[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 125 (Wednesday, June 30, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35140-35142]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-16603]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY


Record of Decision for the Construction and Operation of the 
Spallation Neutron Source

AGENCY: Department of Energy.

ACTION: Record of decision.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Energy (DOE) is issuing this Record of 
Decision (ROD) regarding DOE's proposal to construct and operate the 
Spallation Neutron Source (SNS). DOE has decided to proceed with 
construction and operation of a state-of-the-art Spallation Neutron 
Source facility at the preferred location, the Oak Ridge National 
Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee. This decision is based on the 
analysis contained in the ``Final Environmental Impact Statement for 
the Construction and Operation of the Spallation Neutron Source'' (SNS 
FEIS, DOE/EIS-0247, April 23, 1999).

ADDRESSES: Requests for copies of the Final EIS and this ROD should be 
directed to: Mr. David Wilfert, EIS Document Manager, U.S. Department 
of Energy, Oak Ridge Operations Office, 200 Administration Road, 146/
SNS, Oak Ridge, TN 37831. Alternately, Mr. Wilfert may be contacted by 
telephone at (800) 927-9964, by fax at (423) 576-4542, or by email at 
[email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For general information on the 
Spallation Neutron Source, contact: Mr. Jeff Hoy, SNS Program Manager, 
Office of Basic Energy Sciences (SC-13), Germantown, MD 20874-1290, 
telephone: (301) 903-4924, fax: (301) 903-9513, or email: 
Jeff.H[email protected].
    For general information on DOE's National Environmental Policy Act 
(NEPA) process, contact: Ms. Carol Borgstrom, Director, Office of NEPA 
Policy and Assistance (EH-42), U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 
Independence Ave., S.W., Washington, D.C. 20585, telephone: (202) 586-
4600, fax: (202) 586-7031.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 
(EPA) issued a Notice of Availability for DOE's Final Environmental 
Impact Statement on the Construction and Operation of the Spallation 
Neutron Source (Final EIS, DOE/EIS-0247) on April 23, 1999, (64 FR 
19999). In the Final EIS, DOE considered the potential environmental 
impacts of its proposed action, the construction and operation of the 
SNS at four alternative sites: Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), 
Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), Argonne National Laboratory 
(ANL), and Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL). The Department 
identified Oak Ridge as its preferred alternative site. DOE also 
considered a no action alternative under which the SNS would not be 
built. DOE has considered all of the comments it received during the 
public comment period. The Final EIS analyzed environmental impacts 
over the projected life of the facility, both operating at an initial 
power level of 1 megawatt (MW) and at the maximum potential upgrade 
power level of 4 MW.

Background

    Scientific discoveries and the new technologies derived from 
neutron scattering research have contributed significantly to the 
development of new products in the international marketplace, such as: 
better magnetic materials for information storage media and for 
electric generators and motors; improved engine parts; better 
lubricants; strong, but light-weight structural materials; durable 
plastics; metallic glasses; semiconductors; adhesives; improved 
detergents; and new drugs. Neutron research and the associated 
scientific, engineering, and technological advances provide the 
catalyst for the development of commercial applications and support 
U.S. economic progress and competitiveness among the industrialized 
nations of the world. Construction of a next-generation spallation 
neutron source in the U.S. will provide a competitive edge for the 
nation in the physical, chemical, materials, biological, and medical 
sciences.
    The U.S. needs a high-flux, short-pulsed neutron source to provide 
its scientific and industrial research communities with a much more 
intense source of pulsed neutrons for neutron scattering research than 
is currently available. The neutron science community has long 
recognized the need for both high-intensity, pulsed (accelerator-based) 
neutron sources and continuous (reactor-based) neutron sources. There 
are approximately 20 major neutron sources worldwide that produce 
neutron beams for materials research. The Organization for Economic 
Cooperation and Development (OECD) Neutron Science Working Group has 
identified a growing disparity between the worldwide need for neutron 
scattering research and the availability of facilities. The OECD 
Working Group estimated that as the oldest neutron sources continue to 
age, only about one-third of the present sources would remain available 
by 2010. For nearly a decade, the research community has regarded U.S. 
facilities as inferior to the newer and more extensively upgraded 
foreign facilities. The current generation of neutron sources in the 
United States has lower neutron beam intensities, lower operating 
powers, and less advanced measuring instruments, when compared to the 
current ``state-of-the-science'' (currently technologically feasible 
and desirable). Thus, next-generation neutron sources are needed not 
only to create new scientific and engineering opportunities, but also 
to replace out-dated capacity. Access to European and Japanese neutron 
sources by U.S. researchers and manufacturers is difficult, unreliable, 
and costly. The logistics of scheduling time and configuring 
instrumentation to conduct specialized experiments are prohibitive 
because of the commuting distances to these facilities. In addition, 
given the proprietary nature of much of the research desired by U.S. 
industry, its research cannot be carried out at foreign facilities. A 1 
MW state-of-the-art facility like SNS would produce pulses five times 
more intense than the best spallation source in operation today, the 
ISIS facility in Great Britain.

Alternatives Considered and Evaluated

    In the Final EIS, DOE proposed to construct and operate the SNS. 
DOE evaluated five alternatives for this proposed action:
    1. Construct and operate the SNS at ORNL;
    2. Construct and operate the SNS at LANL;
    3. Construct and operate the SNS at ANL;
    4. Construct and operate the SNS at BNL; and
    5. No Action Alternative: Do not construct the SNS. The United 
States would continue to use existing neutron science facilities.

[[Page 35141]]

The Preferred Alternative

    The Department's preferred alternative is to construct and operate 
the SNS at ORNL.

Environmental Impacts of Alternatives Evaluated

    As demonstrated in the Final EIS, the construction and operation of 
the SNS is not expected to result in any unacceptable environmental 
consequences at any of the four candidate sites, though each site does 
have its own unique adverse environmental aspects. Of the alternative 
sites, ORNL has the fewest negative impacts. The SNS site at ORNL is 
adjacent to the Walker Branch Watershed, an environmental research 
area, and has the potential to degrade some data collection for ongoing 
atmospheric research by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
Administration/Atmospheric Turbulence and Diffusion Division (NOAA/
ATDD) and ecological research by the ORNL Environmental Sciences 
Division. Some of these long-term environmental monitoring programs are 
important to our understanding of gradual global changes, like global 
warming, occurring in the atmosphere. SNS design features are available 
to mitigate these impacts; therefore, the SNS Project shall work with 
the research organizations (NOAA/ATDD and the ORNL Environmental 
Sciences Division) to identify and implement options to reduce or 
eliminate those negative impacts. This includes, but is not limited to, 
options identified in the Final EIS, e.g., sizing and location of 
cooling towers, waste heat recovery to offset the burning of natural 
gas, or the provision of alternative monitoring capability to the 
Walker Branch Watershed researchers. By contrast, negative 
environmental effects associated with the other three candidate sites 
are not so easily ameliorated. At Los Alamos, drawing cooling water 
from the sole-source aquifer could adversely impact the area water 
table; perhaps causing local residents and the White Rock community to 
increase their water well depth in order to sustain service. 
Additionally, the electric power supply and distribution system on the 
mesa would have to be upgraded to accommodate the added SNS load. At 
Argonne, the limited size of the reservation will make the maximally 
exposed individual closer to the radiological source term, and it 
offers fewer opportunities to compensate for the wetlands destroyed 
during construction of the SNS. At Brookhaven, the permeable soils and 
shallow sole-source aquifer would require significant and costly design 
features to mitigate the potential for degradation of the drinking 
water due to migration of activated soils.

Environmentally Preferable Alternative

    The ``no action'' alternative has the least local adverse 
environmental impact on the sites analyzed; however, it may have 
greater long-term negative impact on the environment as a whole by 
depriving the country of future neutron science-based technology that 
might reduce other negative environmental impacts, e.g., lost fuel 
efficiency gains in vehicles, less efficient chemical processes, 
greater power transmission losses, etc. Neutron scattering science has 
provided many advanced materials, which make possible or contribute to 
improved quality of life, including protecting and improving the 
environment. Specific areas with the most direct value to environmental 
quality are: (1) Light-weight materials, (2) improved lubricants, (3) 
high temperature superconductors, and (4) new catalysts. Light-weight 
materials reduce motor vehicle and aircraft weight, thus reducing fuel 
requirements and attendant combustion product emissions. Improved 
lubricants reduce friction losses and wear in machinery, thus reducing 
the manufacture of replacements, and improving emissions performance 
during operation. High temperature superconductors allow improved 
energy efficiency in some devices and offer the possibility for more 
efficient power transmission, thus reducing energy production demands. 
Finally, catalysts have played a major role in pollution control 
devices (such as automobile catalytic converters), and neutron 
scattering is an important tool used in developing new catalysts. Thus, 
neutron based technology has historically been a benefit to the 
environment, and the SNS may well result in fewer environmental impacts 
than the no action alternative.
    Construction and operation at any of the four alternative sites 
does have its own unique adverse environmental impact at the specific 
location. Of the action alternatives, the environmentally preferable 
site for the SNS is the ORNL reservation because it offers relatively 
minor impacts with comparatively easy and effective mitigation actions 
which will be addressed in a Mitigation Action Plan (MAP) as discussed 
later.

Review of the Final EIS

    DOE distributed approximately 950 copies (200 full copies and 750 
copies of the summary) of the Final EIS to members of Congress; 
Federal, State, and local government offices; Native American 
organizations; stakeholders; and public reading rooms. In addition, the 
document is available on the World Wide Web at the Environment, Safety 
and Health home page, http://nepa.eh.doe.gov/eis/eis0247/eis0247.html.
    The U.S. Department of the Interior provided comments on the Draft 
EIS that were inadvertently omitted from the Final EIS. Generic 
concerns focused on protection of ground and surface water, and on 
continued and expanded project participation in consultation and 
permitting processes; and site-specific comments were offered for each 
candidate site. In a subsequent response letter, DOE agreed to address 
these comments in the selected alternative's MAP.
    EPA provided comments on the Final EIS, indicating no objection to 
DOE proceeding with detailed design and site evaluation. However, EPA 
states that if these activities produce significant new information or 
adverse environmental impact, then DOE would prepare a supplemental 
EIS. EPA also identified groundwater concerns at ANL related to 
drinking water wells. Lastly, EPA provided comments regarding air 
quality modeling that would need to be addressed in the next phase of 
the project regardless of which site was selected.

Decision

    DOE will proceed with the proposed action to construct and operate 
the SNS at the preferred location on the ORNL reservation.

Basis for Decision

    The decision to proceed with construction and operation of the SNS 
is based on the significant scientific and economic benefits expected 
to be derived from the facility and the minimal environmental 
consequences associated with its construction and operation. Selection 
of the ORNL reservation as the site for the SNS is based on 
environmental and programmatic factors. First, while the environmental 
consequences for construction and operation of the SNS are not severe 
at any of the candidate locations, the ORNL reservation affords the 
combination of minimal impact and easiest mitigation for those 
consequences that do occur. A modest amount of wetland (0.23 acres) 
will be disturbed when constructing the facility access road. However, 
it is anticipated that the permitting process will not be complicated 
due to DOE's ability to

[[Page 35142]]

implement compensatory action on the ORNL reservation. Periodic 
degradation of the long-term environmental monitoring program on the 
Walker Branch Watershed is undesirable, but engineering solutions to 
reduce or eliminate those impacts are readily available.

Other Decision Factors

    In addition to environmental factors, DOE considered the existing 
infrastructure for neutron science, cost of construction, and community 
support for the proposed action.
    ORNL provides a unique and comprehensive set of scientific research 
infrastructure that will function in synergy with the SNS facility. The 
High Flux Isotope Reactor (HFIR) has long been a dominant location for 
thermal neutron scattering research; and that facility is currently 
being upgraded to provide cold neutron research capability. The 
combination of HFIR and SNS will provide the full spectrum of neutron 
research tools at one laboratory, thus allowing scientists to optimize 
on-site research during their time in Oak Ridge. ORNL maintains a staff 
of world-class neutron scattering scientists continuing the base 
neutron research programs initially developed at the laboratory in the 
early 1950's. The current cadre of technicians supporting neutron 
research at the HFIR will provide an experienced pool from which to 
develop that same capability for the SNS facility as it is brought into 
operation. In addition, ORNL also provides an important physical plant 
infrastructure to support the SNS. This includes a large reservation 
without significant adjoining population centers; ready availability of 
utilities and services to support facility operation and waste stream 
handling; and regional availability of a low-cost skilled labor pool 
for construction and operation of the SNS.
    Construction on the ORNL reservation would require the least 
infrastructure upgrades and only minimal site specific environmental 
mitigation measures. At Los Alamos, it would be necessary to upgrade 
electric power supply and water supply/distribution systems to satisfy 
the incremental SNS needs. At Argonne, the limited space would require 
immediate restoration of an old Argonne waste burial ground, upgraded 
facility safety systems to ensure adequate protection to residents 
located very close to the facility, and extensive surface mitigation 
actions to address wetlands, floodplains, and a major traffic pattern 
disruption. At Brookhaven, close proximity of the sole-source aquifer 
and the highly permeable soil would require design modifications to 
ensure continuing separation of ground water from activated soil/
shielding around large portions of the facility. The construction cost 
advantage at ORNL, due to lower upgrade and mitigation costs, could be 
offset to some degree by the possible application of Tennessee state 
sales and use taxes to the SNS construction project. Thus, based on 
construction costs, the preferred site at ORNL is at least as 
attractive as any of the alternative sites.
    Tennessee State and local governments, as well as the local 
community, have expressed broad support for locating the SNS at Oak 
Ridge. Tennessee is actively demonstrating their support of neutron 
science activities in Oak Ridge by building a guest user facility, the 
Joint Institute for Neutron Science, on the ORNL reservation, and has 
committed to developing a neutron science program at the University of 
Tennessee in Knoxville.

Project Commitments and Mitigation Measures

    The DOE shall use all practicable means to avoid or minimize 
environmental harm from the construction and operation of the SNS and 
will document specific steps to achieve this end in a Mitigation Action 
Plan (MAP). The Department will monitor its progress against the MAP to 
help ensure that it is properly implemented. Copies of the MAP will be 
made available in the local public reading rooms for information.
    With ORNL having been selected as the site for the SNS, DOE will 
perform three-season surveys there to confirm the presence/absence of 
threatened and endangered species and archeological investigations to 
locate any historically sensitive areas. These studies will be 
performed before major land disturbance begins. The Department will 
fully assess any species or areas of concern that it identifies and 
will act to mitigate any adverse impacts to the extent practicable in 
compliance with governing regulatory agencies (U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service and the State of Tennessee).
    Construction of the SNS on the ORNL reservation will result in 
damage or destruction of three small [a total of 0.23 acres (0.09 ha)] 
wetland areas to accommodate the facility access road. As conventional 
facility design evolves, the amount of impacted wetland shall be held 
to a minimum. During construction, DOE will comply with the 
requirements of the appropriate regulatory authority (the U.S. Army 
Corps of Engineers or the State of Tennessee) with respect to the 
affected wetlands. The Department will use runoff and siting controls 
during construction to restrict unnecessary damage to remaining wetland 
areas.
    As changes evolve in facility design or as facility upgrade actions 
are proposed, the DOE shall revisit requirements of the National 
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) to ensure continued compliance by the 
SNS.

    Issued in Washington, D.C. this 18th day of June, 1999.
Bill Richardson,
Secretary of Energy.
[FR Doc. 99-16603 Filed 6-29-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P