[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 126 (Friday, June 28, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 33719-33722]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-16565]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY


Disposition of Surplus Highly Enriched Uranium Final 
Environmental Impact Statement

AGENCY: Department of Energy.

ACTION: Notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Energy (DOE) announces the availability of 
the Disposition of Surplus Highly Enriched Uranium Final Environmental 
Impact Statement (HEU Final EIS). In accordance with the National 
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), the Council on Environmental 
Quality Regulations (40 CFR Parts 1500-1508), and the Department's NEPA 
Implementing Procedures (10 CFR Part 1021), the Department has prepared 
the HEU Final EIS to evaluate alternatives for the disposition of 
United States-origin, weapons-usable, highly enriched uranium (HEU) 
that has been, or may be, declared surplus to national defense needs by 
the President.

DATES: A Record of Decision in the HEU disposition program will be 
issued no earlier than July 29, 1996. The Department will consider, as 
appropriate, in the Record of Decision, any comments received by July 
29, 1996 on the Cost Comparison for Highly Enriched Uranium Disposition 
Alternatives (available separately and summarized in the Supplementary 
Information, below) or the Floodplain Proposed Statement of Findings 
(included in section 4.13 of the HEU Final EIS and also summarized 
below).

ADDRESSES: Requests for copies of the HEU Final EIS or the Cost 
Comparison for Highly Enriched Uranium Disposition Alternatives, 
requests for information, and comments on the Proposed Floodplain 
Statement of Findings (section 4.13 of the HEU Final EIS) should be 
directed to: Office of Fissile Materials Disposition (MD-4), Attention: 
HEU EIS, U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Ave., SW, 
Washington, DC 20585, phone (202) 586-4513, fax (202) 586-4078.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information on the DOE National 
Environmental Policy Act process, contact: Carol M. Borgstrom, 
Director, Office of NEPA Policy and Assistance (EH-42), U.S. Department 
of Energy, 1000 Independence Ave., SW, Washington, DC 20585, (202) 586-
4600 or leave a message at 1-800-472-2756.
    Availability of the HEU Final EIS: Copies of the HEU Final EIS have 
been distributed to Federal, State, Indian tribal, and local officials, 
agencies, and interested organizations and individuals. The full text 
of the 72-page Summary of the HEU Final EIS is available, along with 
numerous other Fissile Materials Disposition program documents, on the 
program's Electronic Bulletin Board/World Wide Web Page (http://
web.fie.com/htdoc/fed/doe/fsl/pub/menu/any/). Copies of the HEU Final 
EIS and supporting technical reports are also available for public

[[Page 33720]]

review at the DOE reading room locations listed at the end of this 
Notice.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On October 26, 1995, the Department published a Notice of 
Availability (NOA) in the Federal Register (60 FR 54967) of the 
Disposition of Surplus Highly Enriched Uranium Draft Environmental 
Impact Statement for public review and comment. The NOA invited the 
public to comment on the draft EIS during a 45-day comment period that 
was to end December 11, 1995. Subsequently, in response to public 
requests, the Department announced in the Federal Register (60 FR 
58056, November 24, 1995) an extension of the comment period until 
January 12, 1996. Public workshops on the draft HEU EIS were held in 
Knoxville, Tennessee on November 14, 1995, and in Augusta, Georgia on 
November 16, 1995.

Alternatives Considered

    The HEU Final EIS assesses environmental impacts of five reasonable 
alternatives identified for the disposition of up to 200 metric tons of 
surplus HEU. This includes HEU that has already been declared surplus 
(175 metric tons) as well as additional weapons-usable HEU that may be 
declared surplus in the future. The material is currently located at 
facilities throughout the Department's nuclear weapons complex, but the 
majority is in, or destined for, interim storage at the Department's Y-
12 Plant in Oak Ridge, Tennessee. Except for the no action alternative, 
all reasonable alternatives involve blending HEU with depleted, 
natural, or low-enriched uranium (LEU) to make LEU, which is not 
weapons-usable, and the majority of which would have potential 
commercial value as non-defense, nuclear power plant fuel feed. The 
alternatives, except for the no action alternative, reflect blending 
different proportions of the HEU to LEU for commercial use versus 
blending it to LEU for disposal as waste. The alternatives also present 
different combinations of blending sites and blending processes.
    Alternative 1 as presented in the HEU Final EIS is No Action 
(continued storage of surplus HEU). Alternative 2 is No Commercial Use, 
and represents blending all 200 metric tons of surplus HEU to waste 
(fuel/waste ratio of 0/100) using the four blending sites listed below. 
Alternative 3 is Limited Commercial Use, and includes transferring 50 
metric tons of HEU (and 7000 metric tons of natural uranium) to the 
United States Enrichment Corporation (USEC) for commercial use, but 
blending the remaining 150 metric tons of HEU to waste (fuel/waste 
ratio of 25/75). Alternative 3 assumes the 50 metric tons of commercial 
material would be blended at two commercial blending sites, and the 
waste material would be blended at four sites. Alternative 4 is 
Substantial Commercial Use, and represents blending 130 metric tons of 
HEU for commercial use and 70 metric tons for disposal as waste (fuel/
waste ratio of 65/35). Alternative 5 is Maximum Commercial Use, and 
represents blending 170 metric tons of HEU for commercial use and 30 
metric tons for disposal as waste (fuel/waste ratio of 85/15). Both 
Alternatives 4 and 5, like Alternative 3, include the proposal to 
transfer 50 metric tons of HEU and 7,000 metric tons of natural uranium 
to USEC for commercial use. Alternatives 4 and 5 each have four site 
variations: (a) two DOE sites only, (b) two commercial sites only, (c) 
all four sites, and (d) each site alone. The DOE and commercial sites 
that can perform HEU conversion and blending are: DOE's Y-12 Plant at 
the Oak Ridge Reservation in Oak Ridge, Tennessee; DOE's Savannah River 
Site in Aiken, South Carolina; the Babcock & Wilcox Naval Nuclear Fuel 
Division in Lynchburg, Virginia; and the Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc. 
Plant in Erwin, Tennessee. The EIS also assesses the environmental 
impacts of necessary transportation of materials. For a more complete 
discussion of the alternatives and their impacts, the reader is 
referred to the HEU Final EIS or its Summary.
    The alternatives as described are not intended to represent 
exclusive options among which the Department must choose, but rather 
are analyzed to represent reasonable points in the matrix of possible 
choices. The HEU Final EIS explains how impacts would change if the 
exact fuel/waste ratio or division among sites or processes were 
different.

Preferred Alternative

    The HEU Final EIS, as did the Draft EIS, identifies DOE's preferred 
alternative as Alternative 5 (Maximum Commercial Use) and site 
variation c (all four sites). Under this alternative, the commercial 
use of surplus HEU would be maximized and the blending would most 
likely be done at some combination of commercial and DOE sites over a 
period of 15 to 20 years. The Department prefers this alternative 
because commercial use of LEU derived from surplus HEU not only would 
serve the objective of rendering these materials non-weapons-usable, 
but it would also allow for peaceful, beneficial reuse of the material, 
recover investment for the Federal Treasury, and reduce Government 
waste disposal costs that would be incurred if all (or a greater 
portion of) the material were blended to waste.

Major Comments Received

    During the 78-day public comment period on the HEU Draft EIS, DOE 
received comments on the document by mail, fax, telephone recording, 
electronic mail, and orally at the two public workshops. All of the 
comments are presented in Volume II of the HEU Final EIS, the Comment 
Analysis and Response Document. The major themes that emerged from 
public comments on the HEU Draft EIS were as follows:
     There was broad support for the fundamental objective of 
transforming surplus HEU to non-weapons-usable form by blending it down 
to LEU (for either fuel or waste).
     There was concern from elements of the uranium fuel cycle 
industry that the entry into the market of LEU fuel derived from U.S. 
and Russian HEU could depress uranium prices and possibly lead to the 
closure of U.S. uranium mines, conversion plants, or enrichment plants.
     There was opposition to commercial use of LEU fuel derived 
from surplus HEU because some commentors believed that such use 
increases proliferation risk by creating commercial spent nuclear fuel, 
which includes plutonium. There was also support for commercial use of 
the material.
    The HEU Final EIS has been modified in several respects (relative 
to the Draft EIS) in response to comments received, as well as other 
changes in circumstances since publication of the Draft EIS:
     The discussion of potential impacts on the uranium 
industry has been augmented to reflect the recent enactment of the USEC 
Privatization Act (Public Law 104-134), and to better reflect the 
cumulative impacts in light of the U.S.-Russian Agreement to purchase 
Russian HEU (blended down to LEU).
     The discussion of the rates of disposition actions that 
could result in commercial sales of LEU has been modified to reflect a 
more pragmatic assessment of the time required for DOE to make surplus 
HEU available for disposition. The document was also modified to 
address the provision of the USEC Privatization Act (signed into law on 
April 26, 1996) that requires the Department to determine that its 
sales of uranium would not have adverse

[[Page 33721]]

material impacts on the domestic uranium mining, conversion, or 
enrichment industries.
     Numerous other technical and editorial changes have been 
made to the document.
    With respect to the comments opposing commercial use of LEU derived 
from surplus HEU, the Department does not agree that the spent nuclear 
fuel that would result from such use poses significant proliferation 
risks, because spent fuel is highly radioactive and difficult to 
handle, and is thus in a form which is proliferation resistant. 
Reactors that might use LEU fuel derived from surplus HEU would simply 
use fuel obtained from virgin uranium if the LEU derived from surplus 
HEU did not exist. There would be no increase in spent fuel and no 
increase in plutonium created in that spent fuel as a consequence of 
this program. Furthermore, commercial use of the material would result 
in the generation of less waste material, and generally would involve 
lower environmental impacts than would the blend-to-waste alternative.

Floodplain Proposed Statement of Findings

    Pursuant to the Department's regulations (10 CFR Part 1022) 
implementing Executive Order 11988, Floodplain Management, DOE must 
assess the potential impacts of its proposed actions in floodplains. 
Floodplain impacts were discussed in the water resources sections of 
the HEU Draft EIS. This information has been compiled into a separate 
Floodplain Assessment and Proposed Statement of Findings in the Final 
EIS (in section 4.13).
    Because HEU blending activities associated with the proposed action 
and its alternatives could be accommodated in existing facilities 
without structural modifications, no positive or negative impacts on 
floodplains would be expected at any of the candidate sites. Similarly, 
since blending facilities are not located in the vicinity of wetlands, 
no impacts to wetlands are anticipated. The Floodplain Assessment 
indicates that blending operations at the Y-12 Plant and B&W would be 
accommodated in facilities located outside 100- and 500-year 
floodplains. At SRS, the F- and H-Canyons that could be used for 
blending also fall outside 100-year floodplains. The 500-year 
floodplain limits at SRS have not been delineated. The NFS site is 
partially located in 100- and 500-year floodplains (as determined by a 
current FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map). However, as described in the 
Final EIS, mitigation measures have been, and will continue to be, 
implemented to reduce potential flooding of the site and the likelihood 
of adverse impacts.
    The Department will consider, in its Record of Decision, public 
comments received by July 15, 1996 on the Floodplain Assessment and 
Proposed Statement of Findings.

Cost Comparison for Highly Enriched Uranium Disposition 
Alternatives

    To assist the Department in reaching a Record of Decision on 
surplus HEU disposition, a study, Cost Comparison for Highly Enriched 
Uranium Disposition Alternatives, was prepared on behalf of the 
Department by the Oak Ridge Y-12 Plant, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, which is 
managed by Lockheed Martin Energy Systems, Inc. The report addresses 
the costs of down-blending and commercial use of various quantities of 
LEU derived from surplus HEU versus down-blending surplus HEU to LEU 
for disposal as waste, as defined by the alternatives in the HEU Final 
EIS. The report estimates that blending HEU to LEU for commercial use 
would save up to $4 billion in direct costs when compared to the 
alternative of blending to LEU for disposal as waste. The Cost 
Comparison, which was completed in April 1996, was disseminated for 
review at the beginning of May 1996 to all commentors who expressed an 
interest in cost issues as well as to all public workshop attendees. 
The full text of the Cost Comparison has been made available on the 
Fissile Materials Disposition Electronic Bulletin Board/World Wide Web 
Page. (http://web.fie.com/htdoc/fed/doe/fsl/pub/menu/any/). Copies can 
also be obtained by calling (202) 586-4513. Comments received on the 
Cost Comparison by July 15, 1996 will be considered as appropriate in 
the Record of Decision.

DOE Public Reading Rooms

    Copies of the final HEU EIS as well as technical data reports and 
other supporting documents are available for public review at the 
following locations:

Department of Energy Headquarters

Freedom of Information Reading Room, Forrestal Building, 1000 
Independence Ave., SW., Washington, DC 20585, Attn: Carolyn Lawson, 
202-586-6020

Albuquerque Operations Office

National Atomic Museum, 20358 Wyoming Blvd., SE, Kirtland AFB, NM 
87117, Attn: Diane Zepeda, 505-845-4378

Nevada Operations Office

Nevada Operations Office, U.S. Department of Energy, Public Reading 
Room, 2753 South Highland Dr., 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 37831-8501, Attn: Jane Greenwalt, 
615-576-1216

Richland Operations Office

Washington State University, Tri-Cities Branch Campus, 300 Sprout Road, 
Room 130 West, Richland, WA 99352, Attn: Terri Traub, 509-376-8583

Rocky Flats Office

Front Range Community College Library, 3645 West 112th Avenue, 
Westminister, CO 80030, Attn: Dennis Connor, 303-469-4435

Savannah River Operations Office

Gregg-Graniteville Library, University of South Carolina-Aiken, 171 
University Parkway, Aiken, SC 29801, Attn: Paul Lewis, 803-641-3320, 
DOE Contact: James M. Gaver, 803-725-2889

Los Alamos National Laboratory

U.S. Department of Energy, c/o Los Alamos Community Reading Room, 1450 
Central, Suite 101, Los Alamos, NM 87544, Attn: Tom Ribe, 505-665-2127

Chicago Operations Office

Office of Planning, Communications & EEO, U.S. Department of Energy, 
9800 South Cass Avenue, Argonne, IL 60439, Attn: Gary L. Pitchford, 
708-252-2013

Amarillo Area Office

U.S. Department of Energy, Amarillo College, Lynn Library/Learning 
Center, P.O. Box 447, Amarillo, TX 79178, PH: 806-371-5400, FX: 806-
371-5470
U.S. DOE Reading Room, Carson County Library, P.O. Box 339, Panhandle, 
TX 79068, PH: 806-537-3742, FX: 806-537-3780, DOE Contact: Tom Walton, 
PH: 806-477-3120, FX: 806-477-3185, Contractor Contact: Kerry Cambell, 
PH: 806-477-4381, FX: 806-477-5743

Sandia National Laboratory/CA

Livermore Public Library, 1000 S. Livermore Avenue, Livermore, CA 
94550, Attn: Julie Casamajor, PH: 510-373-5500, FX: 510-373-5503


[[Page 33722]]


    Issued in Washington, DC, June 24, 1996.
Gregory P. Rudy,
Acting Director, Office of Fissile Materials Disposition.
[FR Doc. 96-16565 Filed 6-27-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P