[Federal Register: August 13, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 156)]
[Notices]
[Page 50176-50180]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr13au04-59]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for
the Decommissioning of the Fast Flux Test Facility at the Hanford Site,
Richland, WA
AGENCY: Department of Energy.
ACTION: Notice of intent.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 50177]]
SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) announces its intent to
prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), pursuant to the
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), on proposed
decommissioning of the Fast Flux Test Facility (FFTF) at the Hanford
Site, Richland, Washington. DOE proposes to decommission the FFTF and
its support buildings on the Hanford Site. Alternatives to be analyzed
will include no action, entombment, and removal.
DATES: DOE invites public comments on the proposed scope of this EIS.
The public scoping period begins with the publication of this notice
and concludes October 8, 2004. DOE invites Federal agencies, Native
American Tribal Nations, State and local governments, and the public to
comment on the scope of this EIS. To ensure consideration, comments
must be postmarked by Friday, October 8, 2004. Late comments will be
considered to the extent practicable. Two public scoping meetings will
be held to provide the public with an opportunity to ask questions on
the scope of the EIS, discuss concerns with DOE officials, and present
comments. The locations, dates, and times for the meetings are as
follows: Wednesday, September 22, 2004, from 7 p.m.-10 p.m., at the Red
Lion Inn--Hanford House, 802 George Washington Way, Richland,
Washington 99352; and on Thursday, September 30, 2004, from 7 p.m.-10
p.m., at the Shilo Inn, 780 Lindsay Boulevard, Idaho Falls, Idaho
83402.
ADDRESSES: Comments or suggestions on the scope for the EIS and
questions concerning the proposed action may be submitted to: Mr.
Douglas H. Chapin, NEPA Document Manager, FFTF Decommissioning EIS,
U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office, Post Office Box
550, Mail Stop A3-04, Richland, Washington, 99352. You may also leave a
message at (888) 886-0821, send a fax to (509) 376-0177, or an e-mail
to: Douglas_H_Chapin@rl.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information about FFTF, to
request information about this EIS and the public scoping meetings, or
to be placed on the EIS distribution list, please contact Mr. Chapin
using any of the methods identified above. For general information
about the DOE NEPA process, please contact: Ms. Carol M. Borgstrom,
Director, Office of NEPA Policy and Compliance (EH-42), U.S. Department
of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585-0119,
telephone: (202) 586-4600, or leave a message at (800) 472-2756.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background: The FFTF is a DOE-owned, 400-megawatt (thermal) liquid-
metal (sodium) cooled nuclear test reactor located on the DOE Hanford
Site's 400 Area near Richland, Washington. FFTF full-scale operations
were conducted between 1982 and 1992. DOE operated FFTF as a non-
breeder test reactor for the U.S. liquid metal fast breeder reactor
program testing advanced nuclear fuels, materials, components, and
reactor safety designs. DOE also conducted ancillary experimental
activities including cooperative international research and irradiation
to produce a variety of medical and industrial isotopes.
In May 1995, DOE issued the Environmental Assessment: Shutdown of
the Fast Flux Test Facility, Hanford Site, Richland, Washington (DOE/
EA-0993, May 1995) and Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI, May
1995). This Environmental Assessment (EA) evaluated the potential
impacts associated with actions necessary to place the FFTF in a
radiologically-safe and industrially-safe permanent shutdown and
deactivation condition (Phase I), suitable for a long-term surveillance
and maintenance (Phase II) prior to decommissioning (Phase III). The EA
did not evaluate Phase III. DOE determined that an EIS was not required
for the permanent shutdown and deactivation of the FFTF, and issued a
Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI).
Based on the Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for
Accomplishing Expanded Civilian Nuclear Energy Research and Development
and Isotope Production Missions in the United States, Including the
Role of the Fast Flux Test Facility (NI-PEIS)( DOE/EIS-0310, December
2000), DOE decided in the Record of Decision (ROD) (66 FR 7877, January
26, 2001), that the permanent closure of FFTF was to be resumed, with
no new missions. The NI PEIS reviewed the environmental impacts
associated with enhancing the existing DOE nuclear facility
infrastructure to provide for the following missions: (1) Production of
isotopes for medical, research, and industrial uses; (2) production of
plutonium-238 for use in advanced radioactive isotope power systems for
future National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) space
exploration missions, and (3) to support the nation's civilian nuclear
energy research and development needs. In the NI PEIS, FFTF was
evaluated as an alternative irradiation services facility for the
aforementioned missions.
DOE is currently engaged in the permanent deactivation of the FFTF
consistent with the May 1995 FFTF Shutdown EA and FONSI and the January
26, 2001, ROD. Major deactivation activities underway at this time
include: washing the FFTF fuel to remove sodium, placing the fuel into
dry cask storage, draining sodium systems, and deactivating auxiliary
plant systems. The FFTF fuel, which includes sodium-bonded fuel, is
being managed and dispositioned consistent with previous applicable DOE
NEPA decisions (see ``Related NEPA Reviews'').
Proposed Action: NEPA requires the preparation of an EIS for major
federal actions that significantly affect the quality of the human
environment. DOE is preparing an EIS (DOE/EIS-0364) for proposed FFTF
decommissioning activities.
DOE's purpose and need is to reduce long-term risks associated with
the deactivated FFTF and its ancillary support facilities, and to
reduce surveillance and maintenance costs. In order to meet this
purpose and need, DOE proposes to decommission the deactivated FFTF and
its support facilities by September 2012, consistent with the ongoing
Request for Proposal No. DE-RP06-04RL14600 for the FFTF Closure
Project. Alternatives for accomplishing this proposed action described
below.
Preliminary Alternatives: Consistent with NEPA implementation
requirements, the EIS will assess the range of reasonable alternatives
regarding DOE's need for decommissioning the FFTF, and a No Action
alternative. The EIS will provide a means for soliciting public input
on the alternatives to be analyzed as part of DOE's decisionmaking
process. DOE's current proposed alternatives include entombment and
removal.
Other reasonable alternatives that may arise during public scoping
and preparation of the draft EIS would also be considered. Because DOE
has made a programmatic decision to permanently shutdown and deactivate
FFTF, and is currently performing deactivation activities consistent
with this decision, restart of the FFTF is not considered a reasonable
decommissioning alternative. The preferred alternative for
decommissioning would be identified in the EIS and DOE's decision would
be announced in a ROD. Consistent with this ROD, DOE would also prepare
any regulatory documents that might be required as a result of
permitting, closure, or documentation requirements under the Atomic
Energy Act; the Resource Conservation and Recovery
[[Page 50178]]
Act, and the Washington State Hazardous Waste Management Act of 1976;
or the Comprehensive Environmental, Response, Compensation and
Liability Act. In meeting any State (of Washington) Environmental
Policy Act (SEPA) requirements related to state permitting or other
regulatory actions, the State of Washington Department of Ecology
(Ecology) can adopt a NEPA document if it determines that it is
sufficient to meet SEPA requirements. DOE intends to coordinate with
Ecology to ensure these needs are addressed.
The EIS will analyze reasonable alternatives for the management and
disposition of FFTF waste, and reasonable onsite (Hanford Site) and
offsite (Idaho) alternatives for the management and disposition of the
Hanford Site radioactive sodium inventory.
The proposed alternatives to be considered in the EIS include:
No Action Alternative. The Council on Environmental
Quality NEPA Regulations (40 CFR parts 1500-1508), and the DOE NEPA
Regulations (10 CFR part 1021) require analysis of a No Action
alternative. Under this alternative, deactivation would be completed
consistent with previous NEPA decisions, such that the FFTF and support
buildings could be maintained in a long-term surveillance and
maintenance condition for the foreseeable future; no decommissioning
would occur. The facility would be monitored and periodic surveillance
and maintenance performed to ensure that no environmental releases or
safety issues develop. The impacts from this No Action alternative will
be used as the basis for comparing the impacts of the action
alternatives.
Entombment Alternative. Under this alternative, DOE would
decontaminate, dismantle, and remove the FFTF Reactor Containment
Building dome (and structures within) above grade level (i.e., 550 feet
above mean sea level). The FFTF Reactor Vessel, contained within the
Reactor Containment Building, along with radioactive and contaminated
equipment, components, piping, and materials, including any asbestos,
depleted uranium shielding, and lead shielding, would remain in place.
The Reactor Containment Building below grade level would be filled with
grout or other suitable fill material to immobilize remaining
radioactive and chemically-hazardous materials to the maximum extent
practicable, and to minimize subsidence. The Reactor Containment
Building fill material may include hazardous, and/or radioactive and
contaminated materials, as allowed by regulations. A regulatory-
compliant, engineered barrier would be used to cover the filled area.
The barrier, together with the lower Reactor Containment Building
structure and internal structures, and the immobilization and/or
subsidence matrix would comprise the entombment structure (i.e., the
entombed area).
The FFTF support buildings outside the entombed area, would be
decontaminated and demolished to below grade level, backfilled, and
remediated, as appropriate. Below-grade portions would be backfilled
and covered to minimize free (void) spaces. Appropriate institutional
controls would also be implemented (e.g., deed restrictions, etc.).
Removal Alternative. Under this alternative, DOE would
decontaminate, dismantle, and remove the Reactor Containment Building
dome (and structures within) above grade level. The Reactor Vessel,
contained within the Reactor Containment Building below grade level,
along with radioactive and contaminated equipment, components, piping,
and materials, including any asbestos, depleted uranium shielding, and
lead shielding, would also be removed. The removed radioactive and
contaminated equipment, components, piping, and materials would include
intermediate heat exchangers, primary pumps, primary isolation valves,
primary overflow tanks, Interim Examination and Maintenance Cell
equipment, test assembly hardware, and the Interim Decay Storage tank.
Additional radioactive and contaminated equipment from the Reactor
Containment Building and the FFTF Heat Transport System would also be
removed, as necessary. The removed radioactive and contaminated
equipment, components, piping, and materials would be disposed of in
appropriate Hanford Site 200 Area disposal units such as, but not
necessarily limited to, the existing Environmental Restoration and
Disposal Facility or the Integrated Disposal Facility, which is
proposed for construction. The Reactor Containment Building (and
structures within) at grade and below grade, and the FFTF support
buildings outside the Reactor Containment Building area, would be
decontaminated and demolished to below grade, backfilled and covered to
minimize free (void) spaces), and remediated, as appropriate.
Appropriate institutional controls would also be implemented (e.g.,
deed restrictions, etc.).
EIS Schedule: This EIS will be prepared pursuant to NEPA, the
Council on Environmental Quality Regulations for Implementing the
Procedural Provisions of NEPA (40 CFR parts 1500-1508), and DOE's NEPA
Implementing Procedures (10 CFR part 1021). Following publication of
this Notice of Intent, DOE will conduct a 45-day public scoping period,
including public scoping meetings; and prepare and distribute the draft
EIS. A comment period on the draft EIS is planned, which will include
public hearings to receive comments. Availability of the draft EIS, the
dates of the public comment period, and information about the public
hearings will be announced in the Federal Register and in local news
media. The final EIS is scheduled for issuance by September 2005. A ROD
would be issued no sooner than 30 days after publication of the
Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) Notice of Availability of the
final EIS in the Federal Register.
Preliminary Identification of Environmental and Other Issues
DOE intends to analyze the following issues when assessing the
potential environmental impacts of the proposed action and alternatives
in this EIS. DOE invites comments on these and any other issues that
should be addressed in this EIS.
Potential accident scenarios at appropriate onsite
(Hanford Site) and offsite locations associated with the
decommissioning of the FFTF and support facilities and with the
management and disposition of resulting waste and Hanford Site
radioactive sodium inventory.
Potential effects on the public and onsite workers from
releases of radiological and nonradiological materials during
decommissioning operations and reasonably foreseeable accidents.
Potential long-term risks resulting from the management
and disposition of the FFTF waste and Hanford Site radioactive sodium
inventory.
Potential effects on air quality, and water quantity and
quality from decommissioning operations and reasonably foreseeable
accidents.
Potential cumulative effects, including impacts from other
past, present and reasonably foreseeable actions at or in the vicinity
of the Hanford Site.
Potential effects on biological resources (e.g., rare,
threatened, or endangered species and their habitat).
Potential effects on archaeological/cultural/historical
sites.
[[Page 50179]]
Potential effects from transportation activities and from
reasonably foreseeable transportation accidents.
Potential socioeconomic impacts on surrounding
communities.
Potential for disproportionately high and adverse effects
on low-income and minority populations (Environmental Justice).
Potential, unavoidable adverse environmental effects.
Potential, short-term uses of the environment versus long-
term productivity.
Potential irreversible and irretrievable commitment of
resources.
Potential consumption of natural resources and energy,
including water, geologic materials, natural gas, and electricity.
Potential pollution prevention, waste minimization, and
mitigative measures.
Related NEPA Reviews: Listed below are some of the key NEPA
documents to be considered in relation to the EIS:
Environmental Statement, Fast Flux Test Facility,
Richland, Washington (WASH-1510, May 1972). This Environmental
Statement (prepared by the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission) assessed the
potential environmental impacts associated with the FFTF Project.
Final Environmental Impact Statement: Department of Energy
Programmatic Spent Nuclear Fuel Management and Idaho National
Engineering Laboratory Environmental Restoration and Waste Management
Programs (DOE/EIS-0203, April 1995) and ROD (60 FR 28680, May 1, 1995).
This EIS analyzed (at a programmatic level) the potential environmental
consequences over the next 40 years of alternatives related to the
transportation, receipt, processing, and storage of spent nuclear fuel
under the responsibility of DOE. For programmatic spent nuclear fuel
management, this EIS analyzed alternatives of no action,
decentralization, regionalization, centralization, and the use of the
plans that existed in 1992 and 1993 for the management of these
materials.
Environmental Assessment: Shutdown of the Fast Flux Test
Facility, Hanford Site, Richland, Washington and FONSI (DOE/EA-0993,
May 1995). This EA evaluated the impacts associated with deactivation
actions necessary to place the FFTF in a radiologically- and
industrially-safe condition (Phase I), suitable for long-term
surveillance and maintenance (Phase II) prior to decommissioning (Phase
III). The EA did not evaluate Phase III. DOE determined that an EIS was
not required for the permanent shutdown and deactivation of the FFTF
and issued a FONSI.
Environmental Assessment: Management of Hanford Site Non-
Defense Production Reactor Spent Nuclear Fuel, Hanford Site, Richland,
Washington and FONSI (DOE/EA-1185, March 1997). This EA evaluated the
environmental impacts associated with actions necessary to place the
Hanford Site's non-defense production reactor spent nuclear fuel, which
includes FFTF's spent nuclear fuel, in a radiologically- and
industrially-safe, and passive, consolidated storage condition pending
final decommissioning. DOE determined that the interim management and
storage of the subject spent nuclear fuel at the Hanford Site did not
require an EIS and issued a FONSI.
Environmental Assessment: Shutdown of Experimental Breeder
Reactor-II (EBR-II) at Argonne National Laboratory-West and FONSI (DOE/
EA-1199, September 1997). This EA addressed the placement of EBR-II and
its supporting facilities in an industrially and radiologically safe
shutdown condition pending ultimate decommissioning, including the
draining of the primary and secondary sodium and reaction of the sodium
in the Sodium Processing Facility. The EA did not evaluate final
decontamination and decommissioning of EBR-II or the Sodium Processing
Facility. DOE determined that an EIS was not required and issued a
FONSI.
Final Hanford Comprehensive Land Use Plan Environmental
Impact Statement (DOE/EIS-0222, September 1999) and ROD (64 FR 61615,
November 12, 1999). This EIS focused on developing an overall strategy
for future land use at Hanford and included a proposed comprehensive
land use plan for the Hanford Site for at least the next 50 years of
ownership. DOE decided in the ROD that the 400 Area would be designated
``industrial.'' This land-use designation supports the 1997 EPA
Brownfields Initiative for contaminated areas (``Brownfields Economic
Development Initiative, EPA 500-F-97-158, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Washington, D.C., September 1997.'')
Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Treatment and
Management of Sodium-Bonded Spent Nuclear Fuel (DOE/EIS-0306, July
2000) and ROD (65 FR 56565, September 19, 2000). This EIS evaluated
strategies to remove or stabilize the reactive sodium contained in a
portion of DOE's spent nuclear fuel inventory to prepare the spent
nuclear fuel for disposal in a geologic repository. The EIS analyzed,
under the proposed action, six alternatives that employ one or more of
the following technology options at nuclear fuel management facilities
at the Savannah River Site or the INEEL: electrometallurgical
treatment; the plutonium-uranium extraction process; packaging in high-
integrity cans; and the melt and dilute treatment process. DOE decided
in the ROD to implement the preferred alternative of
electrometallurgically treating the EBR-II spent nuclear fuel and
miscellaneous small lots of sodium bonded spent nuclear fuel at the
ANL-W facility at the INEEL. FFTF has a small inventory of sodium
bonded fuel identified in this EIS.
Final Environmental Impact Statement, Commercial Low-Level
Radioactive Waste Disposal Site, Hanford Site, Richland, Washington,
State of Washington Department of Ecology (May 2004)). This EIS was
prepared by Ecology to evaluate pending actions, including an operating
license renewal, at the existing commercial low-level radioactive waste
disposal site located on the Hanford Site in Richland, Washington.
Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for
Accomplishing Expanded Civilian Nuclear Energy Research and Development
and Isotope Production Missions in the United States, Including the
Role of the Fast Flux Test Facility (NI-PEIS, DOE/EIS-0310, December
2000) and ROD (66 FR 7877, January 26, 2001). This nuclear
infrastructure programmatic EIS evaluated the proposed expansion of the
nuclear irradiation capabilities for accomplishing civilian nuclear
energy research and development activities, accommodating the projected
growth in demand for medical and industrial isotopes, and production of
plutonium-238 to support future National Aeronautics and Space
Administration space exploration missions. Also included was an
alternative to permanently deactivate the FFTF. The EIS concluded that
``lack of clear commitments from likely users discouraged the
Department from planning to build new facilities or to restart the
FFTF.'' DOE decided in the ROD that the FFTF would be permanently
deactivated.
Final Hanford Site Solid (Radioactive and Hazardous) Waste
Program Environmental Impact Statement, Richland, Washington (DOE/EIS-
0286, January 2004) and ROD (69 FR 39449, June 30, 2004). This EIS
evaluated alternatives to provide capabilities to treat, store, and/or
dispose of existing and anticipated quantities of solid low-level waste
[[Page 50180]]
(LLW), mixed low-level waste (MLLW), Transuranic (TRU) waste, and
immobilized low activity waste to support clean up at Hanford and to
assist other DOE sites in completing their cleanup programs. DOE
decided in the ROD to (1) limit the volumes of LLW and MLLW received at
Hanford from other sites for disposal; (2) dispose of LLW in lined
disposal facilities, a practice already used for MLLW; (3) construct
and operate a lined, combined-use disposal facility (previously
referenced in this Notice of Intent as the ``Integrated Disposal
Facility'') in Hanford's 200 East Area for disposal of LLW and MLLW,
and further limit offsite waste receipts until the IDF is constructed;
(4) treat LLW and MLLW (requiring treatment) at either offsite
facilities or existing or modified facilities, as appropriate; and (5)
use existing and modified onsite facilities to store, process, and
certify TRU waste for subsequent shipment to the DOE Waste Isolation
Pilot Plant.
Environmental Impact Statement for Retrieval, Treatment,
and Disposal of Tank Waste and Closure of Single-Shell Tanks at the
Hanford Site, Richland, Washington (DOE/EIS-0356). This EIS will
evaluate the potential environmental impacts of the proposed action and
range of reasonable alternatives, including no action, to treating and
disposing of the subject tank waste and the safe management and closure
of the subject tanks. The document is currently in development and a
draft EIS has not yet been issued.
Public Reading Rooms
Documents referenced in this Notice of Intent and related
information are available at the following locations: DOE Reading Room,
WSU Tri-Cities, 2710 University Drive, Richland, Washington 99352, 509-
372-7443; and the U.S. Department of Energy Headquarters Public Reading
Room, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Room 1E-190 (ME-74) FORS,
Washington, DC 20585, 202-586-3142.
Issued in Washington, DC on August 9, 2004.
John Spitaleri Shaw,
Acting Assistant Secretary, Office of Environment, Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. 04-18535 Filed 8-12-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P