Amended Record of Decision: Surplus Plutonium Disposition; Waste Solidification Building, 75088-75090 [E8-29240]

Download as PDF 75088 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 238 / Wednesday, December 10, 2008 / Notices Carlsbad, New Mexico 88220, Phone: 1– 800–336–WIPP; Chicago Operations Office, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Science Public Reading Room, Document Department, University Library, The University of Illinois at Chicago, 801 South Morgan Street, 3rd Floor Center, Chicago, Illinois 60607, DOE Contact: Gary Pitchford, Phone: (630) 252– 2013; Idaho Operations Office, U.S. Department of Energy, Public Reading Room, 1776 Science Center Drive, Idaho Falls, Idaho 83415–2300, Reading Room Contact: Gail Willmore, Phone: (208) 526–9162; Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant, Department of Energy, Environmental Information Center and Reading Room, 115 Memorial Drive, Barkley Centre, Paducah, Kentucky 42001, Phone: (270) 554–6979; Los Alamos Site Office, LANL Research Library, Technical Area 3, Building 207, Los Alamos, New Mexico 87545, Phone: (505) 667–5809; Oak Ridge Operations Office, DOE Oak Ridge Information Center, 475 Oak Ridge Turnpike, Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830, Phone: (865) 241–4780 or (toll-free) 1(800) 382–6938, option 6; Richland Operations Office, U.S. Department of Energy, Public Reading Room, MSIN H2–53, P.O. Box 999, Richland, Washington 99352, Contact: Terri Traub, Phone: (509) 372–7443; Savannah River Operations Office, U.S. Department of Energy, Public Reading Room, 471 University Parkway, Aiken, South Carolina 29801, Contact: Paul Lewis, Phone: (803) 641–3320; Albuquerque Operations Office, FOIA Reading Room and DOE Reading Rooms, Government Information Department, Zimmerman Library, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87131– 1466, Contact: Dan Barkley, Phone: (505) 277–7180; Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant, Department of Energy, Environmental Information Center, 1862 Shyville Road, Room 220, Piketon, Ohio 45661. Issued in Washington, DC on December 4, 2008. Dennis R. Spurgeon, Assistant Secretary for Nuclear Energy. [FR Doc. E8–29238 Filed 12–9–08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450–01–P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY National Nuclear Security Administration mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES Amended Record of Decision: Surplus Plutonium Disposition; Waste Solidification Building AGENCY: National Nuclear Security Administration, U.S. Department of Energy. ACTION: Amended Record of Decision. SUMMARY: The National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), a VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:49 Dec 09, 2008 Jkt 217001 separately organized agency within the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), is amending the Record of Decision (ROD) for the Surplus Plutonium Disposition Environmental Impact Statement (SPD EIS) (DOE/EIS–0283, November 1999). In the SPD EIS ROD (65 FR 1608; January 11, 2000), DOE announced decisions for implementing the U.S. Surplus Plutonium Disposition Program, including affirming its January 1997 decision (62 FR 3014) to pursue a hybrid approach for the safe and secure disposition of up to 50 metric tons of surplus weapons-usable plutonium using both immobilization and mixed oxide (MOX) fuel technologies as evaluated in the Storage and Disposition of Weapons-Usable Fissile Materials Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (Storage and Disposition PEIS) (DOE/EIS–0229, November 1996). Decisions announced in the SPD EIS ROD included construction and operation of three new facilities at the Savannah River Site (SRS) near Aiken, South Carolina, to disposition approximately 17 tons of surplus plutonium using the immobilization approach and the use of up to 33 metric tons as MOX fuel that would be irradiated in commercial reactors. The three new facilities were identified as a pit disassembly and conversion facility (PDCF), an immobilization facility,1 and a MOX fuel fabrication facility (MFFF). These facilities as analyzed in the SPD EIS were to be constructed in F-Area at SRS and included capabilities for management of wastes generated as part of the processing activities in each of the facilities. DOE/NNSA is today announcing its decision to construct and operate a standalone building, the waste solidification building (WSB), for treating and solidifying liquid transuranic waste and certain liquid low-level radioactive wastes from MFFF and PDCF, specifically a high-activity (high-alpha) waste stream from MFFF, a low-activity stripped-uranium waste stream from MFFF, and a low-activity laboratory waste stream from PDCF.2 This decision is based on the Supplement Analysis for Construction 1 In an April 19, 2002, amended ROD (67 FR 19432), DOE announced cancellation of the immobilization component of the U.S. Surplus Plutonium Disposition Program. 2 The decision announced in this amended ROD is consistent with the approach discussed in the Construction Authorization Request and the License Application submitted to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) by DOE/NNSA’s contractor for the Mixed Oxide (MOX) Fuel Fabrication Facility. The decision also is consistent with the approach discussed in the NRC’s Environmental Impact Statement on the Construction and Operation of a Proposed Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility at the Savannah River Site, South Carolina (NUREG–1767). PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 and Operation of a Waste Solidification Building at the Savannah River Site (WSB SA) (DOE/EIS–0283–SA–2) prepared pursuant to DOE procedures implementing the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) (10 CFR 1021.314). The WSB SA demonstrates that construction and operation of a standalone WSB represent neither substantial changes relevant to environmental concerns nor significant new circumstances or information relevant to environmental concerns from those evaluated in previous NEPA documents. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information concerning construction and operation of the waste solidification building, or to obtain copies of this amended ROD, contact: Ms. Sachiko W. McAlhany, Office of Site Engineering and Construction Management, U.S. Department of Energy/National Nuclear Security Administration, Savannah River Site, Aiken, South Carolina 29802, Telephone: (803) 952–6110, E-mail: sachiko-w.mcalhany@nnsa.srs.gov. For information on the DOE’s NEPA process, contact: Ms. Carol M. Borgstrom, Director, Office of NEPA Policy and Compliance, GC–20, U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585–0103, (202) 586– 4600, or leave a message at (800) 472– 2756. This Amended ROD, the WSB SA, and other DOE NEPA documents are available on the DOE NEPA Web site at https://www.gc.energy.gov/NEPA. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background The U.S. Surplus Plutonium Disposition Program was first evaluated under NEPA in the Storage and Disposition PEIS. Among the alternatives evaluated, the Reactor Category and Common Activities Alternative included a MOX fuel fabrication facility conceptual design with a standalone building to manage wastes. The ROD for the Storage and Disposition PEIS (62 FR 3014) outlined DOE’s decision to pursue a hybrid disposition strategy that allowed for both immobilization of surplus weapons-usable plutonium for disposal in a geologic repository and fabrication of MOX fuel for use in existing domestic, commercial nuclear power reactors followed by disposal of the spent MOX fuel in a geologic repository. Subsequent to the Storage and Disposition PEIS, DOE prepared the SPD EIS, which supported selection of specific technologies and sites for E:\FR\FM\10DEN1.SGM 10DEN1 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 238 / Wednesday, December 10, 2008 / Notices mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES surplus plutonium disposition. In the ROD for the SPD EIS (65 FR 1608; January 11, 2000), DOE announced its decision to fabricate approximately 33 metric tons (36 tons) of surplus weapons-usable plutonium in pits and clean metal into MOX fuel for use in existing domestic, commercial nuclear power reactors and to immobilize approximately 17 metric tons (19 tons) of surplus weapons-usable non-pit plutonium in a ceramic matrix surrounded by Defense Waste Processing Facility 3 high-level radioactive waste glass. In the 2000 ROD, DOE also announced that the three facilities required to effect this disposition (MFFF, PDCF, and an Immobilization Facility) would be constructed and operated at SRS. On April 19, 2002, DOE/NNSA announced in an Amended ROD for the Storage and Disposition PEIS and the SPD EIS (67 FR 19432) that it was cancelling the immobilization component of the U.S. Surplus Plutonium Disposition Program, thereby reducing the number of facilities to be constructed at SRS from three to two. In the amended ROD, DOE/NNSA explained that the revised disposition strategy involved a MOX-only approach, under which up to 34 metric tons (37 tons) of surplus plutonium would be dispositioned by converting it to MOX fuel and irradiating the fuel in existing domestic, commercial nuclear power reactors. The DOE/NNSA also indicated that no final decisions would be made with respect to the MOX portion of the revised disposition program until DOE/ NNSA had completed additional analysis pursuant to NEPA. That additional NEPA analysis was completed upon issuance of the Supplement Analysis for Changes Needed to the Surplus Plutonium Disposition Program (MOX SA) (DOE/ EIS–0283–SA1) in April 2003, and an Amended ROD was issued (68 FR 20134; April 24, 2003) announcing DOE/NNSA’s decision to fabricate 34 metric tons (37 tons) of surplus plutonium into MOX fuel, including up to 6.5 metric tons (7.2 tons) originally intended for immobilization. In the MOX SA, DOE/NNSA evaluated proposed changes to the Surplus Plutonium Disposition Program to accommodate fabrication of this additional plutonium into MOX fuel at MFFF and also those refinements 3 Nuclear materials production operations at SRS resulted in generation of large quantities of highlevel radioactive waste. The Defense Waste Processing Facility was constructed at SRS to convert this high-level radioactive waste to a stable glass form suitable for disposal in a geologic repository. VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:49 Dec 09, 2008 Jkt 217001 identified through the design process for MFFF. Consistent with the design at the time, a stand-alone WSB in which both liquid low-level radioactive waste and transuranic waste would be treated and solidified was evaluated in the MOX SA. This was a refinement from the facility designs assumed in the SPD EIS, in which MFFF and PDCF each included waste processing equipment to treat and solidify low-level radioactive waste and transuranic waste. A standalone WSB takes advantage of an economy of scale in that similar waste streams from both MFFF and PDCF can be treated together in the same location, rather than having duplicate equipment installed in both facilities. A standalone WSB was also evaluated by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in the 2005 Environmental Impact Statement on the Construction and Operation of a Proposed Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility at the Savannah River Site, South Carolina (MFFF EIS).4 A standalone WSB is also discussed in the Construction Authorization Request and the License Application submitted to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission by DOE/ NNSA’s contractor to design, construct and operate MFFF. Waste Solidification Building During the detailed design process for the MFFF, and after DOE/NNSA considered using existing SRS facilities for processing all or some of the MFFF and PDCF waste streams, the MFFF design was changed from the conceptual design evaluated in the SPD EIS to include the standalone WSB, because, among other reasons, closure schedules for these SRS facilities were not at that time compatible with the Surplus Plutonium Disposition schedule. In 2004, planning for WSB was suspended because of uncertainties with the Surplus Plutonium Disposition Program. Specifically, delays in negotiations with the Russian Federation (for Russian disposition of excess Russian weapons-grade plutonium) coupled with significant funding constraints for the domestic program had caused the project schedules for MFFF and PDCF to be extended. At that time, detailed design for WSB was about to begin, with the assumption that treatment for five liquid 4 Pursuant to Section 202(5) of the Energy Reorganization Act as added by Section 3134 of the Strom Thurmond National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999, MFFF must be licensed by the NRC. NRC prepared the MFFF EIS in accordance with NEPA to support NRC licensing decisions concerning MFFF. Neither WSB nor PDCF will be licensed by NRC, but both were evaluated in the MFFF EIS as connected actions. PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 75089 waste streams from MFFF and PDCF would occur in WSB. Because of the programmatic uncertainties, DOE/NNSA determined instead to suspend WSB Project activities. Design activities for WSB resumed in 2006. During the project suspension, changes in closure schedules for certain SRS waste management facilities allowed DOE/NNSA to reconsider the use of existing SRS site treatment capabilities that were originally scheduled to be shut down before completion of the plutonium disposition mission. As a result, DOE/ NNSA requested the SRS management and operating contractor to undertake an analysis to identify potential reasonable alternatives that would lead to the optimum WSB configuration. The goal of this study was to identify which waste processing and management operations could be conducted in existing SRS facilities and which, if any, would need to be provided independently. The study comparing a range of potential alternatives comprising combinations of new and existing facilities was submitted in June 2005. The DOE/NNSA evaluation of these alternatives showed that the most reasonable alternative with the least project risk would be to (1) use existing SRS facilities (the Effluent Treatment Project) for waste treatment for two waste streams projected to have minimal (or no) radioactive contamination; (2) use existing SRS facilities for certification, packaging and shipping wastes solidified in WSB or generated during WSB operations; and (3) provide independent treatment and management capabilities (i.e., construct and operate a WSB) for three waste streams that are not compatible with existing SRS operations without major, costly modifications to SRS facilities and planned closure schedules. The WSB will be constructed near MFFF and PDCF in F-Area and will process liquid waste streams from both MFFF and PDCF. The WSB will receive three waste streams transferred from MFFF and PDCF through underground, double-walled stainless steel lines: A high-activity (high-alpha) waste stream from MFFF, a low-activity strippeduranium waste stream from MFFF, and a low-activity waste stream from the PDCF laboratory. Waste streams will be stored at WSB in tanks pending subsequent treatment by neutralization, volume reduction by evaporation, and cementation. Condensed overheads from the evaporators will be either transferred through a lift station and piping to the existing SRS Effluent Treatment Project if the overheads meet E:\FR\FM\10DEN1.SGM 10DEN1 75090 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 238 / Wednesday, December 10, 2008 / Notices the acceptance criteria for that facility or routed back through WSB processes for further treatment. The WSB SA discusses existing NEPA evaluations for surplus plutonium disposition activities relative to WSB, and provides a comparison of the potential environmental impacts of constructing and operating the WSB in F-Area at SRS to impacts identified in the SPD EIS for constructing and operating MFFF and PDCF. The WSB SA also qualitatively compares the impacts of a stand-alone WSB to the impacts of the relevant waste processing, treatment and solidification operations discussed as part of both the MFFF and the PDCF in the SPD EIS. Construction and operation of the standalone WSB to treat and solidify transuranic and low-level radioactive wastes from MFFF and PDCF does not involve environmental impacts that are significantly different from those identified in previous NEPA analyses, in particular, the SPD EIS. Activities proposed for this stand-alone building, the WSB, would be similar to those identified in the SPD EIS to occur separately in both MFFF and PDCF. The WSB SA demonstrates that construction and operation of a standalone WSB represent neither substantial changes relevant to environmental concerns nor significant new circumstances or information relevant to environmental concerns. Therefore, pursuant to 10 CFR 1021.314(c), no additional NEPA analyses are required to construct and operate a stand-alone WSB. mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES Decision DOE/NNSA has decided to construct and operate a stand-alone waste solidification building for treating and solidifying liquid transuranic waste and certain liquid low-level radioactive wastes generated by MFFF and PDCF, specifically a high-activity (high-alpha) waste stream from MFFF, a low-activity stripped-uranium waste stream from MFFF, and a low-activity laboratory waste stream from PDCF. As described in the WSB SA (DOE/EIS–0283–SA–2), the potential environmental impacts of constructing and operating a standalone WSB are not significantly different from the impacts of treating and solidifying these wastes in MFFF and PDCF as analyzed in the SPD EIS. Issued in Washington, DC this 26th day of November, 2008. Thomas P. D’Agostino, Administrator, National Nuclear Security Administration. [FR Doc. E8–29240 Filed 12–9–08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450–01–P VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:49 Dec 09, 2008 Jkt 217001 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA–HQ–OECA–2008–0365; FRL–8749–6] Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to OMB for Review and Approval; Comment Request; NESHAP for Primary Lead Smelters, EPA ICR Number 1856.06, OMB Control Number 2060–0414 AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), this document announces that an Information Collection Request (ICR) has been forwarded to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval. This is a request to renew an existing approved collection. The ICR which is abstracted below describes the nature of the collection and the estimated burden and cost. DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before January 9, 2009. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing docket ID number EPA– OECA–2008–0365, to (1) EPA online using https://www.regulations.gov (our preferred method), or by e-mail to docket.oeca@epa.gov, or by mail to: EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), Environmental Protection Agency, Enforcement and Compliance Docket and Information Center, mail code 2201T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460, and (2) OMB at: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Attention: Desk Officer for EPA, 725 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20503. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sounjay Gairola, Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: (202) 564–4003; e-mail address: gairola.sounjay@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA has submitted the following ICR to OMB for review and approval according to the procedures prescribed in 5 CFR 1320.12. On May 30, 2008 (73 FR 31088), EPA sought comments on this ICR pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.8(d). EPA received no comments. Any additional comments on this ICR should be submitted to EPA and OMB within 30 days of this notice. EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under docket ID number EPA–HQ–OECA–2008–0365, which is available for public viewing online at PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 https://www.regulations.gov, in person viewing at the Enforcement and Compliance Docket in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Reading Room is (202) 566–1744, and the telephone number for the Enforcement and Compliance Docket is (202) 566–1927. Use EPA’s electronic docket and comment system at https:// www.regulations.gov, to submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the docket, and to access those documents in the docket that are available electronically. Once in the system, select ‘‘docket search,’’ then key in the docket ID number identified above. Please note that EPA’s policy is that public comments, whether submitted electronically or in paper, will be made available for public viewing at https://www.regulations.gov, as EPA receives them and without change, unless the comment contains copyrighted material, Confidential Business Information (CBI), or other information whose public disclosure is restricted by statute. For further information about the electronic docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov. Title: NESHAP for Primary Lead Smelters (Renewal). ICR Numbers: EPA ICR Number 1856.06, OMB Control Number 2060– 0414. ICR Status: This ICR is scheduled to expire on February 28, 2009. Under OMB regulations, the Agency may continue to conduct or sponsor the collection of information while this submission is pending at OMB. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA’s regulations in title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in the Federal Register when approved, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, and displayed either by publication in the Federal Register or by other appropriate means, such as on the related collection instrument or form, if applicable. The display of OMB control numbers in certain EPA regulations is consolidated in 40 CFR part 9. Abstract: The National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for Primary Lead Smelters were proposed on April 17, 1998 (63 FR 19200) and promulgated on June 4, 1999 (64 FR 30204). On February 12, 1999, E:\FR\FM\10DEN1.SGM 10DEN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 238 (Wednesday, December 10, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 75088-75090]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-29240]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

National Nuclear Security Administration


Amended Record of Decision: Surplus Plutonium Disposition; Waste 
Solidification Building

AGENCY: National Nuclear Security Administration, U.S. Department of 
Energy.

ACTION: Amended Record of Decision.

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

SUMMARY: The National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), a 
separately organized agency within the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), 
is amending the Record of Decision (ROD) for the Surplus Plutonium 
Disposition Environmental Impact Statement (SPD EIS) (DOE/EIS-0283, 
November 1999). In the SPD EIS ROD (65 FR 1608; January 11, 2000), DOE 
announced decisions for implementing the U.S. Surplus Plutonium 
Disposition Program, including affirming its January 1997 decision (62 
FR 3014) to pursue a hybrid approach for the safe and secure 
disposition of up to 50 metric tons of surplus weapons-usable plutonium 
using both immobilization and mixed oxide (MOX) fuel technologies as 
evaluated in the Storage and Disposition of Weapons-Usable Fissile 
Materials Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (Storage and 
Disposition PEIS) (DOE/EIS-0229, November 1996). Decisions announced in 
the SPD EIS ROD included construction and operation of three new 
facilities at the Savannah River Site (SRS) near Aiken, South Carolina, 
to disposition approximately 17 tons of surplus plutonium using the 
immobilization approach and the use of up to 33 metric tons as MOX fuel 
that would be irradiated in commercial reactors. The three new 
facilities were identified as a pit disassembly and conversion facility 
(PDCF), an immobilization facility,\1\ and a MOX fuel fabrication 
facility (MFFF). These facilities as analyzed in the SPD EIS were to be 
constructed in F-Area at SRS and included capabilities for management 
of wastes generated as part of the processing activities in each of the 
facilities. DOE/NNSA is today announcing its decision to construct and 
operate a standalone building, the waste solidification building (WSB), 
for treating and solidifying liquid transuranic waste and certain 
liquid low-level radioactive wastes from MFFF and PDCF, specifically a 
high-activity (high-alpha) waste stream from MFFF, a low-activity 
stripped-uranium waste stream from MFFF, and a low-activity laboratory 
waste stream from PDCF.\2\ This decision is based on the Supplement 
Analysis for Construction and Operation of a Waste Solidification 
Building at the Savannah River Site (WSB SA) (DOE/EIS-0283-SA-2) 
prepared pursuant to DOE procedures implementing the National 
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) (10 CFR 1021.314). The WSB SA 
demonstrates that construction and operation of a standalone WSB 
represent neither substantial changes relevant to environmental 
concerns nor significant new circumstances or information relevant to 
environmental concerns from those evaluated in previous NEPA documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ In an April 19, 2002, amended ROD (67 FR 19432), DOE 
announced cancellation of the immobilization component of the U.S. 
Surplus Plutonium Disposition Program.
    \2\ The decision announced in this amended ROD is consistent 
with the approach discussed in the Construction Authorization 
Request and the License Application submitted to the Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission (NRC) by DOE/NNSA's contractor for the Mixed 
Oxide (MOX) Fuel Fabrication Facility. The decision also is 
consistent with the approach discussed in the NRC's Environmental 
Impact Statement on the Construction and Operation of a Proposed 
Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility at the Savannah River Site, 
South Carolina (NUREG-1767).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information concerning 
construction and operation of the waste solidification building, or to 
obtain copies of this amended ROD, contact: Ms. Sachiko W. McAlhany, 
Office of Site Engineering and Construction Management, U.S. Department 
of Energy/National Nuclear Security Administration, Savannah River 
Site, Aiken, South Carolina 29802, Telephone: (803) 952-6110, E-mail: 
sachiko-w.mcalhany@nnsa.srs.gov.
    For information on the DOE's NEPA process, contact: Ms. Carol M. 
Borgstrom, Director, Office of NEPA Policy and Compliance, GC-20, U.S. 
Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 
20585-0103, (202) 586-4600, or leave a message at (800) 472-2756.
    This Amended ROD, the WSB SA, and other DOE NEPA documents are 
available on the DOE NEPA Web site at https://www.gc.energy.gov/NEPA.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The U.S. Surplus Plutonium Disposition Program was first evaluated 
under NEPA in the Storage and Disposition PEIS. Among the alternatives 
evaluated, the Reactor Category and Common Activities Alternative 
included a MOX fuel fabrication facility conceptual design with a 
standalone building to manage wastes. The ROD for the Storage and 
Disposition PEIS (62 FR 3014) outlined DOE's decision to pursue a 
hybrid disposition strategy that allowed for both immobilization of 
surplus weapons-usable plutonium for disposal in a geologic repository 
and fabrication of MOX fuel for use in existing domestic, commercial 
nuclear power reactors followed by disposal of the spent MOX fuel in a 
geologic repository.
    Subsequent to the Storage and Disposition PEIS, DOE prepared the 
SPD EIS, which supported selection of specific technologies and sites 
for

[[Page 75089]]

surplus plutonium disposition. In the ROD for the SPD EIS (65 FR 1608; 
January 11, 2000), DOE announced its decision to fabricate 
approximately 33 metric tons (36 tons) of surplus weapons-usable 
plutonium in pits and clean metal into MOX fuel for use in existing 
domestic, commercial nuclear power reactors and to immobilize 
approximately 17 metric tons (19 tons) of surplus weapons-usable non-
pit plutonium in a ceramic matrix surrounded by Defense Waste 
Processing Facility \3\ high-level radioactive waste glass. In the 2000 
ROD, DOE also announced that the three facilities required to effect 
this disposition (MFFF, PDCF, and an Immobilization Facility) would be 
constructed and operated at SRS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Nuclear materials production operations at SRS resulted in 
generation of large quantities of high-level radioactive waste. The 
Defense Waste Processing Facility was constructed at SRS to convert 
this high-level radioactive waste to a stable glass form suitable 
for disposal in a geologic repository.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On April 19, 2002, DOE/NNSA announced in an Amended ROD for the 
Storage and Disposition PEIS and the SPD EIS (67 FR 19432) that it was 
cancelling the immobilization component of the U.S. Surplus Plutonium 
Disposition Program, thereby reducing the number of facilities to be 
constructed at SRS from three to two. In the amended ROD, DOE/NNSA 
explained that the revised disposition strategy involved a MOX-only 
approach, under which up to 34 metric tons (37 tons) of surplus 
plutonium would be dispositioned by converting it to MOX fuel and 
irradiating the fuel in existing domestic, commercial nuclear power 
reactors. The DOE/NNSA also indicated that no final decisions would be 
made with respect to the MOX portion of the revised disposition program 
until DOE/NNSA had completed additional analysis pursuant to NEPA. That 
additional NEPA analysis was completed upon issuance of the Supplement 
Analysis for Changes Needed to the Surplus Plutonium Disposition 
Program (MOX SA) (DOE/EIS-0283-SA1) in April 2003, and an Amended ROD 
was issued (68 FR 20134; April 24, 2003) announcing DOE/NNSA's decision 
to fabricate 34 metric tons (37 tons) of surplus plutonium into MOX 
fuel, including up to 6.5 metric tons (7.2 tons) originally intended 
for immobilization.
    In the MOX SA, DOE/NNSA evaluated proposed changes to the Surplus 
Plutonium Disposition Program to accommodate fabrication of this 
additional plutonium into MOX fuel at MFFF and also those refinements 
identified through the design process for MFFF. Consistent with the 
design at the time, a stand-alone WSB in which both liquid low-level 
radioactive waste and transuranic waste would be treated and solidified 
was evaluated in the MOX SA. This was a refinement from the facility 
designs assumed in the SPD EIS, in which MFFF and PDCF each included 
waste processing equipment to treat and solidify low-level radioactive 
waste and transuranic waste. A stand-alone WSB takes advantage of an 
economy of scale in that similar waste streams from both MFFF and PDCF 
can be treated together in the same location, rather than having 
duplicate equipment installed in both facilities. A stand-alone WSB was 
also evaluated by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in the 
2005 Environmental Impact Statement on the Construction and Operation 
of a Proposed Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility at the Savannah 
River Site, South Carolina (MFFF EIS).\4\ A standalone WSB is also 
discussed in the Construction Authorization Request and the License 
Application submitted to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission by DOE/
NNSA's contractor to design, construct and operate MFFF.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Pursuant to Section 202(5) of the Energy Reorganization Act 
as added by Section 3134 of the Strom Thurmond National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999, MFFF must be licensed by the 
NRC. NRC prepared the MFFF EIS in accordance with NEPA to support 
NRC licensing decisions concerning MFFF. Neither WSB nor PDCF will 
be licensed by NRC, but both were evaluated in the MFFF EIS as 
connected actions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Waste Solidification Building

    During the detailed design process for the MFFF, and after DOE/NNSA 
considered using existing SRS facilities for processing all or some of 
the MFFF and PDCF waste streams, the MFFF design was changed from the 
conceptual design evaluated in the SPD EIS to include the standalone 
WSB, because, among other reasons, closure schedules for these SRS 
facilities were not at that time compatible with the Surplus Plutonium 
Disposition schedule.
    In 2004, planning for WSB was suspended because of uncertainties 
with the Surplus Plutonium Disposition Program. Specifically, delays in 
negotiations with the Russian Federation (for Russian disposition of 
excess Russian weapons-grade plutonium) coupled with significant 
funding constraints for the domestic program had caused the project 
schedules for MFFF and PDCF to be extended. At that time, detailed 
design for WSB was about to begin, with the assumption that treatment 
for five liquid waste streams from MFFF and PDCF would occur in WSB. 
Because of the programmatic uncertainties, DOE/NNSA determined instead 
to suspend WSB Project activities.
    Design activities for WSB resumed in 2006. During the project 
suspension, changes in closure schedules for certain SRS waste 
management facilities allowed DOE/NNSA to reconsider the use of 
existing SRS site treatment capabilities that were originally scheduled 
to be shut down before completion of the plutonium disposition mission. 
As a result, DOE/NNSA requested the SRS management and operating 
contractor to undertake an analysis to identify potential reasonable 
alternatives that would lead to the optimum WSB configuration. The goal 
of this study was to identify which waste processing and management 
operations could be conducted in existing SRS facilities and which, if 
any, would need to be provided independently.
    The study comparing a range of potential alternatives comprising 
combinations of new and existing facilities was submitted in June 2005. 
The DOE/NNSA evaluation of these alternatives showed that the most 
reasonable alternative with the least project risk would be to (1) use 
existing SRS facilities (the Effluent Treatment Project) for waste 
treatment for two waste streams projected to have minimal (or no) 
radioactive contamination; (2) use existing SRS facilities for 
certification, packaging and shipping wastes solidified in WSB or 
generated during WSB operations; and (3) provide independent treatment 
and management capabilities (i.e., construct and operate a WSB) for 
three waste streams that are not compatible with existing SRS 
operations without major, costly modifications to SRS facilities and 
planned closure schedules.
    The WSB will be constructed near MFFF and PDCF in F-Area and will 
process liquid waste streams from both MFFF and PDCF. The WSB will 
receive three waste streams transferred from MFFF and PDCF through 
underground, double-walled stainless steel lines: A high-activity 
(high-alpha) waste stream from MFFF, a low-activity stripped-uranium 
waste stream from MFFF, and a low-activity waste stream from the PDCF 
laboratory. Waste streams will be stored at WSB in tanks pending 
subsequent treatment by neutralization, volume reduction by 
evaporation, and cementation. Condensed overheads from the evaporators 
will be either transferred through a lift station and piping to the 
existing SRS Effluent Treatment Project if the overheads meet

[[Page 75090]]

the acceptance criteria for that facility or routed back through WSB 
processes for further treatment.
    The WSB SA discusses existing NEPA evaluations for surplus 
plutonium disposition activities relative to WSB, and provides a 
comparison of the potential environmental impacts of constructing and 
operating the WSB in F-Area at SRS to impacts identified in the SPD EIS 
for constructing and operating MFFF and PDCF. The WSB SA also 
qualitatively compares the impacts of a stand-alone WSB to the impacts 
of the relevant waste processing, treatment and solidification 
operations discussed as part of both the MFFF and the PDCF in the SPD 
EIS. Construction and operation of the stand-alone WSB to treat and 
solidify transuranic and low-level radioactive wastes from MFFF and 
PDCF does not involve environmental impacts that are significantly 
different from those identified in previous NEPA analyses, in 
particular, the SPD EIS. Activities proposed for this stand-alone 
building, the WSB, would be similar to those identified in the SPD EIS 
to occur separately in both MFFF and PDCF.
    The WSB SA demonstrates that construction and operation of a stand-
alone WSB represent neither substantial changes relevant to 
environmental concerns nor significant new circumstances or information 
relevant to environmental concerns. Therefore, pursuant to 10 CFR 
1021.314(c), no additional NEPA analyses are required to construct and 
operate a stand-alone WSB.

Decision

    DOE/NNSA has decided to construct and operate a stand-alone waste 
solidification building for treating and solidifying liquid transuranic 
waste and certain liquid low-level radioactive wastes generated by MFFF 
and PDCF, specifically a high-activity (high-alpha) waste stream from 
MFFF, a low-activity stripped-uranium waste stream from MFFF, and a 
low-activity laboratory waste stream from PDCF. As described in the WSB 
SA (DOE/EIS-0283-SA-2), the potential environmental impacts of 
constructing and operating a stand-alone WSB are not significantly 
different from the impacts of treating and solidifying these wastes in 
MFFF and PDCF as analyzed in the SPD EIS.

    Issued in Washington, DC this 26th day of November, 2008.
Thomas P. D'Agostino,
Administrator, National Nuclear Security Administration.
[FR Doc. E8-29240 Filed 12-9-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.