[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 173 (Friday, September 6, 2002)]
[Notices]
[Pages 56989-56992]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-22698]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY


Revision to the Record of Decision for the Department of Energy's 
Waste Management Program: Treatment and Storage of Transuranic Waste

AGENCY: Department of Energy.

ACTION: Revision to Record of Decision.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to 10 CFR 1021.315, the Department of Energy (DOE) is 
revising the Record of Decision for the Department of Energy's Waste 
Management Program: Treatment and Storage of Transuranic Waste issued 
on January 20, 1998 (63 FR 3629), as revised previously on December 19, 
2000 (65 FR 82985) and July 13, 2001 (66 FR 38646). The Department has 
now decided to transfer approximately 27 cubic meters of transuranic 
(TRU) waste from a portion of the Battelle Columbus Laboratory, the 
Battelle West Jefferson North Site (West Jefferson) in Columbus, Ohio, 
and approximately 9 cubic meters of TRU waste from the Energy 
Technology Engineering Center (ETEC) in Canoga Park, California, to the 
Hanford Site near Richland, Washington, for storage. DOE expects that 
this TRU waste will ultimately be shipped to the Waste Isolation Pilot 
Plant (WIPP) in New Mexico for disposal. The TRU waste will be shipped 
to Hanford from both sites in Type B truck-mounted shipping casks 
licensed by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).
    In its previous Record of Decision (ROD), based on the analysis in 
the Waste Management Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (WM 
PEIS), DOE/EIS-0200F, dated May 1997, DOE had decided (with one 
exception) that each DOE site would prepare its own TRU waste for 
disposal, and store the waste onsite until it could be shipped to WIPP 
for disposal.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the Final Waste Management Programmatic 
Environmental Impact Statement, the WIPP Disposal Phase Final 
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, the first WM ROD, the 
first and second revised WM RODs, the WIPP disposal ROD, and this 
revised WM ROD are available from: The Center for Environmental 
Management Information, P.O. Box 23769, Washington, DC 20026-3769, 
Telephone: 1-800-736-3282 (in Washington, DC: 202-863-5084).
    For copies of the Environmental Assessment for the Battelle 
Columbus Laboratories Decommissioning Project, June 1990, and further 
information about the management of TRU waste at the Battelle West 
Jefferson Site, contact: Mr. Thomas A. Baillieul, Columbus 
Environmental Management Project, U.S. Department of Energy, P.O. Box 
200, West Jefferson, OH 43162, Telephone: 614-424-3559.
    For copies of the draft Environmental Assessment for Cleanup and 
Closure of the Energy Technology Engineering Center, January 2002, and 
further information about the management of TRU waste at ETEC, contact: 
Ms. Mary Gross, Oakland Operations Office, U.S. Department of Energy, 
1301 Clay Street, Room 700N, Oakland, CA 94612, Telephone: 510-637-
1629.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information on the 
disposal of TRU waste at WIPP, contact: Ms. Lynne Smith, U.S. 
Department of Energy, WIPP Office EM-23, Office of Environmental 
Management, 19001 Germantown Road, Germantown, MD 20874, Telephone: 
301-903-4688.
    For further information on Hanford site TRU operations, contact: 
Mr. Todd Shrader, U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations 
Office, P.O. Box 550, MSIN A6-38, Richland, WA 99352, Telephone: 509-
376-2725.
    For information on DOE's National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 
process, contact: Ms. Carol Borgstrom, Director, Office of NEPA Policy 
and Compliance (EH-42), U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence 
Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585, Telephone 202-586-4600, or leave a 
message at 1-800-472-2756.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    The WM PEIS evaluated the potential environmental impacts of 
treating and storing TRU waste at DOE generator sites and at DOE sites, 
such as Hanford, where this waste could be consolidated on a regional 
or centralized basis. In the WM PEIS ROD for TRU waste, DOE selected 
the Decentralized Alternative, stating that ``each of the Department's 
sites that currently has or will generate TRU waste will prepare and 
store its waste on site'' prior to shipment to WIPP.\1\ The WM PEIS ROD 
also noted that ``in the future, the Department may decide to ship 
transuranic wastes from sites where it may be impractical to prepare 
them for disposal to sites where DOE has or will have the necessary 
capability.'' The WM PEIS ROD stated that the sites that could receive 
TRU waste shipments from other sites were the Idaho National 
Engineering and Environmental Laboratory, the Oak Ridge National 
Laboratory, the Savannah River Site, and the Hanford Site, and that 
such decisions would be subject to appropriate review under NEPA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The only exception to this decision was the Sandia National 
Laboratory in New Mexico, which will ship its TRU waste to the Los 
Alamos National Laboratory for disposal preparation and storage 
before disposal at WIPP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    TRU waste is waste that contains alpha particle-emitting 
radionuclides with atomic numbers greater than that of uranium (92) and 
half-lives greater than 20 years in concentrations greater than 100 
nanocuries per gram. TRU waste is classified according to the radiation 
dose at a package surface. Contact-handled TRU waste has a radiation 
dose rate at a package surface of 200 millirem per hour or less; this

[[Page 56990]]

waste can safely be handled directly by personnel. Remote-handled TRU 
waste has a radiation dose rate at a package surface greater than 200 
millirem per hour, and must be handled remotely (e.g., with machinery 
designed to shield workers from radiation). Some TRU wastes are mixed 
with polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs).\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ DOE has applied to the Environmental Protection Agency to 
designate WIPP as a chemical waste landfill, so that WIPP can 
dispose of PCB-contaminated TRU waste.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    WIPP is not currently authorized by the State of New Mexico to 
accept remote-handed TRU waste for disposal. However, DOE submitted a 
request for an amendment of its operating permit to include remote-
handled TRU waste on June 28, 2002. The approval process for the permit 
amendment is expected to take approximately 2 years. DOE currently 
expects to begin shipping remote-handled TRU waste to WIPP in late 2004 
or 2005.

Battelle West Jefferson North Site

    DOE is contractually responsible for the disposal of approximately 
27 cubic meters of contact- and remote-handled TRU waste generated as 
part of the cleanup of the Battelle West Jefferson North Site. This 
waste consists of sample residues, analytical equipment, and hot cell 
fixtures that became highly contaminated during several decades of 
metallurgical and nuclear fuel research. The remote-handled waste is 
currently being characterized and packaged into approximately 115 55-
gallon drums. These packaged drums will meet or exceed the draft Waste 
Acceptance Criteria for disposal of remote-handled TRU waste at WIPP 
before it will be shipped to the Hanford Site. The contact-handled TRU 
waste from an earlier decommissioning of a former plutonium laboratory 
at the site, (up to 10 drums, i.e., approximately 2 cubic meters) will 
require final packaging and disposal certification at a site with the 
necessary handling capabilities for this type of material.
    As part of the closeout of its nuclear materials research contract, 
the Department of Energy is assisting in the remediation of the site. 
Although the West Jefferson facility is privately owned, contract terms 
specify that all radioactive waste generated during the facility 
cleanup is ``DOE-owned'' for the purposes of disposal. The site's TRU 
waste is being stored in shielded holding areas within the hot cell 
building, one of three buildings slated for demolition. In order to 
meet the site's schedule for building demolition, removal of the stored 
TRU waste must begin by the summer of 2002 and be completed within 12 
months, well in advance of DOE's anticipated timeframe (late 2004 or 
2005) for commencing shipments of remote-handled TRU waste to WIPP.
    Continued storage of the TRU waste elsewhere on the West Jefferson 
site until WIPP is ready to receive the remote-handled waste would 
require construction of a new, shielded facility licensed by the State 
of Ohio and the NRC. Also, building a new facility would divert funding 
away from necessary clean-up activities and be inconsistent with DOE's 
goal of early removal of radioactive waste from privately owned sites. 
Therefore, DOE needs to ship the remote-handled TRU waste to another 
DOE site that has the requisite remote-handling and storage 
capabilities.

Energy Technology Engineering Center

    DOE is responsible for the disposal of 11 cubic meters of TRU waste 
at ETEC, a government-owned complex of buildings located on the Santa 
Susana Field Laboratory in southern California. Up to 9 cubic meters of 
the TRU waste are remote-handled and approximately 2 cubic meters are 
contact-handled. (The remote-handled TRU waste will be repackaged and 
reduced in volume prior to shipment. DOE expects that the volume of 
remote-handled TRU waste to be shipped will be between 3 and 7 cubic 
meters. Thus, the maximum TRU shipping volume is expected to be about 9 
cubic meters.)
    The contact-handled TRU waste consists of solidified oils from the 
decontamination and decommissioning of a nuclear materials development 
facility and debris waste from the decontamination and demolition of 
glove boxes used for nuclear fuel decladding and repackaging 
operations. The remote-handled TRU waste, most of which has a low 
(approximately 130 parts per million) concentration of PCB contaminant, 
consists of drain line residue that accumulated in the Hot Laboratory 
(Building 020) drain line system over 30 years of facility operation, 
and one drum of debris waste from the cleanup of the Hot Laboratory and 
a nuclear materials development facility. TRU wastes are currently 
stored in the Radioactive Waste Handling Building at ETEC.
    The waste will be packaged in 26 to 45 55-gallon drums for shipping 
(approximately 11 drums of contact-handled and 15 to 34 drums of 
remote-handled TRU waste). Up to 50 percent of this contact-handled TRU 
waste could be determined to be low-level radioactive waste (LLW) after 
further characterization. ETEC does not have the capability to perform 
the radiological characterization that is required to identify any non-
TRU drums and remove them from the waste stream. In addition, ETEC does 
not have the capability to certify that the contact-handled TRU waste 
meets the present WIPP Waste Acceptance Criteria. For these reasons, 
ETEC cannot currently ship its contact-handled TRU waste directly to 
WIPP.
    ETEC is operated by Rocketdyne Propulsion & Power, a division of 
The Boeing Company, which owns the Santa Susana Field Laboratory land. 
DOE has determined that ETEC is surplus to its current needs. DOE 
intends to remove all radioactive materials and waste resulting from 
DOE activities at ETEC and turn the site over to Rocketdyne in 2006. In 
January 2002, DOE issued a draft Environmental Assessment for Cleanup 
and Closure of the Energy Technology Engineering Center (DOE/EA-1345) 
that describes the cleanup, decommissioning, and demolition of the 
remaining facilities at ETEC.
    Developing the ability at ETEC to certify the contact-handled TRU 
waste as meeting the WIPP Waste Acceptance Criteria would require the 
construction of a new radiological facility or use of a mobile vendor 
to certify the waste. It would be impractical to construct and then to 
decontaminate and remove a radioactive waste management facility at the 
Santa Susana Field Laboratory, and mobile vendors are not capable of 
certifying all of the ETEC contact-handled TRU waste.\3\ Therefore, DOE 
needs to ship the contact-handled TRU waste to another DOE site for 
characterization and packaging in accordance with the WIPP Waste 
Acceptance Criteria.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Some of the contact-handled TRU waste is homogeneous and 
will require coring and sampling in order to be certified as meeting 
the WIPP Waste Acceptance Criteria. Mobile vendors do not have this 
capability.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Storage of remote-handled TRU waste elsewhere at ETEC until it 
could be sent to WIPP would require construction of a new storage 
facility. Further, ETEC does not have the capability to characterize 
and prepare the remote-handled TRU waste for shipment to WIPP. Building 
a facility with these capabilities would be impractical, would divert 
funding away from necessary clean-up activities, and would be 
inconsistent with DOE's goal of early removal of radioactive waste from 
privately owned sites. Therefore, DOE needs to ship the remote-handled 
TRU waste to another DOE site that has the requisite capabilities for 
storing this waste and preparing it for eventual

[[Page 56991]]

shipment to WIPP. As requested by the U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency (EPA), DOE has initiated discussions with EPA prior to the 
packaging of this waste for shipment to Hanford.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Letter dated February 28, 2002, from John H. Smith, EPA, to 
Lynne Smith, DOE WIPP Director.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Decision

Battelle West Jefferson North Site

    DOE has decided to transfer approximately 27 cubic meters 
(approximately 125 55-gallon drums) of contact- and remote-handled TRU 
waste from the West Jefferson site to the DOE Hanford Site for storage 
prior to disposal at WIPP. DOE will ship this TRU waste in NRC-licensed 
Type B truck-mounted casks that are specifically certified for the West 
Jefferson TRU wastes. Approximately 15 truck shipments will be required 
to transfer the inventory of packaged TRU waste to Hanford. The 
shipments are expected to commence in summer of 2002 and to be 
completed within 12 months. Onsite activities will involve packaging 
the waste for shipment and loading trucks for transport.

Energy Technology Engineering Center

    DOE has decided to transfer up to 9 cubic meters of TRU waste (26 
to 45 55-gallon drums), of which most of the remote-handled TRU waste 
has a low (approximately 130 parts per million) concentration of PCB 
contaminant, from ETEC to the DOE Hanford Site for storage prior to 
planned disposal at WIPP. DOE will ship this waste in NRC-licensed Type 
B truck-mounted casks that will be specifically certified for the ETEC 
TRU wastes. Up to five casks will be required to transfer the inventory 
of packaged TRU waste to the receiving site in 1 to 5 shipments, 
depending on the volume of ETEC waste that can be placed in each cask 
and the number of casks that can be transported per shipment. DOE 
intends to complete the shipments over a 12-month period. Onsite 
activities will involve packaging the waste for shipment and loading 
trucks for transport. However, DOE will continue its consultation with 
EPA before packaging the waste for transport.

Hanford Site

    The Hanford Site, located in Washington State near Richland, has an 
established radioactive waste management capability in the central 
plateau of the 586-square mile (1,520-square kilometer) reservation. At 
Hanford, the West Jefferson and ETEC TRU remote-handled waste will be 
stored in shielded containers at the solid radioactive and mixed waste 
management complex located in the 200 West Area of the site until it 
can be accepted at WIPP. ETEC and West Jefferson contact-handled TRU 
waste will be assayed at Hanford, and any fraction determined to be LLW 
will be disposed of at Hanford. Both ETEC (also known as Rocketdyne on 
Hanford's approved generator's list) and West Jefferson are currently 
approved generator sites for disposal of LLW at Hanford. The remaining 
fraction determined to be contact-handled TRU waste will be packaged, 
certified to meet the WIPP Waste Acceptance Criteria, and shipped to 
WIPP for disposal.

III. Basis for the Decision

    DOE needs to begin shipping its TRU waste from the West Jefferson 
and ETEC sites in the near future in order to meet the Department's 
timetables for cleanup of contaminated buildings at these sites. 
However, the TRU waste at both sites is predominantly remote-handled 
TRU waste, which cannot presently be accepted at WIPP for disposal. 
Constructing new facilities to continue onsite storage until the waste 
could be accepted at WIPP (estimated to be approximately late 2004 or 
2005) would be costly, and would divert funds from decontamination and 
decommissioning activities. Constructing new storage capacity would 
also be contrary to the DOE's goal of early removal of radioactive 
waste from privately owned sites.
    DOE's Hanford Site offers a practical, safe, and secure location 
for storing the wastes from West Jefferson and ETEC. Hanford also has a 
WIPP-approved program for certifying contact-handled TRU waste for 
disposal. Comparatively large volumes of remote- and contact-handled 
TRU waste (including PCB-commingled TRU waste) have been and are being 
managed at Hanford, which has trained waste management personnel and 
storage capacity for TRU waste at the 200 Area waste management 
complex. No new storage facilities would be needed at any of the three 
sites; thus, the potential cost and health and environmental impacts 
associated with building new facilities at the two small sites, 
including a capability at ETEC to characterize and prepare its remote-
handled TRU waste, would be avoided.
    Hanford's program for certifying and shipping contact-handled TRU 
waste according to WIPP's Waste Acceptance Criteria and applicable 
state and federal regulations is operational. The site's planning for 
facilities and operations to characterize, certify and package remote-
handled TRU waste is also well underway.\5\ Using Hanford's 
capabilities to certify and ship the West Jefferson and ETEC TRU waste 
to WIPP will avoid the cost of establishing such capabilities at the 
two small sites.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The Hanford Site is currently analyzing additional 
facilities to characterize and prepare remote-handled TRU waste in 
the Draft Hanford Site Solid (Radioactive and Hazardous) Waste 
Program Environmental Impact Statement (DOE/EIS-0286D, April 2002, 
Richland Operations).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE's previous analyses under the National Environmental Policy Act 
(WM PEIS, WIPP SEIS-II, and the Environmental Assessment for Battelle 
Columbus Laboratories Decommissioning Project (DOE/EA-0433, June 1990)) 
indicate that the potential health and environmental impacts of 
shipping a total of approximately 36 cubic meters of TRU waste from 
West Jefferson and ETEC to Hanford would be very small. Further, based 
on its review of the previous NEPA documents, DOE found that it is 
clear that its decision to ship TRU waste from the Battelle West 
Jefferson Site and ETEC to Hanford, for storage and subsequent disposal 
at WIPP, is not a substantial change to the proposed action analyzed in 
the previous NEPA documentation relevant to environmental concerns, and 
that there are no significant new circumstances or information relevant 
to environmental concerns and bearing on the proposed action or its 
impacts. Therefore, DOE concluded that additional NEPA review is not 
required under 40 CFR 1502.9(c) or 10 CFR 1021.314 to implement this 
decision.
    Although the WM PEIS did not analyze the onsite impacts of 
preparing all of the TRU waste that DOE now has decided to ship off 
site from West Jefferson (identified as Battelle Columbus or BCL in the 
WM PEIS) and ETEC, the inventory data for West Jefferson (580 cubic 
meters) and ETEC (9 cubic meters) were included and those impacts were 
analyzed in the WIPP SEIS-II. The onsite health and environmental 
impacts of preparing the West Jefferson (identified as Battelle 
Columbus or BCL in the WIPP SEIS-II) and ETEC wastes for offsite 
shipment were very small (see WIPP SEIS-II, Sections 5.1.9, 5.1.10, and 
5.1.11), and the impacts of the volumes of TRU waste that DOE has now 
decided to ship will be within the impacts identified in the WIPP SEIS-
II.
    Although the WM PEIS did not identify specific transportation 
corridor impacts between the West Jefferson or ETEC sites and the 
Hanford Site, the WM PEIS analyzed a centralized alternative under 
which approximately 700 cubic meters of remote-handled

[[Page 56992]]

TRU waste and 1,700 cubic meters of contact-handled TRU waste would be 
transported from offsite DOE generator sites to Hanford over 20 years 
(see WM PEIS, Table 8.1-1 and Section 8.3.4). The potential risks 
associated with transportation (including routine and accident 
conditions) of the total of approximately 36 total cubic meters that 
DOE has now decided to ship would be small and much less than the 
transportation impacts (including routine and accident risks) 
identified in the WM PEIS (see WM PEIS, Sections 8.4.2, 8.7.5, and 
8.10.1.1). In addition, the WIPP SEIS-II specifically analyzed 
transportation corridor impacts between ETEC and Hanford, which were 
small (see WIPP SEIS-II, Section 5.1.8). The volume of ETEC waste 
currently projected to be shipped to Hanford after volume reduction (11 
cubic meters to 9 cubic meters) is identical to that analyzed in the 
WIPP SEIS II (see WIPP SEIS-II, Table 2-2).
    In addition, the Environmental Assessment for Battelle Columbus 
Laboratories Decommissioning Project identified transportation corridor 
impacts between West Jefferson and Hanford for shipping 1,800 cubic 
meters of TRU waste over a period of 2 years and also found that the 
potential impacts would be very small. The 27 cubic meters of West 
Jefferson waste DOE has now decided to ship, and thus the potential 
transportation corridor impacts, would be substantially less than those 
identified in the environmental assessment.
    The WM PEIS analyzed the onsite impacts at Hanford of storing, 
characterizing, and preparing up to 17,000 cubic meters of remote-
handled TRU waste and 38,000 cubic meters of contact-handled TRU waste 
for shipment to WIPP (TRU waste generated at Hanford and TRU waste 
shipped to Hanford from offsite generators [Lawrence Berkeley 
Laboratory, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Idaho National 
Engineering and Environmental Laboratory, and Los Alamos National 
Laboratory]) (see WM PEIS, Table 8.1-1 and Section 8.3.4). The health 
and environmental impacts of managing these volumes of waste at Hanford 
were small (see WM PEIS, Volume II, Site Data Tables, Section II.5.3). 
Although the WM PEIS did not analyze the specific waste inventory at 
West Jefferson and ETEC that DOE has now decided to ship to Hanford 
(approximately 36 cubic meters total), the characteristics of the West 
Jefferson and ETEC wastes are similar to the TRU wastes analyzed in the 
WM PEIS at Hanford. Further, the waste volumes to be shipped to Hanford 
would represent a very small fraction of the total contact- and remote-
handled TRU waste to be prepared at Hanford for shipment to WIPP (0.07 
percent) as analyzed in the WM PEIS.
    For the reasons stated above, DOE is revising its earlier decision 
and will transfer approximately 27 cubic meters of TRU waste from the 
West Jefferson site and approximately 9 cubic meters of TRU waste from 
the ETEC site to Hanford for storage until certification and shipment 
to WIPP for disposal. Low-level waste (if any) identified during the 
certification process will be disposed of at Hanford according to 
existing procedures.

    Issued in Washington, DC, this 27th day of August, 2002.
Jessie Hill Roberson,
Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management.
[FR Doc. 02-22698 Filed 9-5-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P