Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for a Versatile Test Reactor, 38021-38026 [2019-16578]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 150 (Monday, August 5, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38021-38026]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-16578]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY


Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for 
a Versatile Test Reactor

AGENCY: Office of Nuclear Energy, Department of Energy.

ACTION: Notice of intent.

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

SUMMARY: As required by the ``Nuclear Energy Innovation Capabilities 
Act of 2017'' the Department of Energy (DOE) assessed the mission need 
for a versatile reactor-based fast-neutron source. Having identified 
the need for such a fast-neutron source, the Act directs DOE to 
complete construction and approve the start of facility operations, to 
the maximum extent practicable, by December 31, 2025. To this end, the 
Department intends to prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) 
in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and its 
implementing regulations. This EIS will evaluate alternatives for a 
versatile reactor-based fast-neutron source facility and associated 
facilities for the

[[Page 38022]]

preparation, irradiation and post-irradiation examination of test/
experimental fuels and materials.

DATES: DOE invites public comment on the scope of this EIS during a 30-
day public scoping period commencing August 5, 2019, and ending on 
September 4, 2019. DOE will hold webcast scoping meetings on August 27, 
2019 at 6:00 p.m. ET/4:00 p.m. MT and on August 28, 2019 at 8:00 p.m. 
ET/6:00 p.m. MT.
    In defining the scope of the EIS, DOE will consider all comments 
received or postmarked by the end of the scoping period. Comments 
received or postmarked after the scoping period end date will be 
considered to the extent practicable.

ADDRESSES: Written comments regarding the scope of this EIS should be 
sent to Mr. Gordon McClellan, Document Manager, by mail at: U.S. 
Department of Energy, Idaho Operations Office, 1955 Fremont Avenue, MS 
1235, Idaho Falls, Idaho 83415; or by email to 
[email protected]. To request further information about the 
EIS or to be placed on the EIS distribution list, you may use any of 
the methods listed in this section. In requesting to be added to the 
distribution list, please specify whether you would like to receive a 
copy of the Summary and Draft EIS on a compact disk (CD); a printed 
copy of the Summary and a CD with the Draft EIS; a full printed copy of 
the Summary and Draft EIS; or if you prefer to access the document via 
the internet. The Draft EIS and Summary will be available at: https://www.energy.gov/nepa.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information regarding the 
Versatile Test Reactor (VTR) Project or the EIS, contact Mr. Gordon 
McClellan at the address given above; or email 
[email protected]; or call (208) 526-6805. For general 
information on DOE's NEPA process, contact Mr. Jason Sturm at the 
address given above; or email [email protected]; or call (208) 
526-6805.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Part of the mission of DOE is to advance the energy, environmental, 
and nuclear security of the United States and promote scientific and 
technological innovation in support of that mission. DOE's 2014-2018 
Strategic Plan states that DOE will ``support a more economically 
competitive, environmentally responsible, secure and resilient U.S. 
energy infrastructure.'' Specifically, ``DOE will continue to explore 
advanced concepts in nuclear energy that may lead to new types of 
reactors with further safety improvements and reduced environmental and 
nonproliferation concerns.''
    Many commercial organizations and universities are pursuing 
advanced nuclear energy fuels, materials, and reactor designs that 
complement the efforts of DOE and its laboratories in achieving DOE's 
goal of advancing nuclear energy. These designs include thermal and 
fast-spectrum \1\ reactors targeting improved fuel resource utilization 
and waste management and utilizing materials other than water for 
cooling. Their development requires an adequate infrastructure for 
experimentation, testing, design evolution, and component 
qualification. Existing irradiation test capabilities are aging, and 
some are over 50 years old. The existing capabilities are focused on 
testing of materials, fuels, and components in the thermal neutron 
spectrum and do not have the ability to support the needs for fast 
reactors. Only limited fast-neutron-spectrum-testing capabilities, with 
restricted availability, exist outside the United States.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Fast neutrons are highly energetic neutrons (ranging from 
0.1 to 5 million electron volts [MeV] and travelling at speeds of 
thousands to tens of thousands kilometers per second) emitted during 
fission. The fast-neutron spectrum refers to the range of energies 
associated with fast neutrons. Thermal neutrons are neutrons that 
are less energetic than fast neutrons (more than a million times 
less energetic [about 0.025eV] and travelling at speeds of less than 
5 kilometers per second), having been slowed by collisions with 
other materials such as water. The thermal neutron spectrum refers 
to the range of energies associated with thermal neutrons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Recognizing that the United States does not have a dedicated fast-
neutron-spectrum testing capability, DOE performed a mission needs 
assessment to assess current testing capabilities (domestic and 
foreign) against the required testing capabilities to support the 
development of advanced nuclear technologies. This needs assessment was 
consistent with the Nuclear Energy Innovation Capabilities Act of 2017, 
or NEICA, (Pub. L. 115-248) to assess the mission need for, and cost 
of, a versatile reactor-based fast-neutron source with a high neutron 
flux, irradiation flexibility, multiple experimental environment (e.g., 
coolant) capabilities, and volume for many concurrent users. This 
assessment identified a gap between required testing needs and existing 
capabilities. That is, there currently is an inability to effectively 
test advanced nuclear fuels and materials in a fast-neutron spectrum 
irradiation environment at high neutron fluxes. Specifically, the DOE 
Office of Nuclear Energy (NE), Nuclear Energy Advisory Committee (NEAC) 
report, Assessment of Missions and Requirements for a New U.S. Test 
Reactor, confirmed that there was a need in the U.S. for fast-neutron 
testing capabilities, but that there is no facility that is readily 
available domestically or internationally. The NEAC study confirmed the 
conclusions of an earlier study, Advanced Demonstration and Test 
Reactor Options Study. That study established the strategic objective 
that DOE ``provide an irradiation test reactor to support development 
and qualification of fuels, materials, and other important components/
items (e.g., control rods, instrumentation) of both thermal and fast 
neutron-based advanced reactor systems.'' To meet its obligation to 
support advanced reactor technology development, DOE needs to develop 
the capability for large-scale testing, accelerated testing, and 
qualification of advanced nuclear fuels, materials, instrumentation, 
and sensors. This testing capability is essential for the United States 
to modernize its nuclear energy infrastructure and for developing 
transformational nuclear energy technologies that re-establish the U.S. 
as a world leader in nuclear technology commercialization.
    The key recommendation of the NEAC report was that ``DOE-NE proceed 
immediately with pre-conceptual design planning activities to support a 
new test reactor'' to fill the domestic need for a fast-neutron test 
capability. The considerations for such a capability include:
     An intense, neutron-irradiation environment with 
prototypic spectrum to determine irradiation tolerance and chemical 
compatibility with other reactor materials, particularly the coolant.
     Testing that provides a fundamental understanding of 
materials performance, validation of models for more rapid future 
development, and engineering-scale validation of materials performance 
in support of licensing efforts.
     A versatile testing capability to address diverse 
technology options and, sustained and adaptable testing environments.
     Focused irradiations, either long- or short-term, with 
heavily instrumented experimental devices, and the possibility to do 
in-situ measurements and quick extraction of samples.
     An accelerated schedule to regain and sustain U.S. 
technology leadership and to enable the competiveness of U.S-based 
industry entities in the advanced reactor markets. This can be achieved 
through use of mature technologies for the reactor design (e.g., sodium 
coolant

[[Page 38023]]

in a pool-type, metallic-alloy-fueled fast reactor) while enabling 
innovative experimentation.
    A summary of preliminary requirements that meet these 
considerations include:
     Provide a high peak neutron flux (neutron energy greater 
than 0.1 MeV) with a prototypic fast-reactor-neutron-energy spectrum; 
the target flux is 4 x 10\15\ neutrons per square centimeter per second 
(neutrons/cm\2\-sec) or greater.
     Provide high neutron dose rate for materials testing 
[quantified as displacements per atom]; the target is 30 displacements 
per atom per year or greater.
     Provide an irradiation length that is appropriate for fast 
reactor fuel testing; the target is 0.6 to 1 meter.
     Provide a large irradiation volume within the core region; 
the target is 7 liters.
     Provide innovative testing capabilities through 
flexibility in testing configuration and testing environment (coolants) 
in closed loops.
     Provide the ability to test advanced sensors and 
instrumentation for the core and test positions.
     Expedite experiment life cycle by enabling easy access to 
support facilities for experiments fabrication and post-irradiation 
examination.
     Provide life-cycle management (spent nuclear fuel storage 
pending ultimate disposal) for the reactor driver fuel (fuel needed to 
run the reactor) while minimizing cost and schedule impacts.
     Make the facility available for testing as soon as 
possible by using proven technologies with a high technology readiness 
level.
    Having identified the need for the VTR, NEICA directs DOE ``to the 
maximum extent practicable, complete construction of, and approve the 
start of operations for, the user facility by not later than December 
31, 2025.''
    Secretary of Energy Rick Perry announced the launch of the 
Versatile Test Reactor Project on February 28, 2019 as a part of 
modernizing the nuclear research and development (R&D) user facility 
infrastructure in the United States.
    An initial evaluation of alternatives during the pre-conceptual 
design planning activity recommends the development of a well-
instrumented sodium-cooled, fast-neutron-spectrum test reactor in the 
300 megawatt-thermal power level range. This design would provide a 
flexible, reconfigurable testing environment for known and anticipated 
testing. It is the most practical and cost-effective strategy to meet 
the mission need and address constraints and considerations identified 
above. The evaluation of alternatives is consistent with the 
conclusions of the test reactor options study and the NEAC 
recommendation.
    DOE expects that the VTR, coupled with the existing supporting R&D 
infrastructure, would provide the basic and applied physics, materials 
science, nuclear fuels, and advanced sensor communities with a unique 
research capability. This capability would enable a comprehensive 
understanding of the multi-scale and multi-physics performance of 
nuclear fuels and structural materials to support the development and 
deployment of advanced nuclear energy systems. To this end, DOE is 
collaborating with universities, commercial industry, and national 
laboratories to identify needed experimental capabilities.

Purpose and Need for Agency Action

    The purpose of this DOE action is to provide a domestic versatile 
reactor-based fast-neutron source and associated facilities that meet 
identified user needs (e.g., providing a high neutron flux of at least 
4 x 10\15\ neutrons/cm\2\-sec and related testing capabilities). 
Associated facilities include those for the preparation of driver fuel 
and test/experimental fuels and materials and those for the ensuing 
examination of the test/experimental fuels and materials; existing 
facilities would be used to the extent possible. The United States has 
not had a viable domestic fast-neutron-spectrum testing capability for 
over two decades. DOE needs to develop this capability to establish the 
United States' testing capability for next-generation nuclear 
reactors--many of which require a fast-neutron spectrum for operation--
thus enabling the United States to regain technology leadership for the 
next generation nuclear fuels, material, and reactors. The lack of a 
versatile fast-neutron-spectrum testing capability is a significant 
national strategic risk affecting the ability of DOE to fulfill its 
mission to advance the energy, environmental, and nuclear security of 
the United States and promote scientific and technological innovation. 
This testing capability is essential for the United States to modernize 
its nuclear energy industry. Further, DOE needs to develop this 
capability on an accelerated schedule to avoid further delay in the 
United States' ability to develop and deploy advanced nuclear energy 
technologies. If this capability is not available to U.S. innovators as 
soon as possible, the ongoing shift of nuclear technology dominance to 
other international states (e.g., China, the Russian Federation) will 
accelerate, to the detriment of the U.S. nuclear industrial sector.

Proposed Action

    The Proposed Action is for DOE to construct and operate the VTR at 
a suitable DOE site. DOE would utilize existing or expanded, 
collocated, post-irradiation examination capabilities as necessary to 
accomplish the mission. DOE would use or expand existing facility 
capabilities to fabricate VTR driver fuel and test items and to manage 
radioactive wastes and spent nuclear fuel.

Versatile Test Reactor

    The Nuclear Energy Innovation Capabilities Act of 2017 (Pub. L. 
115-248) directed DOE, to the maximum extent practicable, to approve 
the start of operations for the user facility by not later than 
December 31, 2025. DOE recognized that a near-term deadline would 
require the technology selected for the user facility to be a mature 
technology, one not requiring significant testing or experimental 
efforts to qualify the technology needed to provide the capability.
    The generation of a high flux of high-energy or fast neutrons 
requires a departure from the light-water-moderated technology of 
current U.S. power reactors and use of other reactor moderating and 
cooling technologies. The most mature technology that could provide the 
high-energy neutron flux is a sodium-cooled reactor, for which 
experience with a pool-type configuration and qualification of metallic 
alloy fuels affords the desired level of technology maturity and safety 
approach. Sodium-cooled reactor technology has been successfully used 
in Idaho at the Experimental Breeder Reactor (EBR)-II, in Washington at 
the Fast Flux Test Facility, and in Michigan at the Fermi 1 Nuclear 
Generating Station.
    The current VTR concept would make use of the proven, existing 
technologies incorporated in the small, modular GE Hitachi Power 
Reactor Innovative Small Module (PRISM) design. The PRISM design \2\ 
meets the need to use a sodium-cooled, pool-type reactor of proven 
(mature) technology. The VTR would be a smaller (approximately 300 
megawatt thermal) version of the GE Hitachi

[[Page 38024]]

PRISM power reactor. The reactor, primary heat removal system, and 
safety systems would be similar to those of the PRISM design. VTR, like 
PRISM, would use metallic alloy fuels. The conceptual design for the 
first fuel core of the VTR proposes to utilize a uranium-plutonium-
zirconium alloy fuel. Such an alloy fuel was tested previously in the 
EBR-II reactor. Later reactor fuel could consist of other mixtures and 
varying enrichments of uranium and plutonium and could use other 
alloying metals in place of zirconium.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The PRISM design is based on the EBR-II reactor, which 
operated for over 30 years. PRISM received a review by the Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission as contained in NUREG-1368, Preapplication 
Safety Evaluation Report for the Power Reactor Innovative Small 
Module (PRISM) Liquid-Metal Reactor, which concluded that ``no 
obvious impediments to licensing the PRISM design had been 
identified.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The VTR core design, however, would differ from the PRISM core in 
order to accommodate several positions for test and experimental 
assemblies. Additional experiments could be placed in locations 
normally occupied by driver fuel in the PRISM reactor. The VTR is not a 
power reactor; there would be no PRISM power block for the generation 
of electricity. Heat generated by the VTR would be dissipated through 
air-cooled heat exchangers; no water would be used in reactor cooling 
systems.
    The VTR would provide the capability to test fuels, materials, 
instrumentation, and sensors for a variety of existing and advanced 
reactor designs, including sodium-cooled reactors, lead/lead-bismuth 
eutectic-cooled reactors, gas-cooled reactors, and molten salt 
reactors. Test vehicles for coolants other than sodium would consist of 
closed loops containing the test material enclosed in cartridges that 
isolate the experiments from the primary coolant, allowing performance 
of tests on different coolant types. Due to the high flux possible in 
the VTR, accelerated testing for reactor materials would be possible. 
These experiments would extend the state-of-the art knowledge of 
reactor technology. Tests and experiments could also be developed that 
would improve safeguards technologies. In addition to fast reactor test 
and experimentation, the VTR could be used for research on long-term 
fuel cycles, fusion reactor materials, and neutrino science/detector 
development.
    The VTR would not be used as a breeder reactor. All of the driver 
fuel removed from the reactor core would be stored to allow radioactive 
decay to reduce dose rates, and then conditioned for disposal; no 
nuclear materials would be removed from the fuel for the purpose of 
reuse.

Post-Irradiation Examination Facilities

    Concurrent with the irradiation capabilities provided by the VTR, 
the mission need requires the capabilities to examine the test samples 
irradiated in the reactor to determine the effects of a high flux of 
high-energy or fast neutrons. Typically, the test samples would be 
encapsulated in cartridges such that the material being tested is fully 
contained. The highly radioactive test sample capsule would be removed 
from the reactor after a period of irradiation, ranging from days to 
years, depending on the nature of the test requirements, and 
transferred to a fully shielded facility where the test item could be 
analyzed and evaluated remotely. The examination facilities are ``hot-
cell'' facilities, which include concrete walls several feet thick, 
multi-layered, leaded-glass windows several feet thick, and remote 
manipulators that allow operators to perform a range of tasks remotely 
without incurring substantial radiation dose from the test samples 
within the hot cell; in some cases, an inert atmosphere is required to 
prevent test sample degradation. DOE intends that the hot-cell 
facilities where the test items are examined and analyzed after removal 
from the reactor would be in close proximity to the VTR to minimize on- 
or offsite transportation of the highly radioactive samples.

Other Support Facilities

    Key nuclear infrastructure components required to support the VTR 
and post-irradiation examination include:

 Facilities for VTR driver fuel and test item fabrication
 Facilities for managing radioactive wastes
 Facilities for management of irradiated VTR driver fuel

    Nuclear materials for the VTR driver fuel could come from several 
locations including from within the DOE complex, commercial facilities, 
or possibly foreign sources. The nuclear materials and zirconium would 
be alloyed and formed into ingots from which the fuel would be 
fabricated. The alloy ingots could be produced at one of the locations 
providing the nuclear materials or the materials could be shipped to a 
location within the DOE complex for creating the alloy. DOE anticipates 
fabricating driver fuel from the ingots at the Savanah River site or 
the Idaho National Laboratory.
    DOE would collaborate with a range of university, commercial 
industry, and national laboratory partners for experiment development. 
Fabrication of the test and experimental modules could occur at DOE 
facilities or at the university or commercial industry partners' 
facilities.

Preliminary Description of Alternatives

    As required by the Council on Environmental Quality and DOE NEPA 
implementing regulations at 40 CFR parts 1500-1508 and 10 CFR part 
1021, respectively, DOE will evaluate a range of reasonable 
alternatives for the construction and operation of a VTR and its 
associated facilities. As required by NEPA, the alternatives will 
include a No Action Alternative to serve as a basis for comparison with 
the action alternatives.
    Specific action alternatives proposed for analysis in the EIS 
include alternative DOE national laboratory sites for the construction 
and operation of the VTR and the provision of post-irradiation 
examination. Under all action alternatives and as described previously, 
the VTR would be a small (approximately 300 megawatt thermal), sodium-
cooled, pool-type, metal-fueled reactor based on the GE Hitachi PRISM 
power reactor. DOE projects approval for the start of operations to 
occur as early as the end of 2026.
    There are ancillary activities necessary to support any of the 
action alternatives. These include the fabrication of driver fuel, the 
assembly of test/experimental modules at existing, modified or newly 
constructed test/experiment assembly facilities, and the management of 
waste and spent nuclear fuel. After irradiation in the VTR, test/
experimental cartridges would be transferred to post irradiation 
examination facilities. DOE would make use of existing facilities to 
the extent possible, but these post-irradiation examination facilities 
may require modification or expansion. These activities would be part 
of each action alternative.

1. Idaho National Laboratory (INL) VTR Alternative

    Under the INL VTR Alternative, DOE would site the VTR at the 
Materials and Fuels Complex (MFC) at INL and use existing hot-cell and 
other facilities at the MFC for post-irradiation examination. This area 
of INL is the location of the Hot Fuel Examination Facility (HFEF), the 
Irradiated Materials Characterization Laboratory (IMCL), the 
Experimental Fuels Facility (EFF), the Fuel Conditioning Facility 
(FCF), and the decommissioned Zero Power Physics Reactor (ZPPR). The 
existing security fence would be expanded to include VTR.
    The existing facilities within the MFC would be modified as 
necessary to support fabrication of VTR driver fuel or test items and 
to support post-irradiation examination of irradiated

[[Page 38025]]

targets withdrawn from the VTR. These types of activities are ongoing 
within the MFC. Under the conceptual design, the existing 
infrastructure including utilities and waste management facilities 
would be utilized to support construction and operation of the VTR. 
While some modifications and upgrades to the infrastructure might be 
necessary, the current infrastructure should be largely adequate to 
support the VTR.
    The post-irradiation examination capabilities at MFC, including 
existing facilities, equipment, technical, engineering and support 
staff, would be capable of supporting the anticipated post-irradiation 
examination activities that the VTR would create. The potential 
increase in workload among the MFC facilities in the post-startup 
timeframe might require increased technical and operating staff.
    Driver fuel for the VTR would likely be manufactured at the MFC or 
the Savanah River site, depending on multiple factors including the 
source of the nuclear material and the availability and capabilities of 
DOE, commercial, or foreign suppliers.

2. Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) VTR Alternative

    Under the ORNL VTR Alternative, the VTR would be sited at ORNL at a 
location to be identified.
    Several existing facilities would be used and/or modified to 
provide operational support and needed post irradiation examination 
capabilities. The existing Irradiated Fuels Examination Laboratory 
(IFEL) Building 3525 and the Irradiated Materials Examination and 
Testing (IMET) Building 3025E hot cell facility would be used to 
support post irradiation examination and material testing. The IFEL is 
a Category 2 nuclear facility and contains hot cells that are currently 
used for examination of a wide variety of fuels. The IMET is a Category 
3 nuclear facility and contains hot cells that are used for mechanical 
testing and examination of highly irradiated structural alloys and 
ceramics. Both facilities would need modifications to accommodate VTR 
work activities.
    The existing Radiochemical Engineering Development Center (REDC) 
also would be used to support VTR operations. REDC consists of two hot-
cell facilities, both constructed during the mid-1960s. REDC operates 
in conjunction with ORNL's High Flux Isotope Reactor (HFIR) in remote 
and hands-on fabrication of targets for irradiation and subsequent 
processing and recovery of valuable radioisotopes. The existing 
capabilities of the REDC may not be adequate to support the anticipated 
workload from the VTR and would need to be modified or expanded. 
Existing glovebox laboratories in Building 7920, currently used for 
chemical extraction and processing, could be used for fuel and/or test 
item fabrication. Building 7930 houses heavily shielded hot cells and 
analytical laboratories that could be used for remote examination of 
irradiated fuels and test items.
    Driver fuel for the VTR would likely be manufactured elsewhere, 
depending on a number of factors including the source of the nuclear 
material and the availability and capabilities of DOE, commercial, or 
foreign suppliers.

3. No Action Alternative--Do Not Construct a VTR

    As required by NEPA, DOE will include a No Action Alternative to 
serve as a basis for comparison with the action alternatives. Under the 
No Action alternative, DOE would not pursue the construction and 
operation of a VTR and would make use of the limited capabilities of 
existing facilities to the extent they are capable and available for 
testing in the fast-neutron-flux spectrum.

Potential Environmental Issues for Analysis

    DOE proposes to address the issues listed in this section when 
considering the potential impacts of the construction and operations of 
the proposed facilities (the VTR and associated pre- and post-
irradiation facilities) and the transportation of materials (non-
irradiated fuel, irradiated [spent] fuel and test materials, and 
waste):
     Potential effects on public health from exposure to 
radionuclides under routine and credible accident scenarios including 
natural disasters: Floods, hurricanes, tornadoes, and seismic events.
     Potential impacts on surface and groundwater, floodplains 
and wetlands, and on water use and quality.
     Potential impacts on air quality (including global climate 
change) and noise.
     Potential impacts on plants, animals, and their habitats, 
including species that are Federal- or state-listed as threatened or 
endangered, or of special concern.
     Potential impacts on geology and soils.
     Potential impacts on cultural resources such as historic, 
archeologic, and Native American culturally important sites.
     Socioeconomic impacts on potentially affected communities.
     Potential disproportionately high and adverse effects on 
minority and low-income populations.
     Potential impacts on land-use plans, policies and 
controls, and visual resources.
     Potential impacts on waste management practices and 
activities.
     Potential impacts of intentional destructive acts, 
including sabotage and terrorism.
     Unavoidable adverse impacts and irreversible and 
irretrievable commitments of resources.
     Potential cumulative environmental effects of past, 
present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions.
     Compliance with all applicable Federal, state, and local 
statutes and regulations, and with international agreements, and 
required Federal and state environmental permits, consultations and 
notifications.

Public Scoping Process

    NEPA implementing regulations require an early and open process for 
determining the scope of an EIS and for identifying the significant 
issues related to the proposed action. To ensure that a full range of 
issues related to the proposed action are addressed, DOE invites 
Federal agencies, state, local, and tribal governments, the general 
public and the international community to comment on the scope of the 
EIS. Specifically, DOE invites comment on the identification of 
reasonable alternatives and specific environmental issues to be 
addressed. Analysis of written and oral public comments provided during 
the scoping period will help DOE further identify concerns and 
potential issues to be considered in the Draft EIS.

Webcast Scoping Meeting Information

    DOE will host two interactive webcasts during the scoping period as 
listed under DATES. The purpose of the webcasts is two-fold--the first 
is to provide the public with information about the NEPA process and 
the VTR Project. The second purpose is to invite public comments on the 
scope of the EIS.
    The webcasts will begin with presentations on the NEPA process and 
the VTR Project. Following the presentations, there will be a moderated 
session during which members of the public can provide oral comments on 
the scope of the EIS analysis. Commenters will be allowed 3 minutes to 
provide comments. Comments will be recorded. Note that providing oral 
comments will require joining the meeting by phone.

[[Page 38026]]

    Members of the public who would like to provide oral comments can 
pre-register by sending an email to [email protected]. 
Alternatively, participants will be able to request to speak during the 
webcast. Those who pre-register should indicate at which session they 
want to speak and their name.
    If you are joining the webcast scoping meeting via internet, copy 
and paste the link below to login to the meeting site, then follow the 
prompts. If you are joining the webcast meeting via phone, dial the 
U.S. toll-free number below and follow the prompts. Comments will be 
accepted during the webcast meeting, by mail, and by email.
     Join webcast scoping meeting via the internet:
    August 27: https://78449.themediaframe.com/dataconf/productusers/ldos/mediaframe/31759/indexl.html.
    August 28: https://78449.themediaframe.com/dataconf/productusers/ldos/mediaframe/31762/indexl.html.
    (Copy and Paste into web browser).
     Join webcast public meeting by phone: U.S. toll-free: 877-
869-3847.

    Signed in Washington, DC on July 29, 2019.
Dennis Miotla,
Chief Operating Officer for Nuclear Energy.
[FR Doc. 2019-16578 Filed 8-2-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6450-01-P