[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 49 (Wednesday, March 13, 2002)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11296-11301]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-6034]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY


National Nuclear Security Administration; Record of Decision of 
the Final Site-Wide Environmental Impact Statement for the Oak Ridge Y-
12 National Security Complex

AGENCY: Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration.

ACTION: Record of decision.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), is issuing this Record of 
Decision on the operation of the Y-12 National Security Complex (Y-12) 
in the State of Tennessee. This Record of Decision is based on the 
information and analysis contained in the Site-Wide Environmental 
Impact Statement (EIS) for the Y-12 National Security Complex (DOE/EIS-
0309), and other factors, such as the mission responsibilities of the 
DOE. DOE has decided to implement the Preferred Alternative, which is 
Alternative 4 (No Action-Planning Basis Operations Plus Construct and 
Operate a Highly Enriched Uranium (HEU) Materials Facility and Special 
Materials Complex). This alternative includes the continued operations 
at Y-12 to meet the NNSA mission requirements and other DOE program 
activities, together with the construction and operation of two new 
facilities: HEU Storage Facility and the Special Materials Complex.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information on the Site-
Wide EIS or Record of Decision, or to receive a copy of the Site-Wide 
EIS, contact: Gary Hartman, Document Manager, U.S. Department of 
Energy, Oak Ridge Operations Office, Post Office Box 2001, Oak Ridge, 
Tennessee 37831, (865) 576-0273. For information on the DOE National 
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process, contact: Carol M. Borgstrom, 
Director, Office of NEPA Policy and Compliance (EH-42), U.S. Department 
of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20585, (205) 
586-4600, or leave a message at (800) 472-2756.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:   

Background

    That National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), a separately 
organized agency within the DOE, prepared this Record of Decision 
pursuant to the regulations of the Council on Environmental Quality for 
implementing NEPA (40 CFR parts 1500-1508) and DOE's NEPA Implementing 
Procedures (10 CFR part 1021). This Record of Decision is based, in 
part, on DOE's Site-Wide EIS for the Oak Ridge Y-12 National Security 
Complex (DOE/EIS-0309).
    The Y-12 National Security Complex is one of three primary 
installations on the Oak Ridge Reservation (ORR) in Oak Ridge, 
Tennessee. The ORR is in eastern Tennessee, approximately 40 km (25 
miles) west of Knoxville. The Y-12 area on the ORR covers about 2,197 
ha (5,428 acres). The main area of Y-12 is largely developed and 
encompasses 328 ha (811 acres) with approximately 580 buildings. The 
land surrounding the main area of Y-12 is used primarily for a buffer 
area as well as for environmental restoration and waste management 
activities. Approximately 8,900 workers, including DOE employees and 
contractors, are at Y-12.
    As one of the DOE major production facilities, Y-12 has been the 
primary site for enriched uranium processing and storage, and one of 
the primary manufacturing facilities for maintaining the U.S. nuclear 
weapons stockpile. Y-12 also conducts, and/or supports, nondefense-
related mission activities including environmental monitoring, 
remediation, and decontamination and decommissioning activities of the 
DOE Environmental Management Program; management of waste materials 
from past and current operations; research activities operated by other 
federal agencies through the Work-for-Others Program and the National 
Prototyping Center; and the transfer of highly specialized technologies 
to support the capabilities of the U.S. industrial base.
    The Site-Wide EIS considers the environmental impacts of ongoing 
and proposed activities at Y-12. DOE expects to continue to support new 
projects and facilities for Y-12 (or consider Y-12 as an alternative 
site for such facilities or activities). Such new proposals will be 
considered in programmatic or project-specific NEPA reviews, as 
appropriate, as they become ripe for analysis. Subsequent NEPA reviews 
for projects or activities at Y-12 will make reference to, and be 
tiered from, the Site-Wide EIS.

Alternatives Considered

    DOE analyzed two No Action alternatives and three ``action'' 
alternatives in the Y-12 Site-Wide EIS. The first No Action alternative 
(Alternative 1A, No Action-Status Quo) is basically a continuation of 
Y-12 activities (based on 1999 operations), but does not include some 
Defense Program activities that had not resumed following a 1994 stand-
down at Y-12 for safety reasons. The second No Action alternative 
(Alternative 1B, No Action-Planning Basis Operations) reflects an 
increase in activities at Y-12 to account for the resumption of all 
required Defense Program missions. The

[[Page 11297]]

No Action-Status Quo Alternative (Alternative 1A) is not considered 
reasonable for future Y-12 operations because it does not meet Y-12 
mission needs.
    The ``action'' alternatives are as follows: Alternative 2 (No 
Action-Planning Basis Operations Alternative Plus HEU Storage Mission 
Alternative); Alternative 3 (No Action-Planning Basis Operations 
Alternative Plus Special Materials Mission Alternative); and 
Alternative 4 (No Action-Planning Basis Operations Alternative Plus 
Construct and Operate a New HEU Materials Facility and Special 
Materials Complex). For Alternative 2, DOE analyzed two sub-
alternatives: Alternative 2A would construct and operate a new HEU 
Materials Facility and Alternative 2B would upgrade and expand Building 
9215 for HEU storage. All reasonable alternatives are described in 
greater detail below.

Alternative 1B (No Action-Planning Basis Operations)

    Under Alternative 1B (No Action--Planning Basis Operations 
Alternative), Y-12 would continue historic nuclear weapons program 
missions. This alternative reflects the implementation of the DOE 
decision in the Stockpile Stewardship and Management Programmatic 
Environmental Impact Statement Record of Decision (61 FR 68014, 
December 19, 1996) to maintain the Defense Programs national security 
mission at Y-12, but to downsize Y-12 consistent with reduced 
requirements. This includes: (1) Defense Programs capabilities to 
produce and assemble uranium and lithium weapons components, to recover 
uranium and lithium materials from the component fabrication process 
and disassembled weapons, to produce secondaries, cases, and related 
nonnuclear weapons components, to process and store enriched uranium, 
and to supply enriched uranium, lithium, and other products; (2) 
Environmental Management activities at Y-12 related to environmental 
monitoring, remediation, deactivation and decontamination, and 
management of waste materials from past and current operations; (3) 
Office of Science activities operated by Oak Ridge National Laboratory 
(ORNL); and (4) Defense Programs support of other federal agencies 
through the Work-for-Others Program, the National Prototype Center, and 
the transfer of highly specialized technologies to support the 
capabilities of the U.S. industrial base. The No Action-Planning Basis 
Operations Alternative also includes activities to store surplus 
enriched uranium pending disposition in accordance with the Storage and 
Disposition of Weapons-Usable Fission Materials Programmatic 
Environmental Impact Statement Record of Decision (62 FR 3014, January 
14, 1997).

Alternative 2A (No Action--Planning Basis Operations Alternative Plus 
Construct and Operate a New HEU Materials Facility)

    This alternative includes the No Action--Planning Basis Operations 
Alternative plus the construction and operation of a new HEU Materials 
Facility. The HEU Materials Facility would be a single-story concrete 
structure. It would enable Y-12 to safely and securely store: HEU 
Categories I and II, including canned subassemblies that contain HEU; 
and cans containing HEU in metal and oxide forms that are part of the 
strategic reserve or excess inventories. The HEU Materials Facility 
would replace the use of existing storage vaults and facilities located 
within existing Y-12 buildings.
    Options for locating the new HEU Materials Facility include two 
candidate site locations: Site A (located on the west end of the Y-12 
site in the West Portal Parking Lot area) and Site B (located on the 
west end of the Y-12 site in the area of the Y-12 Scrap Metal Yard 
south of Building 9114, west of the western-most portion of the Y-12 
Perimeter Intrusion Detection and Assessment System (PIDAS) and north 
of Portal 33 and Second Street).

Alternative 2B (No Action--Planning Basis Operations Alternative Plus 
Upgrade Expansion of Building 9215)

    This alternative is similar to Alternative 2A, except that the 
storage of HEU would be accommodated through the expansion of the 
existing Building 9215. The building would be expanded by approximately 
160 by 300 feet, with two floors, and would be sized to handle all of 
the long-term storage requirements anticipated for Y-12 similar to 
those described for the HEU Materials Facility. The proposed site for 
construction of the Building 9215 expansion is a parcel of land 
approximately two acres in size located west of Building 9212 and 9998 
and north of Building 9215.

Alternative 3 (No Action--Planning Basis Operations Alternative Plus 
Construct and Operate a New Special Materials Complex)

    This alternative includes the No Action--Planning Basis Operations 
Alternative plus the construction and operation of a Special Materials 
Complex. The Special Materials Complex would house a number of separate 
processing operations and the support facilities to serve each. 
Included in the Special Materials Complex would be: (1) Beryllium 
production operations at Y-12; (2) a facility for purification of 
special materials; (3) a manufacturing/warehouse facility to produce 
special materials and provide for storage of new materials and parts; 
(4) an isostatic press for forming blanks for machining; and (5) a core 
support structure to house common support functions for the complex.
    Options for locating the new Special Materials Complex include 
three candidate sites: Site 1 is approximately 20 acres and is located 
northwest of Building 9114 and on the north side of Bear Creek Road. 
Site 2 is approximately 10 acres and is located at the Y-12 Scrap Metal 
Yard area southeast of Building 9114 and east of the western-most 
portion of the Y-12 PIDAS; Site 3 is approximately 10 acres and is 
located on the west end of the Y-12 site in the area of the Y-12 Scrap 
Metal yard, south of Building 9114, west of the western-most portion of 
the Y-12 PIDAS and north of Portal 33 and Second Street.

Alternative 4 (No Action--Planning Basis Operations Alternative Plus 
Construct and Operate a New HEU Materials Facility and Special 
Materials Complex)

    This alternative includes the No Action--Planning Basis Operations 
Alternative plus the construction and operations of a new HEU Materials 
Facility at one of two candidate sites (Site A or Site B described 
above under Alternative 2A), and the construction and operation of a 
Special Materials Complex at one of three candidate sites (Site 1, 2, 
or 3 described above under Alternative 3).

Preferred Alternative

    DOE's Preferred Alternative is Alternative 4 (No Action--Planning 
Basis Operations Alternative Plus Construct and Operate a New HEU 
Materials Facility and a Special Materials Complex). The Preferred 
Alternative includes the continued maintenance of existing Defense 
Programs capabilities and other DOE programs, continued support/
infrastructure activities, and implementation of new facility 
construction projects for the Y-12 HEU Storage Mission and Special 
Materials Mission (i.e., the HEU Materials Facility, and the Special 
Materials Complex). The preferred site for the HEU Materials Facility 
is Site A.

[[Page 11298]]

Environmentally Preferable Alternative

    Ordinarily, the environmentally preferable alternative is the 
alternative that causes the least damage to the biological and physical 
environment; it is also the alternative that best protects, preserves, 
and enhances historic, cultural, and natural resources. After 
considering impacts to each resource area by alternative, DOE has 
identified Alternative 1A (No Action--Status Quo Alternative) as having 
the fewest direct impacts to the biological and physical environment 
because operations would not resume to full levels and fewer new 
construction projects would be implemented. Although DOE does not 
consider Alternative 1A to be reasonable for future Y-12 operations 
because it does not meet Y-12 mission needs, it is the environmentally 
preferable alternative. With respect to the ``reasonable'' 
alternatives, the analyses indicate that there would be very little 
difference in the environmental impacts among the alternatives analyzed 
and also that any impacts would be small. Of the reasonable 
alternatives, Alternative 1B (No Action--Planning Basis Operations) 
would have the fewest impacts, and thus, is environmentally preferable.

Environmental Impacts of Alternatives

    DOE weighed environmental impacts as one factor in its decision-
making. DOE analyzed existing environmental impacts and the potential 
impacts that might occur for each reasonable alternative, including the 
irreversible or irretrievable commitments of resources.

Land Use

    There is a small difference in the impacts on land use between the 
No Action--Planning Basis Operations Alternative and Alternatives 2, 3, 
and 4, which include the HEU Storage Mission and Special Materials 
Mission projects. Differences among the alternatives are primarily 
associated with facility construction. Potential land disturbance would 
range from 35-51 ha (No Action--Planning Basis) to 45-64 ha (Preferred 
Alternative). The permanent land disturbance would range from 18-29 ha 
(No Action--Planning Basis Operations) to 26-37 ha (Preferred 
Alternative). No land use change would result from implementing any of 
the alternatives, except for Alternatives 3 and 4 if the Special 
Materials Complex is constructed at Site 1.

Transportation

    There would be a small increase in vehicle traffic on Oak Ridge 
area roads due to construction activities under each of the Site-Wide 
EIS alternatives. The construction traffic increase during peak 
construction periods would range from 85 vehicles per day (No Action--
Planning Basis Operations) to 420 vehicles per day (Preferred 
Alternative). The additional traffic would have a negligible impact on 
Y-12 site traffic and level-of-service on area roads.
    The overall maximum lifetime fatalities from Y-12 annual shipments 
over the next ten years of all types of materials and waste due to Y-12 
operations were estimated to be 2.8 fatalities under each of the Site-
Wide EIS alternatives. Of these estimates, 1.8 fatalities would be due 
to traffic accidents; 0.9 fatalities would be due to incident-free 
transport of radiological materials and waste; and 0.006 fatalities 
would be due to vehicle emissions. There is little variation in impacts 
between alternatives because effects are small, and any projected 
increased transport of radioactive materials is not enough to make a 
significant change in the small effects.

Socioeconomics

    Y-12 employment changes would be very small (less than 100) under 
all the alternatives because operations, including operations 
associated with new facilities for the HEU Storage Mission and the 
Special Materials mission, would use existing workers. The employment 
changes would affect regional population, employment, personal income, 
and other socioeconomic measures in the region by less than one 
percent. Accordingly, no adverse socioeconomic impacts would be 
expected to result from any of the alternatives.

Geology and Soils

    No impacts to geology or geological conditions are expected with 
any of the alternatives. Potential impacts on soil due to disturbance 
and/or erosion are related to the area of disturbance during 
construction. The smallest potential increase in soil erosion would 
result from the No Action--Planning Basis Operations Alternative, and 
the greatest potential would be with the Preferred Alternative. 
Standard construction soil erosion control measures would be used to 
minimize erosion and impacts. New facility site design and layout would 
address storm water runoff control. No significant impacts on soils are 
expected.
    Soil contamination from past Y-12 operations and activities is 
being addressed through the Office of Environmental Management's 
Environmental Restoration Projects at Y-12. Environmental restoration 
activities or actions would not change the alternatives in the Site-
Wide EIS and would continue to occur at the same rate for all the 
alternatives.

Water Resources

    Water demand for Y-12 Site-Wide EIS alternatives ranges from 20.2 
million liters per day of treated water (No Action--Planning Basis 
Operations) to 20.43 million liters per day of treated water (Preferred 
Alternative). The total treated water demand of ORR (including Y-12, 
ORNL, and East Tennessee Technology Park) is approximately 22,290 
million liters per year, which is well within the ORR water supply 
system capacity of 44,347 million liters per year. All water for 
operations at ORR, including Y-12, is supplied by the Clinch River. 
Water usage among Y-12 alternatives does not vary appreciably.
    Groundwater contamination attributed to Y-12 operations and other 
waste disposal operations is present in Bear Creek Valley, Upper East 
Fork Poplar Creek, and the Chestnut Ridge area of Y-12. The 
contamination is due primarily to past Y-12 operations and other waste 
management practices rather than current operations. Investigations and 
cleanup at locations with groundwater contamination would continue at 
the same rate under any of the Site-Wide EIS alternatives.

Biological Resources

    Construction projects under all the alternatives would impact 
terrestrial resources due to the loss of small amounts of grassland, 
old-field habitat, and mixed hardwood/conifer forest habitat. The No 
Action--Planning Basis Operations Alternative would have the least 
impact, based on area disturbed (35-51 ha), and Alternative 4 
(Preferred Alternative) would have the largest impact (45-64 ha). The 
variation among alternatives is not significant. The potential habitat 
loss is small compared to available similar habitat in the immediate Y-
12 area. With appropriate design and construction best management 
practices, no significant adverse impacts to biological resources are 
projected under any of the Site-Wide EIS alternatives.
    Potential impact to wetlands (both direct and indirect) would be 
least with the No Action--Planning Basis Operations Alternative (0.4ha) 
and greatest with Alternative 4 (1.2 ha). With appropriate site layout 
design and construction best management practices, significant adverse 
impacts would not be expected. In addition, no adverse impacts to 
aquatic resources are expected from any of the alternatives.
    Potential impact to Tennessee-listed endangered and threatened 
plant

[[Page 11299]]

species may occur under the No Action--Planning Basis Operations 
Alternative due to construction of the Environmental Management Waste 
Management Facility, a separate Comprehensive Environmental Response, 
Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) project activity at Y-12. 
Prior to construction, DOE will survey the disposal facility 
construction site for the presence of listed species and consult with 
the US Fish and Wildlife Service and Tennessee Wildlife Resource 
Agency, as appropriate. No Federal or state-listed threatened or 
endangered species would be impacted by proposed new construction 
projects for the HEU Storage Mission or Special Materials Mission under 
the other Y-12 Site-Wide EIS alternatives.

Air Quality

    Non-radioactive hazardous air pollutants would not be expected to 
significantly degrade air quality or affect human health under any of 
the alternatives. The alternatives do not result in large differences 
in chemical usage or steam from the Y-12 Steam Plant (the major source 
of criteria pollutants). No net increase in Y-12 building floor space 
is anticipated under the Preferred Alternative because any added new 
floor space is expected to be offset by other downsizing activities at 
Y-12 and the transfer of mission activities to the new facilities. Air 
emissions are, therefore, not expected to change by a magnitude that 
would trigger more stringent regulatory requirements or warrant 
additional continuous monitoring.
    The radiological dose to the maximally exposed individual due to 
the annual radiological air emissions from Y-12 facilities during 
normal operations under each of the alternatives would be lower than 
the National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants limit of 
10 millirem per year. The estimated radiological dose to a maximally 
exposed individual would be 4.5 millirem per year for each of the 
alternatives.
    The calculated collective dose to the population within 80 
kilometers (50-miles) of Y-12 for each alternative from the annual 
radiological air emissions due to Y-12 operations would be 33.7 person-
rem per year. These doses were considered in the human health impact 
analysis.

Visual Resources

    There would be no adverse impacts to visual resources that change 
the overall appearance of the existing landscape, obscure scenic views, 
or alter the off-site visibility of Y-12 structures under any of the 
alternatives.

Noise

    There would be no change in the on-site noise levels (50 to 70 dBA) 
or off-site noise levels (35 to 50 dBA in rural locations and 53 to 62 
dBA in city of Oak Ridge) due to normal Y-12 operations under any of 
the alternatives.

Site Infrastructure

    Electrical consumption would range from 566,000 megawatt hours per 
year (No Action--Planning Basis Operations Alternative) to 602,000 
megawatt hours per year (Preferred Alternative). There is little 
difference in projected water usage among the alternatives, 
approximately 5.3 million additional gallons per day. Annual projected 
utility demands for all alternatives would be well within system 
capabilities. Other infrastructure-related factors, including 
maintaining roads, communications, steam, natural gas, and facility 
decommissioning, would be similar for each alternative and would not 
pose adverse impacts.

Cultural Resources

    No impact to historic and cultural resources is expected under the 
No Action-Planning Basis Operations Alternative. Alternatives 2, 3, and 
4 would have a small potential to encounter buried cultural resources 
due to utility relocation associated with potential construction 
projects identified in the alternatives. Alternative 4 (Preferred 
Alternative) would have the largest potential to impact buried cultural 
resources, since it includes construction of new facilities for both 
the HEU Materials Storage Mission and the Special Materials Mission. 
Any potential adverse impacts are anticipated to be minor and able to 
be mitigated.
    No historic properties would be affected by the No Action--Planning 
Basis Operations Alternative or alternatives 2A, 3, or 4. Alternative 
2B includes the expansion of Building 9215 and would be a major 
alteration of a historic property. Consultation with the Tennessee 
Historical Commission would be conducted in accordance with procedures 
in the Y-12 Cultural Resource Management Plan to resolve any adverse 
effect.

Waste Management

    The projected annual waste generation from Y-12 normal operations 
would not vary appreciably across alternatives from the No Action--
Planning Basis Operations Alternative volumes. Liquid and solid low-
level waste would increase the greatest under Alternative 4 (Preferred 
Alternative) by 757 liters (200 gallons) per year and 120 cubic meters 
(157 cubic yards) per year, respectively. There would be no additional 
mixed low-level waste (solid or liquid) under Alternatives 2, 3, or 4. 
Liquid and solid hazardous waste would increase the most under 
Alternative 4 (Preferred Alternative), by 14,998 liters (3,962 gallons) 
per year and 37 cubic meters (48 cubic yards) per year, respectively. 
Treatment and disposal of these wastes at on-site locations is 
projected to constitute a small portion of the existing capacity for 
treatment and disposal.

Worker and Public Health

    During construction, yearly non-fatal occupational injuries/
illnesses at Y-12 could increase by an estimated maximum of 15 above 
the No Action--Planning Basis Operations Alternative. During 
operations, the estimated total number of yearly non-fatal occupational 
injuries/illnesses for the Y-12 workforce would be the same (424) for 
all the alternatives.
    The annual average dose to Y-12 workers of 11.6 millirem would be 
the same for all the alternatives and would result in an estimated 
0.024 latent cancer fatalities per year. Under alternatives 2 and 4, 
the number of latent cancer fatalities expected from HEU storage 
operations workers would decrease due to a reduction in the workforce, 
but there would be no change in average worker dose compared to the No 
Action--Planning Basis Operations Alternative. There would be a one-
time transfer of stored HEU to the new HEU storage facility under 
Alternatives 2 and 4. This transfer would result in a total worker dose 
of 150 person-millirem and 0.002 latent cancer fatalities. Because 
there are no radiological impacts associated with the Special Materials 
Complex, the radiological impacts associated with Alternative 3 are the 
same as the No Action--Planning Basis Operations Alternative. Under all 
of the Site-Wide EIS alternatives, the dose to the maximally exposed 
individual would be 4.5 millirem per year and result in an estimated 
2.65  x  10-6 latent cancer fatalities per year of exposure. 
The 80 kilometer (50 mile) population dose under all of the 
alternatives would be 33.7 person-rem per year, and the corresponding 
estimated number of latent cancer fatalities would be 1.69  x  
10-5 per year. Thus, no significant adverse health effects 
would be expected from any of the alternatives for Y-12.

[[Page 11300]]

Environmental Justice

    Based on the analysis of all resource areas and demographic 
information on low-income and minority populations, DOE does not expect 
any environmental justice related issues (i.e., projected impacts are 
not disproportionately high and adverse for minority or low-income 
populations in the area) from the continued operation of Y-12 under any 
of the alternatives.

Facility Accidents

    The accident analyses considered a variety of initiators (including 
natural and manmade phenomena), the range of activities at Y-12, and 
the range of radioactive and other hazardous materials at Y-12. The 
operational accident analysis included the following scenarios that 
would result in multiple source releases of hazardous materials: beyond 
evaluation-basis earthquake accident; criticality accident; fire 
involving radioactive materials; fire involving chemicals; and a 
chemical release due to loss of containment. The beyond evaluation-
basis earthquake accident dominates the radiological risk due to 
accidents at Y-12 because it involves radiological releases at multiple 
facilities and is considered credible (that is, it would be expected to 
occur with a frequency of less than 5  x  10-4 per year but 
greater than 1  x  10-6 per year). It is noteworthy that the 
consequences of such a seismic event are dependent on the frequency of 
the earthquake event, the facility design, and the amount of materials 
that could be released due to the earthquake; such features do not 
change across the alternatives, so the impacts of these accidents are 
the same for all the Site-Wide EIS alternatives.
    The risks were estimated conservatively in terms of both frequency 
of the event and the consequences of such events. (In particular, it is 
noteworthy that the analysis assumes the structural collapse of the 
building accompanied by the most significant internal events, including 
fire and explosions that create a path for release of material outside 
of the building.) The total risk of an accident is the product of the 
accident frequency and the consequences to the total population within 
80 kilometers (50 miles). Risks of excess latent cancer fatalities per 
year of operation would not be expected to exceed 2.8  x  
10-5 for the bounding accident analyzed. Statistically, this 
would equate to a maximum of one latent cancer fatality approximately 
every 35,700 years of operation.
    The risk for release of chemicals, such as hydrogen fluoride, is 
calculated similarly as the product of the frequency and numbers of 
people exposed to greater than the selected guideline concentrations, 
Emergency Response Planning Guidelines (ERPG-2). (ERPG-2 is the maximum 
airborne concentration below which nearly all individuals could be 
exposed for up to 1 hour without irreversible or serious health effects 
or symptoms that could impair their abilities to take protective 
action). Under all alternatives, the risk for chemical releases ranges 
from between 80 and 190 workers exposed (fire involving chemicals 
accident scenario) to between 80 and 310 workers exposed (chemical 
release due to loss of containment accident scenario).

Comments on the Final Site-Wide EIS

    DOE distributed approximately 500 copies of the Final Site-Wide EIS 
to appropriate Congressional members and committees, the states of 
Tennessee, Georgia, and North Carolina, local governments, other 
Federal agencies, and other interested stakeholders. Prior to the 
issuance of this ROD, DOE received two comment letters regarding the 
Final Y-12 Site-Wide Environmental Impact Statement. The first letter, 
from the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC), 
provided clarifications and minor technical corrections to the 
``Affected Environment'' chapter of the SWEIS (Chapter 4). The TDEC 
also reiterated their support of Alternative 4, the preferred 
alternative. The second letter, from the Citizens Advisory Committee of 
the Oak Ridge Reservation Local Oversight Committee, contained two 
comments and several technical corrections. The comments, which were 
consistent with comments this group previously submitted on the Draft 
Y-12 Site-Wide Environmental Impact, were responded to in the Final Y-
12 Site-Wide Environmental Impact, and no additional response is 
necessary. The group also stated their preference that the Special 
Materials Complex be sited at a ``brownfield'' site. Although these 
comments, clarifications and minor technical corrections did not change 
any of the environmental impacts of the alternatives, they were 
considered by the Department in issuing this ROD.

Other Decision Factors

    As directed by the President and Congress, the DOE/NNSA is 
responsible for maintaining the safety, security and reliability of the 
country's nuclear weapons stockpile. In addition, DOE has national 
security, energy resources, environmental quality, and science and 
technology mission lines, which it supports at a number of facilities 
across the United States. DOE/NNSA directs and funds Y-12 activities in 
support of its programs and missions. While protecting human health and 
the environment, DOE/NNSA needs to continue to fulfill its 
responsibilities as mandated by statutes, Presidential Decision 
Directives, and Congressional authorization and appropriations.
    As noted in the Final Site-Wide EIS, Y-12 houses unique facilities 
and expertise that have been developed over the past 50 years. These 
capabilities have served national security and other national needs 
successfully in the past. Under current planning, the U.S. will 
maintain a nuclear weapons stockpile and require manufacturing 
capabilities to address issues of national importance for the 
maintenance of that stockpile and for other purposes, including 
assuring the safety and reliability of that stockpile. The unique 
facilities and expertise at Y-12 are needed to address these issues. 
These factors were also considered (in addition to the human health and 
environmental impact information discussed above) in reaching this 
Record of Decision.

Decision

    DOE/NNSA has decided to continue to operate Y-12 for the 
foreseeable future at the planning basis operations level and to 
construct two new facilities to support Y-12 missions: HEU Storage 
Facility and Special Materials Complex. DOE/NNSA is implementing the 
Preferred Alternative, Alternative 4 (No Action--Planning Basis 
Operations Alternative Plus Construct and Operate a New HEU Materials 
Facility (Site A location) and Special Materials Complex). This 
alternative includes the planned required operations of the NNSA 
mission at Y-12 and the continued operations/support at existing levels 
for other Y-12 activities conducted by other DOE offices (e.g., 
Environmental Management; Nuclear Energy, Science and Technology; 
Nuclear Nonproliferation and National Security) and nondefense research 
and development programs conducted by ORNL, Work-for-Others, and 
Technology Transfer. In addition, this alternative includes the 
construction and operation of a new HEU Materials Facility and Special 
Materials Complex. This alternative also includes the continued 
maintenance of existing capabilities, and continues support and 
infrastructure activities. The following discussion describes the major 
actions that will be taken under Alternative 4,

[[Page 11301]]

with an emphasis on those areas that have had the most extensive 
programmatic or public interest. The decision in this Record of 
Decision will be reflected in DOE/NNSA budget requests and management 
practices. However, the actual implementation of these decisions is 
dependent on DOE/NNSA funding levels and allocations of DOE/NNSA 
budgets across competing priorities.

Planning Basis Operations

    DOE/NNSA remains committed to meeting the NNSA Weapons Stockpile 
Management Program requirements assigned to Y-12, as described in the 
Final SWEIS. As part of its implementation of the Preferred 
Alternative, DOE will continue all activities associated with the 
resumption of remaining enriched uranium operations that were shut-down 
due to the Y-12 1994 stand-down. The planning basis operations level 
also includes continuing the current, planned, and weapons-directed 
activities associated with the major components of the Weapons 
Stockpile Management Program. Other DOE Program activities at Y-12 
would continue at current levels for the foreseeable future, including 
those conducted by Environmental Management; Nuclear Nonproliferation 
and National Security; Nuclear Energy Science and Technology; and 
Nondefense Research and Development Program activities by ORNL, the 
Work-for-Other Program, and Technology Transfer Program.
    The Department has decided that under the Preferred Alternative, 
operations at Y-12 associated with long-term storage of HEU, including 
transport and receiving, would be transferred to the new HEU Materials 
Facility, when completed. In addition, current special materials 
operations would be replaced by operations in the new Special Materials 
Complex, when completed.

HEU Storage Mission

    The Department has decided to construct the new HEU Materials 
Facility at Site A as described in Section 3.2.3.2 of the Final Y-12 
SWEIS. Site A is the Y-12 West Portal Parking Lot, located just north 
of Portal 16. Site A was selected over Site B based on overall cost, 
proximity to the major Y-12 production manufacturing facilities, 
construction phase security issues and impact on current production 
activities, and environmental impacts. The HEU Materials Facility would 
be used for long-term storage of Categories I and II HEU. The new 
facility would provide the capacity to store approximately 14,000 cans 
and 14,000 drums of HEU, a surge capacity area for an additional 4,000 
drums, and a storage area for materials currently under international 
safeguards. Constructing the new facility would consolidate and 
modernize the HEU storage operations at Y-12. Consolidating HEU in the 
HEU Materials Facility would enable Y-12 to meet its HEU storage 
mission in a more safe and efficient manner; improve nuclear materials 
security and accountability; minimize the number of personnel required 
for operations and security; and enhance worker and public health and 
safety, and environmental protection.

Special Materials Mission

    The Department has decided to construct the Special Materials 
Complex at Y-12. A location for construction of the Special Materials 
Complex has not been decided. Ongoing studies involving the Special 
Materials mission and project configuration and design needs must be 
completed before a decision on a location for these facilities can be 
made. The engineering design for this facility will proceed while the 
Department is completing the project review and additional studies. 
Once these studies are completed, DOE/NNSA intends to review the Site-
Wide EIS for completeness and amend the Site-Wide and ROD, as 
appropriate, to announce the site selection. Constructing the Special 
Materials Complex would modernize special materials operations at Y-12, 
reduce the health risk to workers and the public, and ensure efficient 
production of adequate quantities of special materials (e.g., 
beryllium) to meet projected nuclear weapons stockpile requirements for 
the next 50 years.

Mitigation Measures

    The Site-Wide EIS includes a discussion of existing programs and 
plans and controls built into the operations at Y-12, including 
operating within applicable regulations, DOE Orders, contractual 
requirements and approved polices and procedures. No new mitigation 
measures were identified. It is unnecessary to prepare a Mitigation 
Action Plan under 10 CFR 1021.331.

Conclusion

    DOE/NNSA has considered environmental impacts, stakeholders' 
concerns, and national policy in its decisions regarding the management 
and use of Y-12. The analysis contained in the Site-Wide EIS is both 
programmatic and site-specific in detail. It is programmatic from the 
perspective of broad, multi-use facility management and site-specific 
in the detailed project and program activity analysis. The impacts 
identified in the Site-Wide EIS were based on conservative estimates 
and assumptions. In this regard, the analyses bound the impacts of the 
alternatives evaluated in the Site-Wide EIS.
    DOE has decided to implement Alternative 4 (No Action--Planning 
Basis Operations Alternative Plus Construct and Operate a New HEU 
Materials Facility and Special Materials Complex), i.e., the Preferred 
Alternative in the Final Site-Wide EIS. The location for the HEU 
Materials Facility construction is in the area identified as Site A 
(the Y-12 West Portal Parking Lot) in the Final Site-Wide EIS. A 
location for construction of the Special Materials Complex has not been 
decided. Ongoing studies involving the special materials mission and 
project configuration and design needs must be completed before a 
decision on a location for the Special Materials Complex can be made.

    Issued in Washington, DC, this 4th day of February, 2002.
Spencer Abraham,
Secretary of Energy.
[FR Doc. 02-6034 Filed 3-12-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P