Notice of Intent To Prepare a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for Surplus Plutonium Disposition at the Savannah River Site, 14543-14546 [E7-5591]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 59 (Wednesday, March 28, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14543-14546]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-5591]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY


Notice of Intent To Prepare a Supplemental Environmental Impact 
Statement for Surplus Plutonium Disposition at the Savannah River Site

AGENCY: Department of Energy.

ACTION: Notice of Intent.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) intends to prepare a 
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) to evaluate the 
potential environmental impacts of plutonium disposition capabilities 
that would be constructed and operated at the Savannah River Site (SRS) 
near Aiken, South Carolina. DOE completed the Surplus Plutonium 
Disposition (SPD) EIS (DOE/EIS-0283) in November 1999, and on January 
11, 2000, published a Record of Decision (ROD) in the Federal Register 
(65 FR 1608). DOE decided to dispose of approximately 17 metric tons of 
plutonium surplus to the nation's defense needs using an immobilization 
process and up to 33 metric tons by using the surplus plutonium as 
feedstock in the fabrication of mixed oxide (MOX) fuel to be irradiated 
in commercial reactors. DOE selected the SRS as the site for all 
surplus plutonium disposition facilities. Subsequently, DOE cancelled 
the immobilization portion of its disposition strategy due to budgetary 
constraints (ROD, 67 FR 19432, April 19, 2002). The selection of the 
SRS as the location for disposition facilities for up to 50 metric tons 
of surplus plutonium remains unchanged. Site preparation for the MOX 
Fuel Fabrication Facility at the SRS began in November 2005.
    The 2002 decision left DOE with about 13 metric tons of surplus 
plutonium that does not have a defined path to disposition (about 4 
metric tons of the 17 metric tons originally considered for 
immobilization has been designated for programmatic use). DOE has been 
investigating alternative disposition technologies and will now prepare 
an SEIS for Surplus Plutonium Disposition at the SRS (DOE/EIS-0283-S2) 
to evaluate the potential environmental impacts of those alternatives. 
DOE's preferred alternative is to construct and operate a vitrification 
facility within an existing building at the SRS. This facility would 
immobilize plutonium within a lanthanide borosilicate glass inside 
stainless steel cans. The cans then would be placed within larger 
canisters to be filled with vitrified high-level radioactive waste in 
the Defense Waste Processing Facility (DWPF) at the SRS. The canisters 
would be suitable for disposal in a geologic repository. DOE also would 
prepare some of the surplus plutonium for disposal by processing it in 
the H-Canyon at the SRS, then sending it to the high-level waste tanks 
and DWPF. DOE seeks to take this action to reduce the threat of nuclear 
weapons proliferation worldwide by disposing of surplus plutonium in 
the United States in a safe and environmentally sound manner. The 
preferred vitrification technology, along with processing in H-Canyon, 
would fulfill this need for

[[Page 14544]]

disposition of surplus plutonium materials that are not planned for 
disposition via fabrication into MOX fuel.

DATES: DOE invites Federal agencies, state and local governments, 
Native American tribes, industry, other organizations, and members of 
the public to submit comments to assist in identifying environmental 
issues and in determining the appropriate scope of the SEIS. The public 
scoping period starts with the publication of this notice in the 
Federal Register and will continue until May 29, 2007. Comments 
received after this date will be considered to the extent practicable. 
Also, DOE requests Federal, State, and local agencies that desire to be 
designated as cooperating agencies on the SEIS to contact the NEPA 
Document Manager at the addresses listed under ADDRESSES by the end of 
the scoping period. DOE will hold two public scoping meetings:
     April 17, 2007 (5:30 p.m.-10 p.m.) at Newberry Hall, 117 
Newberry Street, SW., Aiken, SC.
     April 19, 2007 (5:30 p.m.-10 p.m.) at the Columbia 
Marriott Hotel, 1200 Hampton Street, Columbia, SC.
    DOE officials will be available to answer questions about plutonium 
disposition and the proposed alternatives at both locations beginning 
at 5:30 p.m. DOE will provide a brief presentation on the SEIS, then, 
beginning about 6:30 p.m., accept public comments on the scope of the 
SEIS.

ADDRESSES: Comments or questions regarding the scoping process, 
requests to be placed on the SEIS distribution list, and comments on 
the scope of the SEIS should be addressed to Mr. Andrew R. Grainger, 
NEPA Document Manager, Savannah River Operations Office, P.O. Box B, 
Aiken, SC 29802; toll-free telephone 1-800-881-7292; fax 803-952-7065; 
or e-mail drew.grainger@srs.gov.
    For general information concerning the DOE NEPA process, contact: 
Carol Borgstrom, Director, Office of NEPA Policy and Compliance (GC-
20), U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., 
Washington, DC 20585-0103; telephone 202-586-4600, or leave a message 
at 1-800-472-2756; fax 202-586-7031; or send an e-mail to 
askNEPA@eh.doe.gov. This NOI will be available on the Internet at 
https://www.eh.doe.gov/nepa.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    After the end of the Cold War, the United States declared 50 metric 
tons of plutonium surplus to the defense needs of the nation. At that 
time, plutonium materials were in various forms and various stages of 
the material manufacturing and weapons fabrication processes and were 
located at several weapons complex sites that DOE had operated in the 
preceding decades. DOE began the process of placing these materials in 
safe, stable configurations for storage until disposition strategies 
could be developed and implemented.
    In the Storage and Disposition of Weapons-Usable Fissile Materials 
Programmatic EIS (Storage and Disposition PEIS, DOE/EIS-0229, December 
1996), DOE evaluated six candidate sites for siting plutonium 
disposition facilities and three categories of disposition technologies 
that would convert surplus plutonium into a form that would meet the 
Spent Fuel Standard.\1\ The three categories were: Deep Borehole 
Category (two options); Immobilization Category (three options: 
vitrification, ceramic immobilization, electrometallurgical treatment); 
and Reactor Category (four options). DOE also analyzed a No Action 
Alternative. DOE selected a dual-path strategy for disposition 
involving immobilization of surplus plutonium in glass or ceramic 
material for disposal in a geologic repository, and burning other 
surplus plutonium as MOX fuel in existing domestic commercial 
reactor(s) with subsequent disposal of the spent fuel in a geologic 
repository (ROD, 62 FR 3014, January 21, 1997). DOE also decided that 
an immobilization facility would be located at Hanford in Washington or 
at the SRS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Under that standard, the surplus weapons-usable plutonium 
should be made as inaccessible and unattractive for weapons use as 
the much larger and growing quantity of plutonium that exists in 
spent nuclear fuel from commercial power reactors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In November 1999, DOE issued the Surplus Plutonium Disposition EIS. 
The SPD EIS tiered from the Storage and Disposition PEIS and included 
an analysis of alternative technologies and sites to implement the 
dual-path plutonium disposition strategy. In January 2000, DOE decided 
to construct and operate a MOX Fuel Fabrication Facility at the SRS to 
use up to 33 metric tons of surplus plutonium to fabricate MOX fuel and 
to construct and operate a new immobilization facility at the SRS 
(referred to as the Plutonium Immobilization Plant) using the ceramic 
can-in-canister technology allowing for the immobilization of 
approximately 17 metric tons of surplus plutonium (ROD, 65 FR 1608, 
January 11, 2000). Using this technology, DOE would immobilize 
plutonium in a ceramic form, seal it in cans, and place the cans in 
canisters filled with borosilicate glass containing intensely 
radioactive high-level waste at the existing DWPF. DOE stated that the 
can-in-canister approach would complement existing site missions, take 
advantage of existing infrastructure and staff expertise, and enable 
DOE to use an existing facility, DWPF.
    In 2002, DOE cancelled the immobilization portion of the plutonium 
disposition strategy (ROD, 67 FR 19432, April 19, 2002). The selection 
of the SRS as the location for disposition facilities for up to 50 
metric tons of surplus plutonium remains unchanged. In November 2005, 
DOE began site preparation at SRS for the MOX Fuel Fabrication 
Facility.
    For purposes of this NEPA analysis, DOE will assume that the 
surplus plutonium to be disposed of will include some of the plutonium 
already stored at the SRS and some that DOE could move to the SRS from 
other sites (e.g., Hanford in Washington, Los Alamos National 
Laboratory in New Mexico, and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in 
California). DOE previously evaluated the transfer and storage of 
surplus plutonium from other sites in the Storage and Disposition PEIS 
and the SPD EIS. In addition, DOE will analyze the potential 
environmental impacts of these proposed shipments to, and subsequent 
storage in, the K-Area at the SRS in a supplement analysis (pursuant to 
10 CFR 1021.314(c)). Upon completion of the supplement analysis, DOE 
will determine whether to issue an Amended ROD or conduct additional 
NEPA review, as appropriate. As explained in a prior ROD, ``in addition 
to achieving the ultimate goal of permanent disposition of surplus 
plutonium materials, DOE independently needs to improve the 
configuration of the storage system for these materials, pending 
disposition'' (67 FR 19433, April 19, 2002).
    In addition to completing appropriate environmental reviews in 
compliance with NEPA, prior to shipping surplus weapons-usable 
plutonium to the SRS that would have been disposed of in the Plutonium 
Immobilization Plant, DOE must comply with Section 3155, Disposition of 
Defense Plutonium at the Savannah River Site, of Public Law 107-107, 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002. Section 
3155(d) of this law requires that DOE prepare a plan that identifies a 
disposition path for such surplus plutonium.

Purpose and Need for Action

    DOE's purpose and need for proposing this immobilization process 
has not changed since the SPD EIS was prepared. DOE needs to reduce the 
threat of nuclear weapons proliferation

[[Page 14545]]

worldwide by disposing of surplus plutonium in the United States in a 
safe and environmentally sound manner. As stated in the ROD for the SPD 
EIS, DOE needs to ensure that plutonium produced for nuclear weapons 
and declared surplus to national security needs, now and in the future, 
is never again used for nuclear weapons. In addition, because of the 
cancellation of the immobilization portion of the disposition strategy 
in 2002, DOE is responsible for approximately 13 metric tons of 
declared surplus plutonium that does not have a defined disposition 
path. This situation needs to be addressed in light of DOE's ongoing 
responsibility to ensure the safe disposition of surplus plutonium.

Potential Range of Alternatives

    In September 2005, DOE approved the Mission Need for a Plutonium 
Disposition Project at the SRS to address up to approximately 13 metric 
tons of surplus plutonium without an identified disposition path. The 
Mission Need is the first step in DOE's project management process, in 
accordance with DOE Order 413.3A, Program and Project Management for 
the Acquisition of Capital Assets.
    DOE completed a technical review of alternative technologies in May 
2006, which identified four potentially viable alternatives for 
completing the disposition of surplus plutonium. Three of these four 
alternatives will be evaluated in the SEIS.
     A glass can-in-canister approach installed in K-Area at 
the SRS. Plutonium would be vitrified within small cans, which would be 
placed in a rack inside a DWPF canister and surrounded with vitrified 
high-level waste. This alternative is similar to one evaluated in the 
SPD EIS, except that the capability would be installed in an existing 
rather than a new facility. Also, the currently proposed facility would 
be designed to immobilize approximately 13 metric tons of surplus 
plutonium rather than 17 metric tons as evaluated in the SPD EIS. (This 
is DOE's Preferred Alternative.)
     A ceramic can-in-canister approach installed in K-Area at 
the SRS. Plutonium would be incorporated in a ceramic material and 
placed in small cans, which would be placed in a rack inside a DWPF 
canister and surrounded with vitrified high-level waste. This 
alternative is similar to that initially selected by DOE following 
analysis in the SPD EIS. As with the glass can-in-canister approach, 
the two primary differences are that the SEIS will evaluate installing 
the capability in an existing rather than a new facility, and the SEIS 
will assume the disposition of approximately 13 metric tons of surplus 
plutonium, rather than 17 metric tons.
     Disposition using the MOX Fuel Fabrication Facility. This 
alternative would rely on facilities to be constructed at the SRS for 
disposition by using the surplus plutonium as feedstock in the 
fabrication of MOX fuel to be irradiated in commercial reactors. DOE 
anticipates that less than a third of the 13 metric tons of surplus 
plutonium that are the subject of this SEIS would meet the 
specifications for use as MOX Fuel Fabrication Facility feedstock.
    Under each of the three alternatives, DOE would process some 
surplus plutonium for disposal using the H-Canyon. Plutonium materials 
would be dissolved, and the resulting plutonium-bearing solutions would 
be sent to the SRS liquid radioactive waste tanks then to DWPF for 
vitrification. DOE is evaluating the continued use of H-Canyon for 
uranium processing in a separate NEPA document--a supplement analysis 
scheduled for completion in 2007. Decisions regarding future operations 
of H-Canyon have a bearing on the availability of the facility to 
process surplus plutonium (i.e., processing for plutonium disposition 
would occur while H-Canyon is operating primarily for uranium 
processing).
    The SEIS also will evaluate a No Action alternative of continued 
storage of the surplus plutonium.
    DOE has determined that the fourth alternative identified in the 
May 2006 technical review is not reasonable, and thus, it will not be 
evaluated in detail in the SEIS. This alternative involved disposing of 
the entire 13 metric tons of surplus plutonium through H-Canyon and 
DWPF. Disposing of the entire 13 metric tons of surplus plutonium by 
using the H-Canyon facilities would result in extending operation of 
those facilities many years beyond the estimated 2019 date for 
completion of its currently approved mission of preparing spent nuclear 
fuel and highly-enriched uranium materials for disposition, and would 
also extend the planned operation of DWPF and the high-level waste 
system. Furthermore, implementation of this alternative would require 
security upgrades to make H-Canyon a Category I nuclear facility, which 
is inconsistent with the Department's plans to enhance security and 
reduce costs throughout the complex by reducing the number of such 
facilities. The additional cost of these security upgrades and extended 
operations are estimated to be several billion dollars.

Invitation to Comment

    DOE invites Federal agencies, state and local governments, Native 
American tribes, industry, other organizations, and members of the 
public to provide comments on the proposed scope, alternatives, and 
environmental issues to be analyzed in the Supplemental EIS for Surplus 
Plutonium Disposition at the SRS. DOE will consider all such comments 
and other relevant information in defining the scope and analyses for 
the SEIS. Comments should be submitted as described under DATES and 
ADDRESSES above.

Potential Environmental Issues for Analysis

    DOE has tentatively identified the following environmental issues 
for analysis in the Supplemental EIS for Surplus Plutonium Disposition 
at the SRS. The list is presented to facilitate comment on the scope of 
the SEIS and is not intended to be comprehensive nor to predetermine 
the alternatives to be analyzed or their potential impacts.
     Impacts to the general population and workers from 
radiological and nonradiological releases.
     Worker health and safety, including impacts from the use 
of chemicals.
     Long-term health and environmental impacts.
     Impacts of emissions on air and water quality.
     Impacts on ecological systems and threatened and 
endangered species.
     Impacts from waste management activities.
     Impacts from the transportation of radioactive materials 
and waste.
     Impacts of postulated accidents and from terrorist actions 
and sabotage.
     Potential disproportionately high and adverse effects on 
low-income and minority populations (environmental justice).
     Short-term and long-term land use impacts.

NEPA Process

    Following the scoping period announced in this Notice of Intent, 
and after consideration of comments received during scoping, DOE will 
prepare a Draft SEIS for Surplus Plutonium Disposition at the SRS. DOE 
will announce the availability of the Draft SEIS in the Federal 
Register and local media outlets. DOE plans to issue the Draft SEIS by 
January 2008. Comments received on the Draft SEIS will be considered 
and addressed in the Final SEIS, which DOE anticipates issuing by July 
2008. DOE will issue a ROD no sooner than 30 days after

[[Page 14546]]

publication by the Environmental Protection Agency of a Notice of 
Availability of the Final SEIS.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on March 21, 2007.
Eric J. Fygi,
Acting General Counsel.
 [FR Doc. E7-5591 Filed 3-27-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P