[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 8 (Wednesday, January 13, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2201-2203]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-750]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY


Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for Savannah River 
Site (SRS) Spent Nuclear Fuel (SNF) Management, Savannah River Site, 
South Carolina

AGENCY: Department of Energy.

ACTION: Notice of availability and public meetings.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Energy announces the availability of the 
Savannah River Site Spent Nuclear Fuel Management Draft Environmental 
Impact Statement (DOE/EIS-0279D). This draft EIS evaluates the 
potential impacts of reasonable alternatives for the safe and efficient 
management of spent nuclear fuel and targets stored and scheduled to be 
received at the Savannah River Site (SRS), including placing these 
materials in a form suitable for disposition.

DATES: The public comment period began on December 24, 1998 and extends 
through February 8, 1999. DOE will consider comments postmarked or 
submitted after February 8, 1999 to the extent practicable. Oral and 
written comments will be accepted at public meetings on the dates and 
at the locations given below. The Department will hold two public 
meetings, with two sessions each, to discuss the Draft EIS and receive 
comments:
    1. Thursday, January 28, 1999, at the Holiday Inn Coliseum, 630 
Assembly Street, Columbia, SC, (803) 799-7800. The first session begins 
at 1:00 p.m. and the second begins at 6:00 p.m.
    2. Tuesday, February 2 at the North Augusta Community Center, 495 
Brookside Drive, North Augusta, SC, (803) 441-4290. The first session 
begins at 1:00 p.m. and the second begins at 6:00 p.m.

ADDRESSES: Written comments, requests for further information on the 
draft EIS or public meetings, and requests for copies of the document 
should be directed to Andrew R. Grainger, NEPA Compliance Officer, 
Savannah River Site, Building 742-A, Room 185, Aiken, South Carolina 
29802; orally by calling (800) 881-7292; or electronically to 
[email protected]. Addresses of locations where the Draft EIS is available 
for public review are listed in this notice under ``Availability of 
Copies of the Draft EIS.''
    General information on the DOE National Environmental Policy Act 
(NEPA) process may be requested from Ms. Carol Borgstrom, Director, 
Office of NEPA Policy and Assistance (EH-42), U.S. Department of 
Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20585. Ms. 
Borgstrom may be contacted by telephone at (202) 586-4600 or by leaving 
a message at 1-800-472-2756.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, a DOE predecessor agency, 
established the SRS in the early 1950s for the production of special 
radioactive isotopes to support national programs. Historically, the 
primary Site mission was the production of strategic isotopes 
(plutonium-239 and tritium) for use in the development and production 
of nuclear weapons. The SRS produced other isotopes (e.g., californium-
252, plutonium-238, and americium-241) to support research in nuclear 
medicine, space exploration, and commercial applications. DOE produced 
these isotopes in the five SRS production reactors.
    The material used to produce isotopes consisted of nuclear fuel and 
targets. The nuclear fuel was enriched uranium that was alloyed with 
aluminum and then clad in aluminum. The targets were either oxides or 
metallic forms of various isotopes such as neptunium-237 or uranium-238 
that were clad with aluminum. Fuel and targets were fabricated at the 
SRS and placed in the reactors and then the reactors operated to create 
the neutrons necessary to transmute the target material. After 
irradiation, the fuel and targets (collectively referred to as spent 
nuclear fuel) were removed from the reactors and placed in water-filled 
basins for short-term storage, about 12 to 18 months, before they were 
chemically processed in the SRS separations facilities.
    SNF was chemically dissolved in F or H Canyon to recover the 
uranium or transuranic isotopes for future use (``reprocessing''). The 
remaining residue from the fuel, high-level radioactive waste 
consisting primarily of fission products and cladding in liquid form, 
was transferred to large steel tanks for storage. The high-level waste 
is being vitrified in the Defense Waste Processing Facility at the SRS 
to prepare it for placement in a geologic repository.
    In 1992, the Secretary of Energy directed that reprocessing 
operations to produce strategic nuclear materials be phased out 
throughout the DOE complex. However, unprocessed SNF and targets 
remained in storage. SRS also has accepted SNF from foreign and 
domestic research reactors. In the past, most of this material was 
reprocessed. With the end of the Site's strategic nuclear materials 
production mission, SNF from research reactors has been accumulating in 
the Receiving Basin for Offsite Fuels and the L-Reactor Disassembly 
Basin.

Stabilization

    DOE has taken action to stabilize about 175 MTHM of the 195 MTHM of 
aluminum-based SNF that was in storage at SRS in 1995. DOE decided to 
stabilize this material following completion of the Interim Management 
of Nuclear Materials Environmental Impact Statement (DOE/EIS-0220). The 
primary purpose of the actions described in that environmental impact 
statement (EIS) was to correct or eliminate potential health and safety 
vulnerabilities related to some of the methods used to store nuclear 
materials (including SNF) at SRS. In that EIS, DOE identified the 
remaining 20 MTHM (out of 195 MTHM) of aluminum-based SNF at SRS as 
``stable'' (i.e., the SNF likely could be safely stored for about 10 
more years, pending decisions on final disposition). Thus, that 20 MTHM 
of aluminum-based SNF is included in this EIS.
    On June 1, 1995, DOE decided (60 FR 28680) under the Department of 
Energy Programmatic Spent Nuclear Fuel Management and Idaho National 
Engineering Laboratory Environmental Restoration and Waste Management 
Programs Final Environmental Impact Statement to consolidate existing 
and

[[Page 2202]]

newly generated SNF at three existing Departmental sites (including 
SRS) based on the fuel type, pending future decisions on ultimate 
disposition. DOE designated the SRS as the site that would manage 
aluminum-based SNF. As a result, DOE will transfer 20 MTHM of non-
aluminum-based SNF from SRS to Idaho National Engineering and 
Environmental Laboratory (INEEL) and will transfer about 5 MTHM of 
aluminum-based SNF at INEEL to SRS. Additionally, SRS could receive 
about 5 MTHM of aluminum-based SNF from domestic research reactors.
    In May 1996, DOE announced a decision (61 FR 25092) under the Final 
Environmental Impact Statement on a Proposed Nuclear Weapons 
Nonproliferation Policy Concerning Foreign Research Reactor Spent 
Nuclear Fuel to accept about 18 MTHM of aluminum-based SNF containing 
uranium of U.S. origin from foreign research reactors for management in 
the United States at the SRS. The receipt of foreign research reactor 
SNF at SRS is now underway and receipts are scheduled to be completed 
by 2009. The 18 MTHM of foreign research reactor SNF that could be 
received at SRS is included in the scope of this EIS. (Recent decisions 
by some foreign research reactor operators have reduced the quantity of 
SNF expected to be shipped to SRS from about 18 MTHM to about 14 MTHM; 
however, for this EIS the 18 MTHM projection is used because foreign 
research reactor operators still have the option to ship to the United 
States.) Table S-1 summarizes the amount of SNF to be managed at SRS 
that is considered in this EIS.

             Table 1.--Quantity of SNF Discussed in This EIS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aluminum-based SNF stored at SRS.............................    20 MTHM
Domestic and DOE aluminum-based research reactor SNF to be
 received at SRS.............................................    10 MTHM
Foreign Research Reactor aluminum-based SNF to be received at
 SRS.........................................................    18 MTHM
Non-aluminum-based SNF at SRS (to be shipped to INEEL).......    20 MTHM
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Purpose and Need for Action

    DOE anticipates that it eventually will place most of its aluminum-
based SNF inventory in a geologic repository after treatment or 
repackaging. DOE currently is conducting analysis leading to a decision 
whether to recommend the Yucca Mountain site in Nevada as the site of 
this nation's first geologic repository. Even if the Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission eventually were to license such a site, DOE does not expect 
a geologic repository to be available until at least 2010 and it is 
unclear when shipments from DOE sites could begin. Regardless of when a 
repository is available, the Department intends to develop and 
implement a safe and efficient SNF management strategy that includes 
preparing for ultimate disposition the aluminum-based SNF stored at SRS 
or expected to be shipped to SRS. DOE is committed to avoiding 
indefinite storage at the SRS of this nuclear fuel in a form that is 
unsuitable for final disposition. Therefore, DOE needs to identify 
management technologies and facilities for storing and treating this 
SNF in preparation for final disposition.

Scope

    In this EIS, DOE is evaluating the treatment and storage of about 
48 MTHM of aluminum-based SNF pending shipment to a geologic 
repository, including impacts from the construction and operation of 
facilities (either new or modified existing facilities) that would be 
used to receive, store, treat, and package SNF in preparation for 
ultimate disposition.
    Onsite transportation impacts are considered; however, no impacts 
associated with transporting SNF to SRS are included, because these 
impacts have been assessed in other EISs.
    The potential impacts of transporting SNF to a geologic repository 
are discussed for completeness but no decisions related to transporting 
SNF offsite will be made under this EIS. Transportation of SNF to a 
federal repository will be addressed in the EIS for a Geologic 
Repository for the Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel and High-Level 
Radioactive Waste at Yucca Mountain, Nye County, Nevada (Notice of 
Intent published in 60 FR 40164 on August 7, 1995). The Yucca Mountain 
EIS is being prepared in the event DOE decides to recommend Yucca 
Mountain as the site of the Nation's first geologic repository for SNF 
and high-level radioactive waste.
    DOE also evaluates transferring 20 MTHM of non-aluminum-clad spent 
nuclear fuel currently stored in the Receiving Basin for Offsite Fuel 
at SRS to a new dry storage facility at SRS. This transfer would occur 
only if a dry storage facility were built as part of the implementation 
of a treatment technology to prepare aluminum-based spent nuclear fuel 
for disposition and if the dry storage facility became operational 
before the non-aluminum-clad fuel was transferred to the INEEL. The 
transfer to dry storage would occur after the fuel had been relocated 
from the Receiving Basin for Offsite Fuel to the L-Reactor Disassembly 
Basin in support of activities necessary to phase out the use of the 
Receiving Basin for Offsite Fuel by 2006.
    This EIS does not evaluate the impacts of managing the non-
aluminum-clad fuel at INEEL or of transporting the fuel to INEEL. These 
impacts were considered in the SNF programmatic EIS which served as the 
basis for DOE's decision to consolidate the storage of non-aluminum-
clad spent nuclear fuel at the INEEL.
    Additionally, in this EIS DOE evaluates alternative storage 
arrangements for Mark-51 and ``other'' targets currently located in the 
Receiving Basin for Offsite Fuel at the SRS. In addition to evaluating 
the continued use of wet storage, DOE considers transferring the 
targets to dry storage to provide flexibility in material management 
operations. The targets contain americium and curium isotopes that have 
potential programmatic use.

Decisions To Be Based on This EIS

    DOE expects to make the following decisions on the management of 
SNF and preparation of SNF for ultimate disposition.
     Select the appropriate treatment or packaging technology 
to prepare for ultimate disposal of the aluminum-based SNF that is to 
be managed at SRS.
     Determine whether DOE should construct new facilities or 
use existing facilities to store and treat or package aluminum-based 
SNF that is expected to be managed at SRS in preparation for its 
ultimate disposition.
     Determine whether DOE should repackage and dry-store 
stainless-steel and zirconium-clad SNF pending shipment to INEEL, and 
whether DOE should repackage and dry-store americium/curium targets 
pending decisions on programmatic use. Repackaging and dry-storing 
these fuels would further DOE's plan to phase out the use of the 
Receiving Basin for Offsite Fuel at the SRS.

Proposed Action

    DOE's proposed action is to safely manage SNF that is currently 
located or expected to be received at SRS, including treating or 
packaging aluminum-based fuel for offsite shipment and placement in a 
monitored geologic repository, and packaging non-aluminum-clad fuel and 
programmatic material for dry storage.
    In the Record of Decision for the Foreign Research Reactor EIS (61 
FR 25092--May 17, 1996), DOE stated that it would embark on an 
accelerated

[[Page 2203]]

program at SRS to identify, develop, and demonstrate one or more non-
reprocessing, cost effective treatment or packaging technologies to 
prepare aluminum-based foreign research reactor spent nuclear fuel for 
ultimate disposition.
    Based on that decision, DOE's strategy is to select a new non-
chemical processing technology or a new packaging technology that would 
put aluminum-based foreign research reactor SNF into a form or 
container suitable for direct placement in a monitored geologic 
repository. The SNF would be treated or conditioned to address 
potential repository acceptance criteria or safety concerns. After 
implementing the new non-chemical processing treatment or packaging 
technology, DOE would manage the SNF in a road-ready condition at SRS 
in dry storage pending shipment to a geologic repository.
    Because of the similarity of the materials, DOE proposes to manage 
the other aluminum-alloy SNF that is the subject of this EIS (domestic 
research reactor and DOE reactor fuels) in the same manner as the 
foreign research reactor fuels.
    DOE has included chemical processing as a management alternative in 
this EIS. However, DOE's strategy and preference is to use non-chemical 
separations processes when practical. DOE proposes to use chemical 
separation processes when a potential health or safety vulnerability 
exists for aluminum-based SNF that DOE considers should be alleviated 
before a non-chemical separations process is in operation in about 
2005. Additionally, such SNF in its current form would likely not be 
acceptable in a geologic repository.

Alternatives Considered

    For analysis in this EIS, DOE has categorized the SNF at SRS into 
six groups based on characteristics such as fuel size, physical or 
chemical properties, and radionuclide inventories. To manage this SNF 
and prepare it for disposition, DOE identified six reasonable new 
technologies and one existing technology (conventional chemical 
processing) for analysis. Because of the differences in the 
characteristics of the SNF and the capabilities of the technologies, no 
single technology could be applied to all the SNF. Although there are 
many possible combinations of technologies and fuel groups, DOE 
evaluated a limited number of configurations as alternatives. The 
alternatives were chosen to illustrate the range of impacts that could 
occur and consist of: Preferred Alternative, Minimum Impact 
Alternative, Direct Disposal Alternative, Maximum Impact Alternative, 
and the No Action Alternative.
    In the Preferred Alternative, DOE proposes to implement several 
technologies to manage the SNF at SRS. These include Melt and Dilute, 
Conventional Processing, and Repackage and Prepare to Ship. The Melt 
and Dilute option is the preferred method for treating most (about 97 
percent by volume and 60 percent by mass) of the spent nuclear fuel. 
Conventional processing would be used for the remaining 3 percent by 
volume (40 percent by mass) because of the potential health and safety 
vulnerability of continuing wet storage of those fuels while awaiting 
the availability of Melt and Dilute technology and uncertainties 
associated with repository acceptance. DOE would continue to wet store 
the Higher Actinide Targets and the non-aluminum clad SNF. If this 
material has not been transferred offsite by the time a dry storage 
facility is in operation at the SRS, DOE could repackage this material 
and transfer it to dry storage.

Availability of Copies of the Draft EIS

    Copies of the Draft EIS are being distributed to Federal, State and 
local officials and agencies; Tribes; and organizations and individuals 
that have indicated an interest in SRS or the Draft EIS. In addition, 
the Draft EIS is available on the Internet at the following address: 
http://www.eh.doe.gov/nepa/docs/docs.htm. Addresses of DOE Public 
Reading Rooms and libraries where the Draft EIS will be available for 
public review are listed below:

Freedom of Information Public Document Room, University of South 
Carolina at Aiken, SC, Gregg-Graniteville Library, 471 University 
Parkway, Aiken, SC 29801
Freedom of Information Reading Room, U.S. Department of Energy, Room 
1E-190, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, 
DC 20585
Battelle-Pacific Northwest Laboratories, Technical Library, P.O. Box 
999, Richland, WA 99352
Pullen Public Library, 100 Decatur Street, SE, Atlanta, GA 30303
Reese Library, Augusta College, 2500 Walton Way, Augusta, GA 30904
Georgia Institute of Technology, Bobby Dodd Way, Atlanta, GA 30332
Chatham-Effingham-Liberty Regional Library, 2002 Bull Street, Savannah, 
GA 31499-4301
Los Alamos Technical Association, 1200 Trinity Drive, Los Alamos, NM 
87544
U.S. Department of Energy, FOIA Reading Room, 4700 Morris NE, 
Albuquerque, NM 87111
U.S. Department of Energy, Albuquerque Operations Office, National 
Atomic Museum, 20358 Wyoming Boulevard SE, Kirtland Air Force Base, 
P.O. Box 5400, Albuquerque, NM 87185
The Libraries, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523
Erskine College, McCain Library, One Depot Street, Due West, SC 29639
Parsons Brinckeroff Library, 1660 Lincoln Street, Suite 2000, Denver, 
CO 80264
Public Reading Room, Chicago Operations Office, 9800 South Cass Avenue, 
Argonne, IL 60439
Argonne National Laboratory, Technical Library, P.O. Box 2528, Idaho 
Falls, ID 83403
Library of Congress, CRS-STR-LM413, Washington, DC 20540-7490
South Carolina State Library, 1500 Senate Street, Columbia, SC 29211
County Library, 404 King Street, Charleston, SC 29403
Savannah River Site Library, Savannah River Technology Center, 773-A, 
Savannah River Site, Aiken, SC 29808
Westinghouse Savannah River Site Company Library, 766-H, Savannah River 
Site, Aiken, SC 29808
U.S. Department of Energy, Public Reading Room, Oak Ridge Operations 
Office, 55 Jefferson Circle, Room 1123, Oak Ridge, TN 37831

    Issued in Washington, DC on January 7, 1999.
David G. Huizenga,
Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Nuclear Material and Facility 
Stabilization, Office of Environmental Management.
[FR Doc. 99-750 Filed 1-12-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P