissions. Radiological airborne emissions are regulated by NRC under 10 CFR 20 and by Environmental Protection Agency under 40 CFR 61. The licensee has reevaluated and documented criticality safety analyses (CSAs) including CSAs related to 30B cylinder receipt, pad storage, incineration, decontamination facilities, and liquid radwaste effluent treatment systems (GNF-A 2022b). The licensee committed to taking adequate environmental protection measures for the use of LEU+ in their facilities, including (1) environmental and effluent monitoring, and (2) effluent controls to maintain public doses as low as reasonably achievable as part of the radiation protection program. GNF-As proposed
9 controls are adequate to protect the environment and the health and safety of the public and comply with the regulatory requirements.
The request to increase the enrichment to 8 wt percent U-235 would not result in significant modifications that would effect changes to the radiation protection program described in chapter 4 of SNM-1097. Current practices and processes are sufficient to contain the uranium and to ensure radiation exposures to personnel and the environment are maintained as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA) (GNF-A 2022a).
3.1.1 Impacts from Normal Operations The NRC staffs previous environmental reviews considered the public and occupational health impacts from operations of the GNFA facility (NRC 1997, 2009). The exposure pathways were categorized into three general pathways that could affect the general public: direct radiation, airborne effluents, and liquid effluents from the GNFA facility. Direct radiation levels are taken by measuring gamma radiation at the GNFA restricted area boundary and these measurements were found to be indistinguishable from background readings for the 2007 license renewal request (GNFA 2007). After a higher reading in 2021, a nearby Model 30B cylinder storage pad was moved away from the fence line to reduce exposure levels (GNFA 2022b). Quarterly measurements at this area in 2022 demonstrated that the levels are once again indistinguishable from background levels (GNFA 2023a).
A number of effluent treatment systems are in place at GNF-A, as well as an effluent monitoring program to ensure that potential releases to the environment are within Federal and State regulations and are maintained ALARA (GNF-A 2007). GNF-A sources of radioactive liquid and airborne effluents are controlled and monitored, and monitoring data have verified the controls effectively limit radioactive releases to below regulatory limits (GNF-A 2007). The most likely public exposure pathway is by inhalation of airborne effluents. Calculated annual radiological doses to the public from GNF-A operations from 1995 to 2005 were at most approximately 4 percent of the 0.1 milli-sievert (mSv) (10 Roentgen equivalent man [mrem]) annual dose limit from 10 CFR 20.1101 for air emissions of radioactive material (GNF-A 2007). Using data from the most recent semi-annual effluent monitoring report, dated August 15, 2022, the calculated approximate public annual dose is 0.5 percent of the 0.1 mSv [10 mrem] annual dose limit due to air emission. If this estimate is adjusted for up to 8 wt percent LEU+, the approximated dose due to air emissions would increase to 0.84 percent (0.00084 mSv [.084 mrem]) of the 0.1 mSv
[10 mrem] annual dose limit (GNF-A 2022b). As stated in the GNF-A response to the NRCs request for supplemental information, airborne and liquid effluents are below and anticipated to remain below regulatory limits in 10 CFR Part 20 for non-radiological and radiological contaminants (GNF-A 2023a).
In the 2009 license renewal EA the NRC staff evaluated the impacts to the environmental resources at GNF-A. The NRC staff determined that any non-radiological impacts to worker or public health would be SMALL and would be managed by a combination of process controls, best management and ALARA practices, and monitoring programs. Therefore, based on review of this information and response to NRCs request for supplemental information provided by the applicant, the NRC staff determined that the radiological and nonradiological environmental impacts from to the proposed license amendment would not be significant.
10 3.1.2 Impacts From Accidents NRC regulations at 10 CFR Part 70, subpart H, applicable to materials licensees authorized to possess a critical mass of special nuclear material, including the GNF-A facility near Wilmington NC, are designed to ensure that the high and intermediate accident scenarios would be highly unlikely. The regulations in subpart H, required GNF-A to prepare an Integrated Safety Analysis (ISA) for its facility near Wilmington NC to demonstrate compliance with the performance requirements in 10 CFR 70.61(b), (c), and (d) to limit the risk of credible high-and intermediate-consequence events, as well as nuclear criticality accidents.
High-consequence accidents are defined in terms of (i) radiation dose to a worker, (ii) radiation dose to an individual located outside the controlled area, (iii) an intake of soluble uranium by an individual located outside the controlled area, or (iv) a chemical exposure to an individual. High-consequence events must be controlled by items relied on for safety such that the event is highly unlikely, or its consequences are less than the defined high consequences.
Intermediate consequence accidents are defined in terms of (i) radiation dose to a worker, (ii) radiation dose to an individual located outside the controlled area, (iii) an environmental release, or (iv) a chemical exposure to an individual. Intermediate consequence events must be controlled by items relied on for safety such that the event is unlikely, or its consequences are less than the defined intermediate consequences.
The NRC staffs previous safety reviews, and current safety review will assess the safety features and operating procedures required to reduce the risks from accidents. The combination of Items Relied on for Safety (IROFS) that mitigate emergency conditions, and the implementation of emergency procedures and protective actions in accordance with the Emergency Plan for the GNF-A facility, would limit the impacts of accidents that could otherwise extend beyond the GNF-A boundaries. The IROFS include measures such as active and passive engineered controls required by 10 CFR 70.61(e).
The NRC staff will analyze a range of possible accidents selected for detailed evaluation from the ISA conducted by the licensee to assess the potential human health impacts associated with accidents, which will be documented in the staffs SER. These analyses will include a determination of whether the facility complies with the performance requirements of 10 CFR 70.61, which would also serve to control the environmental consequences of accidents.
In the NRCs staffs 2009 license renewal EA, the NRC staff determined that accidents at the GNF-A Wilmington facility would result in SMALL impacts on workers, the environment, and the public and would be managed by a combination of process controls, best management and ALARA practices, and monitoring programs.
Accident events with the highest potential consequences involve releases of UF6 and exposure to hexafluoride or soluble uranium produced by a UF6 release. The potential consequences from a chemical exposure are greater than the consequences of a radiological exposure. The consequences of a chemical exposure event will not be more severe due to an increase in higher enrichment of UF6, although an accidental UF6 release would have the highest potential consequences. A combination of process controls, best management, and monitoring programs at the GNF-A facility provide reasonable assurance of adequate protection against the excursion of that uranium off-site and that chemical and radiological exposures to personnel and the environment will be maintained ALARA (GNF-A 2022a).
11 GNF-A supplemented the ISA prepared for the LAR to address the use of U-235 enriched to 8 wt percent. GNF-A determined that the use of higher-enriched uranium does not increase the severity of potential consequences of accidents involving air or liquid effluent releases (GNF-A 2022b). Additionally, no changes to facility features or IROFS that prevent or mitigate exposure to the public are anticipated (GNF-A 2022a). The NRC staff reviewed the supplemental information and did not identify any new types of accident sequences, or increases in the likelihood of an accident, or consequences greater than previously evaluated for the GNF-A fuel fabrication facility. Therefore, the NRC staff finds that the proposed license amendment would not create a new or different type of accident or increase the likelihood or risk of any previously accident evaluated. Accordingly, the proposed license amendment would have no significant impact on potential releases.
3.2 Waste Management GNF-A proposes to modify both the existing liquid radwaste effluent treatment systems and the decontamination facilities to meet criticality safety geometry configurations. GNF-A evaluated these changes and found that in terms of treatment, filtration and discharge monitoring, these facilities will remain functionally the same (GNF-A 2022b). These changes will take place in existing buildings and would not involve alteration to the site footprint, nor will they change the operating processes of the existing facility. Therefore, no impacts due to waste management are anticipated due to these changes. No solid wastes are disposed onsite (GNF-A 2007, GNF-A 2022b).
In the 2009 license renewal EA the NRC staff evaluated the impacts due to waste management.
Potential waste management impacts associated with GNF-A operations include changes in air, water, or soil quality due to contaminated liquid or gaseous effluent streams and material leaks or spills. In the 2009 EA, the NRC staff determined that although wastes are generated during normal operations at the GNF-A Wilmington facility, these S impacts on workers, the environment, and the public would be managed by a combination of process controls, best management and ALARA practices, and monitoring programs.
The NRC staff has determined that the waste management impacts of the proposed license amendment would not be significant because changes are not anticipated to the waste management process. Additionally, the 2009 EA concluded that the impacts are SMALL from operation of an additional 40 years.
4.0 CONSULTATION The NRC staff considered related environmental regulations in accordance with NUREG-1748 (NRC 2003). These regulations and consultations included (1) Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966, as amended, and Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973. The NRC submitted the draft EA to the North Carolina Clearinghouse for their review and comment on September 12, 2023 (NRC, 2023a). No response was received from the NC Clearinghouse.
12 4.1 The Endangered Species Act Section 7 of the ESA and the implementing regulations in 50 CFR Part 402, subpart B require a Federal agency to determine prior to taking a proposed action whether: (1) proposed, endangered, or threatened species or their critical habitats are known to be in the vicinity of the proposed action and if so, whether (2) the proposed Federal action may affect listed species or critical habitats. If the proposed action could affect listed species or critical habitats, the Federal agency is required to consult with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and/or the U.S.
National Marine Fisheries Service. The NRC consulted with the FWS in preparing its EA for the license renewal of the GNF-A in 2009, and determined that direct aquatic impacts from continued operation of the GNF-A facilities would be SMALL. During the 2009 review the NRC staff also considered cumulative ecological effects in the affected region. The NRC staff focused on the ecological effects associated with continued land use. GNF-A is located in an area zoned as heavy industrial, and the land north of the site is zoned rural agricultural. Although further development may result in potential habitat fragmentation or loss of biological diversity, local officials would consider this effect in their future development decisions (NRC 2009).
The NRC staff utilized the FWS Information for Planning and Consultation website and completed its online project review process. The results of the review process generated a list of threatened or endangered species (FWS 2022). No critical habitat, for any of the species listed, was identified in the project site. Therefore, for the proposed action the NRC has determined that no consultation is required under Section 7 of the ESA.
For this action, GNF-A does not plan to expand its operations or change its land use (GNF-A, 2022). Accordingly, consistent with guidance provided in NUREG-1748, the NRC determined that even if listed endangered or threatened species or their critical habitats were now present in the vicinity of the GNF-A facilities, the proposed action would have no effect on such species or their habitats since there would be no ground disturbing activities, all activities would occur indoors, and there would be no increase in effluents or discharges to aquatic habitats.
4.2 National Historic Preservation Act The NHPA was enacted to create a national historic preservation program, including the National Register of Historic Places and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. Section 106 of the NHPA requires federal agencies to consider the effects of their undertakings on historic properties. NHPA implementing regulations at 36 CFR 800, Protection of Historic Properties, define an undertaking as a project, activity, or program funded in whole or in part under the direct or indirect jurisdiction of a federal agency, including those carried out by or on behalf of a federal agency; those carried out with federal financial assistance; and those requiring a federal permit, license, or approval [36 CFR 800.16(y)]. Therefore, the NRCs approval of this license amendment request constitutes a federal undertaking. The NRC staff determined the scope of activities described in this license amendment request does not have the potential to cause effects on historic properties. Moreover, the approval of the license amendment request would not result in construction or land disturbance activities (GNF A 2022a). Thus, if historic properties were present at the site there would be no effects..
Therefore, in accordance with 36 CFR 800.3(a)(1), no consultation is required under Section 106 of the NHPA.
The NRC staff, however, requested the NC SHPOs concurrence with this determination by letter dated December 22, 2022 (NRC 2022b). The NC SHPO concurred with the NRCs determination of no impacts by letter dated January 17, 2023 (NC SHPO 2023).
13
5.0 CONCLUSION
AND FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT Based on its review of the proposed action, in accordance with the requirements in 10 CFR Part 51, the NRC staff has determined that approval for GNF-A to fabricate nuclear fuel using higher enriched U-235 would not significantly affect the quality of the human environment.
As discussed in this EA, no significant radiological or non-radiological impacts are expected to result from approval of the proposed action. Occupational dose estimates associated with the proposed action is expected to be ALARA and within the limits identified in 10 CFR 20.1201.
Approval of the proposed action is not expected to result in measurable radiation exposure to a member of the public. Approval of the LAR would not result in construction or land disturbance activities. Therefore, the NRC staff has determined that pursuant to 10 CFR 51.31, preparation of an environmental impact statement is not required for this proposed action, and pursuant to 10 CFR 51.32, a finding of no significant impact is appropriate.
6.0 LIST OF PREPARERS Jean Trefethen, Environmental Project Manager, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. NRC
7.0 REFERENCES
10 CFR Part 20. Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Energy, Part 20, Standards for Protection Against Radiation. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C.
10 CFR Part 51. Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Energy, Part 51, Environmental Protection Regulations for Domestic Licensing and Related Regulatory Functions. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C.
10 CFR Part 70. Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Energy, Part 70, Domestic Licensing of Special Nuclear Material. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C.
36 CFR 800. Title 36 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Parks, Forests, and Public Property, Part 800, Protection of Historic Properties. Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, Washington, D.C.
40 CFR Part 61. Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Protection of Environment, Part 800, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.
50 CFR 402. Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Wildlife and Fisheries, Part 800, Interagency CooperationEndangered Species Act of 1973, As Amended. United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of the Interior, National Marine Fisheries Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Department of Commerce, Washington, D.C.
FWS (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service). 2023. FWS List of Threatened and Endangered Species that May Occur with Respect to the GNF-A Facility License Amendment Request, December 2022. ADAMS ML23228A217
14 GNF-A (Global Nuclear Fuel - Americas LLC). 2023a Response to NRC Request for Additional Information, July 2023. ADAMS ML23209A676.
GNF-A (Global Nuclear Fuel - Americas LLC). 2023b. GNF-A Natruim Fuel Fabrication Facility Schedule Update, July 2023. ADAMS ML23192A516 GNF-A (Global Nuclear Fuel - Americas LLC). 2022a License Amendment Request for 8 weight percent, June 2022. ADAMS ML22175A070.
GNF-A (Global Nuclear Fuel - Americas LLC). 2022b Response to NRC Environmental Protection Request for Supplemental information, October 2022. ADAMS ML22278A155.
GNF-A (Global Nuclear Fuel - Americas). 2022c License Amendment Request for 8 weight percent - Meeting Slides, April 2022. ADAMS ML22104A092.
GNF-A (Global Nuclear Fuel - Americas). 2021. Letter of Intent, Natrium HALEU Fuel Fabrication Pre-Application Discussions, October 2021. ADAMS ML21292A180 GNF-A (Global Nuclear Fuel - Americas). 2007 Site Environmental Report Supplement for the Period 1995-2005, March 2007. ADAMS ML071000137.
North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources letter Lease Amendment Request for Global Nuclear Fuels - Americas, Docket #: 70-1113, New Hanover County, ER 08-0036.
Raleigh, 2023. ADAMS ML23032A372.
NRC (U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission). 1997. Environmental Assessment for the Renewal of U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission License No. SNM-1097 For Global Nuclear Fuel-Americas, Wilmington Fuel Fabrication Facility. Washington, D.C. May 1997. ADAMS ML072960048 NRC (U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission). 2003. Environmental Review Guidance for Licensing Actions Associated with NMSS Programs. NUREG-1748, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, Washington, D.C. ADAMS ML032450279.
NRC (U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission). 2009. Environmental Assessment for the Renewal of U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission License No. SNM-1097 For Global Nuclear Fuel-Americas, Wilmington Fuel Fabrication Facility. Washington, D.C. May 2009. ADAMS ML091180239.
NRC (U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission). 2022a. Request for Supplemental Information for Global Nuclear Fuel-Americas, License Amendment Request for 8 Weight Percent (Docket Number: 70-1113). Washington, D.C. October 2022. ADAMS ML22271A936.
NRC (U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission). 2022b. Section 106 Consultation of the National Historic Preservation Act for Global Nuclear Fuel-Americas, License Amendment Request (Docket Number: 70-1113). Washington, D.C. December 2022. ADAMSML22349A694.
NRC (U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission). 2023a. Email transmitting the GNF-A draft EA for review to the NC State Clearinghouse. September 2022. ADAMS ML23278A268.