Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for the Disposal of Greater-Than-Class-C Low-Level Radioactive Waste, 40135-40139 [E7-14139]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 140 / Monday, July 23, 2007 / Notices
frequent performance reports under 34
CFR 75.720(c). For specific
requirements on reporting, please go to
https://www.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/
appforms/appforms.html.
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
Note: NIDRR will provide information by
letter to grantees on how and when to submit
the report.
4. Performance Measures: To evaluate
the overall success of its research
program, NIDRR assesses the quality of
its funded projects through review of
grantee performance and products. Each
year, NIDRR examines, through expert
review, a portion of its grantees to
determine:
The percentage of newly awarded
NIDRR projects that are conducting at
least one multi-site, collaborative,
controlled trial.
The number of accomplishments (e.g.,
new or improved tools, methods,
discoveries, standards, interventions,
programs, or devices) developed or
tested with NIDRR funding that have
been judged by expert panels to be of
high quality and to advance the field.
The percentage of grantee research
and development that has appropriate
study design, meets rigorous standards
of scientific and/or engineering
methods, and builds on, and contributes
to, knowledge in the field.
The average number of publications
per award based on NIDRR-funded
research and development activities in
refereed journals.
The percentage of new grants that
include studies funded by NIDRR that
assess the effectiveness of interventions,
programs, and devices using rigorous
and appropriate methods.
NIDRR uses information submitted by
grantees as part of their Annual
Performance Reports (APRs) for these
reviews.
The Department’s program
performance reports, which include
information on NIDRR programs, are
available on the Department’s Web site:
www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/opepd/
sas/.
Updates on the Government
Performance and Results Act of 1993
(GPRA) indicators, revisions, and
methods appear on the NIDRR Program
Review Web site: www.cessi.net/
contracts/pm/doe_nidrr_tsam.html.
Grantees should consult these sites,
on a regular basis, to obtain details and
explanations on how NIDRR programs
contribute to the advancement of the
Department’s long-term and annual
performance goals.
VII. Agency Contact
For Further Information Contact:
Lynn Medley, U.S. Department of
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:09 Jul 20, 2007
Jkt 211001
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW.,
room 6027, PCP, Washington, DC 20202.
Telephone: (202) 245–7338 or by e-mail:
lynn.medley@ed.gov.
If you use a TDD, call the Federal
Relay Service (FRS), toll free, at 1–800–
877–8339.
VIII. Other Information
Alternative Format: Individuals with
disabilities can obtain this document
and a copy of the application package in
an alternative format (e.g., Braille, large
print, audiotape, or computer diskette)
by contacting the Grants and Contracts
Services Team, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW.,
room 5075, PCP, Washington, DC
20202–2550. Telephone: (202) 245–
7363. If you use a TDD, call the FRS, toll
free, at 1–800–877–8339.
Electronic Access to This Document:
You may view this document, as well as
all other documents of this Department
published in the Federal Register, in
text or Adobe Portable Document
Format (PDF) on the Internet at the
following site: www.ed.gov/news/
fedregister.
To use PDF you must have Adobe
Acrobat Reader, which is available free
at this site. If you have questions about
using PDF, call the U.S. Government
Printing Office (GPO), toll free, at 1–
888–293–6498; or in the Washington,
DC, area at (202) 512–1530.
Note: The official version of this document
is the document published in the Federal
Register. Free Internet access to the official
edition of the Federal Register and the Code
of Federal Regulations is available on GPO
Access at: www.gpoaccess.gov/nara/
index.html.
Dated: July 18, 2007.
John H. Hager,
Assistant Secretary for Special Education and
Rehabilitative Services.
[FR Doc. E7–14180 Filed 7–20–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Notice of Intent To Prepare an
Environmental Impact Statement for
the Disposal of Greater-Than-Class-C
Low-Level Radioactive Waste
Department of Energy.
Notice of Intent To Prepare an
Environmental Impact Statement.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Department of Energy
(DOE) announces its intent to prepare
an environmental impact statement
(EIS) under the National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA) for the disposal of
Greater-Than-Class-C low-level
radioactive waste (GTCC LLW). GTCC
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
40135
LLW is defined by the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (NRC) in 10
CFR 72.3 as ‘‘low-level radioactive
waste that exceeds the concentration
limits of radionuclides established for
Class C waste in [10 CFR 61.55].’’ GTCC
LLW is generated by NRC or Agreement
State-licensed activities (hereafter
referred to as NRC-licensed activities).
DOE proposes to evaluate alternatives
for GTCC LLW disposal: in a geologic
repository; in intermediate depth
boreholes; and in enhanced near surface
facilities. Candidate locations for these
disposal facilities would be: the Idaho
National Laboratory (INL) in Idaho; the
Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL)
and Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP)
in New Mexico; the Nevada Test Site
(NTS) and the proposed Yucca
Mountain repository in Nevada; the
Savannah River Site (SRS) in South
Carolina; the Oak Ridge Reservation
(ORR) in Tennessee; and the Hanford
Site (Hanford) in Washington. DOE will
also evaluate disposal at generic
commercial facilities in arid and humid
locations.
In addition, DOE proposes to include
DOE LLW and transuranic waste having
characteristics similar to GTCC LLW
and which may not have an identified
path to disposal (hereafter referred to as
GTCC-like waste) in the scope of this
EIS. DOE’s GTCC-like waste is owned or
generated by DOE. The use of the term
‘‘GTCC-like’’ does not have the intent or
effect of creating a new classification of
radioactive waste.
DOE invites public comment on the
scope of this EIS during a 60-day public
scoping period. During this period, DOE
will hold public scoping meetings to
provide the public with an opportunity
to comment on the scope of the EIS and
to learn more about the proposed action
from DOE officials.
DOE issued an Advance Notice of
Intent (ANOI), 70 FR 24775 (May 11,
2005), inviting the public to provide
preliminary comments on the potential
scope of the EIS. This Notice of Intent
(NOI) includes a summary of the public
comments received on the ANOI.
DATES: The public scoping period starts
with the date of publication of this NOI
in the Federal Register and will
continue until September 21, 2007. DOE
will consider all comments received or
postmarked by September 21, 2007 in
defining the scope of this EIS.
Comments received or postmarked after
that date will be considered to the
extent practicable.
Public scoping meetings will be held
to provide the public with an
opportunity to present comments on the
scope of the EIS and to learn more about
E:\FR\FM\23JYN1.SGM
23JYN1
40136
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 140 / Monday, July 23, 2007 / Notices
the proposed action from DOE officials.
The locations, dates, and times for the
public scoping meetings are listed in the
‘‘Public Scoping’’ section under
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.
ADDRESSES: Written comments on the
scope of the GTCC LLW EIS or requests
to speak at one of the public scoping
meetings should be sent to: James L.
Joyce, Document Manager, Office of
Regulatory Compliance (EM–10), U.S.
Department of Energy, 1000
Independence Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20585–0119.
Telephone: (301) 903–2151. Fax: 301–
903–4303. E-mail: gtcceis@anl.gov.
Written comments on the scope of the
GTCC LLW EIS and requests to speak at
one of the public scoping meetings can
also be submitted through the Web site
at https://www.gtcceis.anl.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To
request further information about the
EIS, the public scoping meetings, or to
be placed on the EIS distribution list,
use any of the methods (fax, telephone,
e-mail, or Web site) listed under
ADDRESSES above. 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 20585–0119.
Telephone: 202–586–4600, or leave a
message at 1–800–472–2756.
Fax: 202–586–7031.
This NOI will be available on the
internet at https://www.eh.doe.gov/nepa.
Additional information on the GTCC
LLW EIS can be found at https://
www.gtcceis.anl.gov.
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
GTCC LLW is defined by NRC in 10
CFR 72.3 as ‘‘low-level radioactive
waste that exceeds the concentration
limits of radionuclides established for
Class C waste in 10 CFR 61.55.’’ In 10
CFR 61.55, the NRC defines classes of
LLW as A, B and C by the concentration
of specific short- and long-lived
radionuclides, with Class C LLW having
the highest radionuclide concentration
limits. Consistent with NRC’s and DOE’s
authorities under the Atomic Energy Act
of 1954 (as amended), the NRC LLW
radioactive waste classification system
does not apply to radioactive wastes
generated or owned by DOE and
disposed of at DOE facilities. However,
DOE owns and generates LLW and
transuranic radioactive waste with
characteristics similar to GTCC LLW
and that may not have a path to
disposal. For the purposes of this EIS,
DOE is referring to this DOE waste as
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:09 Jul 20, 2007
Jkt 211001
GTCC-like waste (the use of the term
‘‘GTCC-like’’ does not have the intent or
effect of creating a new classification of
radioactive waste). DOE proposes to
evaluate alternatives for the disposal of
both GTCC LLW and DOE GTCC-like
waste in this EIS.
Section 3(b)(1)(D) of the Low-Level
Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments
Act of 1985 (LLRWPAA) assigns the
responsibility for the disposal of GTCC
LLW to the Federal Government. The
LLRWPAA specifies that the GTCC LLW
covered under Section 3(b)(1)(D) is to be
disposed of in a facility licensed and
determined to be adequate by the NRC.
DOE is the federal agency responsible
for the disposal of GTCC LLW. This
responsibility was described in a 1987
report to Congress, Recommendations
for Management of Greater-Than-ClassC Low-Level Waste (DOE/NE–0077),
U.S. Department of Energy, February
1987. The report can be obtained by
contacting the Document Manager listed
under ADDRESSES above or from the Web
site at https://www.gtcceis.anl.gov.
The September 11, 2001, attacks and
subsequent threats have heightened
concerns that terrorists could gain
possession of radiological sealed
sources, including GTCC LLW sealed
sources, and use them for malevolent
purposes. Since 2003, the Government
Accountability Office (GAO) has issued
three reports on matters related to the
security of uncontrolled sealed sources,
including the Department’s progress in
developing a GTCC LLW disposal
facility.1 In addition, the Energy Policy
Act of 2005 contains several provisions
(e.g., sections 631, 651, and 957)
directed at improving the control of
sealed sources, including disposal
availability.
Because of its technical expertise in
radiation protection, the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
will participate as a cooperating agency
in the preparation of this EIS. NRC will
be a commenting agency.
Energy Policy Act of 2005 Reporting
Requirements
Section 631 of the Energy Policy Act
of 2005 requires the Secretary of Energy
to: provide Congress with notification of
the DOE office with responsibility for
completing activities needed to provide
1 These GAO reports are entitled Nuclear
Security: Federal and State Action Needed to
Improve Security of Sealed Radiological Sources,
GAO–03804 (August 6, 2004); Nuclear
Nonproliferation: DOE Action Needed to Ensure
Continued Recovery of Unwanted Radioactive
Sources, GAO–03–438 (April 15, 2003); and
Nuclear Security: DOE Needs Better Information to
Guide Its Expanded Recovery of Sealed Sources,
GAO–05–967 (September 2005). These reports can
be found at https://www.gao.gov/.
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
for safe disposal of GTCC LLW; submit
a report to Congress containing an
estimate of the cost and schedule to
complete an EIS and record of decision
(ROD) for a permanent disposal facility
for GTCC LLW; and prior to making a
final decision on the disposal
alternative or alternatives to be
implemented, submit to Congress a
report that describes all alternatives
considered in the EIS. In meeting these
requirements thus far, DOE has named
the Office of Environmental
Management as the lead organization
having responsibility to develop GTCC
LLW disposal capability and has
submitted a report to Congress dated
July 2006 on the estimated cost and
proposed schedule to complete the EIS.
Types and Estimated Quantities of
GTCC LLW and DOE GTCC-like Waste
GTCC LLW may generally be
categorized into the following three
types: sealed sources, activated metals,
and other miscellaneous waste (e.g.,
contaminated equipment). Sealed
sources are typically small, high-activity
radioactive materials encapsulated in
closed metal containers. They are used
for a variety of purposes including
irradiating food and medical products
for sterilization, detecting flaws and
failures in pipelines and metal welds,
calculating moisture content in soil and
other materials, and assisting in the
diagnosis and treatment of illnesses.
Activated metal wastes are primarily
generated in nuclear reactors during
facility modifications and
decommissioning. There are 104
operating commercial reactors in the
United States and an additional 18 that
have been closed or decommissioned.
The activated metals consist of internal
nuclear components that have become
radioactive from neutron absorption.
These components include portions of
the reactor vessel and other stainless
steel components near the fuel
assemblies.
Other miscellaneous waste includes
all GTCC LLW that is not activated
metals or sealed sources. This waste
includes contaminated equipment,
debris, trash, scrap metal and
decontamination and decommissioning
waste from miscellaneous industrial
activities, such as the manufacture of
sealed sources and laboratory research.
DOE GTCC-like waste includes some
sealed sources owned or generated by
DOE activities; activated metals
including reflector materials from
research reactors as well as other
miscellaneous waste owned by DOE or
generated by DOE activities that has
characteristics similar to GTCC LLW
and may not have a path to disposal.
E:\FR\FM\23JYN1.SGM
23JYN1
40137
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 140 / Monday, July 23, 2007 / Notices
Most of the DOE GTCC-like waste
consists of transuranic waste 2 (a DOE
waste category) that may have
originated from non-defense activities
and therefore may not be authorized for
disposal at WIPP under the Waste
Isolation Pilot Plant Land Withdrawal
Act of 1992 and has no other currently
identified path to disposal.
DOE estimates a total inventory
(existing and projected to be generated)
of approximately 2,600 cubic meters of
GTCC LLW and approximately 3,000
cubic meters of GTCC-like waste. A
small percentage of this waste is mixed
waste (i.e., radioactive waste that
contains a hazardous component subject
to the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act). Table 1 shows estimated
quantities of GTCC LLW and GTCC-like
waste that DOE proposes to analyze and
is based on the report entitled GreaterThan-Class C Low-Level Radioactive
Waste Inventory Estimates, (DOE, July
2007). This report updates the 1993
inventory estimates contained in the
report entitled Greater-Than-Class C
Low-Level Radioactive Waste
Characterization: Estimated Volumes,
Radionuclides, Activities, and Other
Characteristics, DOE/LLW–114,
Revision 1 (Sept. 1994), which served as
the basis for inventories in the ANOI.
Copies of both reports are available by
contacting the Document Manager listed
under ADDRESSES above or at https://
www.gtcceis.anl.gov.
TABLE 1.—INVENTORY SUMMARY OF ESTIMATED QUANTITIES OF GTCC LLW AND DOE GTCC-LIKE WASTE a
Total stored and projected
Waste type
In storage
GTCC LLW:
Activated metal .........................................................
Sealed sources .........................................................
Other d .......................................................................
Projected
Volume in
cubic meters
(m3)
Activityb
MCi
Volume m3
Activity b
MCi
58
(c)
76
3.5
(c)
0.0076
810
1,700
1.0
110
2.4
0.00023
870
1,700
77
110
2.4
0.0078
Total GTCC LLW ...............................................
DOE GTCC-like waste:
Activated metal .........................................................
Sealed sources .........................................................
Other d .......................................................................
130
3.5
2,500
110
2,600
110
5.0
8.7
860
0.11
0.013
11
29
25
2,000
0.82
0.030
19
34
34
2,900
0.93
0.043
30
Total DOE GTCC-like waste .............................
870
11
2,100
20
3,000
31
Total GTCC and GTCC-like waste ............
1,000
15
4,600
130
5,600
140
a Values
have been rounded to two significant figures.
b Radioactivity values are in millions of curies (MCi).
c There are sealed sources currently possessed by NRC licensees that may become GTCC LLW when no longer needed by the licensee. The
estimated volume and activity of those sources are included in the projected inventory, notwithstanding the lack of information on the current status of the sources (e.g., in use, waste, etc.).
d Other GTCC LLW and DOE GTCC-like waste includes contaminated equipment, debris, trash, scrap metal and decontamination and decommissioning waste.
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
Purpose and Need for Action
As shown in Table 1, NRC and
Agreement State licensees have
generated and continue to generate
GTCC LLW for which there is no
permitted disposal facility. DOE is
responsible for the safe and secure
disposal of GTCC LLW covered under
Section 3(b)(1)(D) of the LLRWPAA,
including determining how and where
to dispose of these wastes. In addition,
DOE owns or generates certain LLW and
transuranic wastes with characteristics
similar to GTCC LLW that also may not
have an identified path to disposal.
at the end of each facility’s operational
life. Based on the EIS analysis, DOE
expects to make a decision on the
method(s) and location(s) for disposing
of GTCC LLW and DOE GTCC-like
waste. A combination of disposal
methods and locations may be
appropriate based on the characteristics
of the waste and other factors.
Alternatives Proposed for Evaluation
Proposed Action
DOE proposes to construct and
operate a new facility or facilities, or use
an existing facility, for the disposal of
GTCC LLW and GTCC-like waste. DOE
would then close the facility or facilities
The GTCC EIS will evaluate the range
of reasonable alternatives for the
disposal of GTCC LLW and GTCC-like
waste, together with a no action
alternative. The NRC regulations at 10
CFR 61.55(a)(2)(iv) define GTCC LLW as
that waste which would require
disposal in a geologic repository as
defined in 10 CFR Part 60 or 63, unless
proposals for an alternative method of
disposal are approved by NRC under 10
2 Transuranic waste is radioactive waste
containing more than 100 nanocuries of alphaemitting transuranic isotopes per gram of waste,
with half-lives greater than 20 years, except for: (1)
High-level waste; (2) waste that the Secretary of
Energy has determined, with the concurrence of the
Administrator of EPA, does not need the degree of
isolation required by the 40 CFR Part 191 disposal
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:09 Jul 20, 2007
Jkt 211001
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
CFR 61.55(a)(2)(iv). Although NRC
regulations state that GTCC LLW is
generally not acceptable for near
surface-disposal, the NRC recognizes in
10 CFR 61.7(b)(5) that ‘‘there may be
some instances where waste with
concentrations greater than permitted
for Class C waste would be acceptable
for near-surface disposal with special
processing or design.’’ Therefore, the
disposal methods DOE proposes to
evaluate in the EIS include deep
geologic repository disposal,
intermediate depth borehole disposal,
and enhanced near-surface disposal.
For deep geologic disposal, DOE
intends to analyze disposal at Yucca
Mountain in Nevada, a proposed
geologic repository to be licensed under
10 CFR Part 63. DOE will also evaluate
deep geologic repository disposal at
WIPP in New Mexico. Identification of
regulations; or (3) waste that the NRC has approved
for disposal on a case-by-case basis in accordance
with 10 CFR Part 61. PAGE
E:\FR\FM\23JYN1.SGM
23JYN1
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
40138
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 140 / Monday, July 23, 2007 / Notices
the proposed Yucca Mountain
repository for analysis in the EIS is
based on the 10 CFR 61.55 regulations,
which identify disposal in a geologic
repository licensed under 10 CFR Part
60 or 63 as an acceptable method for the
disposal of GTCC LLW. Identification of
WIPP is based on its characteristics as
a geologic repository, although not
subject to NRC licensing as a geologic
repository under 10 CFR Parts 60 or 63.
DOE does not plan to evaluate an
additional deep geologic repository
facility because siting of another deep
geologic repository facility for GTCC
LLW and GTCC-like waste is
impractical due to the cost, time, and
the relatively small volume of GTCC
LLW and GTCC-like waste.
DOE also intends to evaluate disposal
of GTCC LLW and GTCC-like waste in
a new intermediate depth borehole
facility and enhanced-near surface
facility at existing DOE sites and generic
commercial locations. The DOE sites
considered for analysis include INL in
Idaho, LANL in New Mexico, WIPP
vicinity (either within the WIPP Land
Withdrawal perimeter that is under the
jurisdiction of DOE, or on government
property in the vicinity of WIPP), NTS
in Nevada, SRS in South Carolina, ORR
in Tennessee, and Hanford in
Washington. Identification of these sites
for potential analysis is based on
mission compatibility (these DOE sites
currently have waste disposal
operations as part of their mission) and
physical characteristics of the sites such
as hydrogeology and topography.
In addition, DOE intends to evaluate
a generic enhanced near surface and
intermediate depth borehole
commercial disposal facility under both
arid and humid conditions in the EIS.
In a Request for Information in the
FedBizOpps on July 1, 2005, DOE
solicited technical capability statements
from commercial vendors that may be
interested in constructing and operating
a GTCC waste disposal facility.
Although several commercial vendors
expressed an interest, no vendors have
provided specific information on
disposal locations and methods for
analysis in the EIS. Including a generic
commercial facility in the EIS would
allow DOE to make a programmatic
determination regarding disposal of
GTCC LLW and GTCC-like waste in
such a facility. Should one or more
commercial facilities be identified at a
later time, DOE would conduct further
NEPA review, as appropriate.
DOE intends to evaluate each of the
GTCC waste types (i.e., sealed sources,
activated metals, and other waste)
individually and in combination for
each of the disposal alternatives, taking
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:09 Jul 20, 2007
Jkt 211001
into account the characteristics of the
waste types and other considerations
(e.g., waste volumes, physical and
radiological characteristics, and
generation rates). For example, GTCC
LLW containing transuranic
radionuclides with longer half-lives may
require greater isolation or other special
measures to protect against potential
inadvertent human intrusion, whereas
GTCC LLW containing radionuclides
with shorter half-lives may require less
extensive measures. DOE will also
consider volumes and time periods
when wastes would be generated and
require disposal.
In the GTCC LLW EIS, DOE will
describe the statutory and regulatory
requirements for each disposal
alternative and whether legislation or
regulatory modifications may be needed
to implement the alternative under
consideration. In summary, DOE
proposes to evaluate the alternatives
listed below:
Alternative 1: No Action—under this
alternative, current and future GTCC
LLW and GTCC-like waste would be
stored at designated locations consistent
with ongoing practices, such as storage
of GTCC LLW activated metals at
nuclear utilities;
Alternative 2: Disposal in a Geologic
Repository at WIPP—under this
alternative, DOE would dispose of
GTCC LLW and GTCC-like waste at
WIPP;
Alternative 3: Disposal in a Geologic
Repository at Yucca Mountain—under
this alternative, DOE would dispose of
GTCC LLW and GTCC-like waste at the
proposed Yucca Mountain Repository;
Alternative 4: Disposal at a New
Enhanced Near-Surface Facility—under
this alternative, DOE would dispose of
GTCC LLW or GTCC-like waste at a new
enhanced near-surface facility at INL,
LANL, WIPP vicinity, NTS, SRS, ORR,
and Hanford, or a commercial facility
should such a facility be identified in
the future;
Alternative 5: Disposal at a New
Intermediate Depth Borehole Facility—
under this alternative, DOE would
dispose of GTCC LLW or GTCC-like
waste at a new intermediate depth
borehole facility at INL, LANL, WIPP
vicinity, NTS, SRS, ORR and Hanford,
or a commercial facility should such a
facility be identified in the future.
Identification of Environmental Issues
DOE proposes to evaluate disposal
technologies at various DOE and generic
commercial locations for the
construction, operation, and closure of a
facility or facilities for the disposal of
GTCC LLW and GTCC-like waste. DOE
proposes to address the issues listed
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
below in the process of considering the
potential impacts of the proposed
disposal alternatives.
• Potential impacts on air, noise,
surface water and groundwater.
• Potential impacts from the
shipment of GTCC LLW and GTCC-like
waste to the disposal site(s).
• Potential impacts from postulated
accidents.
• Potential impacts on human health,
including impacts to involved and noninvolved site workers and members of
the public.
• Potential impacts to historical and
cultural artifacts or sites of historical
and cultural significance.
• Potential disproportionately high
and adverse effects on low income and
minority populations (environmental
justice).
• Potential Native American
concerns.
• Short-term and long-term land use
impacts.
• Long-term site suitability, including
erosion and seismicity.
• Potential impacts to endangered
species.
• Intentional destructive acts.
• Compliance with applicable federal,
state, and local requirements.
• Irretrievable and irreversible
commitment of resources.
• Cumulative impacts from past,
present and reasonably foreseeable
actions.
This list is not intended to be
inclusive, and we invite interested
parties to suggest other issues to be
considered, including aspects of the
waste inventories presented in Table 1.
Summary of Public Comments on the
Advance Notice of Intent
In 2005, DOE issued an ANOI, 70 Fed.
Reg. 24775 (May 11, 2005), inviting the
public to provide preliminary comments
on the potential scope of the EIS. DOE
received comments on the ANOI from:
the states of Nevada, Oregon and
Washington; the Sacramento Municipal
Utility District; the New England
Coalition; the Sierra Club; the Nuclear
Energy Institute; and the Savannah
River Site Citizens Advisory Board. The
major scoping issues identified in the
comments are summarized below, along
with DOE’s response.
• EIS General Scope: Commenters
questioned the need for the EIS,
assuming that GTCC LLW would be
disposed of in the proposed Yucca
Mountain repository for spent nuclear
fuel and high-level waste. Some
commenters favored the inclusion of
DOE’s GTCC-like waste along with
GTCC LLW generated from NRClicensed activities in the EIS, while
E:\FR\FM\23JYN1.SGM
23JYN1
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 140 / Monday, July 23, 2007 / Notices
other commenters recommended
restricting the scope of the EIS to GTCC
LLW analyzed in the Yucca Mountain
EIS (DOE/EIS–0250, February 2002) or
to waste generated from NRC-licensed
activities. Still other commenters
questioned the basis for projecting the
GTCC LLW volume to 2035 and 2055.
Response: GTCC waste is LLW, not
high-level waste or spent nuclear fuel;
nevertheless, DOE has identified the
proposed Yucca Mountain repository as
one of the sites to be analyzed in the EIS
for GTCC LLW as a disposal alternative,
as well as other appropriate sites, in
accordance with 10 CFR Part 61. Under
the LLRWPAA, DOE is responsible for
disposing of this waste, and because
such disposal would be a major federal
action, DOE is required by the Council
on Environmental Quality regulations
that implement NEPA to complete an
EIS analyzing the range of reasonable
alternatives for this action. The Energy
Policy Act of 2005 also requires DOE to
take actions related to the preparation of
an EIS for GTCC LLW. DOE plans to
include its GTCC-like waste that may
have no path to disposal, as well as
waste generated from NRC or Agreement
State licensed activities, and to identify
where economies of scale may be
achieved in using the same disposal
methods and locations.
DOE has identified the estimated
GTCC LLW and GTCC-like waste
volumes based on the best available
data. DOE has changed the projections
to 2035 and 2062 to include the 20-year
license renewal that commercial
reactors may receive plus an additional
6-year ‘‘cooling period’’ before
commencing reactor decommissioning
activities. Thus GTCC LLW and GTCClike waste estimates are projected
through 2035, except for GTCC LLW
activated metals estimates, which are
projected through 2062, based on
anticipated nuclear reactor
decommissioning schedules.
• Waste Disposal Alternatives:
Commenters stated that DOE should
identify its criteria for including sites
considered in the EIS as potential
disposal locations and criteria for
selecting the technologies and disposal
methods to be evaluated.
Response: DOE has identified its basis
for the disposal locations and disposal
methods proposed for analysis in the
EIS under ‘‘Alternatives Proposed for
Evaluation’’ in this Notice.
• Waste Inventories: Commenters
stated that the inventory data provided
in the ANOI should be updated.
Response: DOE has updated the
inventory data as shown in Table 1.
DOE will incorporate other appropriate
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:09 Jul 20, 2007
Jkt 211001
inventory data that may become
available during preparation of the EIS.
• Resource Areas Proposed for
Analysis: Commenters suggested a
number of subjects that DOE should
include in the EIS impact analyses.
Response: DOE’s list of subjects
proposed for evaluation in the EIS
under ‘‘Identification of Environmental
Issues’’ in this NOI responds to those
comments.
• Concentration Averaging:
Commenters raised questions about
DOE’s potential use of ‘‘concentration
averaging’’ in which, for example, the
activity of one component is averaged
over the volume or mass of waste to
identify applicable waste classification
standards.
Response: For the purposes of
analysis in the EIS, DOE would use
guidance in the Branch Technical
Position on Concentration Averaging
and Encapsulation, U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Washington
DC, January 1995, to determine when
LLW is greater than Class C as defined
at according to 10 CFR Part 61.
• Regulatory Requirements: A
number of commenters discussed the
need to address compliance with
regulatory and other legal requirements
in the EIS.
Response: The EIS would describe
applicable regulatory and other legal
requirements and consider the extent to
which the alternatives analyzed meet
those requirements.
Public Scoping
Interested parties are invited to
participate in the public scoping process
to provide their comments on the
proposed disposal alternatives for
analysis in the EIS and the
environmental issues to be analyzed.
The scoping process is intended to
involve all interested agencies (federal,
state, county, and local), public interest
groups, Native American tribes,
businesses, and members of the public.
Public scoping meetings will be held at
the following locations and times:
• Carlsbad, New Mexico: Pecos River
Village Conference Center, Carousel
House, 711 Muscatel Avenue, Carlsbad,
New Mexico, Monday, August 13, 2007,
6 p.m.–9 p.m.
• Los Alamos, New Mexico: Hilltop
House Best Western, La Vista Room, 400
Trinity Drive, Los Alamos, New Mexico,
Tuesday, August 14, 2007, 6 p.m.–9
p.m.
• Oak Ridge, Tennessee: DOE Oak
Ridge Information Center, 475 Oak
Ridge Turnpike, Oak Ridge, Tennessee,
Wednesday, August 22, 6 p.m.—9 p.m.
• North Augusta, South Carolina:
North Augusta Community Center, 495
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
40139
Brookside Avenue, North Augusta,
South Carolina, Thursday, August 23, 6
p.m.–9 p.m.
• Troutdale, Oregon: Comfort Inn &
Suites-Columbia Gorge West, 477 NW
Phoenix Drive, Troutdale, Oregon,
Monday, August 27, 2007, 6 p.m.–9 p.m.
• Pasco, Washington: Red Lion Hotel,
Gold Room, 2525 N 20th Avenue, Pasco,
Washington, Tuesday, August 28, 2007,
6 p.m.–9 p.m.
• Idaho Falls, Idaho: Red Lion Hotel
On The Falls, Yellowstone/Teton
Rooms, 475 River Parkway, Idaho Falls,
Idaho, Thursday, August 30, 2007, 6
p.m.–9 p.m.
• Las Vegas, Nevada: Atomic Testing
Museum, 755 E. Flamingo Road (Just
East of Paradise Road), Las Vegas,
Nevada, Tuesday, September 4, 2007, 6
p.m.–9 p.m.
• Washington DC: Hotel Washington,
Washington Room, 15th and
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC, Monday, September
10, 1 p.m.–5 p.m.
During the first hour of each scoping
meeting, DOE officials will be available
for informal discussions with attendees.
During the formal part of the meeting,
the public will have the opportunity to
provide comments orally or in writing.
The presiding officer will establish
procedures to ensure that everyone who
wishes to speak has a chance to do so.
Both oral and written comments will be
considered and given equal weight.
Issued in Washington, DC on July 17, 2007.
James A. Rispoli,
Assistant Secretary for Environmental
Management.
[FR Doc. E7–14139 Filed 7–20–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste
Management; Safe Routine
Transportation and Emergency
Response Training; Technical
Assistance and Funding
Department of Energy.
Notice of revised proposed
policy and request for comments.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Department of Energy
(DOE) is publishing this notice of
revised proposed policy to set forth its
revised plans for implementing Section
180(c) of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act
of 1982 (the NWPA). Under Section
180(c) of the NWPA, DOE shall provide
technical and financial assistance for
training of local public safety officials to
States and Indian Tribes through whose
jurisdictions the DOE plans to transport
spent nuclear fuel or high-level
E:\FR\FM\23JYN1.SGM
23JYN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 140 (Monday, July 23, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 40135-40139]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-14139]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for
the Disposal of Greater-Than-Class-C Low-Level Radioactive Waste
AGENCY: Department of Energy.
ACTION: Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Energy (DOE) announces its intent to prepare
an environmental impact statement (EIS) under the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for the disposal of Greater-Than-Class-
C low-level radioactive waste (GTCC LLW). GTCC LLW is defined by the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in 10 CFR 72.3 as ``low-level
radioactive waste that exceeds the concentration limits of
radionuclides established for Class C waste in [10 CFR 61.55].'' GTCC
LLW is generated by NRC or Agreement State-licensed activities
(hereafter referred to as NRC-licensed activities).
DOE proposes to evaluate alternatives for GTCC LLW disposal: in a
geologic repository; in intermediate depth boreholes; and in enhanced
near surface facilities. Candidate locations for these disposal
facilities would be: the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) in Idaho; the
Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) and Waste Isolation Pilot Plant
(WIPP) in New Mexico; the Nevada Test Site (NTS) and the proposed Yucca
Mountain repository in Nevada; the Savannah River Site (SRS) in South
Carolina; the Oak Ridge Reservation (ORR) in Tennessee; and the Hanford
Site (Hanford) in Washington. DOE will also evaluate disposal at
generic commercial facilities in arid and humid locations.
In addition, DOE proposes to include DOE LLW and transuranic waste
having characteristics similar to GTCC LLW and which may not have an
identified path to disposal (hereafter referred to as GTCC-like waste)
in the scope of this EIS. DOE's GTCC-like waste is owned or generated
by DOE. The use of the term ``GTCC-like'' does not have the intent or
effect of creating a new classification of radioactive waste.
DOE invites public comment on the scope of this EIS during a 60-day
public scoping period. During this period, DOE will hold public scoping
meetings to provide the public with an opportunity to comment on the
scope of the EIS and to learn more about the proposed action from DOE
officials.
DOE issued an Advance Notice of Intent (ANOI), 70 FR 24775 (May 11,
2005), inviting the public to provide preliminary comments on the
potential scope of the EIS. This Notice of Intent (NOI) includes a
summary of the public comments received on the ANOI.
DATES: The public scoping period starts with the date of publication of
this NOI in the Federal Register and will continue until September 21,
2007. DOE will consider all comments received or postmarked by
September 21, 2007 in defining the scope of this EIS. Comments received
or postmarked after that date will be considered to the extent
practicable.
Public scoping meetings will be held to provide the public with an
opportunity to present comments on the scope of the EIS and to learn
more about
[[Page 40136]]
the proposed action from DOE officials. The locations, dates, and times
for the public scoping meetings are listed in the ``Public Scoping''
section under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.
ADDRESSES: Written comments on the scope of the GTCC LLW EIS or
requests to speak at one of the public scoping meetings should be sent
to: James L. Joyce, Document Manager, Office of Regulatory Compliance
(EM-10), U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20585-0119. Telephone: (301) 903-2151. Fax: 301-903-
4303. E-mail: gtcceis@anl.gov.
Written comments on the scope of the GTCC LLW EIS and requests to
speak at one of the public scoping meetings can also be submitted
through the Web site at https://www.gtcceis.anl.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To request further information about
the EIS, the public scoping meetings, or to be placed on the EIS
distribution list, use any of the methods (fax, telephone, e-mail, or
Web site) listed under ADDRESSES above. 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 20585-0119.
Telephone: 202-586-4600, or leave a message at 1-800-472-2756.
Fax: 202-586-7031.
This NOI will be available on the internet at https://
www.eh.doe.gov/nepa.
Additional information on the GTCC LLW EIS can be found at https://
www.gtcceis.anl.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
GTCC LLW is defined by NRC in 10 CFR 72.3 as ``low-level
radioactive waste that exceeds the concentration limits of
radionuclides established for Class C waste in 10 CFR 61.55.'' In 10
CFR 61.55, the NRC defines classes of LLW as A, B and C by the
concentration of specific short- and long-lived radionuclides, with
Class C LLW having the highest radionuclide concentration limits.
Consistent with NRC's and DOE's authorities under the Atomic Energy Act
of 1954 (as amended), the NRC LLW radioactive waste classification
system does not apply to radioactive wastes generated or owned by DOE
and disposed of at DOE facilities. However, DOE owns and generates LLW
and transuranic radioactive waste with characteristics similar to GTCC
LLW and that may not have a path to disposal. For the purposes of this
EIS, DOE is referring to this DOE waste as GTCC-like waste (the use of
the term ``GTCC-like'' does not have the intent or effect of creating a
new classification of radioactive waste). DOE proposes to evaluate
alternatives for the disposal of both GTCC LLW and DOE GTCC-like waste
in this EIS.
Section 3(b)(1)(D) of the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy
Amendments Act of 1985 (LLRWPAA) assigns the responsibility for the
disposal of GTCC LLW to the Federal Government. The LLRWPAA specifies
that the GTCC LLW covered under Section 3(b)(1)(D) is to be disposed of
in a facility licensed and determined to be adequate by the NRC. DOE is
the federal agency responsible for the disposal of GTCC LLW. This
responsibility was described in a 1987 report to Congress,
Recommendations for Management of Greater-Than-Class-C Low-Level Waste
(DOE/NE-0077), U.S. Department of Energy, February 1987. The report can
be obtained by contacting the Document Manager listed under ADDRESSES
above or from the Web site at https://www.gtcceis.anl.gov.
The September 11, 2001, attacks and subsequent threats have
heightened concerns that terrorists could gain possession of
radiological sealed sources, including GTCC LLW sealed sources, and use
them for malevolent purposes. Since 2003, the Government Accountability
Office (GAO) has issued three reports on matters related to the
security of uncontrolled sealed sources, including the Department's
progress in developing a GTCC LLW disposal facility.\1\ In addition,
the Energy Policy Act of 2005 contains several provisions (e.g.,
sections 631, 651, and 957) directed at improving the control of sealed
sources, including disposal availability.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ These GAO reports are entitled Nuclear Security: Federal and
State Action Needed to Improve Security of Sealed Radiological
Sources, GAO-03804 (August 6, 2004); Nuclear Nonproliferation: DOE
Action Needed to Ensure Continued Recovery of Unwanted Radioactive
Sources, GAO-03-438 (April 15, 2003); and Nuclear Security: DOE
Needs Better Information to Guide Its Expanded Recovery of Sealed
Sources, GAO-05-967 (September 2005). These reports can be found at
https://www.gao.gov/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Because of its technical expertise in radiation protection, the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) will participate as a
cooperating agency in the preparation of this EIS. NRC will be a
commenting agency.
Energy Policy Act of 2005 Reporting Requirements
Section 631 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 requires the Secretary
of Energy to: provide Congress with notification of the DOE office with
responsibility for completing activities needed to provide for safe
disposal of GTCC LLW; submit a report to Congress containing an
estimate of the cost and schedule to complete an EIS and record of
decision (ROD) for a permanent disposal facility for GTCC LLW; and
prior to making a final decision on the disposal alternative or
alternatives to be implemented, submit to Congress a report that
describes all alternatives considered in the EIS. In meeting these
requirements thus far, DOE has named the Office of Environmental
Management as the lead organization having responsibility to develop
GTCC LLW disposal capability and has submitted a report to Congress
dated July 2006 on the estimated cost and proposed schedule to complete
the EIS.
Types and Estimated Quantities of GTCC LLW and DOE GTCC-like Waste
GTCC LLW may generally be categorized into the following three
types: sealed sources, activated metals, and other miscellaneous waste
(e.g., contaminated equipment). Sealed sources are typically small,
high-activity radioactive materials encapsulated in closed metal
containers. They are used for a variety of purposes including
irradiating food and medical products for sterilization, detecting
flaws and failures in pipelines and metal welds, calculating moisture
content in soil and other materials, and assisting in the diagnosis and
treatment of illnesses.
Activated metal wastes are primarily generated in nuclear reactors
during facility modifications and decommissioning. There are 104
operating commercial reactors in the United States and an additional 18
that have been closed or decommissioned. The activated metals consist
of internal nuclear components that have become radioactive from
neutron absorption. These components include portions of the reactor
vessel and other stainless steel components near the fuel assemblies.
Other miscellaneous waste includes all GTCC LLW that is not
activated metals or sealed sources. This waste includes contaminated
equipment, debris, trash, scrap metal and decontamination and
decommissioning waste from miscellaneous industrial activities, such as
the manufacture of sealed sources and laboratory research.
DOE GTCC-like waste includes some sealed sources owned or generated
by DOE activities; activated metals including reflector materials from
research reactors as well as other miscellaneous waste owned by DOE or
generated by DOE activities that has characteristics similar to GTCC
LLW and may not have a path to disposal.
[[Page 40137]]
Most of the DOE GTCC-like waste consists of transuranic waste \2\ (a
DOE waste category) that may have originated from non-defense
activities and therefore may not be authorized for disposal at WIPP
under the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Land Withdrawal Act of 1992 and
has no other currently identified path to disposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Transuranic waste is radioactive waste containing more than
100 nanocuries of alpha-emitting transuranic isotopes per gram of
waste, with half-lives greater than 20 years, except for: (1) High-
level waste; (2) waste that the Secretary of Energy has determined,
with the concurrence of the Administrator of EPA, does not need the
degree of isolation required by the 40 CFR Part 191 disposal
regulations; or (3) waste that the NRC has approved for disposal on
a case-by-case basis in accordance with 10 CFR Part 61. PAGE
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE estimates a total inventory (existing and projected to be
generated) of approximately 2,600 cubic meters of GTCC LLW and
approximately 3,000 cubic meters of GTCC-like waste. A small percentage
of this waste is mixed waste (i.e., radioactive waste that contains a
hazardous component subject to the Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act). Table 1 shows estimated quantities of GTCC LLW and GTCC-like
waste that DOE proposes to analyze and is based on the report entitled
Greater-Than-Class C Low-Level Radioactive Waste Inventory Estimates,
(DOE, July 2007). This report updates the 1993 inventory estimates
contained in the report entitled Greater-Than-Class C Low-Level
Radioactive Waste Characterization: Estimated Volumes, Radionuclides,
Activities, and Other Characteristics, DOE/LLW-114, Revision 1 (Sept.
1994), which served as the basis for inventories in the ANOI. Copies of
both reports are available by contacting the Document Manager listed
under ADDRESSES above or at https://www.gtcceis.anl.gov.
Table 1.--Inventory Summary of Estimated Quantities of GTCC LLW and DOE GTCC-like Waste a
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total stored and projected
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Volume in
Waste type In storage Projected cubic Activity\b\ Activity Volume Activity
meters MCi Volume m\3\ \b\ MCi m \3\ \(b)\
(m\3\) MCi
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------
GTCC LLW:
Activated metal......................................... 58 3.5 810 110 870 110
Sealed sources.......................................... (\c\) (\c\) 1,700 2.4 1,700 2.4
Other \d\............................................... 76 0.0076 1.0 0.00023 77 0.0078
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total GTCC LLW...................................... 130 3.5 2,500 110 2,600 110
DOE GTCC-like waste:
Activated metal......................................... 5.0 0.11 29 0.82 34 0.93
Sealed sources.......................................... 8.7 0.013 25 0.030 34 0.043
Other \d\............................................... 860 11 2,000 19 2,900 30
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total DOE GTCC-like waste........................... 870 11 2,100 20 3,000 31
===========================================================================================
Total GTCC and GTCC-like waste.................. 1,000 15 4,600 130 5,600 140
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Values have been rounded to two significant figures.
\b\ Radioactivity values are in millions of curies (MCi).
\c\ There are sealed sources currently possessed by NRC licensees that may become GTCC LLW when no longer needed by the licensee. The estimated volume
and activity of those sources are included in the projected inventory, notwithstanding the lack of information on the current status of the sources
(e.g., in use, waste, etc.).
\d\ Other GTCC LLW and DOE GTCC-like waste includes contaminated equipment, debris, trash, scrap metal and decontamination and decommissioning waste.
Purpose and Need for Action
As shown in Table 1, NRC and Agreement State licensees have
generated and continue to generate GTCC LLW for which there is no
permitted disposal facility. DOE is responsible for the safe and secure
disposal of GTCC LLW covered under Section 3(b)(1)(D) of the LLRWPAA,
including determining how and where to dispose of these wastes. In
addition, DOE owns or generates certain LLW and transuranic wastes with
characteristics similar to GTCC LLW that also may not have an
identified path to disposal.
Proposed Action
DOE proposes to construct and operate a new facility or facilities,
or use an existing facility, for the disposal of GTCC LLW and GTCC-like
waste. DOE would then close the facility or facilities at the end of
each facility's operational life. Based on the EIS analysis, DOE
expects to make a decision on the method(s) and location(s) for
disposing of GTCC LLW and DOE GTCC-like waste. A combination of
disposal methods and locations may be appropriate based on the
characteristics of the waste and other factors.
Alternatives Proposed for Evaluation
The GTCC EIS will evaluate the range of reasonable alternatives for
the disposal of GTCC LLW and GTCC-like waste, together with a no action
alternative. The NRC regulations at 10 CFR 61.55(a)(2)(iv) define GTCC
LLW as that waste which would require disposal in a geologic repository
as defined in 10 CFR Part 60 or 63, unless proposals for an alternative
method of disposal are approved by NRC under 10 CFR 61.55(a)(2)(iv).
Although NRC regulations state that GTCC LLW is generally not
acceptable for near surface-disposal, the NRC recognizes in 10 CFR
61.7(b)(5) that ``there may be some instances where waste with
concentrations greater than permitted for Class C waste would be
acceptable for near-surface disposal with special processing or
design.'' Therefore, the disposal methods DOE proposes to evaluate in
the EIS include deep geologic repository disposal, intermediate depth
borehole disposal, and enhanced near-surface disposal.
For deep geologic disposal, DOE intends to analyze disposal at
Yucca Mountain in Nevada, a proposed geologic repository to be licensed
under 10 CFR Part 63. DOE will also evaluate deep geologic repository
disposal at WIPP in New Mexico. Identification of
[[Page 40138]]
the proposed Yucca Mountain repository for analysis in the EIS is based
on the 10 CFR 61.55 regulations, which identify disposal in a geologic
repository licensed under 10 CFR Part 60 or 63 as an acceptable method
for the disposal of GTCC LLW. Identification of WIPP is based on its
characteristics as a geologic repository, although not subject to NRC
licensing as a geologic repository under 10 CFR Parts 60 or 63. DOE
does not plan to evaluate an additional deep geologic repository
facility because siting of another deep geologic repository facility
for GTCC LLW and GTCC-like waste is impractical due to the cost, time,
and the relatively small volume of GTCC LLW and GTCC-like waste.
DOE also intends to evaluate disposal of GTCC LLW and GTCC-like
waste in a new intermediate depth borehole facility and enhanced-near
surface facility at existing DOE sites and generic commercial
locations. The DOE sites considered for analysis include INL in Idaho,
LANL in New Mexico, WIPP vicinity (either within the WIPP Land
Withdrawal perimeter that is under the jurisdiction of DOE, or on
government property in the vicinity of WIPP), NTS in Nevada, SRS in
South Carolina, ORR in Tennessee, and Hanford in Washington.
Identification of these sites for potential analysis is based on
mission compatibility (these DOE sites currently have waste disposal
operations as part of their mission) and physical characteristics of
the sites such as hydrogeology and topography.
In addition, DOE intends to evaluate a generic enhanced near
surface and intermediate depth borehole commercial disposal facility
under both arid and humid conditions in the EIS. In a Request for
Information in the FedBizOpps on July 1, 2005, DOE solicited technical
capability statements from commercial vendors that may be interested in
constructing and operating a GTCC waste disposal facility. Although
several commercial vendors expressed an interest, no vendors have
provided specific information on disposal locations and methods for
analysis in the EIS. Including a generic commercial facility in the EIS
would allow DOE to make a programmatic determination regarding disposal
of GTCC LLW and GTCC-like waste in such a facility. Should one or more
commercial facilities be identified at a later time, DOE would conduct
further NEPA review, as appropriate.
DOE intends to evaluate each of the GTCC waste types (i.e., sealed
sources, activated metals, and other waste) individually and in
combination for each of the disposal alternatives, taking into account
the characteristics of the waste types and other considerations (e.g.,
waste volumes, physical and radiological characteristics, and
generation rates). For example, GTCC LLW containing transuranic
radionuclides with longer half-lives may require greater isolation or
other special measures to protect against potential inadvertent human
intrusion, whereas GTCC LLW containing radionuclides with shorter half-
lives may require less extensive measures. DOE will also consider
volumes and time periods when wastes would be generated and require
disposal.
In the GTCC LLW EIS, DOE will describe the statutory and regulatory
requirements for each disposal alternative and whether legislation or
regulatory modifications may be needed to implement the alternative
under consideration. In summary, DOE proposes to evaluate the
alternatives listed below:
Alternative 1: No Action--under this alternative, current and
future GTCC LLW and GTCC-like waste would be stored at designated
locations consistent with ongoing practices, such as storage of GTCC
LLW activated metals at nuclear utilities;
Alternative 2: Disposal in a Geologic Repository at WIPP--under
this alternative, DOE would dispose of GTCC LLW and GTCC-like waste at
WIPP;
Alternative 3: Disposal in a Geologic Repository at Yucca
Mountain--under this alternative, DOE would dispose of GTCC LLW and
GTCC-like waste at the proposed Yucca Mountain Repository;
Alternative 4: Disposal at a New Enhanced Near-Surface Facility--
under this alternative, DOE would dispose of GTCC LLW or GTCC-like
waste at a new enhanced near-surface facility at INL, LANL, WIPP
vicinity, NTS, SRS, ORR, and Hanford, or a commercial facility should
such a facility be identified in the future;
Alternative 5: Disposal at a New Intermediate Depth Borehole
Facility--under this alternative, DOE would dispose of GTCC LLW or
GTCC-like waste at a new intermediate depth borehole facility at INL,
LANL, WIPP vicinity, NTS, SRS, ORR and Hanford, or a commercial
facility should such a facility be identified in the future.
Identification of Environmental Issues
DOE proposes to evaluate disposal technologies at various DOE and
generic commercial locations for the construction, operation, and
closure of a facility or facilities for the disposal of GTCC LLW and
GTCC-like waste. DOE proposes to address the issues listed below in the
process of considering the potential impacts of the proposed disposal
alternatives.
Potential impacts on air, noise, surface water and
groundwater.
Potential impacts from the shipment of GTCC LLW and GTCC-
like waste to the disposal site(s).
Potential impacts from postulated accidents.
Potential impacts on human health, including impacts to
involved and non-involved site workers and members of the public.
Potential impacts to historical and cultural artifacts or
sites of historical and cultural significance.
Potential disproportionately high and adverse effects on
low income and minority populations (environmental justice).
Potential Native American concerns.
Short-term and long-term land use impacts.
Long-term site suitability, including erosion and
seismicity.
Potential impacts to endangered species.
Intentional destructive acts.
Compliance with applicable federal, state, and local
requirements.
Irretrievable and irreversible commitment of resources.
Cumulative impacts from past, present and reasonably
foreseeable actions.
This list is not intended to be inclusive, and we invite interested
parties to suggest other issues to be considered, including aspects of
the waste inventories presented in Table 1.
Summary of Public Comments on the Advance Notice of Intent
In 2005, DOE issued an ANOI, 70 Fed. Reg. 24775 (May 11, 2005),
inviting the public to provide preliminary comments on the potential
scope of the EIS. DOE received comments on the ANOI from: the states of
Nevada, Oregon and Washington; the Sacramento Municipal Utility
District; the New England Coalition; the Sierra Club; the Nuclear
Energy Institute; and the Savannah River Site Citizens Advisory Board.
The major scoping issues identified in the comments are summarized
below, along with DOE's response.
EIS General Scope: Commenters questioned the need for the
EIS, assuming that GTCC LLW would be disposed of in the proposed Yucca
Mountain repository for spent nuclear fuel and high-level waste. Some
commenters favored the inclusion of DOE's GTCC-like waste along with
GTCC LLW generated from NRC-licensed activities in the EIS, while
[[Page 40139]]
other commenters recommended restricting the scope of the EIS to GTCC
LLW analyzed in the Yucca Mountain EIS (DOE/EIS-0250, February 2002) or
to waste generated from NRC-licensed activities. Still other commenters
questioned the basis for projecting the GTCC LLW volume to 2035 and
2055.
Response: GTCC waste is LLW, not high-level waste or spent nuclear
fuel; nevertheless, DOE has identified the proposed Yucca Mountain
repository as one of the sites to be analyzed in the EIS for GTCC LLW
as a disposal alternative, as well as other appropriate sites, in
accordance with 10 CFR Part 61. Under the LLRWPAA, DOE is responsible
for disposing of this waste, and because such disposal would be a major
federal action, DOE is required by the Council on Environmental Quality
regulations that implement NEPA to complete an EIS analyzing the range
of reasonable alternatives for this action. The Energy Policy Act of
2005 also requires DOE to take actions related to the preparation of an
EIS for GTCC LLW. DOE plans to include its GTCC-like waste that may
have no path to disposal, as well as waste generated from NRC or
Agreement State licensed activities, and to identify where economies of
scale may be achieved in using the same disposal methods and locations.
DOE has identified the estimated GTCC LLW and GTCC-like waste
volumes based on the best available data. DOE has changed the
projections to 2035 and 2062 to include the 20-year license renewal
that commercial reactors may receive plus an additional 6-year
``cooling period'' before commencing reactor decommissioning
activities. Thus GTCC LLW and GTCC-like waste estimates are projected
through 2035, except for GTCC LLW activated metals estimates, which are
projected through 2062, based on anticipated nuclear reactor
decommissioning schedules.
Waste Disposal Alternatives: Commenters stated that DOE
should identify its criteria for including sites considered in the EIS
as potential disposal locations and criteria for selecting the
technologies and disposal methods to be evaluated.
Response: DOE has identified its basis for the disposal locations
and disposal methods proposed for analysis in the EIS under
``Alternatives Proposed for Evaluation'' in this Notice.
Waste Inventories: Commenters stated that the inventory
data provided in the ANOI should be updated.
Response: DOE has updated the inventory data as shown in Table 1.
DOE will incorporate other appropriate inventory data that may become
available during preparation of the EIS.
Resource Areas Proposed for Analysis: Commenters suggested
a number of subjects that DOE should include in the EIS impact
analyses.
Response: DOE's list of subjects proposed for evaluation in the EIS
under ``Identification of Environmental Issues'' in this NOI responds
to those comments.
Concentration Averaging: Commenters raised questions about
DOE's potential use of ``concentration averaging'' in which, for
example, the activity of one component is averaged over the volume or
mass of waste to identify applicable waste classification standards.
Response: For the purposes of analysis in the EIS, DOE would use
guidance in the Branch Technical Position on Concentration Averaging
and Encapsulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington DC,
January 1995, to determine when LLW is greater than Class C as defined
at according to 10 CFR Part 61.
Regulatory Requirements: A number of commenters discussed
the need to address compliance with regulatory and other legal
requirements in the EIS.
Response: The EIS would describe applicable regulatory and other
legal requirements and consider the extent to which the alternatives
analyzed meet those requirements.
Public Scoping
Interested parties are invited to participate in the public scoping
process to provide their comments on the proposed disposal alternatives
for analysis in the EIS and the environmental issues to be analyzed.
The scoping process is intended to involve all interested agencies
(federal, state, county, and local), public interest groups, Native
American tribes, businesses, and members of the public. Public scoping
meetings will be held at the following locations and times:
Carlsbad, New Mexico: Pecos River Village Conference
Center, Carousel House, 711 Muscatel Avenue, Carlsbad, New Mexico,
Monday, August 13, 2007, 6 p.m.-9 p.m.
Los Alamos, New Mexico: Hilltop House Best Western, La
Vista Room, 400 Trinity Drive, Los Alamos, New Mexico, Tuesday, August
14, 2007, 6 p.m.-9 p.m.
Oak Ridge, Tennessee: DOE Oak Ridge Information Center,
475 Oak Ridge Turnpike, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, Wednesday, August 22, 6
p.m.--9 p.m.
North Augusta, South Carolina: North Augusta Community
Center, 495 Brookside Avenue, North Augusta, South Carolina, Thursday,
August 23, 6 p.m.-9 p.m.
Troutdale, Oregon: Comfort Inn & Suites-Columbia Gorge
West, 477 NW Phoenix Drive, Troutdale, Oregon, Monday, August 27, 2007,
6 p.m.-9 p.m.
Pasco, Washington: Red Lion Hotel, Gold Room, 2525 N 20th
Avenue, Pasco, Washington, Tuesday, August 28, 2007, 6 p.m.-9 p.m.
Idaho Falls, Idaho: Red Lion Hotel On The Falls,
Yellowstone/Teton Rooms, 475 River Parkway, Idaho Falls, Idaho,
Thursday, August 30, 2007, 6 p.m.-9 p.m.
Las Vegas, Nevada: Atomic Testing Museum, 755 E. Flamingo
Road (Just East of Paradise Road), Las Vegas, Nevada, Tuesday,
September 4, 2007, 6 p.m.-9 p.m.
Washington DC: Hotel Washington, Washington Room, 15th and
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC, Monday, September 10, 1 p.m.-
5 p.m.
During the first hour of each scoping meeting, DOE officials will
be available for informal discussions with attendees. During the formal
part of the meeting, the public will have the opportunity to provide
comments orally or in writing. The presiding officer will establish
procedures to ensure that everyone who wishes to speak has a chance to
do so. Both oral and written comments will be considered and given
equal weight.
Issued in Washington, DC on July 17, 2007.
James A. Rispoli,
Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management.
[FR Doc. E7-14139 Filed 7-20-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
