[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 178 (Wednesday, September 15, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 50064-50071]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-24086]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for Accomplishing
Expanded Civilian Nuclear Energy Research and Development and Isotope
Production Missions in the United States, Including the Role of the
Fast Flux Test Facility (DOE/EIS-0310)
AGENCY: Department of Energy (DOE).
ACTION: Notice of intent (NOI).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: DOE's civilian nuclear research and isotope production
infrastructure has diminished significantly since the early 1990s. As a
result, DOE is no longer able to accommodate new and expanding missions
for nuclear research and development and isotope production. The
Department does not have sufficient steady-state neutron resources to
meet all of its projected irradiation needs for: (1) The production of
isotopes for medical and industrial uses, (2) the production of
plutonium-238 for use in advanced radioisotope power systems for future
National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) space missions,
and 3) the Nation's nuclear research and development needs.
Therefore, pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA), the Secretary of Energy recently announced DOE's intent to
prepare a programmatic environmental impact statement (PEIS) on
accomplishing these new missions through the proposed enhancement of
the existing infrastructure, including the possible role of the Fast
Flux Test Facility (FFTF), located at DOE's
[[Page 50065]]
Hanford Site near Richland, Washington.
This PEIS will analyze the potential environmental impacts of
alternative ways to meet the projected irradiation needs for the next
35 years by enhancing the existing infrastructure as follows: (1)
Resuming FFTF operation, (2) constructing and operating a research
reactor at a generic DOE site, and (3) constructing and operating one
or more neutron accelerators at a generic DOE site. In addition, the
PEIS will analyze the potential environmental impacts of meeting the
projected mission needs to the extent possible using existing reactor
and neutron accelerator facilities.
The FFTF, DOE's largest operable reactor, is currently maintained
in a standby mode with no fuel in the reactor vessel. The PEIS will
include sufficient project-specific analyses of the FFTF to enable DOE
to support a restart decision. In addition, since DOE may decide not to
restart FFTF to meet the projected irradiation needs evaluated in this
PEIS, the environmental impacts of deactivating the FFTF reactor will
also be analyzed.
Consistent with the Council on Environmental Quality's NEPA
regulations, a No Action alternative, i.e., maintaining the status quo,
will be evaluated in this PEIS. Under No Action, DOE would continue to
rely on the existing infrastructure for production of isotopes and
nuclear research and development within the current operating envelope.
No domestic capability to produce plutonium-238 for future space
missions would be established.
DOE is now canceling the Plutonium-238 Production EIS, announced in
the Federal Register on October 5, 1998 (63 FR 53398) and integrating
the plutonium-238 production analyses into this PEIS. All oral and
written comments received by DOE on the proposed scope of the
Plutonium-238 Production EIS will be considered in preparing this PEIS.
DOE invites individuals, organizations, and agencies to submit oral
and/or written comments regarding the scope of this PEIS, including the
environmental issues and alternatives that the PEIS should analyze.
DATES: The public scoping period begins with the publication of this
Notice in the Federal Register and will continue until October 31,
1999. Comments submitted by mail, facsimile (FAX), electronic mail (e-
mail), or telephone will be considered in preparation of this PEIS.
Comments received after this date will be considered to the extent
practicable. DOE will conduct public scoping meetings to assist in
defining the scope of this PEIS including the significant environmental
issues to be addressed. DOE will hold scoping meetings in Seattle and
Richland, Washington; Portland and Hood River, Oregon; Oak Ridge,
Tennessee; Idaho Falls, Idaho; and in the Washington D.C. area. The
dates, times, and locations of these meetings are as follows:
Oak Ridge, Tennessee, October 13, 1999, registration at 6
p.m., presentation at 7 p.m., at the American Museum of Science &
Energy, 300 South Tulane Avenue
Idaho Falls, Idaho, October 15, 1999, registration beginning
at 6 p.m., presentation at 7 p.m., at the Shilo Inn, 780 Lindsay
Boulevard
Seattle, Washington, October 18, 1999, registration beginning
at 6 p.m., presentation at 7 p.m., at the Seattle Center, 305 Harrison
Street
Portland, Oregon, October 19, 1999, registration beginning at
6 p.m., presentation at 7 p.m., at the Marriott Hotel-Downtown
Portland, 1401 SW Front Avenue
Hood River, Oregon, October 20, 1999, registration beginning
at 6 p.m., presentation at 7 p.m., at the Hood River Inn, 1108 E.
Marina Way
Richland, Washington, October 21, 1999, registration beginning
at 6 p.m., presentation at 7 p.m., at the Best Western Tower Inn &
Conference Center, 1515 George Washington Way
Arlington, Virginia, October 26, 1999, registration beginning
at 2 p.m., presentation at 2:30 p.m., at the Hyatt Regency Crystal
City, 2799 Jefferson Davis Highway
ADDRESSES: Written comments on the scope of the PEIS, requests to speak
at the public scoping meetings, requests for special arrangements to
enable participation at the meetings (e.g., interpreter for the
hearing-impaired), and questions concerning the project review, should
be addressed to the DOE NEPA Document Manager: Ms. Colette E. Brown,
Office of Nuclear Energy, Science and Technology (NE-50), U.S.
Department of Energy, 19901 Germantown Road, Germantown, MD 20874.
Electronic mail (e-mail): [email protected];
toll-free facsimile (FAX): 1-877-562-4592; or leave a message, toll-
free, at telephone number 1-877-562-4593.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To request information about this
PEIS, or to be placed on the PEIS document distribution list, contact
Colette E. Brown at the above mailing/e-mail addresses or toll-free
telephone/FAX numbers. For general information on the DOE NEPA process,
please contact: Ms. Carol M. Borgstrom, Director, Office of NEPA Policy
and Assistance (EH-42), U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence
Avenue S.W., Washington, DC 20585-0119.
Telephone: 202-586-4600 or leave a message at 1-800-472-2756.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Purpose and Need for Agency Action
DOE recognizes that increased nuclear research, technology
development, and educational programs are essential to support national
nuclear energy programs and international collaboration. DOE believes
that the availability of nuclear research reactor and accelerator
facilities is necessary to implement a successful nuclear energy
program. Under the authority of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as
amended, DOE is responsible for serving the national need for a
reliable supply of isotope products and services for medicine,
industry, research, and space exploration. An adequate nuclear research
and isotope production facility infrastructure is needed to continue
these national services into the future at projected increased demand
levels.
DOE's nuclear technology infrastructure is dwindling while the
demand for steady-state neutron sources continues to increase to
explore the use of nuclear science for analyzing and testing materials,
nuclear fuels, electronic circuits, and other components; creating
isotopes required by medical clinicians, researchers, government, and
industry for a wide range of applications; and to produce plutonium-238
required to power deep space probes. Current supplies of isotopes are
limited and the demand is projected to increase dramatically,
particularly as research points toward additional medical applications
for many radioisotopes . Resuming operations at the FFTF, building a
new research reactor, or building new accelerator facilities, in
conjunction with the existing DOE neutron sources, would provide
adequate neutron source capacity to serve the nation's foreseeable
nuclear research and development and isotope production needs.
Therefore, DOE is proceeding with a NEPA evaluation (i.e., a
Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement, [PEIS]) of potential
enhancement to the nation's nuclear research and technology
infrastructure to assure that the United States can support future
nuclear research and isotope production activities.
[[Page 50066]]
This PEIS will analyze the potential environmental impacts
resulting from accomplishing these new nuclear research and development
and isotope production missions with (1) The existing operational DOE
infrastructure; (2) the existing operational DOE infrastructure
supplemented by the operation of the FFTF; (3) the existing operational
DOE infrastructure supplemented by the construction and operation of a
research reactor and supporting facilities at a generic DOE site; and
(4) the existing operational DOE infrastructure supplemented by the
construction and operation of one or more neutron-producing
accelerators and supporting facilities at a generic DOE site. Impacts
from the No Action alternative, as discussed below, will also be
analyzed.
Background
DOE's nuclear research and isotope production infrastructure has
diminished significantly since the early 1990s. The Department does not
have sufficient steady-state neutron sources to meet all of its
projected irradiation needs for: (1) The production of isotopes for
medical and industrial uses, (2) the production of plutonium-238 for
use in advanced radioisotope power systems for future NASA space
missions, and (3) the Nation's nuclear research and development needs.
On August 18, 1999, the Secretary of Energy announced DOE's intent to
prepare a PEIS on accomplishing these new and expanded missions through
the proposed enhancements of the existing infrastructure, including the
possible role of the FFTF.
FFTF, the largest research reactor in the world, is a sodium-cooled
research reactor located in the 400 Area of the Hanford Site, near the
City of Richland, in southeastern Washington State. FFTF is currently
defueled and usable fuel is stored on site in sodium fuel storage pools
or in the secure vault at the Plutonium Finishing Plant at the Hanford
Site. The reactor is in standby mode with the main cooling system
operating at approximately 200 deg.C (400 deg.F), to keep the sodium
coolant liquid and circulating. Essential systems, staffing, and
support services are being maintained in a manner that will support
either timely deactivation of the reactor or its restart. With minor
modification, (e.g., the installation of a system to insert and remove
irradiation targets while at power), the FFTF is capable of
accomplishing new and expanded mission requirements discussed above.
Alternatively, all or most of the new and expanded mission
requirements can be achieved by the addition of a new research reactor
or new neutron-producing accelerators to the existing infrastructure.
The environmental impacts of the proposed new facilities (including
support facilities) will be analyzed at a generic DOE site.
The Department does not have sufficient steady-state neutron
generation capacity to meet all of the projected needs without
impacting current missions at existing operating facilities. However,
some of the mission objectives can be achieved with surplus capacity
available at these existing operating facilities. The plutonium-238
mission objectives could be achieved at existing DOE research reactors
or commercial light water reactor (CLWR) facilities. Surplus capacity
exists at the Advanced Test Reactor (ATR) at the Idaho National
Engineering and Environmental Laboratory and at the High Flux Isotope
Reactor (HFIR) at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Implementation of
plutonium-238 production at ATR and HFIR would consume nearly all of
the available surplus capacity. Surplus capacity in these facilities
and existing neutron-producing accelerators could be used to support
medical and industrial isotope production and nuclear research and
development missions to the extent possible without impacting existing
missions. CLWRs cannot support most isotope production and research and
development mission objectives without significantly impacting their
primary mission, the production of electrical power. CLWRs were
therefore dropped from further consideration for these missions.
This PEIS will analyze the environmental impacts of operating
existing and new steady-state irradiation facilities, including both
reactors and neutron accelerators, and existing and new support
processing facilities to meet the mission objectives. In evaluating
these alternatives the Department assumes:
(1) None of these proposed missions is defense-related; and
(2) The mission activities currently pursued at existing facilities
(i.e., isotope production, nuclear research, etc.) are not changed in
any of the alternatives.
Following is a brief discussion of the proposed new and expanded
mission areas:
(1) Medical and Industrial Isotope Production
Medical isotopes are produced in the United States by the
Department of Energy in nuclear accelerators and reactors, and by
extracting them from existing radioactive materials. These isotopes can
be used for diagnosis or therapy. Diagnostic isotopes are used for
imaging internal organs. Unlike conventional radiology, imaging with
radioisotopes reveals organ function and structure, providing more
accurate diagnostics data and early detection of abnormalities. In
ongoing clinical testing, therapeutic isotopes have proven effective in
the treatment of cancer and other illnesses by cell-directed localized
radiation therapy (i.e., deploying antibodies or carriers of
radioisotopes to seek and destroy invasive cancer cells). This directed
therapy can minimize adverse side effects (e.g., healthy tissue damage,
nausea, hair loss) making it an effective and attractive alternative to
traditional chemotherapy or radiation treatments. An Expert Panel
convened by the Department last year reviewed several industry
projections relating to the future demand growth of medical isotopes.
The Expert Panel believes that the growth rate of medical isotope usage
could be significant over the next 20 years.
Industrial applications of radioisotopes fall into three broad
categories, including nucleonic instrumentation, irradiation and
radiation processing, and technologies that use radioactive tracers.
Examples of nucleonic instrumentation include gauges for measuring
physical parameters, such as: detection systems for pollutants,
explosives, drugs, ores, petroleum, and natural gases; nondestructive
testing by gamma radiography; and smoke detectors. Irradiation and
radiation processing technologies include radiation sterilization of
food and medical products, and the curing of plastics. Radioactive
tracer applications include studies on chemical synthesis reactions;
monitoring of mass transfer in industrial plants; analysis of transport
and uptake of nutrients, fertilizers, herbicides, and waste materials
in plants, soil, and groundwater; and laboratory-based studies on the
properties of materials.
In supporting these mission activities, the Department does not
expect to engage the commercial market itself. Rather, consistent with
current isotope activities, the Department will work with the private
sector to support private sector production and sale of isotopes. The
Department prefers to provide irradiation services for the private
sector using an appropriate fee structure and allow the private sector
to take responsibility for producing and processing targets.
[[Page 50067]]
(2) Plutonium-238 Production
Under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, DOE and its
predecessor agencies have been developing radioisotope power systems
and radioisotope heater units and supplying them to the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) for more than 30 years. The
radioisotope used in these systems is plutonium-238. These systems have
repeatedly demonstrated their value as enabling technologies in various
NASA missions. DOE has projected that over the next 20 to 35 years,
NASA will continue to conduct missions that require or would be enabled
or enhanced by radioisotope power systems fueled with plutonium-238.
Under the National Space Policy issued by the Office of Science and
Technology Policy in September 1996, and in accordance with its nuclear
charter under the Atomic Energy Act, as amended, DOE has responsibility
to assure that it maintains the capability to provide the nuclear
infrastructure, including the plutonium-238, needed to support these
missions. The Intersector Guidelines section of the National Space
Policy state that ``The Department of Energy will maintain the
necessary capability to support space missions which may require the
use of space nuclear power systems.'' DOE has estimated that up to 5
kilograms per year of plutonium-238 is required to support NASA
requirements for future space missions.
Historically, the reactors and chemical processing facilities at
DOE's Savannah River Site (SRS) were used to produce plutonium-238 by
the irradiation of targets containing neptunium-237. The irradiated
targets were moved from the reactor site to a chemical processing
facility where the targets were processed and the plutonium-238 was
recovered as an oxide powder. The remaining neptunium-237 was recovered
for recycling into additional targets. The plutonium-238 oxide powder
was then shipped to facilities for producing pellets that were in turn
shipped to another DOE site to make the radioisotope power systems. As
a result of the downsizing of the DOE nuclear weapons complex at the
end of the Cold War, the reactors used to produce plutonium-238 at SRS
were shut down. The radiochemical processing facilities at SRS are also
planned to be shut down in the near future after existing supplies of
radioactive materials no longer needed to support DOE's missions have
been processed into a form suitable for long-term storage or disposal.
In 1992, DOE signed a contract to purchase plutonium-238 from
Russia allowing the U.S. to purchase up to 40 kilograms of plutonium-
238. Under this contract, DOE has purchased 9 kilograms of plutonium-
238, and in 1997, extended the contract for another five years. This
option, therefore, continues to be viable until at least 2002. However,
the long-term viability of this option is unclear once the end of the
current contract is reached. The political and economic climate in
Russia creates uncertainties about the reliability of this source of
plutonium-238 to satisfy future NASA space mission requirements.
Moreover, limited information exists regarding the extent of the
Russian supply, Russian plans on how they would satisfy future demand,
and nuclear safety and nonproliferation implications of Russian
production methods. Therefore, DOE proposes to reestablish a reliable
domestic capability for producing and processing plutonium-238 to
satisfy these foreseeable space mission requirements. Since the
facilities previously used at SRS are no longer available for the
production of plutonium-238, DOE needs to evaluate other existing DOE
and commercial light water reactors and chemical processing facilities
for target irradiation and separation of plutonium-238. The
environmental impacts of purchasing plutonium-238 from Russia are
evaluated and documented in the Environmental Assessment of the Import
of Russian Plutonium-238 (DOE/EA-0841, June 1993), prepared by DOE's
Office of Nuclear Energy, Science and Technology.
On October 5, 1998, DOE published a Notice of Intent in the Federal
Register (63 FR 53398) to prepare an EIS on the proposed production of
plutonium-238 for use in advanced radioisotope power systems for future
space missions. Since then, DOE has been preparing the draft EIS,
giving consideration to the numerous comments submitted by the public
during the scoping period last fall. During the public scoping of this
EIS, DOE announced that FFTF would not be considered a reasonable
alternative for that mission unless the facility was proposed to be
restarted for other reasons. With the Secretary's recent announcement
to prepare a PEIS which includes the possible restart of FFTF, the
scope of the Plutonium-238 Production EIS has been consolidated into
the scope of this PEIS. This PEIS will include the environmental
impacts of re-establishing a domestic plutonium-238 production
capability for future space missions. The Plutonium-238 Production EIS
has been terminated as a separate NEPA review. However, all comments
and input received from the public during the scoping period will be
considered in the preparation of the draft PEIS to be prepared pursuant
to this Notice.
(3) Support of Nuclear Research and Development
Materials Testing: Researchers from many different countries have
used DOE's high flux research reactor facilities for nuclear materials
testing and fuels research. These facilities, with the capability to
maintain a high density of neutrons in a given test volume for
materials testing, shorten the time needed for such testing, tailor the
flux to simulate different reactors and reactor conditions, and
instrument the core for close monitoring of tests. There is particular
interest in materials testing related to commercial nuclear power plant
license renewal, cooperative international fusion energy, space power
technology, and transmutation of wastes as a means to destroy long-
lived isotopes from commercial spent nuclear fuel. Activities
considered within the scope of this PEIS will include those arising
from international cooperation.
Nonproliferation Programs: Since October 1976, when President
Gerald Ford issued a Nuclear Policy Statement prohibiting the export of
reprocessing and other nuclear technologies that could contribute to
proliferation of fissile materials, all U.S. Administrations have
adopted policies aimed at minimizing the prospects that civilian
plutonium separation would be adopted in other countries. At the same
time, the U.S. has refrained from the commercial development of
reprocessing and plutonium separation technologies. The U.S. policy is
to advance global non-proliferation technology, while at the same time
supporting the development of advanced, ultra-high burnup nuclear
fuels. DOE's high flux research reactor facilities are ideally suited
for the study, research, testing, development, and demonstration of
technologies necessary to safely convert plutonium-based materials for
disposition and use as proliferation-resistant fuels.
Alternatives To Be Evaluated
This PEIS will analyze the potential environmental impacts of using
irradiation and processing facilities to meet projected irradiation
service mission needs for 35 years, i.e., (1) production of isotopes
for medical and industrial uses, (2) production of up to five kilograms
per year of plutonium-238 for use in advanced radioisotope
[[Page 50068]]
power systems for future NASA space missions, and (3) to support the
Nation's nuclear research and development needs. This PEIS will not re-
examine current missions conducted at existing, operating facilities,
but rather assumes that these current activities will continue while
new or expanded missions are pursued.
When applicable, the impacts of transporting radioactive feedstock
material to the processing facility for storage, transporting
radioactive material between the irradiation facility and the
processing facility, and transporting the product to the user will be
analyzed in this PEIS.
No Action
Under this alternative, DOE would maintain the status quo. The
Department would not restart the FFTF and would maintain it in a
standby mode. Production of isotopes for medical and industrial uses
and existing irradiation services missions currently conducted at
operating facilities would continue within the existing mission
envelope. No domestic capability to produce plutonium-238 would be
established. DOE would rely on its remaining inventory of plutonium-238
inventory to meet the power requirements of near-term space missions
and would seek to negotiate for additional purchases from Russia to
enable future space missions. The PEIS would evaluate two scenarios
with respect to the neptunium-237 currently stored at the Savannah
River Site: (a) The neptunium-237 aqueous nitrate solution stored at
the Savannah River Site would be converted to a solid form suitable for
disposal as evaluated in the Final Environmental Impact Statement
Interim Management of Nuclear Materials, Savannah River Site (DOE/EIS-
0220, October 1995); or (b) the neptunium-237, converted to an oxide
form, would be transferred from the Savannah River Site to a new
storage site to maintain a future option to produce plutonium-238. The
three alternative facilities for the storage of the neptunium-237 are
the Radiochemical Engineering Development Center in Oak Ridge,
Tennessee; the Fluorinel Dissolution Process Facility near Idaho Falls,
Idaho; and the Fuels and Materials Examination Facility in Hanford,
Washington. The impacts of transporting neptunium-237 to the candidate
storage facilities from the Savannah River Site will be evaluated.
Alternative 1--Restart FFTF
Under this alternative, the PEIS will analyze the potential
environmental impacts of resuming operation of FFTF to accomplish the
identified missions. The FFTF is designed to operate at a maximum power
level of 400 megawatts, but can achieve all the projected new and
expanded mission requirements anticipated under this PEIS while
operating at the 100 megawatt power level. This PEIS will analyze the
FFTF for operations at the 100 megawatt power level. The FFTF has an
onsite supply of mixed oxide (MOX) fuel (i.e., plutonium-uranium) to
support approximately 6 years of operation at the 100 megawatt level.
When the onsite fuel is depleted the FFTF may continue to use MOX fuel
or switch to a reactor core of highly-enriched uranium (HEU) fuel. The
Department believes that an additional 15-year supply of MOX fuel is
available from Germany under very favorable terms (i.e., no charge for
the fuel). This PEIS will evaluate 35 years of FFTF operation for two
reactor core configurations: (1) MOX core for approximately 21 years
followed by 14 years of operation with a HEU core, and (2) MOX core for
approximately 6 years followed by 29 years of operation with a HEU
core. The impacts of spent fuel produced by FFTF operation and for
transporting German fuel to FFTF will be evaluated in the PEIS. The
PEIS will include sufficient project-specific analyses of the FFTF to
enable DOE to support a restart decision.
This PEIS will also analyze the impacts of performing medical,
industrial, and plutonium-238 isotope processing operations associated
with the identified missions in hot cell facilities in the DOE complex.
Processing operations include storage of target and process feedstock
material, fabrication of targets for irradiation, processing irradiated
targets to separate the product and recycling the unconverted feedstock
material for the fabrication of new targets.
The processing operations portion of this alternative includes
three options. Because space is not available in currently operating
facilities on the Hanford site to support all of the processing
requirements for the identified missions, new or off-site facilities
will be needed to support activities conducted using the FFTF. The
first option incorporates the use of a large existing and never used
hot cell facility located near the FFTF to support all process facility
operations for the identified missions. The second and third options
incorporate the use of off site processing facilities to support the
plutonium-238 production mission in conjunction with the use of
existing operational processing facilities at the Hanford Site to
support the FFTF in the remaining missions.
Option 1 will assess the impact of using the Fuels and Materials
Examination Facility (FMEF) located near the FFTF in the 400 Area of
the Hanford Site to support the FFTF missions.
Option 2 will assess the impact of using the Radiochemical
Engineering Development Center (REDC) located in the Oak Ridge National
Laboratory at Oak Ridge, Tennessee, in support of FFTF for the
production of plutonium-238 and other existing facilities located in
the 300 and 400 Areas of the Hanford Site to support the FFTF in the
remaining mission areas (i.e., production of medical and industrial
isotopes and nuclear research and development).
Option 3 will assess the impact of using the Fluorinel Dissolution
Process Facility (FDPF) located in the Idaho National Engineering and
Environmental Laboratory near Idaho Falls, Idaho, in support of FFTF
for the production of plutonium-238 and other existing facilities
located in the 300 Area and 400 Area of the Hanford Site to support the
FFTF in the remaining mission areas (i.e., production of medical and
industrial isotopes and nuclear research and development).
Alternative 2--Use Only Existing Operational Facilities to the Extent
Possible
Under this alternative, the PEIS will analyze the potential
environmental impacts of meeting the projected mission needs to the
extent possible using only existing operational facilities (without
FFTF). The Department's analyses indicate that the plutonium-238
production objectives can be met using existing facilities. However,
should plutonium-238 production be conducted at existing facilities,
significant new medical and industrial isotope production and nuclear
research and development mission objectives cannot be achieved without
impacting current missions at these facilities. This PEIS will analyze
the impact of the continuing, existing isotope production and nuclear
research and development missions at current levels as part of the No
Action alternative. The cumulative impacts from operating the affected
facilities for all missions will be addressed under this alternative.
This PEIS will evaluate the potential impacts of nine options for
plutonium-238 production, that is, the combinations of three reactor
sites (for the irradiation of targets) with three different processing
facilities (for the storage of neptunium-237, fabrication of neptunium-
237
[[Page 50069]]
targets for irradiation, and the processing of irradiated targets to
separate plutonium-238). The three reactor sites are the Advanced Test
Reactor located at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental
Laboratory near Idaho Falls, Idaho; the High Flux Isotope Reactor
located at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee; and
a commercial light water reactor located at an undefined generic site.
The three processing facilities, previously discussed under Alternative
1, are REDC, FDPF, and FMEF. The impacts of transporting neptunium-237
to the storage facility from the Savannah River Site (SRS);
unirradiated and irradiated targets between the irradiation facilities
and processing facilities; and plutonium-238 from the processing
facilities to the Los Alamos National Laboratory in Los Alamos, New
Mexico where it is processed for use in advanced radioisotope power
systems, will be evaluated for each combination.
Alternative Sites for Plutonium-238 Production Target Irradiation
Advanced Test Reactor (ATR) at the Idaho National Engineering
and Environmental Laboratory: Under this alternative, DOE would
irradiate targets (fabricated from neptunium-237 currently stored at
SRS) in the ATR to produce up to 5 kilograms per year of plutonium-
238, the maximum annual production requirement for the plutonium-238
production mission under current planning. ATR is an operating test
reactor with a primary programmatic mission to support the Naval
Reactor Fuels Program. A prerequisite of applying this alternative
is that no impacts to the primary mission of the reactor would be
allowed. In addition, nuclear research and isotope production
missions at the ATR would also continue within the facility's
current mission envelope.
High Flux Isotope Reactor (HFIR) at the Oak Ridge National
Laboratory: Under this alternative, DOE would irradiate neptunium-
237 targets in HFIR to produce up to 2 kilograms per year of
plutonium-238. HFIR is an operating research reactor with its main
programmatic mission to support DOE's Office of Science. A
prerequisite of applying this alternative is that no impacts to the
primary mission of the reactor would occur. Nuclear research and
isotope production missions at the HFIR would also continue within
the facility's current mission envelope. The use of HFIR for
production of small quantities of plutonium-238 is compatible with
the primary neutron scattering and radioisotope production mission
of that reactor. Production of plutonium-238 at a rate higher than
two kilograms per year would disrupt experimental programs currently
being conducted at HFIR. Use of HFIR for the plutonium-238
production would need to be supplemented by the ATR to meet the 5
kilograms per year production objective.
Commercial Light Water Reactor (CLWR) at a generic site
location: Under this alternative, DOE would irradiate neptunium-237
targets in an existing CLWR to produce up to five kilograms per year
of plutonium-238. A CLWR is an operating reactor with a primary
mission to deliver electric power to the local power grid. A
prerequisite of applying this alternative is that no impacts to the
primary mission of the reactor would be allowed.
Under Alternative 2, the PEIS will also analyze the potential
environmental impacts of meeting projected medical and industrial
isotope production and nuclear research and development mission needs,
to the extent possible (i.e., without impacting existing missions),
using existing neutron spallation sources (i.e., neutron-producing
accelerators), such as, for example, the Brookhaven LINAC Isotope
Producer at Brookhaven National Laboratory in Upton, New York, or the
Isotope Production Facility at Los Alamos National Laboratory in Los
Alamos, New Mexico). The FFTF would be deactivated under Alternative 2.
Alternative 3--Construct New Accelerator(s)
Under this alternative, the PEIS will analyze the potential
environmental impacts of constructing and operating one or more (if
necessary, depending on power level requirements) new neutron-producing
accelerators and new process facility at a generic DOE site for all
identified missions. The role of the process facility is the same as in
Alternative 1. Under Alternative 3, the FFTF would be deactivated.
Alternative 4--Construct New Research Reactor
Under this alternative, the PEIS will analyze the potential
environmental impacts of constructing and operating a new research
reactor and new process facility at a generic DOE site for all
identified missions. The role of the process facility is the same as in
Alternative 1. Under Alternative 4, the FFTF would be deactivated.
Environmental Impact Areas To Be Analyzed
The following areas have been tentatively identified for analysis
in the PEIS. This list is neither intended to be all inclusive nor is
it a predetermination of potential environmental impacts. The list is
presented to facilitate comments on the scope of this PEIS. 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, transportation, and
credible accident scenarios;
Waste Management/Pollution Prevention: Types of wastes
expected to be generated, handled, and stored; 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 and recreationally important species, and threatened 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;
Cumulative Effects: Including impacts from past, present,
and reasonably foreseeable actions at and in the vicinity of the sites;
Unavoidable Adverse Impacts;
Natural and Depletable Resources: Requirements and
conservation potential; and
Environmental Justice: Any potential disproportionately
high and adverse impacts to minority and low income populations.
Pending Decisions
This PEIS is only one of many inputs required for a decision to be
made relating to the infrastructure to support new nuclear research and
development and isotope production missions. Other elements that will
provide major inputs into the decision process include:
DOE's Nuclear Science and Technology Long-Range Research
and Development Plan;
DOE's Nuclear Science and Technology Infrastructure Road
Map;
Nonproliferation Study, a review of potential impacts to
the U.S. nonproliferation policy from the
[[Page 50070]]
alternatives under consideration in the PEIS;
Cost Study, a review of costs for the alternatives under
consideration in the PEIS; and
Implementation schedule for the alternatives under
consideration in the PEIS.
The primary decision is related to the ability of DOE to support
the future missions evaluated in the PEIS. DOE will make a decision
whether its infrastructure should be enhanced to support these
missions.
If the decision is for enhancement, then subsequent
decisions will be made relating to Alternatives 1, 3, and 4.
If Alternative 1 (FFTF Restart) is selected for
implementation, subsequent decisions will be made relating to the
support facilities. The FMEF could support FFTF for all of the missions
or existing operational onsite facilities in combination with either
the REDC in the Oak Ridge National Laboratory or the FDPF at the Idaho
National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory could support FFTF
for all the missions.
If Alternative 3 (New Accelerator(s)) or Alternative 4
(New Research Reactor) is selected, subsequent NEPA review would be
required for site selection, construction, and operation of the
facility(ies).
If the decision is not to enhance or expand the
infrastructure, then subsequent decisions will be made relating to No
Action or Alternative 2 (Use Only Existing Facilities).
If No Action Scenario 1 is selected, a subsequent
decision would be required to determine if Russian plutonium-238 should
be purchased to support future NASA space missions.
If No Action Scenario 2 is selected, a subsequent
decision would be required to determine if Russian plutonium-238 should
be purchased to support future NASA space missions. In addition, the
site for the storage of the neptunium-237 would be selected.
If Alternative 2 is selected, a series of decisions are
required: (1) The selection of neutron accelerator sites to support, to
the extent possible, the medical and industrial isotope production and
research and development missions; (2) the selection of the reactor
option to support the plutonium-238 mission; and (3) the selection of
the processing facility site to support the plutonium-238 mission.
DOE, in its Record of Decision (ROD), may elect to implement a
combination of the pathways and/or individual elements within the
outlined pathways.
Scoping Meetings
The purpose of this Notice is to encourage public involvement in
the PEIS process and to solicit public comments on the proposed scope
and content of this PEIS. Through this notice, DOE formally invites
Federal, state, tribal, and other government agencies, as well as the
public to comment on the scope of this PEIS. DOE will hold scoping
meetings in Seattle, Washington, Portland, Oregon, Hood River, Oregon,
Richland, Washington, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, Idaho Falls, Idaho, and
Washington DC. The dates, times, and locations of these meetings are
identified under DATES above.
In order to facilitate an understanding of the program's
objectives, DOE personnel will also be available at the scoping
meetings to explain the program to the public and answer any 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 each be allotted ten minutes. 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 questions, but the scoping
meetings will not be conducted as evidentiary hearings.
Toll-free telephone and facsimile (FAX) numbers have been
established to receive public comments. Interested parties may call 1-
877-562-4593 and leave a detailed message with their comments or FAX
their comments to 1-877-562-4592. Comments will also be accepted by
electronic mail. Interested parties may e-mail their comments to:
[email protected]
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, SW,
Washington, DC 20585, Telephone: (202) 586-3142
Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory, DOE--Idaho
Operations Office Public Reading Room, 1776 Science Center Drive, Idaho
Falls, ID 83415, Telephone: (208) 526-1144
Portland State University, Branford Price Millar Library, Government
Documents Section, 951 Southwest Hall, Portland, OR 97207, Telephone:
(503) 725-3690
U.S. Department of Energy, Oak Ridge Operations Office, Oak Ridge
Public Reading Room, 230 Warehouse Road, Building 1916-T-2, Suite 300,
Oak Ridge, TN 37830, Telephone: (423) 241-4780
Richland Public Library, 955 Northgate Drive, Richland, WA 99352,
Telephone: (509) 942-7457
U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office, DOE Public
Reading Room, 2770 University Drive CIC, Room 101L, Richland, WA 99352,
Telephone: (509) 372-7443
University of Washington, Suzzallo Library, Government Publications
Room, Seattle, WA 98195, Telephone: (206) 543-1937
Gonzaga University, Foley Center Library, East 502 Boone, Spokane, WA
99258, Telephone: (509) 323-6532
NEPA Process
The Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for Accomplishing
Expanded Civilian Nuclear Energy Research and Development and Isotope
Production Missions in the United States, Including the Role of the
Fast Flux Test Facility 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 45-day comment period on the draft PEIS is planned, and public
hearings to receive comments will be held approximately 3 to 4 weeks
after distribution of the draft PEIS. The draft PEIS is expected to be
issued during the Spring 2000. Availability of the draft PEIS, 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 PEIS is distributed.
The final PEIS, which will consider the public comments received on
the draft PEIS, is expected to be published during the Fall 2000. No
sooner than 30 days after the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's
notice of availability of the final PEIS is published in the Federal
Register, DOE will issue its Record of Decision and publish it in the
Federal Register.
[[Page 50071]]
Signed in Washington, D.C., this 10th day of September 1999.
David Michaels, PhD,
Assistant Secretary, Environment, Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. 99-24086 Filed 9-14-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P