[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 1 (Monday, January 4, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 137-140]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-31151]


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

 DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY


Amended Record of Decision: Idaho High-Level Waste and Facilities 
Disposition Final Environmental Impact Statement Revised by State 12/
21/09

AGENCY: Department of Energy.

ACTION: Amended Record of Decision.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is amending its initial 
Record of Decision (ROD) published December 19, 2005 (70 Federal 
Register [FR] 75165) (2005 ROD), pursuant to the Idaho High-Level Waste 
and Facilities Disposition Final Environmental Impact Statement (DOE/
EIS-0287), issued in October 2002 \1\ (2002 EIS). The State of Idaho 
was a cooperating agency in the preparation of the EIS. The DOE 
analyzed two sets of alternatives for accomplishing its proposed 
actions regarding the Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center 
(lNTEC) at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL, formerly known as the 
Idaho National Environmental and Engineering Laboratory): (1) Waste 
processing alternatives for high-level waste (HLW) calcine and liquid 
sodium-bearing waste (SBW); and (2) Waste management facility 
disposition alternatives. Some of the alternatives contained sub-
alternatives referred to as ``options'' in the EIS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Pursuant to a phased decision strategy described in the 
initial ROD, DOE has issued an amended ROD on November 28, 2006 (71 
FR 68811). This new amended ROD supplements the decisions in the two 
previous RODs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE has decided to select hot isostatic pressing (HIP) as the 
technology to treat calcine to provide a volume reduced monolithic 
waste form that is suitable for transport outside Idaho, with 
completion of treatment by a target date of December 31, 2035.
    DOE has consulted with the State of Idaho on the decision described 
herein. DOE will continue to consult with the State on the decisions 
yet to be made on closure of calcine-related facilities.

ADDRESSES: Copies of this Amended ROD will be available on DOE's 
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Web site at: http://www.gc.energy.gov/nepa under DOE NEPA Documents.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information on this 
Amended

[[Page 138]]

ROD and the Idaho Cleanup Project, contact Nolan R. Jensen, Federal 
Project Director, U.S. DOE, Idaho Operations Office, 1955 Fremont 
Avenue, MS 1222, Idaho Falls, ID 83415, telephone: (208) 526-5793.
    For general information on DOE's NEPA process, please contact: 
Carol M. Borgstrom, Director, Office of NEPA Policy and Compliance (GC-
54), U.S. DOE, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585-
0103, Telephone: (202) 586-4600 or leave a message at (800) 472-2756.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background

    From 1952 to 1991, DOE and its predecessor agencies reprocessed 
spent nuclear fuel (SNF) at INTEC, known prior to 1998 as the Idaho 
Chemical Processing Plant, on the INL Site. Reprocessing operations 
used solvent extraction systems to remove mostly uranium-235 from SNF. 
The waste product from the first extraction cycle of the reprocessing 
operation was liquid HLW mixed with hazardous materials. Subsequent 
extraction cycles, treatment processes, and follow-on decontamination 
activities generated additional liquid HLW that was combined to form 
SBW, which is generally much less radioactive than HLW generated from 
the first extraction cycle. These liquid wastes were stored in eleven 
300,000-gallon below-grade storage tanks. The last campaign of SNF 
reprocessing at INTEC was in 1991, and HLW was no longer generated at 
INTEC after that time. From 1963 to 1998, DOE processed HLW and SBW 
through a calcination process that converted the liquid waste into a 
dry powder referred to as calcine. Some SBW was processed by 
calcination from 1998 to 2000, when a decision to shut down the New 
Waste Calcining Facility was made.
    At present, approximately 4,400 cubic meters of HLW calcine remain 
stored in six bin sets (a series of reinforced concrete vaults, each 
containing three to twelve stainless steel storage bins). The stainless 
steel in the storage bins is highly corrosion resistant, and the bins 
are designed to be secure for at least 500 years. Based on the analyses 
summarized in the EIS, DOE has concluded that the calcine stored in the 
bins poses no significant present hazard to public health or the 
environment.
    As a result of litigation, DOE and the State of Idaho reached an 
agreement in 1995 referred to as the Idaho Settlement Agreement/Consent 
Order (Settlement Agreement) that, among other things, requires DOE to 
``treat all HLW currently at INEL so that it is ready to be moved 
outside of Idaho for disposal by a target date of 2035.'' It further 
requires that a ROD be issued no later than December 31, 2009 
establishing a date for completion of the treatment of all calcined 
waste located at the INL Site by a contemplated target date of December 
31, 2035. The Settlement Agreement also requires that DOE submit an 
application for a RCRA (or statutory equivalent) Part B Permit to the 
State by December 1, 2012.
    DOE issued the Idaho High-Level Waste and Facilities Disposition 
Final Environmental Impact Statement in October 2002, with the State of 
Idaho as a cooperating agency. The EIS analyzed two sets of 
alternatives for accomplishing the proposed action relative to calcine:
    1. Waste processing alternatives for liquid SBW, including newly 
generated liquid waste stored in three 300,000 gallon below grade 
tanks, and solid calcine stored in bin sets at the INTEC on the INL 
Site; and
    2. Facility disposition alternatives for final disposition of 
facilities directly related to the HLW and SBW Program after its 
missions are complete, including any new facilities necessary to 
implement the waste processing alternatives.
    In DOE's 2005 ROD, DOE decided to pursue a phased decision-making 
process regarding the proposed actions in the EIS. DOE also decided, 
among other things, to treat the remaining liquid SBW using the steam 
reforming technology and to conduct performance-based RCRA closure of 
existing facilities directly related to the HLW program at INTEC, 
excluding the INTEC Tank Farm Facility (TFF) and bin set closure. As a 
result, DOE is constructing a facility for the purpose of treating and 
packaging the SBW. This new facility is known as the Integrated Waste 
Treatment Unit (IWTU).
    The 2005 ROD also addressed the plan to issue an Amended ROD in 
2006 specifically addressing closure of the TFF as well as an Amended 
ROD in 2009 addressing the strategy for calcine disposition and bin set 
closure. In the 2006 Amended ROD (71 FR 68811), DOE decided to conduct 
performance based closure of the INTEC TFF.
    Decisions made in this ROD consider the Administration's intent to 
terminate ongoing funding for the Yucca Mountain program while 
evaluating nuclear waste disposal alternatives, as indicated in the 
Administration's fiscal year 2010 budget request. DOE remains committed 
to meeting its obligations to manage and ultimately dispose of HLW and 
spent nuclear fuel. DOE will convene a Blue Ribbon Commission to 
evaluate alternatives for meeting these obligations. The commission 
will provide the opportunity for a meaningful dialogue on how best to 
address this challenging issue and will provide recommendations to DOE 
that will form the basis for working with the Congress to revise if 
appropriate the statutory framework for managing and disposing of HLW 
and spent nuclear fuel. The ultimate disposition of the calcine HLW, 
and the applicable waste acceptance criteria, may be affected by the 
upcoming recommendations of the anticipated Blue Ribbon Commission.

II. Waste Processing Alternatives Analyzed in the EIS

    The 2002 EIS analyzed six alternatives for calcine:
     No Action Alternative
    Under this alternative, the New Waste Calcining Facility (NWCF) 
would remain in standby and the calcine would remain in the bin sets 
indefinitely.
     Continued Current Operations Alternative
    Under this alternative, the NWCF would remain in standby pending 
receipt of a RCRA permit from the State of Idaho and upgrades to air 
emission controls required by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 
(EPA).
     Separations Alternative (with three treatment options)
    This alternative comprises three treatment options, each of which 
would use a chemical separations process, such as solvent extraction, 
to divide the calcine into fractions suitable for disposition as 
either: HLW, transuranic (TRU) waste, or low-level waste, depending on 
waste characteristics. Separating the radionuclides in the waste into 
fractions would decrease the amount of HLW, saving space and reducing 
disposition costs. The three waste treatment options under the 
Separations Alternative are described below:
    1. The Full Separations Option would separate the radioisotopes in 
the calcine into high-level and low-level waste fractions. The HLW 
fraction would be vitrified in a new facility at INTEC, placed in 
stainless steel canisters, and stored onsite until shipped to a storage 
or disposition facility. DOE would dispose of the low-level waste 
fraction on site, or at an offsite DOE or commercial low-level waste 
disposal facility.
    2. The Planning Basis Option reflects previously announced DOE 
decisions and agreements with the State of Idaho regarding the 
management of HLW. It is similar to the Full Separations Option in 
that, after separations, the HLW fraction

[[Page 139]]

would be vitrified in a new facility at INTEC, placed in stainless 
steel canisters, and stored onsite until shipped to a storage or 
disposition facility. DOE would dispose of the low-level waste fraction 
on site, or at an offsite DOE or commercial low-level waste disposal 
facility.
    3. The Transuranic Separations Option would consist of separating 
the HLW into two fractions. The resulting fractions would be managed as 
TRU waste and low level waste. The TRU fraction that meets applicable 
requirements, would be solidified, packaged, and shipped to the Waste 
Isolation Pilot Plant for disposal. DOE would dispose of the low-level 
waste fraction on site or at an offsite DOE or commercial low-level 
waste disposal facility.
     Non-Separations Alternative (with four treatment options)
    This alternative includes four treatment options for solidifying 
HLW calcine. The four treatment options are briefly described below:
    1. The Hot Isostatic Pressing (HIP) Waste Option under which HLW 
calcine would be treated in a high pressure, high temperature process 
that would convert the calcine into a glass-ceramic waste form. The 
final product would be packaged for storage, transport, and 
disposition.
    2. The Direct Cement Waste Option under which HLW calcine would be 
retrieved, mixed with cement, poured in stainless-steel canisters, and 
cured at elevated temperature and pressure. The canisters would be 
placed in storage for transport and subsequent disposition.
    3. The Early Vitrification Option would involve vitrifying the HLW 
calcine into a glass-like solid. The vitrified HLW would be placed in 
interim storage pending disposition.
    4. The Steam Reforming Option includes packaging of HLW calcine 
without additional treatment for shipment and disposition.
     Minimum INEEL (now INL) Processing Alternative
    This alternative would minimize the amount of waste treatment at 
the INL by using the vitrification facility (Waste Treatment Plant) 
under construction for the DOE Hanford Site in the State of Washington. 
The HLW calcine would be placed in shipping containers and sent to the 
Hanford Site where it would be vitrified.
     Direct Vitrification Alternative (with two treatment 
options)
    This alternative includes two treatment options: Vitrification 
without Calcine Separations and Vitrification with Calcine Separations. 
The option to vitrify calcine without separations would be similar to 
the Early Vitrification Option. The option to vitrify the HLW fraction 
from calcine separations would be similar to the Full Separations 
Option. Under the Vitrification with Calcine Separations Option, 
calcine would be retrieved from the bin sets, and chemically separated 
into a HLW fraction to be vitrified and a low-level waste (LLW) 
fraction to be grouted. Under the Vitrification without Calcine 
Separations Option, calcine would be directly vitrified. Under either 
option, vitrified HLW would be stored pending disposition.

III. DOE and the State of Idaho Preferred Alternatives Identified in 
the EIS

    The DOE Preferred Alternative identified in the 2002 EIS for waste 
processing (including calcine) was to implement the proposed action by 
selecting from among the action alternatives, options, and technologies 
analyzed in the 2002 EIS. The selection of any one of, or combination 
of, technologies or options used to implement the proposed action would 
be based on the performance criteria of technical maturity, 
environmental health and safety considerations, consideration of public 
comment, cost, schedule, and programmatic risk. Options excluded from 
DOE's preferred alternative were storage of calcine in bin sets for an 
indefinite period of time (analyzed under the Continued Current 
Operation Alternative), shipment of all calcine to the Hanford Site for 
treatment (analyzed under the Minimum INEEL [now INL] Processing 
Alternative), and disposal of mixed LLW at INL (analyzed under multiple 
alternatives).
    The State of Idaho Preferred Alternative identified in the 2002 EIS 
for waste processing was the Direct Vitrification Alternative. The 
State of Idaho preferred vitrification based on the belief that it was 
the treatment alternative with the lowest technical and regulatory 
uncertainty for meeting waste removal goals and providing a clear 
baseline for fulfilling the objectives of removal of waste from Idaho 
within the timelines envisioned by the Settlement Agreement. The State 
of Idaho was willing to consider other waste treatment options, if they 
were comparable or better than the Direct Vitrification Alternative in 
terms of environmental impact, schedule, and/or cost.

IV. Environmentally Preferable Alternative

    In nine of fourteen environmental areas analyzed, the 2002 EIS 
indicates little or no environmental impact would occur under all of 
the action alternatives. In the remaining five areas analyzed (air, 
traffic and transportation, health and safety, waste and materials, and 
facility accidents), the results indicate that potential short-term 
impacts from routine exposures would be small and would not differ 
significantly among action alternatives. Under normal operations, none 
of the waste processing action alternatives analyzed in the EIS would 
result in large short-term or long-term impacts to human health or the 
environment. Also, none of the action alternatives would result in 
appreciably different impacts on historic, cultural and natural 
resources.
    Any of the waste treatment alternatives that place the calcine in a 
waste form suitable for disposition outside of the State of Idaho would 
be environmentally preferable compared to the No Action and Continued 
Current Operations Alternatives.

V. Decision

    DOE has decided to deploy the HIP technology to cost-effectively 
treat the calcine waste. This option also presents the flexibility to 
either:
     Treat calcine in a sealed high temperature and high 
pressure canning process including the addition of treatment additives 
necessary to produce a glass-ceramic and volume reduced monolithic 
waste form; or
     Treat calcine in a sealed high temperature and high 
pressure canning process without addition of treatment additives 
resulting in an even greater volume reduction.
    The HIP technology deployed for the treatment of HLW calcine also 
provides the technological capability to further treat the SBW steam-
reformed carbonate waste form, should such treatment be necessary in 
order for this waste to be ready to leave Idaho by 2035 as required by 
the 1995 Settlement Agreement.
    Treatment using the HIP technology has been demonstrated to 
generate a waste form consistent with waste form requirements that are 
currently specified for the performance of single-phase borosilicate 
glass being produced at DOE's Defense Waste Processing Facility at the 
Savannah River Site and to be produced at the Waste Treatment Plant at 
DOE's Hanford Site. The use of HIP with the addition of treatment 
additives will be necessary to eliminate the RCRA hazardous waste 
characteristics should calcine be

[[Page 140]]

dispositioned at a non-RCRA-permitted site outside the State of 
Idaho.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Under this treatment option (HIP with additives), an 
approved delisting petition would be required and any land disposal 
restrictions would also have to be met.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If it is decided to disposition calcine at a RCRA-permitted 
facility outside the State of Idaho, the use of HIP without addition of 
treatment additives would cost-effectively reduce the volume of waste 
even further, resulting in fewer canisters of product to be ultimately 
shipped for such disposition outside the State of Idaho.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Under this treatment option (HIP without treatment 
additives), any land disposal restrictions would also have to be 
met.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOE's decision will allow DOE to meet the provisions of the 
Settlement Agreement for the treatment of all calcinated waste and, if 
applicable, SBW.
    To facilitate treatment, DOE has decided to retrieve and 
pneumatically (forced air through piping) transport the calcine to a 
surge tank located at the head end of the IWTU at such time as the 
calcine treatment and packaging process is about to commence. The IWTU 
facility, after completion of its SBW mission and suitable 
reconfiguration, will be used to support treatment of the calcine and 
other wastes and meet associated safety and seismic design basis 
requirements.
    In accordance with the Settlement Agreement, DOE will submit a 
request for a Permit Modification to the Integrated Waste Treatment 
Unit RCRA Part B Permit no later than December 1, 2012, that will 
address:
     Calcine retrieval and pneumatic transport of the retrieved 
calcine to a designed surge tank to be located at the head end of the 
IWTU facility, and
     HIP treatment/processing of all calcine within a modified 
IWTU facility.
    DOE has consulted with the State of Idaho on the decisions 
described herein. The State of Idaho concurs with DOE's selection of 
HIP technology to treat calcine (and concurs that it provides the 
technological capability to further treat the SBW steam-reformed 
carbonate waste form, should such treatment be necessary) to produce a 
glass ceramic and volume reduced monolithic waste form. This treatment 
appears comparable to single-phase borosilicate glass resulting from 
vitrification which was Idaho's previous preferred alternative. Idaho 
prefers the HIP technology with the addition of treatment additives 
because it is the most likely form to meet current regulatory 
requirements allowing for disposal outside the State of Idaho. Idaho 
does not object to the HIP technology without the addition of treatment 
additives provided the final waste form is eligible for transport 
outside the State of Idaho for storage or disposition. DOE will 
continue to consult with the State on the decisions yet to be made 
concerning the addition of treatment additives for the HIP treatment of 
the calcine waste.
    No environmental impacts resulting from operations under this 
decision would require specific mitigation measures. DOE will, however, 
use all practicable means to avoid or minimize environmental harm when 
implementing the actions described in this amended ROD. Those measures 
include employing engineering design features to ensure that calcine 
waste processing via HIP is conducted safely and in accordance with all 
applicable regulatory requirements. Other measures include maintaining 
a rigorous health and safety program to protect workers from 
radiological and chemical contaminants, monitoring worker and 
environmental risk, and continuing efforts to reduce generation of 
wastes. DOE will implement the comprehensive list of standards and 
requirements to protect workers, the public, and the environment 
specified in Chapter 6 of the Final EIS, as appropriate.

VI. Basis for Decision

    DOE is selecting the HIP technology to treat calcine HLW for a 
number of reasons. The HIP technology is anticipated to cost-
effectively treat the calcine waste, reduce the volume of the waste, 
and place the waste in a form ready to be moved out of the State of 
Idaho, consistent with the dates in the Settlement Agreement.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on December 23, 2009.
In[eacute]s R. Triay,
Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management.
[FR Doc. E9-31151 Filed 12-31-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P