81 FR 86024 - University of Missouri-Columbia Research Reactor

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 229 (November 29, 2016)

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering renewal of Facility Operating License No. R-103, held by the Curators of the University of Missouri (the licensee) for the continued operation of its University of Missouri-Columbia Research Reactor (MURR or the reactor). The NRC is issuing an environmental assessment (EA) and finding of no significant impact (FONSI) associated with the renewal of the license.

[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 229 (Tuesday, November 29, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 86024-86030]
From the Federal Register Online  [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2016-28711]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-186; NRC-2013-0090]


University of Missouri-Columbia Research Reactor

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 Facility Operating License No. R-103, held by the Curators 
of the University of Missouri (the licensee) for the continued 
operation of its University of Missouri-Columbia Research Reactor (MURR 
or the reactor). The NRC is issuing an environmental assessment (EA) 
and finding of no significant impact (FONSI) associated with the 
renewal of the license.

DATES: The EA and FONSI are available on November 29, 2016.

ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2013-0090 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 Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2013-0090. Address 
questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301-415-
3463; 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 http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select ``ADAMS Public Documents'' and 
then 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]. For 
the convenience of the reader, the ADAMS accession numbers are provided 
in a table in the ``Availability of Documents'' section of 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: Geoffrey A. Wertz, Office of Nuclear 
Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 
20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-0893; email: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Introduction

    The NRC is considering renewal of Facility Operating License No. R-
103, held by the Curators of the University of Missouri, which would 
authorize continued operation of its reactor for 20 years from date of 
issuance, located in the University Research Park, Columbia, Boone 
County, Missouri. As required by section 51.21 of title 10 of the Code 
of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), ``Criteria for and identification of 
licensing and regulatory actions requiring environmental assessments,'' 
the NRC staff prepared an EA documenting its environmental review. 
Based on the results of the EA that follows, the NRC has determined not 
to prepare an environmental impact statement for the proposed renewed 
license is not required and is issuing a FONSI in accordance with 10 
CFR 51.32.

II. Environmental Assessment

Facility Site and Environs

    The MURR facility is located on 7.5 acres of land in the central 
portion of the 84-acre University Research Park in Boone County. Boone 
County is located in the central part of the state and consists of an 
area of approximately 683 square miles (1,769 square km) and is 
approximately 41 miles (66 km) in its greatest north-to-south length 
and 22 miles (35.4 km) in its greatest east-to-west width. The 
University Research Park is an extension of the University of Missouri-
Columbia, main campus and is located approximately 1.6 kilometers (1 
mile) southwest of the main campus. The MURR facility includes a five-
story reactor containment building which is centrally located and 
integrated into a one-story laboratory building. Immediately 
surrounding the MURR facility are other research buildings and parking 
lots associated with the University Research Park. Facilities beyond 
the University Research Park include a golf course to the west; campus 
sports arenas and fields to the northeast, east, and south; and the 
University's main campus. The City of Columbia is to the north. There 
are few permanent residences nearby with only 225 persons living within 
1 kilometer (0.6 miles) of the MURR facility. The nearest permanent 
residence is located approximately 760 meters (0.5 miles) north of the 
site. The nearest dormitories are located approximately 1 kilometer 
(0.6 miles) from the MURR facility. The MURR is a tank-type (pressure 
vessel) reactor where the tank is located in an open pool. The reactor 
is light water moderated and cooled. It is licensed to operate at a 
maximum thermal steady state power level of 10 megawatts (MWt). The 
reactor core is located in a pressure vessel within the lined reactor 
pool. The reactor pool is 3 meters (10 feet) in diameter and 9 meters 
(30 feet) deep. The reactor is fueled with highly-enriched uranium 
plate-type fuel contained in eight fuel elements. A detailed 
description of the reactor can be found in the MURR safety analysis 
report (SAR). There have been no major modifications to the MURR since 
issuance of Operating License Amendment No. 2 on July 9, 1974, which 
authorized the MURR to operate at its current power level. However, the 
facility has added several laboratories and hot cells over the 
intervening time period in order to conduct research activities. A 
complete description of these changes will be provided in the NRC 
staff's safety evaluation report (SER) accompanying the issuance of the 
renewed license.

Description of the Proposed Action

    The proposed action would renew Facility Operating License No. R-
103 for an additional 20 years from the date

[[Page 86025]]

of issuance of the renewal license. The proposed action is in 
accordance with the licensee's application dated August 31, 2006, as 
supplemented by letters dated January 15, January 29, May 18, July 2, 
July 16, August 31, September 3, September 30, October 29, and November 
30, 2010; March 11 and September 8, 2011; January 6 and June 28, 2012; 
January 28, July 31, and October 1, 2015; and February 8, April 8, 
April 15, May 31, and July 25, 2016 (the renewal application). In 
accordance with 10 CFR 2.109, ``Effect of timely renewal application,'' 
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 reactor to routinely provide training, research, and services to 
the research community and the commercial sector for a period of 20 
years.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

Radiological Impacts
    Gaseous radioactive effluents are discharged through a multi-stage 
filtration system to the facility ventilation exhaust stack during 
reactor operations. The stack height is 21 meters (70 feet) above grade 
level; however, the effective stack height is greater due to the stack 
exhaust volumetric flow rate of 864 cubic meters per minute (30,500 
cubic feet per minute). Other parts of the MURR facility are maintained 
at a negative pressure with respect to the reactor exhaust system which 
helps ensure that any release pathways are through the facility 
ventilation exhaust stack that provides an elevated release point for 
dispersion of the effluent. The licensee indicated that the most 
significant radionuclide released from reactor operation into the 
gaseous effluent stream is Argon-41 (Ar-41), which accounts for greater 
than 99 percent of the radioactivity released. The licensee measures 
the quantity of Ar-41 released annually from the facility ventilation 
exhaust stack under normal reactor steady-state operating conditions 
and provides the results in their annual reports. The licensee also 
provided calculations, using the maximum annual Ar-41 radioactivity 
release allowed by Technical Specification (TS) 3.7, ``Radiation 
Monitoring Systems and Airborne Effluents,'' which results in a maximum 
potential dose to a member of the public of 0.0235 milliSieverts (mSv) 
(2.35 mrem), which occurs at the nearest residence: A location which is 
760 meters (2493 feet) from the licensee's release point (elevated 
stack). The NRC staff performed independent calculations to verify that 
the licensee's calculated public dose from Ar-41 represented a 
conservative estimate. The NRC staff calculated a maximum public dose 
from Ar-41 of 0.0415 mSv (4.15 mrem).
    A review of the licensee's annual reports for the 5 years of 
operation from 2010 through 2015 shows that Ar-41 constitutes the 
significant radioactive isotope released from the MURR facility. The 
maximum annual release of Ar-41 was approximately 78 percent of the TS 
3.7 limit in 2013, and the average Ar-41 release was approximately 70 
percent of the TS 3.7 limit over the period from 2010 through 2015.
    The licensee also considered the radiological effect of nitrogen-16 
(N-16), which is produced from neutron activation of oxygen-16 in the 
reactor primary cooling system and pool coolant water. N-16 decays with 
a very short half-life of 7 seconds. Because the primary cooling system 
is a closed system that is shielded or located in areas with restricted 
access to the MURR staff during reactor operation, radiation exposure 
from or release of N-16 are not concerns. The MURR has hold-up tanks in 
both the primary coolant demineralizer loop and the pool coolant 
system, which allows the majority of N-16 in these systems to decay. 
The hold-up tanks are located in an area designated as a high radiation 
area which has locked, restricted access. Therefore, most of the N-16 
has been removed through decay prior to reaching the pool surface or in 
areas where the MURR staff requires access. Other radioactive gaseous 
effluents released, as reported in the licensee's annual reports were 
approximately 1 percent or less of the air effluent concentration 
limits set by 10 CFR part 20, appendix B, ``Annual Limits on Intake 
(ALIs) and Derived Air Concentrations (DACs) of Radionuclides for 
Occupational Exposure; Effluent Concentrations; Concentrations for 
Release to Sewerage,'' Table 2, ``Effluent Concentrations,'' Column 1, 
``Air.''
    Since the potential annual radiation dose resulting from the 
maximum effluent release from the normal operation of the MURR to a 
member of the public in the unrestricted area at the nearest residence 
is 2.35 mrem (0.0235 mSv) to 4.15 mrem (0.0415 mSv), the licensee 
demonstrates compliance with the dose limit of 100 mrem (1 mSv) set by 
10 CFR 20.1301, ``Dose limits for individual members of the public.'' 
Additionally, this potential radiation dose also demonstrates 
compliance with the ``as low as is reasonably achievable'' (ALARA) air 
emissions dose constraint of 10 mrem (0.1 mSv) specified in 10 CFR 
20.1101, ``Radiation protection programs,'' paragraph (d). The NRC 
staff reviewed the radiological dose calculations provided by the 
licensee, the assumptions used, and the results of several years of 
effluent releases from the licensee's annual reports, as well as toured 
the facility, and finds the results of the licensee's dose estimates to 
be reasonable.
    The licensee directs all potentially radioactive liquid waste into 
a liquid waste retention system until the liquid waste can be assayed 
for radioactive content, and chemically treated, if necessary, for 
disposal by discharge to the sanitary sewer system. Discharge of any 
liquid waste to the sanitary sewer requires the use of the MURR 
procedures to ensure that the liquid discharge meets the requirements 
of 10 CFR 20.2003, ``Disposal by release into sanitary sewerage,'' 
prior to release into the sanitary sewer. A review of the licensee's 
disposal data from its annual reports over the years 2010 through 2015, 
indicates that tritium constitutes more than 90 percent of the total 
activity released to the sanitary sewer, and all radioactive liquid 
releases were well below 10 percent of the regulatory limits in 10 CFR 
part 20, appendix B.
    The MURR Health Physics Group oversees the handling of solid low-
level radioactive waste generated at the MURR facility. This waste 
consists mainly of contaminated items such as demineralizer resins, 
filters, plastic bags, gloves, absorbent material, and wipes, as well 
as reactor equipment or components that are no longer of use. The MURR 
Health Physics Group disposes of the waste by shipment to a low level 
waste broker, or directly to a waste processing site for final 
disposal, in accordance with all applicable regulations for 
transportation of radioactive materials.
    The licensee transfers mixed waste, consisting of substances having 
both hazardous and radioactive materials, to the Missouri University 
Environmental Health and Safety Department for disposal. If the mixed 
waste contains only short-lived radioactive materials, it may be stored 
until the short-lived materials decay to background levels and is then 
disposed of as hazardous waste. Mixed waste with long-lived radioactive 
material is transferred to an authorized facility for disposal.
    To comply with the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, the licensee 
has entered into a contract with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) 
that

[[Page 86026]]

provides that DOE retains title to the fuel utilized at the MURR and 
that DOE is obligated to take the fuel from the site for final 
disposition. Spent nuclear fuel is shipped regularly from the site to 
the DOE following a period of time, which allows for the decay of 
short-lived radioisotopes and lowers the temperature of the spent fuel, 
in accordance with the MURR procedures and the applicable regulations 
for transportation of radioactive materials. No changes during the 
license renewal period are expected in the procedures for shipment of 
spent fuel that would affect the environment.
    The MURR is cooled by three coolant systems: Primary, pool, and 
secondary. Natural convection can be used to cool the reactor core up 
to a license limit power of 50 kilowatts thermal (kWt), and forced 
circulation is required for higher power levels up to the license limit 
of 10 MWt. Above 50 kWt, the reactor core is cooled by the primary 
cooling system which circulates pressurized primary coolant through the 
reactor pressure vessel and then through the primary coolant heat 
exchangers, which transfer the heat to the secondary cooling system. 
The reactor pool, which contains the reactor pressure vessel and other 
reactor systems, is cooled by the pool cooling system which circulates 
the flow of pool coolant through the pool coolant heat exchanger and 
transfers the heat to the secondary cooling system. The heat from the 
primary and pool coolant systems is transferred to the secondary 
coolant system which dissipates the heat to the atmosphere from a 
mechanical cooling tower. The temperature control of the primary and 
pool cooling systems is maintained by an automatic temperature control 
system which adjusts secondary coolant flow to support the desired heat 
transfer and coolant temperature. The primary coolant is monitored for 
fission product activity by the Fuel Element Failure Monitoring System, 
which provides a continuous indication of the primary coolant 
radioactivity to the control room operators. The Secondary Coolant 
Monitoring System continuously monitors the secondary coolant for 
radioactivity which could indicate a leak from the primary or pool 
coolant heat exchangers. Continuously monitoring both cooling systems 
for radioactivity helps to ensure that the potential for any 
radioactivity to leak into the secondary cooling system, and 
environment, are minimized. The licensee also conducts periodic tests 
of the coolant systems to further reduce the likelihood of secondary 
system contamination.
    As described in Chapter 11 of the MURR SAR, personnel exposures are 
well within the limits set by 10 CFR 20.1201, ``Occupational dose 
limits for adults,'' and the ALARA dose criteria in 10 CFR 20.1101, 
paragraph (b). The MURR Health Physics Group tracks personnel 
exposures, which are usually less than 5.0 milliSieverts (500 millirem) 
per year. The MURR ALARA program requires the Health Physics Group to 
investigate any personnel exposure that exceed 0.3 milliSieverts (30 
millirem) in a month, which is less than 1 percent of the annual limit 
of 50 milliSieverts (5,000 millirem) specified in 10 CFR 20.1201. 
Environmental dosimeters mounted in several locations in and around the 
MURR facility provide a quarterly measurement of total radiation 
exposures at those locations. These dosimeters typically measure annual 
doses of less than 0.3 milliSieverts (30 millirem), except in the area 
of the loading dock, where packages containing radioactive materials in 
transit may be stored for short periods of time. In this location, the 
environmental dosimeters measure annual doses typically less than 1.0 
milliSievert (100 millirem). The proposed action does not authorize any 
changes in the design or operation of the facility that would alter 
these occupational dose levels. There is no significant increase in 
individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure as a result of 
license renewal.
    The licensee conducts an environmental monitoring program to record 
and track the radiological impact of the MURR operation on the 
surrounding unrestricted area. The program consists of soil and 
vegetation collected semi-annually from eight locations; water samples 
collected semi-annually from three locations; and quarterly radiation 
exposure measurements at 45 locations of varying distances and 
directions from the MURR facility and at two control locations away 
from any direct influence from the reactor. The MURR Health Physics 
Group administers the program and maintains the appropriate records. 
Based on a review of the licensee's annual reports over the years from 
2010 through 2015, the survey program indicated that radioactivity and 
radiation levels at the monitoring locations were not significantly 
higher than those measured prior to the start of activities at the MURR 
facility. Year-to-year trends in radioactivity and radiation levels are 
consistent between monitoring locations. Also, no correlation exists 
between total annual reactor operation and annual radioactivity and 
radiation levels measured at the monitoring locations. Based on the NRC 
staff's review of data from the annual reports over the years from 2010 
through 2015, the NRC staff concludes that operation of the MURR does 
not have any significant radiological impact on the surrounding 
environment. No changes in reactor operation that would affect off-site 
radiation levels are proposed as part of the license renewal.
    Because occupational and public exposures are below regulatory 
limits, the NRC staff concludes that the proposed action would not have 
a significant radiological impact.
    Accident scenarios are provided in the guidance in NUREG-1537, 
``Guidelines for Preparing and Reviewing Applications for the Licensing 
of Non-Power Reactors,'' issued February 1996, and the results of the 
licensee's analysis was provided in Chapter 13 of the MURR SAR. The 
most significant radiological fission product release accident at a 
research reactor is considered as the maximum hypothetical accident 
(MHA), which for the MURR is the failure of a fueled experiment during 
irradiation. The MHA scenario involves the irradiation of a 5-gram low-
enriched uranium target, for approximately 150 hours, producing 
approximately 150 Curies of Iodine-131 through Iodine-135, as well as 
other radioactive isotopes. The scenario assumes that 100 percent of 
the activity of the sample is released into the reactor pool water; 100 
percent of the noble gases in the pool rise to the surface, and becomes 
airborne, and 0.1 percent of the radioiodine in the pool also becomes 
airborne via pool water evaporation. The containment ventilation system 
isolates on actuation of the pool surface radiation monitors, and the 
radiation workers evacuate the reactor containment within 5 minutes. 
The licensee conservatively calculated doses to facility personnel 
during evacuation and the maximum potential doses to members of the 
public at various locations around the MURR facility. The license 
estimated an occupational dose of 1,180 mrem (11.80 mSv), for a five 
minute (evacuation) duration, and 0.0112 mrem (0.00012 mSv) for the 
maximum exposed member of the public. The NRC staff performed 
independent calculations to verify that the licensee's calculated doses 
represented conservative estimates for the MHA. The NRC staff, using 
conservative assumptions, estimated a dose to a worker of 2,001 mrem 
(20.01 mSv) for a five minute duration, and 66 mrem (0.66 mSv) for the 
maximum exposed member of the public. The

[[Page 86027]]

details of these calculations are provided in the NRC staff's SER that 
the NRC staff is preparing to document its safety review of the 
application for a renewed license. The occupational radiation doses 
resulting from the postulated MHA would be well below the 10 CFR 
20.1201 limit of 5,000 mrem (50 mSv). The maximum calculated radiation 
doses for members of the public resulting from the postulated MHA would 
be below the 10 CFR 20.1301 limit of 100 mrem (1 mSv).
    Because the licensee has not requested any changes to the facility 
design or operating conditions as part of its application for license 
renewal, the proposed action will not significantly increase the 
probability or consequences of accidents and there will be no 
significant changes in the type or significant increase in the 
effluents that may be release off site. The licensee has systems in 
place for controlling the release of radiological effluents and 
implements a radiation protection program to monitor personnel 
exposures and releases of radioactive effluents. The systems and 
radiation protection program are appropriate for the types and 
quantities of effluents expected to be generated by continued operation 
of the reactor. In addition, the NRC staff evaluated information 
contained in the licensee's renewal application, and data the licensee 
reported to the NRC for the last 5 years of operation to determine the 
projected radiological impact of the facility on the environment during 
the period of the renewed license. The NRC staff found that releases of 
radioactive material and personnel exposures have been well within 
applicable regulatory limits.
    Based on its evaluation, the NRC staff concludes that continued 
operation of the reactor would not have a significant radiological 
impact.
Non-Radiological Impacts
    As discussed above, the MURR is cooled by three coolant systems: 
Primary, pool, and secondary. The MURR facility uses approximately 38 
million gallons of water per year (or 72 gallons per minute), the 
majority of which is used to provide make-up water for the secondary 
system (50 gallons per minute). The source of this water is the 
University of Missouri Columbia raw water supply system, which draws 
water from 5 deep wells, and which can provide up to 4,700 gallons per 
minute. Therefore, the water usage needed to replenish the secondary 
coolant lost due to evaporation from the MURR facility cooling tower 
would not impact the University of Missouri Columbia raw water supply, 
which has excess capacity. Release of thermal effluents from the MURR 
cooling tower will not have a significant effect on the environment. 
Chemicals are used in the treatment of secondary coolant and liquid 
radioactive waste. Sulfuric acid is used to control the potential of 
Hydrogen (pH) of the secondary coolant, and other chemicals are added 
to control water hardness and microbiological growth. Chemical 
treatment of liquid radioactive waste is used to precipitate 
radionuclides for removal as solids, or to adjust the pH level for 
disposal. Other chemicals are routinely used in the performance of 
experiments, which are evaluated and controlled by procedure. Given 
that the proposed action does not involve any change in the operation 
of the reactor or change in the emissions or heat load dissipated to 
the environment, the proposed action would not have a significant 
impact on land use, visual resources, air quality, noise, non-
radiological wastes, or terrestrial or aquatic resources. Additionally, 
because the MURR does not discharge cooling water directly to the 
environment, the proposed action would have no effect on surface 
waters. Furthermore, in preparation for replacement of the secondary 
coolant cooling towers in 2012, the licensee sampled the cooling tower 
sump sludge for radioactivity and found none. The MURR's continued use 
of 38 million gallons of groundwater per year from wells owned and 
maintained by the University of Missouri-Columbia represents a 
negligible portion of water compared to that used by the University as 
a whole. The proposed action would result in no groundwater conflicts, 
degradation of groundwater, or other significant impacts to groundwater 
resources.
    Based on its evaluation, the NRC staff concludes that the proposed 
action would have no significant non-radiological impacts.

Other Applicable Environmental Laws

    In addition to the National Environmental Policy Act, the NRC has 
responsibilities that are derived from other environmental laws, 
including the Endangered Species Act, Coastal Zone Management Act, 
National Historic Preservation Act, Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, 
and the Executive Order 12898--Environmental Justice. The following is 
a brief discussion of impacts associated with these laws and other 
requirements.
1. Endangered Species Act (ESA)
    The ESA was enacted to prevent further decline of endangered and 
threatened species and restore those species and their critical 
habitat. Section 7 of the ESA requires Federal agencies to consult with 
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife's (FWS) or National Marine Fisheries Service 
regarding actions that may affect listed species or designated critical 
habitats.
    The NRC staff conducted a search of Federally listed species and 
critical habitats that have the potential to occur in the vicinity of 
the MURR using the FWS Environmental Conservation Online System (ECOS) 
Information for Planning and Conservation (IPaC) system. The IPaC 
system report identified four Federally endangered or threatened 
species that may occur or could potentially be affected by the proposed 
action (ADAMS Accession No. ML16190A040). However, none of these 
species are likely to occur near the MURR because the facility is 
located within the University Research Park, an 84-acre developed area 
used for research and academic purposes. The MURR was constructed in 
the 1960s and has remained in use since that time. University Research 
Park is bordered by a golf course, athletic fields, other academic and 
office buildings associated with the University of Missouri-Columbia, 
and residential properties. Accordingly, the area does not provide 
suitable habitat for any Federally listed species. Further, the IPaC 
report determined that no critical habitat is within the vicinity of 
the MURR. Accordingly, the NRC concludes that the proposed license 
renewal of the MURR would have no effect on Federally listed species or 
critical habitats. Federal agencies are not required to consult with 
the FWS if the agencies determine that an action will not affect listed 
species or critical habitats (ADAMS Accession No. ML16120A505). Thus, 
the ESA does not require consultation for the proposed the MURR license 
renewal, and the NRC considers its obligations under ESA Section 7 to 
be fulfilled for the proposed action.
2. Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA)
    The CZMA, in part, encourages States to preserve, protect, develop, 
and where possible, restore or enhance, resources. Applicants for 
Federal licenses to conduct an activity that affects any land or water 
use or natural resource of the coastal zone of a state must provide a 
certification in that the proposed activities complies with the State's 
approved coastal zone management program and will conduct activities 
consistent with that program.
    The State of Missouri does not contain any coastal zones. Because 
the

[[Page 86028]]

MURR is not located within or near any managed coastal zones, the 
proposed action would not affect any coastal zones. Therefore, the NRC 
finds that the licensee does not need to provide a certification under 
the CZMA.
3. National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA)
    The NHPA requires Federal agencies to consider the effects of their 
undertakings on historic properties. As stated in the Act, historic 
properties or resources are any prehistoric or historic district, site, 
building, structure, or object included in, or eligible for inclusion 
in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). The NRHP lists one 
historical site located on the University of Missouri campus. The site 
is the East Campus Neighborhood Historic District. The location of the 
East Campus Neighborhood Historic District is approximately 4 
kilometers (2.4 miles) northeast of the MURR facility. The closest off-
campus historical site is the Sanborn Field and Soil Erosion Plots 
located 2 kilometers (1.2 miles) northeast of the MURR facility. Given 
the distance between the MURR facility and the Sanborn Field and Soil 
Erosion Plots, continued operation of the MURR will not impact any 
historical sites. Based on this information, the NRC finds that the 
potential impacts of license renewal would have no adverse effect on 
historic and archaeological resources.
4. Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act
    The FWCA requires Federal agencies that license water resource 
development projects to consult with the FWS (or NMFS, when applicable) 
and State wildlife resource agencies regarding the potential impacts of 
the project on fish and wildlife resources.
    The licensee is not planning any water resource development 
projects, including any 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. 
Therefore, no coordination with other agencies pursuant to the FWCA is 
required for the proposed action.
5. Executive Order 12898--Environmental Justice
    Executive Order 12898, ``Federal Actions to Address Environmental 
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations,'' 59 FR 
7629 (February 16, 1994), directs agencies to identify and address the 
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental 
effects of their actions on minority and low-income populations, to the 
greatest extent practicable and permitted by law.
    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 MURR. Such effects 
may include human health, biological, cultural, economic, or social 
impacts. Minority and low-income populations are subsets of the general 
public residing around the MURR, and all are exposed to the same health 
and environmental effects generated from activities at the MURR.
    Minority Populations in the Vicinity of the MURR--According to the 
2010 Census, approximately 22 percent of the population (total of 
approximately 138,000 individuals) residing within a 10-mile radius of 
MURR identified themselves as a minority. The largest minority 
populations were Black or African American (approximately 15,000 
persons or 11 percent) and Asian (approximately 4,600 persons or 3.3 
percent). According to the 2010 Census, about 19 percent of the Boone 
County population identified themselves as minorities, with Black or 
African Americans and Asians comprising the largest minority 
populations (9.3 and 3.8 percent, respectively). According to the U.S. 
Census Bureau's 2015 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, the 
minority population of Boone County, as a percent of the total 
population, had increased to about 21 percent with Black or African 
Americans and Asians origin comprising the largest minority populations 
(9 and 4 percent, respectively).
    Low-income Populations in the Vicinity of the MURR--According to 
the U.S. Census Bureau's 2010-2014 American Community Survey 5-Year 
Estimates, approximately 29,600 individuals (22.2 percent) residing 
within a 10-mile radius of the MURR were identified as living below the 
Federal poverty threshold. The 2014 Federal poverty threshold was 
$24,230 for a family of four.
    According to the U.S. Census Bureau's 2015 American Community 
Survey 1-Year Estimates, the median household income for Missouri was 
$50,238, while 14.8 percent of the state population and 10.2 percent of 
families were found to be living below the Federal poverty threshold. 
Boone County had a slightly higher median household income average 
($50,520) and a higher percentage of persons (18.5 percent) and lower 
percentage of families (6.9 percent) living below the poverty level, 
respectively.
    Impact Analysis--Potential impacts to minority and low-income 
populations would consist of radiological effects; however, radiation 
doses from continued operations associated with this license renewal 
are expected to continue at current levels, and would be well below 
regulatory limits. Because the proposed action involves no construction 
or land disturbance, no additional visual or noise impacts are expected 
to result from the proposed action.
    Based on this information and the analysis of human health and 
environmental impacts presented in this EA, the proposed action would 
not have disproportionately high and adverse human health and 
environmental effects on minority and low-income populations residing 
in the vicinity of the MURR.

Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives to the Proposed Action

    As an alternative to license renewal, the NRC considered denial of 
the proposed action (i.e., the ``no-action'' alternative). If the NRC 
denied the request for license renewal, reactor operations would cease 
and decommissioning would be required (sooner than if a renewed license 
were issued) and the environmental effects of decommission would occur. 
Decommissioning would be conducted in accordance with an NRC-approved 
decommissioning plan, which would require a separate environmental 
review under 10 CFR 51.21. Cessation of facility operations would 
reduce or eliminate radioactive effluents and emissions associated with 
operations. However, as previously discussed in this EA, radioactive 
effluents and emissions from reactor operations constitute a small 
fraction of the applicable regulatory limits. Therefore, the 
environmental impacts of license renewal and the denial of the request 
for license renewal would be similar. In addition, denying the request 
for license renewal would eliminate the benefits of teaching, research, 
and services provided by the MURR.

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 Amendment No. 2 to Facility 
Operating License No. R-103 for the MURR dated July 9, 1974, which 
authorized the MURR to operate at a maximum steady-state power level of 
10 MWt.

[[Page 86029]]

Agencies and Persons Consulted

    In accordance with NRC policy, the staff consulted with the 
Missouri State Liaison Officer on October 28, 2016, regarding the 
environmental impact of the proposed action, explained the 
environmental reviews and forwarded a draft of this environmental 
assessment. On November 16, 2016, the Missouri State Liaison Officer 
indicated, by electronic mail, that the State understood the NRC review 
and had no comments regarding the proposed action (ADAMS Accession No. 
ML16321A511).
    The NRC staff also consulted with the State of Missouri, Department 
of Natural Resources, State Historic Preservation Office (Missouri 
SHPO) pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act 
by letter dated June 17, 2010 (ADAMS Accession No. ML101730044). The 
Missouri SHPO responded by letter dated July 2, 2010 (ADAMS Accession 
No. ML101950104). The Missouri SHPO informed the NRC that the MURR in 
Columbia is eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic 
Places. However, the SHPO stated that because the proposed license 
renewal would not involve any new construction, excavation, demolition 
or rehabilitation, the action should have no adverse effect.

III. Finding of No Significant Impact

    The NRC is considering issuance of a renewed Facility Operating 
License No. R-103, held by the Curators of the University of Missouri 
for the continued operation of the MURR for an additional 20 years.
    On the basis of the EA included in Section II of this notice and 
incorporated by reference in this finding, the NRC staff finds that the 
proposed action will not have a significant impact on the quality of 
the human environment. The NRC staff's evaluation considered 
information provided in the licensee's application, as supplemented, 
and the NRC staff's review of related environmental documents. Section 
IV below lists the environmental documents related to the proposed 
action and includes information on the availability of these documents. 
Accordingly, the NRC has determined not to prepare an environmental 
impact statement for the proposed action.

IV. Availability of Documents

    The following table identifies the environmental and other 
documents cited in this document and related to the NRC's FONSI. These 
documents are available for public inspection online through ADAMS at 
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html or in person at the NRC's PDR 
as described previously.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Document                       ADAMS  Accession No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Application for License Renewal for the  ML062540114
 University of Missouri-Columbia
 Research Reactor as Per 10 CFR 2.109--
 Cover Letter, August 31, 2006.
Safety Analysis Report for the           ML092110573
 University of Missouri-Columbia
 Application for License Renewal,
 Volume 1 of 2--August 31, 2006
 (redacted version).
Safety Analysis Report for the           ML092110597
 University of Missouri-Columbia
 Application for License Renewal,
 Chapters 10-18, Volume 2 of 2, August
 31, 2006 (redacted version).
University of Missouri Research Reactor  ML062540121
 (MURR) Environmental Report for
 License Renewal, August 31, 2006.
Transmittal of University of Missouri-   ML100220371
 Columbia Research Reactor's Responses
 to the NRC Request for Additional
 Information Regarding Renewal for
 Amendment Facility Operating License,
 January 15, 2010.
Written Communication as Specified by    ML100330073
 10 CFR 50.4(b)(1) Regarding the
 Response to the University of Missouri
 at Columbia--Request for Additional
 Information RE: License Renewal
 Environmental Report, January 29, 2010.
University of Missouri-Columbia          ML101440148
 Research Reactor's Response to NRC RAI
 dated April 20, 2010, May 18, 2010.
MO, Dept. of Natural Resources, Review   ML101950104
 of University of Missouri, Columbia
 Research Reactor, 1513 Research Park
 Drive is Eligible for Inclusion in the
 National Register of Historic Places
 and Determination of Proposed License
 Renewal have no adverse Effect, July
 2, 2010.
University of Missouri, Columbia,        ML12354A237
 Response to NRC Request for Additional
 Information, dated June 1, 2010, July
 16, 2010 (redacted version).
University of Missouri, Columbia,        ML120050315
 Licensee Response to NRC Request for
 Additional Information--Chapter 10,
 August 31, 2010 (redacted version).
University of Missouri, Columbia,        ML102500533
 Response to Request for Additional
 Information Regarding License Renewal,
 September 3, 2010.
University of Missouri, Columbia,        ML12355A019
 Response to Request for Additional
 Information Regarding License Renewal,
 September 30, 2010.
University of Missouri, Columbia         ML12355A023
 Response to NRC Request for Additional
 Information 45-Day Response Questions,
 October 29, 2010 (redacted version).
Written Communication as Specified by    ML103060018
 10 CFR 50.4(b)(1) Regarding the
 Response to the University of Missouri
 at Columbia--Request for Additional
 Information RE: License Renewal,
 Safety Analysis Report, Complex
 Questions, dated May 6, 2010, October
 29, 2010.
University of Missouri, Columbia--       ML12355A026
 Response to NRC Request for Additional
 Information 45-Day Response Questions,
 (TAC No. ME1580) November 30, 2010
 (redacted version).
University of Missouri-Columbia          ML110740249
 Research Reactor Response to Request
 for Additional Information Regarding
 Renewal Request for Amendment Facility
 Operating License R-103, March 11,
 2011.
University of Missouri-Columbia          ML11255A003
 Research Reactor's Response to NRC
 Request for Additional Information
 Regarding Renewal Request for Amended
 Facility Operating License R-103,
 September 8, 2011.
University of Missouri--Columbia,        ML12010A186
 Written Communication as Specified by
 10 CFR 50.4(b)(1) Regarding Responses
 to the University of Missouri at
 Columbia--Request for Additional
 Information RE: License Renewal,
 Safety Analysis Report, January 6,
 2012.
University of Missouri, Columbia--       ML12346A004
 Licensee Response to NRC Request for
 Additional Information dated May 6,
 2010 (Complex Questions) and June 1,
 2012 (45-day Response Questions) RE:
 License Renewal, June 28, 2012
 (redacted version).
Written Communication as Specified by    ML15034A474
 10 CFR 50.4(b)(1) Regarding the
 Response to the University of Missouri
 at Columbia--Request for Additional
 Information Regarding the Renewal of
 Facility Operating License No. R-103
 for the University of Missouri,
 January 28, 2015.
University of Missouri-Columbia--        ML15216A122
 Response to Request for Additional
 Information Regarding Renewal Request
 for Amended Facility Operating
 License, July 31, 2015.

[[Page 86030]]

 
University of Missouri, Columbia--       ML15275A314
 Responses to NRC Request for
 Additional Information, Dated April
 17, 2015, Regarding Renewal Request
 for Amended Facility Operating
 License, October 1, 2015.
University of Missouri-Columbia--        ML16041A221
 Response to NRC Request for Additional
 Information dated December 18, 2015,
 Regarding Renewal Request for License
 No. R-103, February 8, 2016.
University of Missouri at Columbia--     ML16103A536
 Responses to NRC Request for
 Additional Information dated February
 8, 2016, Regarding Renewal Request
 (Financial Review), April 8, 2016.
University of Missouri-Columbia          ML16110A164
 Research Reactor, Response to Request
 for Additional Information on License
 Renewal, April 15, 2016.
University of Missouri-Columbia          ML16155A132
 Research Reactor's Responses to the
 NRC Request for Additional Information
 dated October 28, 2015, Regarding Our
 Renewal Request for Amended Facility
 Operating License No. R-103, May 31,
 2016.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,          ML16190A040
 University of Missouri-Columbia
 Research Reactor Proposed License
 Renewal, IPaC Trust Resources Report,
 July 8, 2016.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,          ML16120A505
 Endangered Species Consultations
 Frequently Asked Questions, July 15,
 2013.
University of Missouri-Columbia          ML16209A236
 Research Reactor's Responses to the
 NRC Request for Additional Information
 Regarding the Proposed Technical
 Specifications for License Renewal,
 July 25, 2016.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 18th day of November 2016.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Alexander Adams, Jr.,
Chief, Research and Test Reactors Licensing Branch, Division of Policy 
and Rulemaking, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2016-28711 Filed 11-28-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 7590-01-P