[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 191 (Friday, October 2, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 53031-53033]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-26464]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY


Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Transfer of the Heat 
Source/Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generator Assembly and Test 
Operations From the Mound Site

AGENCY: Department of Energy (DOE).

ACTION: Notice of intent.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), DOE 
announces its intent to prepare an EIS for the proposed transfer of the 
Heat Source/Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generator (HS/RTG) operations 
at the Mound Site near Miamisburg, Ohio, to an alternative DOE site. 
Alternative sites for the proposed transfer of operations to be 
evaluated in the EIS include: Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) in 
Oak Ridge, Tennessee; the Pantex Plant, seventeen miles east of 
Amarillo, Texas; the Hanford Site, north of Richland, Washington; the 
Nevada Test Site (NTS), sixty miles northwest of Las Vegas, Nevada; and 
Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL), fifty 
miles west of Idaho Falls, Idaho. In addition, the ``No Action'' 
alternative (operations remaining at Mound) will be evaluated as 
required by NEPA. DOE invites individuals, organizations, and agencies 
to present oral and/or written comments concerning the scope of the 
EIS, including the environmental issues and alternatives the EIS should 
analyze.

DATES: The public scoping begins with publication of this Notice in the 
Federal Register and continues until December 1, 1998. Comments must be 
postmarked or submitted by fax or electronic mail by that date to 
ensure consideration. The public may also call 1-800-931-9006 and leave 
a detailed message with their comments. Comments received after that 
date will be considered to the extent practicable. DOE will conduct 
public scoping meetings to assist it in defining the appropriate scope 
of the EIS including the significant environmental issues to be 
addressed. DOE plans to hold scoping meetings in the vicinity of the 
Mound Site, ORNL, Pantex, Hanford, NTS, and INEEL. The date, time, and 
location will be announced through the local media as soon as 
determined but at least 15 days before the date of the meetings.

ADDRESSES: Please direct comments on the scope of the EIS, requests to 
speak at the public scoping meetings, requests for special arrangements 
to enable participation at scoping meetings (e.g., interpreter for the 
hearing-impaired), and questions concerning the project to: Timothy A. 
Frazier, U.S. Department of Energy, P. O. Box 66, Miamisburg, OH 45343-
0066, Telephone: (937) 865-3748 or leave a message on (800) 931-9006, 
Facsimile (937) 865-4219, Electronic mail: [email protected]

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For general and technical information 
associated with the HS/RTG assembly and acceptance testing activities, 
please contact Mr. Frazier at the address above. For general 
information on the DOE NEPA process, please contact:
    Carol M. Borgstrom, Director, Office of NEPA Policy and Assistance, 
EH-42, U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, S.W., 
Washington, D.C. 20585-0119, Telephone: (202) 586-4600 or leave a 
message on (800) 472-2756.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    DOE and its predecessor agencies have been developing HS/RTGs and 
supplying them to user agencies for more than 35 years. The 
radioisotope used in these systems is plutonium-238, a non-fissile 
(i.e., non-weapons-usable) form of plutonium. A HS/RTG converts thermal 
energy that is generated by the spontaneous radioactive decay of Pu-238 
to electrical energy. These systems have repeatedly demonstrated their 
value as key technologies in various harsh, remote, and inaccessible 
environments, such as space, where it is impractical to provide the 
fuel and maintenance that more conventional electrical power sources 
would need. The Mound Site has been performing the DOE's HS/RTG 
assembly and testing operations for over 15 years.
    The Mound Site, located in Miamisburg, Ohio, was established in 
1946 as the first permanent installation associated with the Atomic 
Energy Commission. Until the early 1990s, the Mound Site manufactured 
critical nuclear weapons components. The site is currently being 
environmentally restored under a Comprehensive Environmental Response, 
Compensation and Liabilities Act (CERCLA) Sec. 120 Agreement. DOE and 
its site restoration contractor plan to complete the environmental 
restoration and exit the site by February 2003. It is anticipated that 
the future use of the site will involve an industrial park.
    The HS/RTG assembly and test operations are contained in two major 
buildings at the Mound Site. HS/RTG assembly is performed in Mound's 
Building 38. The HSs are assembled in glove boxes using parts 
manufactured or procured by the Mound Site and encapsulated plutonium-
238 provided by the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL). RTGs are 
also assembled, as well as tested, in Mound's Building 50. The RTGs are 
assembled in a large inert atmosphere chamber and then acceptance 
tested. The acceptance testing involves: mass properties (mass and 
center of gravity), determination of magnetic signature, vibration, and 
performance testing (to simulate in-flight performance).

Purpose and Need for Agency Action

    It is DOE's responsibility and a primary mission to maintain the 
availability of HS/RTGs for the U.S. Government. DOE currently has 
projected requirements to provide such power systems through FY 2009. 
Based on that commitment and the planned exit of DOE from the Mound 
Site, DOE needs to relocate the HS/RTG assembly and test operations 
from the Mound Site to a technically capable site with a continuing 
long-term Departmental presence. DOE is proposing to transfer the HS/
RTG assembly and test operations from the Mound Site immediately prior 
to the completion of the environmental restoration activities at this 
site. DOE would then cease operations and exit the site in February 
2003. Should DOE maintain the HS/RTG operations at the Mound Site, DOE 
would be unable to exit the site as planned in February 2003.
    The assessment that led to the proposed transfer addressed a number

[[Page 53032]]

of questions related to remaining at Mound versus the advantages of 
moving to another site. Items evaluated included: (1) Staying at Mound 
would require DOE to maintain a secure facility collocated with an 
industrial park, (2) staying at Mound would require DOE to maintain a 
small facility handling nuclear materials in close proximity to the 
public, (3) moving to another location would enable the program to draw 
upon the technical resources of a much broader program structure in the 
event of technical problems or schedule demands, and (4) the supporting 
infrastructure of DOE offices, safety staff, and related functions 
would exist at another site but DOE would have to create an as-yet 
undefined system of support to enable the program to remain at Mound.

Alternatives To Be Evaluated

    The EIS will analyze the reasonable alternatives as determined 
based on public input during the scoping process and further study by 
DOE for the proposed transfer of the HS/RTG assembly and test 
operations. The alternatives must meet certain technical evaluation 
criteria related to the site's technical approach to accomplish the 
work, the proposed personnel and management commitment, past 
performance and project management, facilities and equipment, the 
operation of the facilities, the integration with other program 
activities, and the schedule. DOE has preliminarily identified the 
following alternatives which meet these criteria:

No Action Alternative

    Under this alternative, the HS/RTG assembly and test operations 
would remain at the Mound Site. Operations would continue at the Mound 
Site and be consolidated into Building 50 with several support 
buildings. Continuation of HS/RTG assembly and test operations at the 
Mound Site would require the DOE to maintain a presence at the site and 
the planned closure of the Mound Site in February 2003 would not take 
place.

Transfer Operations to ORNL

    Under this alternative, DOE would transfer the HS/RTG assembly and 
test operations to Building 3525 and support facilities at ORNL.

Transfer Operations to Pantex

    Under this alternative, DOE would transfer the HS/RTG assembly and 
test operations to Building 12-66 at the Pantex Plant. Current DOE 
planning to store surplus pits in Pantex's Building 12-66, in 
accordance with the Record of Decision (ROD) on the Storage and 
Disposition of Weapons Useable Fissile Materials Programmatic 
Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) (January 14, 1997, 62 Federal 
Register 3014), could impact the use of this building as a reasonable 
alternative for the HS/RTG assembly and test operations.

Transfer Operations to Hanford

    Under this alternative, DOE would transfer the HS/RTG assembly and 
test operations to the Hanford Site's Fuel Materials and Examination 
Facility (FMEF). In its Surplus Plutonium Disposition Draft 
Environmental Impact Statement (July 1998), DOE is also analyzing the 
use of FMEF as a reasonable alternative for the siting of surplus 
plutonium disposition facilities, and this analysis could impact the 
use of FMEF as a reasonable alternative for the HS/RTG assembly and 
test operations.

Transfer Operations to Nevada

    Under this alternative, DOE would transfer HS/RTG assembly and test 
operations to NTS's Device Assembly Facility.

Transfer Operations to INEEL

    Under this alternative, DOE would transfer the HS/RTG assembly and 
test operations to INEEL's Test Area North.

Preliminary Environmental Analysis

    The following issues have been tentatively identified for analysis 
in the EIS. This list is neither intended to be all-inclusive nor is it 
a predetermination of potential environmental impacts. The list is 
presented to facilitate comment on the scope of the EIS. Additions to 
or deletions from this list may occur as a result of the public scoping 
process.
     Health and Safety: potential public and occupational 
consequences from construction, routine operation, and credible 
accident scenarios.
     Waste Management: types and quantities of wastes expected 
to be generated, handled, and stored.
     Pollution Prevention: pollution prevention opportunities 
and the potential consequences to public safety and the environment.
     Hazardous Materials: handling, storage, and use, both 
present and future.
     Background Radiation: cosmic, rock, soil, water, and air, 
and the potential addition of radiation.
     Water Resources: surface and groundwater hydrology, water 
use and quality, and the potential for degradation.
     Air Quality: meteorological conditions, ambient 
background, sources, and potential for degradation.
     Earth Resources: physiography, topography, geology, and 
soil characteristics.
     Land Use: plans, policies, and controls.
     Noise: ambient, sources, and sensitive receptors.
     Ecological Resources: wetlands, aquatic, terrestrial, 
economically/recreationally important species, threatened species, and 
endangered species.
     Socioeconomic: demography, economic base, labor pool, 
housing, transportation, utilities, public services/facilities, 
education, recreation, and cultural resources.
     Natural Disasters: floods, hurricanes, tornadoes, and 
seismic events.
     Unavoidable Adverse Impacts.
     Natural and Depletable Resources: requirements and 
conservation potential.
     Environmental Justice: any potential disproportionately 
high and adverse impacts to minority and low income populations.

Scoping Meetings

    The purpose of this Notice is to encourage public involvement in 
the EIS process and to solicit public comments on the proposed scope 
and content of the EIS. DOE will hold public scoping meetings near 
Mound, ORNL, Pantex Plant, Hanford Site, NTS, and INEEL to solicit both 
oral and written comments from interested parties. The public may also 
call 1-800-931-9006 and leave a detailed message with their comments. 
The dates, times, and locations will be announced through the local 
media as soon as determined but at least 15 days before the date of the 
meetings.
    In order to facilitate an understanding of the program's 
objectives, DOE personnel will be available at the scoping meetings to 
explain the program to the public and answer questions. DOE will 
designate a facilitator for the scoping meetings. At the opening of 
each meeting, the facilitator will establish the order of speakers and 
will announce any additional procedures necessary for conducting the 
meetings. To ensure that all persons wishing to make a presentation are 
given the opportunity, each speaker may be limited to five minutes, 
except for public officials and representatives of groups, who will be 
allotted ten minutes each. DOE encourages those providing oral comments 
to also submit them in writing. Comment cards will also be available 
for those who prefer to submit their comments in written form. Speakers 
may be asked clarifying

[[Page 53033]]

questions, but the scoping meetings will not be conducted as 
evidentiary hearings.
    DOE will make transcripts of the scoping meetings and project-
related materials available for public review in the following reading 
rooms:

U.S. Department of Energy, Freedom of Information Public Reading Room, 
Forrestal Building, Room 1E-190, 1000 Independence Avenue, S.W., 
Washington, D.C. 20585, Telephone: (202) 586-3142
Ohio Field Office, Freedom of Information Public Reading Room, 
Cafeteria Garden Room, One Mound Road, Miamisburg, OH 45342, Telephone: 
(937) 865-4078
Oak Ridge Operations Office, DOE Oak Ridge Public Reading Room, U.S. 
Department of Energy, 200 Administration Road, Room G-217, P.O. Box 
2001, Oak Ridge, TN 37831, Telephone: (423) 576-1216 or (423) 241-4780
Amarillo Area Office, Pantex Plant, DOE Public Reading Room, Reference 
Department, Lynn Library and Learning Center, Amarillo College, 2201 
South Washington, 4th Floor, Amarillo, TX 79109, Telephone: (806) 371-
5400
Richland Operations Office, DOE Public Reading Room, 2770 University 
Drive CIC, Room 101L, P.O. Box 999, mail stop H2-53, Richland, WA 
99352, Telephone: (509) 372-7443
Nevada Test Site, Coordination and Information Center, Bechtel Nevada, 
P.O. Box 98521, Las Vegas, NV 89193-8521, Telephone: (702) 295-1628
Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory, DOE-Idaho 
Operations Office Public Reading Room, 1776 Science Center Drive, Idaho 
Falls, ID 83415, Telephone: (208) 526-0271

NEPA Process

    The EIS for the proposed transfer of the HS/RTG assembly and test 
operations will be prepared in accordance with the National 
Environmental Policy Act of 1969, the Council on Environmental 
Quality's Regulations for Implementing the Procedural Provisions of 
NEPA (40 CFR Parts 1500-1508), and DOE's NEPA Regulations (10 CFR Part 
1021).
    A schedule for the draft EIS will be contingent on the scoping 
process. A 60-day comment period on the draft EIS is planned, and 
public hearings to receive comments will be held approximately six 
weeks after distribution of the draft EIS. Availability of the draft 
EIS, the dates of the public comment period, and information about the 
public hearings will be announced in the Federal Register and in the 
local news media when the draft EIS is distributed.
    The final EIS, which will consider the public comments received on 
the draft EIS, is scheduled to be published in the fall of 1999. No 
sooner than 30 days after the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 
publishes a notice of availability of the final EIS in the Federal 
Register, DOE will issue its Record of Decision and publish it in the 
Federal Register.

    Signed in Washington, D.C., this 24th day of September 1998.
Peter N. Brush,
Acting Assistant Secretary, Environment, Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. 98-26464 Filed 10-1-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P