[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 204 (Monday, October 24, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-26361]
[[Page Unknown]]
[Federal Register: October 24, 1994]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for
the Fabrication and Deployment of a Multi-Purpose Canister-Based System
for the Management of Civilian Spent Nuclear Fuel
AGENCY: United States Department of Energy (DOE).
ACTION: Notice of intent.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: DOE announces its intent to prepare an Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), in accordance with the Council on
Environmental Quality Regulations for Implementing the Procedural
Provisions of NEPA (40 CFR Parts 1500-1508) and the DOE NEPA
Implementing Procedures (10 CFR Part 1021).
Under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, as amended (42 U.S.C.
10101 et seq.) (the Act), DOE is responsible for disposal of civilian
spent nuclear fuel in a high-level radioactive waste geologic
repository, and for any monitored retrievable storage of spent nuclear
fuel prior to disposal. The Department is also responsible under the
Act for transportation of spent nuclear fuel in connection with DOE's
disposal or storage. In order to carry out its responsibilities
relating to the transportation of spent nuclear fuel, and to facilitate
planning for the design of a geologic disposal facility and a possible
monitored retrievable storage facility, DOE is in the process of
deciding whether or not to fabricate and deploy a multi-purpose
canister\1\-based system that would use metal canisters capable of
holding multiple spent fuel assemblies.\2\ This system would enable
spent fuel assemblies to be loaded into a canister and sealed at the
reactor site. The sealed canister could be stored, transported, and
disposed of without repackaging or further handling of bare spent
nuclear fuel. Alternatives to the multi-purpose canister-based system
would require additional handling of the individual spent fuel
assemblies as they are transferred to different specialized casks\3\
for storage, transport, and disposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\A canister is the primary or sealed container for spent
nuclear fuel or vitrified high level waste.
\2\A fuel assembly is the physical arrangement of fuel rods held
together by plates and separated by spacers attached to the fuel
cladding.
\3\A cask is a large, heavily-shielded container used for
storage and/or transport of spent nuclear fuel. The cask provides
chemical, mechanical, thermal, and radiological protection, and
dissipates decay heat during handling, transportation and storage.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to the sealed metal canisters, the multi-purpose
canister-based system would use specialized casks or overpacks\4\ for
transfer, storage, and transport of multi-purpose canisters containing
spent nuclear fuel. Multi-purpose canisters containing spent nuclear
fuel could be transported to any storage facility that may become
available and eventually to a geologic repository. At a geologic
repository, the spent nuclear fuel could remain in the multi-purpose
canister and may be placed in a disposal overpack and sealed for
disposal as a unit. The sealed disposal overpack would be designed
during the design phase of geologic repository development to meet
regulatory requirements for disposal. Centralized storage of multi-
purpose canisters, or disposal of multi-purpose canisters in a geologic
repository, would be analyzed in separate NEPA documents, as provided
by the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\An overpack is a secondary (or additional) external container
for the spent nuclear fuel. The overpack provides structural
strength, radiation shielding, corrosion resistance, containment,
and engineered barrier performance for the spent nuclear fuel, as
specified under 10 CFR Parts 60, 71, and 72.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The subject EIS will evaluate the potential environmental impacts
of fabricating and deploying the multi-purpose canister-based system,
as well as the impacts of reasonable alternative storage and transport
systems.
DATES: To ensure that the full range of issues and alternatives related
to this proposal is addressed, DOE invites comments on the proposed
action (fabrication and deployment of the multi-purpose canister-based
system), including the scope of the subject EIS. Oral and written
comments will be considered equally in preparation of the EIS. The
public participation process is discussed below in the Supplemental
Information section.
The public scoping period begins with the publication of this
Notice of Intent in the Federal Register and will continue until
January 6, 1995. Written comments should be postmarked by that date to
ensure consideration. Comments received after that date will be
considered to the extent practicable.
ADDRESSES: Written comments on the scope of this EIS should be directed
to: U.S. Department of Energy, c/o Argonne National Laboratory, EAD,
Building 900, Mail Stop 1, 9700 South Cass Avenue, Argonne, IL 60439,
ATTN: Multi-Purpose Canister EIS Comments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information on this EIS,
please contact: Mr. Gerald J. Parker, Multi-Purpose Canister EIS
Manager, Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management (RW-45), U.S.
Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC
20585, Telephone: 1-202-586-5679.
For general information on the DOE NEPA review process, please
contact: Ms. Carol M. Borgstrom, Director, Office of NEPA Oversight
(EH-25), U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20585, Telephone: 1-202-586-4600 or leave a message at
1-800-472-2756.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Public Participation: All interested persons
or stakeholders, including Federal agencies, Indian tribal
organizations, State and local government agencies, public interest
groups, manufacturers of equipment, transportation interests, industry
and utility organizations, regulators, and the general public are
encouraged to participate in the EIS scoping process. Because of the
anticipated public interest and national scope of the program, DOE will
provide several means for the public to express its views and provide
comments. Comments submitted by any of these means will become part of
the official record for scoping.
Written Comments: DOE invites all interested persons to submit
comments related to the proposed fabrication and deployment of the
multi-purpose canister-based system. Written comments should be sent to
the Argonne National Laboratory address listed above. Requests for fact
sheets and related documents (which will cover such topics as the
proposed multi-purpose canister-based system, safety, transportation,
and the NEPA process) may also be made by writing to this address.
Written comments and requests for fact sheets and related documents can
be submitted to the following toll-free facsimile telephone number: 1-
800-MPC-4531 or 1-800-672-4531.
Toll-Free Telephone Line: Oral comments may be made via the
following toll-free telephone number, 1-800-MPC-3304 or 1-800-672-3304,
from 9 a.m. to 9 p.m. Eastern Standard Time, Monday through Friday.
Comments will be noted and become part of the official record for
scoping. Requests for fact sheets and related documents may also be
made by calling this toll-free telephone number.
Electronic Mail: Comments can be submitted by electronic mail to
the following INTERNET address: [email protected]. Requests
for fact sheets and related documents may also be made using this
electronic mail address.
Electronic Bulletin Board: The public may review technical
documents and provide comments via an electronic bulletin board. Call
1-800-MPC-1855 or 1-800-672-1855 for information on downloading, and
for uploading comments for inclusion in the scoping process.
Meetings: Three public scoping meetings will be held to provide and
discuss information on the subject EIS, and to receive oral and written
comments. Meetings are scheduled for November 21, 1994, in Las Vegas,
Nevada, at the Cashman Field Center, 850 Las Vegas Boulevard North;
November 30, 1994, in Chicago, Illinois, at the Clarion International
Hotel, 6810 N. Mannheim Rd.; and December 7, 1994, in the Washington
D.C., area, at the Hyatt Crystal City Hotel in Arlington, Virginia. All
meetings are scheduled from 8:30 a.m. until 9 p.m. or later, depending
upon public interest. Pre-registration to speak at a scoping meeting is
requested no later than five days prior to the meeting in that city.
Pre-registration (by providing name and organization affiliation, if
any) can be accomplished via the toll-free telephone number, the toll-
free facsimile number, electronic mail, or in writing. The meetings
will be open to the general public and on-site registration to speak
will be accommodated to the extent practicable.
Technical exhibits, informational materials, models, and videos
will be available in a separate room at each meeting site. DOE staff
and representatives will be available to discuss the program and answer
questions. Comment cards will be available for those who desire to
provide scoping comments at that time. On the day of the public
meeting, this room will be open from 8 a.m. until 9 p.m. or later,
depending upon public interest.
The three public scoping meetings will start at 8:30 a.m. DOE staff
will briefly describe: (1) the proposed multi-purpose canister-based
system; (2) the EIS procedure and the scoping process, including other
public participation opportunities such as the toll-free telephone
number, toll-free facsimile number, written comment process, electronic
mail availability, and electronic bulletin board access; and (3) the
morning's informational workshop format and the format for public
scoping. Following this introduction, informational workshops will be
held, focusing on different technical aspects of the multi-purpose
canister-based system. The four workshops will be repeated during the
morning and will cover the following topics: (1) Multi-purpose canister
design parameters and fabrication; (2) storage at reactor sites and at
other possible storage facilities; (3) transportation; and (4) surface
handling of multi-purpose canisters at a geologic repository in
preparation for disposal. These informational workshops will be
informal, and will not become part of the record for scoping.
On-the-record public scoping will begin at 1:30 p.m. Based upon
pre- registration, a list of speakers will be developed. Walk-in
registrants will be accommodated following pre-registrants. Oral
comments will be recorded by a court reporter.
Results of scoping, including a summary of comments received, will
be made available in the EIS Implementation Plan. DOE will make the
Implementation Plan available to the public for information as soon as
possible after the close of scoping but prior to issuance of the draft
EIS. The Implementation Plan will also include a statement of the
planned scope and content of the EIS, the purpose and need for agency
action, the proposed action and alternatives, target schedules,
anticipated consultation with other agencies, and a description of the
scoping process and the results of this process. Copies of the
Implementation Plan, as well as the draft and final EISs, will be
provided to anyone requesting copies of the documents. In addition,
copies will be made available for inspection during business hours at
DOE's Freedom of Information Reading Room (1E-190), Forrestal Building,
1000 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C., Monday through
Friday; and in local DOE Field Office reading rooms (locations are
listed at the end of this notice).
Purpose and Need for Agency Action: Under the Nuclear Waste Policy
Act of 1982, as amended (42 U.S.C. 10101 et seq.), DOE is responsible
for managing the disposal of spent nuclear fuel from civilian nuclear
power plants, and for possible monitored retrievable storage of spent
nuclear fuel prior to disposal. The Department is also responsible for
transportation of spent nuclear fuel in connection with DOE's disposal
or storage. In order to carry out these responsibilities, DOE needs to
develop a program for handling, storing, transporting, and disposing
spent nuclear fuel. A number of alternative technology systems may be
available to accomplish these objectives and protect the environment.
DOE needs to select one or more such systems.
Background: The Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, as amended, (the
Act), made DOE responsible for managing the disposal of high-level
radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel from civilian nuclear power
plants, and established the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste
Management for that purpose. Specifically, the Act directed DOE to
``establish a schedule for the siting, construction, and operation of
repositories that will provide a reasonable assurance that the public
and the environment will be adequately protected from the hazards posed
by high-level radioactive waste and such spent nuclear fuel as may be
disposed of in a repository.'' As discussed below, Congress also
established in the Act specific requirements applicable to DOE's NEPA
compliance activities as DOE proceeds to implement the Act's mandate.
In carrying out that mandate, DOE is developing an overall waste
management system that will include a geologic repository for permanent
disposal of waste and a possible monitored retrievable storage facility
for temporary storage. The requirements for developing these facilities
are explicitly set forth in the Act. These facilities are described
below.
Geologic Repository: On May 27, 1986, the then-Secretary of Energy,
as required by the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, nominated five
sites in Mississippi, Nevada, Texas, Utah, and Washington as suitable
for characterization for a possible geologic repository and recommended
to the President that three of these sites--the Yucca Mountain site in
Nevada, the Deaf Smith County site in Texas, and the Hanford site in
Washington--be characterized as candidate sites for a first repository.
The Secretary's recommendation was approved by the President.
In 1987, Congress passed the Nuclear Waste Policy Amendments Act,
which directed that DOE conduct repository site-characterization
activities only at the Yucca Mountain site in Nye County, Nevada. If,
after site characterization, Yucca Mountain is found by DOE to be
suitable as a geologic repository, it is expected to be available for
receiving spent nuclear fuel by the year 2010.
The Nuclear Waste Policy Amendments Act stipulates that if the
Yucca Mountain site is found suitable, DOE's decision to recommend to
the President the development of the Yucca Mountain site as a geologic
repository will be supported by an EIS. The statute specifically
provides that this EIS need not consider the following issues (which
otherwise might require consideration under NEPA): (1) The need for a
geologic repository, (2) alternatives to geologic disposal, and (3)
alternative sites to Yucca Mountain. The scope of a geologic repository
EIS will be discussed in a Notice of Intent that DOE has scheduled to
be issued in the Federal Register in 1995.
Monitored Retrievable Storage Facility: The Nuclear Waste Policy
Amendments Act also provided two processes for siting and constructing
a monitored retrievable storage facility. Under one process, DOE would
survey and evaluate potentially suitable sites. Under the other
process, the Nuclear Waste Negotiator (a position established by the
Nuclear Waste Policy Amendments Act) would attempt to find a State or
Indian tribe willing to host a monitored retrievable storage facility.
DOE is currently supporting the efforts of the Nuclear Waste
Negotiator to find a suitable site for a monitored retrievable storage
facility. For either siting process, the Act requires that DOE's
application to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for a construction
authorization be accompanied by an EIS.
Current Practices for On-Site Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel: Spent
nuclear fuel assemblies consist of an array of zircalloy or stainless
steel rods filled with uranium dioxide pellets, which have reached the
end of their useful life in a nuclear reactor. Spent fuel assemblies
from commercial power reactors are initially stored under water in
specially designed pools at the reactor sites. The spent nuclear fuel
is both thermally hot and highly radioactive. At many commercial
reactor sites, the quantity of spent fuel assemblies is approaching the
maximum storage capacity of the pools. Although pool capacity can be
increased by fuel rod consolidation or re-racking, as reactors continue
to operate and more spent nuclear fuel is generated, other means for
temporary storage of spent nuclear fuel are being implemented. One
storage option is the construction of additional at-reactor storage, or
independent spent fuel storage installations, which would provide dry
storage of spent nuclear fuel. The first licensed dry cask storage
facility began operation in 1986. Since then, several other dry cask
storage facilities have been licensed.
The Department's Energy Information Administration projects that 22
spent fuel storage pools will have reached their maximum storage
capacity before the end of 1998; therefore, additional storage capacity
would be required. Utilities are currently using dry cask storage at
reactor sites for this additional storage capacity. The need for spent
nuclear fuel storage will increase whether or not DOE deploys the
multi-purpose canister-based system or any of its alternatives.
Multi-purpose Canister-based System: The multi-purpose canister-
based system would replace or supplement existing technologies for
storage and transport of spent nuclear fuel. While the Act makes DOE
responsible for the transportation, monitored retrievable storage, and
disposal of spent nuclear fuel, multi-purpose canister technology is
not a specific requirement of the Act. Rather, it is one means of
providing for spent nuclear fuel transportation that, because of its
multi-purpose design, would also facilitate the Department's planning
for disposal facilities and possible monitored retrievable storage,
while assisting commercial reactor operators in satisfying their need
to plan for additional storage of the spent nuclear fuel that is
accumulating at the civilian reactor sites.
In 1992, DOE investigated the feasibility of using a multi-purpose
canister-based system, i.e., a standardized set of sealed canisters,
transportation casks, and storage overpacks to handle spent nuclear
fuel. Under this approach, spent fuel assemblies would be placed in
sealed canisters that would remain sealed during transport and storage,
and that would be compatible with disposal. Because this approach would
minimize the handling of individual fuel assemblies, preliminary
evaluations indicated that such a multi-purpose canister-based system
could provide cost, feasibility, health and safety, environmental
impact, and risk advantages over other existing and proposed waste
management systems. Additionally, the multi-purpose canister-based
system could be used to accept a majority of existing fuel sizes and
configurations, and would allow the establishment of standardized
handling procedures.
The investigation of the multi-purpose canister concept involved
the development of a conceptual design, numerous supporting studies,
evaluations of alternative cask and canister concepts, and input from
stakeholders. Based on these activities, the decision was made to
invite private vendors to submit designs for components of the multi-
purpose canister-based system. On June 3, 1994, a package of
information was provided to individuals responding to a DOE contractor
(TRW Environmental Safety Systems, Inc.) request for proposals
announcement, which was published in the May 11, 1994, issue of the
Commerce Business Daily. One or more design contracts are expected to
be awarded in early 1995. The request for proposals established broad
criteria sufficient to allow for varied design approaches.
The varied design approaches expected to be received in response to
the request for proposals will be reviewed by DOE and a range of
reasonable alternatives will be submitted to the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission for certification of their compliance with the Commission's
regulations for transport and storage of spent nuclear fuel (10 CFR
Parts 71 and 72). DOE expects that each vendor team will submit a
package of up to six multi-purpose canister-related Safety Analysis
Reports (up to four for storage and two for transportation). More than
one vendor team may proceed to the cask certification phase. DOE
expects these applications to represent the reasonable range of multi-
purpose canister-based system alternatives. The decision to proceed
with designs and to submit Safety Analysis Reports for a multi-purpose
canister-based system will not limit the choice of reasonable
alternatives for handling, storing and transporting spent nuclear fuel
nor prejudice the ultimate decisions on the spent nuclear fuel
management system, because DOE and/or commercial reactor operators are
free to use any Nuclear Regulatory Commission-certified technology. If
there are any meaningful differences in the environmental impacts of
varied multi-purpose canister-based system designs, they are expected
to relate to cask capacity, which determines the quantity of spent
nuclear fuel in a storage and transport unit, and therefore would
determine the total inventory of multi-purpose canisters required for
storage and transport.
DOE, in accordance with both the Council on Environmental Quality's
NEPA regulations (40 CFR Parts 1500-1508) and its own regulations for
implementing NEPA (10 CFR Part 1021), has determined that an EIS is the
appropriate level of environmental review documentation for the
proposed action. The subject EIS will analyze the environmental impacts
of fabricating and deploying a multi-purpose canister-based system as a
part of the civilian spent nuclear fuel management system.
Proposed Action: The proposed action would provide a standardized
system to handle, store, and transport spent nuclear fuel, in order to
minimize or eliminate the need for the spent nuclear fuel to be removed
from canisters or casks during storage and transportation, and, to the
extent practicable, be compatible with disposal.
DOE proposes to fabricate and deploy certain components of a multi-
purpose canister-based system. These components are: (1) Canisters
capable of holding multiple spent nuclear fuel assemblies; (2)
specialized handling and welding equipment; (3) transfer casks to
shield the canisters during loading into on-site storage casks; (4)
storage casks for sealed canisters; (5) transportation casks for rail
transport of canisters; and (6) associated equipment necessary to
deploy the multi-purpose canister-based system. If DOE decides to
deploy this system, the multi-purpose canister-based system components
could be provided to utilities building dry storage facilities and
willing to adopt the multi-purpose canister as part of their spent
nuclear fuel management system.
In evaluating the environmental impacts of the proposed action, the
following will be analyzed:
Manufacturing of multi-purpose canister-based system
components;
Packaging and handling of spent nuclear fuel as it is
transferred to canisters or casks;
Canister transfer and loading operations;
Storage of spent nuclear fuel in canisters and casks at
the reactor sites;
Spent nuclear fuel transportation from the reactor sites
to a hypothetical monitored retrievable storage facility and/or a
geologic repository (generic analysis);
Handling and storage of spent nuclear fuel at a
hypothetical monitored retrievable storage facility (generic analysis);
and
Surface activities involving the handling and disposal of
spent nuclear fuel at a geologic repository (generic analysis).
The multi-purpose canister-based system could be compatible with
the permanent disposal of spent nuclear fuel because the canister could
be encapsulated in a sealed disposal overpack for placement in a
geologic repository. Because site characterization data are not
available and the regulatory standards applicable to permanent disposal
have not yet been established by the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, underground emplacement and post-closure impacts at a geologic
repository will not be addressed in this EIS. As previously described,
such impacts will be discussed in the geologic repository EIS.
To analyze the impacts of the multi-purpose canister-based system,
the subject EIS will use the conceptual designs that accompanied the
request for proposals information package, which was distributed on
June 3, 1994. The conceptual designs include two sizes for the multi-
purpose canister: a large capacity canister that would satisfy a 125-
ton crane hook weight limit and a small capacity canister that would
meet a 75-ton crane hook weight limit. The capacity of the large
canister would be 21 pressurized water reactor fuel assemblies or 40
boiling water reactor fuel assemblies. The small canister would have a
capacity of 12 pressurized water reactor assemblies or 24 boiling water
reactor assemblies.
A multi-purpose canister would consist of a cylindrical shell with
two lids, a spent fuel basket, and a shield plug. The spent fuel basket
would provide structural support for the spent fuel assemblies and a
path for the transfer of the heat generated by the spent nuclear fuel
into the canister shell. The spent fuel basket would also provide
criticality\5\ control to ensure that the spent nuclear fuel remains
subcritical. The cylindrical shell would provide structural support for
the fuel basket structure. For storage, the cylindrical shell and the
inner lid would provide a primary containment boundary to prevent the
release of radioactive material from the spent nuclear fuel. For
transportation and disposal, the outer lid would provide primary
containment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\Criticality is the ability of an array of nuclear fuel to
sustain a nuclear chain reaction. Casks used for storage and
transportation of spent nuclear fuel and waste packages used for
final disposal must be designed to prevent the occurrence of
criticality, even under postulated accident conditions. The
condition of nuclear fuel before it achieves criticality is called
subcritical.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The material considered in the conceptual design for the multi-
purpose canister shell was 316L stainless steel; alternatives may
include other types of stainless steel. The shield plug is a metal
barrier to reduce exposure during transfer and may be required to
maintain personnel radiation exposures as low as reasonably achievable
during welding and inspection; alternative materials may include
depleted uranium and carbon steel.
The multi-purpose canister-based system conceptual design also
includes two transportation casks, one to transport the large canister
and one to transport the small canister. For transportation, the
transportation cask provides the primary containment. The structural
components of the cask body may be composed of stainless steel and an
enclosed gamma shielding material that incorporates depleted uranium
and a layer of lead. Alternative shielding materials may be lead,
depleted uranium, or a combination of the two.
Alternatives to the Proposed Action: Three alternative hardware
systems are being considered for evaluation in the EIS. These
alternatives are presented to facilitate discussion on the scope of the
EIS and are not intended to be all-inclusive or to predetermine the EIS
scope. The alternatives include: (1) no action, which is the current
technology consisting of different systems of specialized single-
purpose canisters and casks that have been certified by the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission or are presently undergoing Nuclear Regulatory
Commission certification; (2) the current technology [as in alternative
(1)] supplemented by a high-capacity rail transportation cask; and (3)
a system using transportable storage casks. These alternatives are
further described below.
Under the no-action alternative, DOE would not promote a particular
system. Under this approach, DOE expects that spent fuel assemblies
would be transferred from one single-purpose cask to another single-
purpose cask as they move through the waste-management system. Each
transfer process would require additional handling of bare spent fuel
assemblies. This non-standardized single-purpose system is currently
being used or proposed for use by utilities as their spent fuel pools
reach capacity. In addition to the currently certified rail
transportation casks, this scenario assumes that the legal weight truck
cask, currently being developed with a capacity of four pressurized
water reactor or nine boiling water reactor fuel assemblies, will also
be available. Because DOE expects this scenario to occur if DOE does
not act to implement the multi-purpose canister-based system or one of
the other alternatives, it regards this scenario as the no-action
alternative in the EIS.
The second alternative is identical to the no-action alternative,
except that the system would be supplemented by a new high-capacity
rail transportation cask. This alternative would examine the use of
rail transport to reduce the frequency of required shipments, improve
transportation efficiency, and reduce cumulative exposures near
transportation routes. Like the no-action alternative, this alternative
would require additional handling of bare spent fuel assemblies as
these assemblies are transferred from one single purpose storage or
transportation canister or cask to another. Although DOE is unaware of
any effort currently under way to obtain Nuclear Regulatory Commission
certification of such a rail cask, the rail cask is technically
feasible and may provide advantages over the no-action alternative.
The third alternative involves the development of dual-purpose
transportable storage casks (a dual-purpose cask-based system that
could be transported by rail). This system could be supplemented with
legal weight truck casks for those utilities unable to accommodate
transportable storage casks suitable for rail transport. Under this
alternative, spent fuel assemblies would be placed in a sealed cask
that may be used for dry storage and transport by rail, either to a
monitored retrievable storage facility or to a geologic repository. At
a geologic repository, individual fuel assemblies would be removed from
the transportable storage cask and repackaged in a suitable geologic
disposal package. This alternative could provide high transportation
capacities in comparison to the no-action alternative and reduce the
number of times that spent nuclear fuel would have to be handled
outside a canister or a cask. However, it would require additional
repackaging and handling of the spent nuclear fuel at a geologic
repository.
Environmental Issues: DOE has identified environmental issues
related to the multi-purpose canister-based system and the alternative
systems. The issues are presented here to facilitate scoping. The list
of issues is not intended to be all-inclusive or to predetermine the
scope of the EIS.
Since the proposed multi-purpose canister-based system would be
made available to commercial reactor operators, and would be used by
DOE in its own activities relating to the management of spent nuclear
fuel, this EIS would address in general terms potential impacts related
to deployment of the multi-purpose canister-based system or its
alternatives at all steps leading to ultimate disposal. However, the
EIS would not include site-specific analysis of the potential impacts
associated with specific reactor sites, potential monitored retrievable
storage facility sites, potential geologic repository sites, or site-
specific transportation routes. These analyses would be performed in
subsequent NEPA reviews, as appropriate.
DOE expects that the EIS would address the following issues:
Public and Worker Safety and Health. The potential health
and safety impacts to workers and the public during the handling,
packaging and storage of spent nuclear fuel at a generic nuclear power
plant site, during transportation of spent nuclear fuel, and during
handling at storage and disposal facilities. Subsequent NEPA documents
will address health effects in more detail once the specific proposed
sites and routes are identified;
Transportation. The potential risks associated with
transport of spent nuclear fuel will be assessed for shipments between
reactor sites and each hypothetical monitored retrievable storage
facility and/or a geologic repository. For purposes of analysis, two
hypothetical monitored retrievable storage facility locations will be
considered: one in the eastern region and one in the western region of
the United States. A geologic repository will be assumed to be located
at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, which is the only candidate repository site
currently authorized by law for investigation. The use of hypothetical
routes and facility locations for the monitored retrievable storage
facility and geologic repository in performing various calculations is
not meant to imply that DOE has actually made routing or site-selection
decisions at this time;
Accidents. The potential effects to the environment,
workers and the public due to reasonably foreseeable accidents during
handling, storage, and transportation, including accidents with low
probability but high consequences;
Waste Isolation. The potential impacts on the operation of
at-reactor storage sites, hypothetical monitored retrievable storage
facilities, and a geologic repository;
Waste Management. The impacts of management of solid and
liquid waste, including residues, non-hazardous, hazardous, and
radiological wastes that might result from manufacturing, storage, and
transportation;
Socioeconomic Conditions. Potential generic socioeconomic
impacts, such as impacts on employment, tax base, and public services;
Environmental Justice. Potential disproportionately high
and adverse impacts of activities on minority or low-income
populations;
Pollution Prevention. Appropriate and innovative pollution
prevention, waste minimization, and energy and water use reduction
technologies, including eliminating or significantly reducing: (a)
Acquisition of unnecessary hazardous substances, and (b) energy, water,
and related environmental impacts by promoting use of energy efficient
and renewable technologies;
Soil, Water, and Air Resources. Potential generic impacts
to soil, water, and air pathways;
Sensitive Habitat Resources. Potential generic impacts to
plants, animals, and habitat, including impacts to floodplains,
wetlands, and threatened and endangered species and their habitat; and
Cultural Resources. Potential generic impacts to cultural
resources.
Relationship to Other NEPA Reviews: The Act directs DOE to
characterize only one site, Yucca Mountain, Nye County, Nevada, for the
first geologic repository. If, after site characterization, the Yucca
Mountain site is found to be suitable, the Secretary of Energy may
submit to the President a recommendation that the President approve the
site for development as a geologic repository. This recommendation is
required by the Act to be accompanied by an EIS. At present, site
characterization activities are proceeding at Yucca Mountain, but a
site-suitability determination has not been made. The Act also
authorizes DOE to site, construct, and operate a monitored retrievable
storage facility subject to certain conditions. The Act states that any
DOE selection of a monitored retrievable storage facility site must be
accompanied by an environmental assessment for site selection and a
subsequent EIS for licensing, and may not occur until the Secretary has
characterized a geologic repository site and recommended to the
President the approval of the geologic repository site. At present, no
monitored retrievable storage facility site has been proposed. The Act
also provides for a negotiated, volunteer process for siting a
monitored retrievable storage facility. The Act allows the negotiated
siting of a monitored retrievable storage facility by this process
before recommendation of a geologic repository site. The Act requires
the preparation of (1) an environmental assessment for proposing a
negotiated site to Congress, and (2) an EIS for licensing. No monitored
retrievable storage site has been proposed under this voluntary
process.
DOE prepared two EIS's that supported the programmatic decision to
develop a civilian radioactive waste management system and were
available to Congress during its consideration of the Act. These two
supporting EIS's are:
Final Environmental Impact Statement: Management of
Commercially Generated Radioactive Waste, DOE/EIS-0046-F, 1980,
evaluated the environmental impacts of various alternatives associated
with the management of commercially generated waste and recommended
geologic disposal over other disposal forms; and
Final Environmental Impact Statement: U.S. Spent Fuel
Policy, DOE/EIS-0015, 1980, evaluated the environmental impacts of the
storage and transportation of spent nuclear fuel as proposed in the
draft Spent Nuclear Fuel Act of 1979. The alternatives evaluated were
at-reactor storage, regionalized storage, and centralized storage
(i.e., a monitored retrievable storage facility). The last of these was
found to have the least environmental impacts.
DOE also prepared other environmental review documents under the
Act relative to other aspects of the waste management system. The
subject EIS would use pertinent information presented in the following
environmental review documents:
Environmental Assessment, Yucca Mountain Site, Nevada
Research and Development Area, Nye County, Nevada, DOE/RW-0073, 1986;
and
Environmental Assessment for a Monitored Retrievable
Storage Facility, DOE/RW-0035, 1986.
Additional documents that may be prepared, as required by the Act,
include:
EIS for construction and operation of a geologic
repository;
Environmental Assessment for a negotiated site for a
monitored retrievable storage facility;
Environmental Assessment for the selection of a DOE-sited
monitored retrievable storage facility;
EIS for construction of a monitored retrievable storage
facility.
Additional DOE NEPA documentation related to spent nuclear fuel,
recently issued or in preparation, includes:
Programmatic Spent Nuclear Fuel Management and Idaho
National Engineering Laboratory Environmental Restoration and Waste
Management Programs Draft EIS, June 1994; and
A Proposed Policy for the Acceptance of Foreign Research
Reactor Spent Nuclear Fuel EIS, Notice of Intent, October 21, 1993 (58
FR 54366).
These two documents address spent nuclear fuel that the DOE
currently owns or proposes to acquire; the total quantity of such spent
nuclear fuel is a small fraction of the current and prospective
domestic commercial civilian spent nuclear fuel inventory. Although the
DOE-owned fuel is not being specifically considered in the development
of the multi-purpose canister, multi-purpose canister-based technology
may be appropriate for the DOE-owned spent nuclear fuel.
Supporting Documentation: Copies of the Implementation Plan, as
well as the draft and final EISs, will be made available for inspection
during business hours at DOE's Freedom of Information Reading Rooms,
which are listed below.
Department of Energy Freedom of Information Public Reading Rooms
Albuquerque Operations Office
National Atomic Museum, Building 20358, Wyoming Boulevard, P.O. Box
5400, Albuquerque, NM 871-5400, Attn: Diane Zepeda, (505) 845-4370
Bartlesville Project Office/National Institute for Petroleum and Energy
Research
BPO/NIPER Library, U.S. Department of Energy, 220 North Virginia
Avenue, P.O. Box 2128, Bartlesville, OK 74003, Attn: Josh Stroman,
(918) 337-4971
Dallas Support Office
U.S. Department of Energy, Suite 400, 1440 W. Mockingbird Lane, Dallas,
TX 75247, Attn: Gailene Reinhold, (214) 767-7040
Denver Support Office
U.S. Department of Energy, 1075 South Yukon Street, P.O. Box 26247,
Lakewood, CO 80226, Attn: Al Hymer, (303) 969-7000 x233
Bonneville Power Administration
U.S. Department of Energy, P.O. Box 3621-ALP, Portland, OR 97208, Attn:
Jo Ann Scott, (503) 230-3474/3232
Chicago Operations Office
Document Department, University of Illinois at Chicago, 801 South
Morgan Street, Chicago, IL 60607, Attn: Karen Graves, (312) 996-2738
Fernald Area Office
U.S. Department of Energy, Public Information Room, FERMCO, P.O. Box
398705, Cincinnati, OH 45239-8705, Attn: Ken Morgan, (513) 648-3131
Headquarters Office
U.S. Department of Energy, Room 1E-190, Forrestal Bldg., 1000
Independence Ave., SW., Washington, DC 20585, Attn: Denise Diggin,
(202) 586-6020
Idaho Operations Office
Idaho Public Reading Room, 1776 Science Center Drive, Idaho Falls, ID
83402, Attn: Carl R. Robertson, (208) 526-1144
Morgantown Energy Technology Center
METC Library, U.S. Department of Energy, 3610 Collins Ferry Road, P.O.
Box 880, Morgantown, WV 26505, Attn: Matt Marsteller, (304) 291-4183
Richland Operations Office
Washington State University, Tri-Cities Branch Campus, 100 Sprout Road,
Richland, WA 99352, Attn: Terri Traub, (509) 376-8583
Rocky Flats Field Office
Front Range Community, College Library, 3645 West 112th Avenue,
Westminster, CO 80030, Attn: Will-Ann Lamsens, (303) 469-4435
Nevada Operations Office
U.S. Department of Energy, Public Reading Room, 2753 South Highland
Drive, P.O. Box 98518, Las Vegas, NV 89193-8518, Attn: Charlotte Cox,
(702) 295-1459
Oak Ridge Operations Office
U.S. Department of Energy, Public Reading Room, 200 Administration
Road, P.O. Box 2001, Oak Ridge, TN 37831-8510, Attn: Jane Greenwalt,
(615) 576-1216
Oakland Operations Office
U.S. Department of Energy, Public Reading Room, EIC, 8th Floor, 1301
Clay Street, Oakland, CA 94612-5208, Attn: Lauren McNair, (510) 637-
1762
Savannah River Operations Office
Gregg-Granite Library, Univer. of S. Carolina--Aiken, 171 University
Parkway, Aiken, SC 29801, Attn: James M. Gaver, (803) 725-2889
Pittsburgh Energy Technology Center
U.S. Department of Energy, Building 922/M210, P.O. Box 10940800,
Pittsburgh, PA 15236, Attn: Ann C. Dunlap, (412) 892-6167
Southeastern Power Administration
U.S. Department of Energy, Legal Library, Samuel Elbert Building,
Public Square, Elberton, GA 30635-2496, Attn: Joel W. Seymour, (706)
283-9911
Seattle Support Office
U.S. Department of Energy, 800 Fifth Avenue, #3950, Seattle, WA 98104,
Attn: Kathy Vega, (206) 553-1132
Southwestern Power Administration
U.S. Department of Energy, Public Reading Room, P.O. Box 1619, Tulsa,
OK 74101, Attn: Marti Ayers, (918) 581-7426
Strategic Petroleum Reserve Project Management Office
U.S. Department of Energy, SPRPMO/SEB Reading Room, 900 Commerce Road,
New Orleans, LA 70123, Attn: Ulyess Washington, (504) 734-4243
Superconducting Super Collider Termination Project Office
U.S. Department of Energy, 2550 Beckleymeade Avenue, Dallas, TX 75237,
Attn: Gina Dan, (214) 708-2526
Issued in Washington, DC., on October 19, 1994.
Thomas A. Rollow,
Acting Assistant Secretary, Environment, Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. 94-26361 Filed 10-20-94; 11:41 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P