[Federal Register: November 28, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 228)]
[Notices]
[Page 68811-68813]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr28no06-45]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Amended Record of Decision: Idaho High-Level Waste and Facilities
Disposition Final Environmental Impact Statement
AGENCY: Department of Energy.
ACTION: Amended Record of Decision.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is amending its Record of
Decision (ROD) published December 19, 2005 (70 Federal Register [FR]
75165), pursuant to the Idaho High-Level Waste and Facilities
Disposition Final Environmental Impact Statement (Final EIS) (DOE/EIS-
0287, September 2002). The Final EIS analyzed two sets of alternatives
for accomplishing DOE's proposed actions regarding the Idaho Nuclear
Technology and Engineering Center (INTEC): (1) Waste processing
alternatives and (2) facility disposition alternatives. As described in
this Amended ROD, DOE has decided to conduct performance-based closure
of the INTEC Tank Farm Facility (TFF). This decision to conduct
performance-based closure of the TFF does not affect decisions made in
the initial ROD concerning: performance-based closure of other existing
facilities directly related to the HLW Program; planned clean closure
of newly constructed waste processing facilities needed to implement
the initial ROD; steam reforming treatment of sodium-bearing waste
(SBW) to allow disposal at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) near
Carlsbad, New Mexico (DOE's preferred disposal path) or at a geologic
repository for spent nuclear fuel (SNF) and HLW; management of newly
generated liquid waste (NGLW); and DOE's strategy to retrieve HLW
calcine for disposal outside the State of Idaho. Nor does this Amended
ROD affect future decisions concerning the retrieval strategy for HLW
calcine stored at INTEC, potential calcine treatment if necessary, and
closure of the bin sets in which the calcine is stored.
ADDRESSES: Copies of this Amended ROD will be available on DOE's
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Web site at: http://www.eh.doe.gov/nepa
under DOE NEPA Documents. Copies of the Section
3116 Determination and associated documents are available on DOE's Web
site at http://apps.em.doe.gov/idwd.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information on this
Amended ROD and the Idaho Cleanup Project, contact Scott Van Camp,
Assistant Manager, Facility and Materials Disposition Project, U.S.
DOE, Idaho Operations Office, 1955 Fremont Avenue, MS-1222, Idaho
Falls, ID 83415, Telephone: (208) 526-6503.
For general information on DOE's NEPA process, please contact:
Carol M. Borgstrom, Director, Office of NEPA Policy and Compliance (GC-
20), U.S. DOE, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585-
0103, Telephone: (202) 586-4600 or leave a message at (800) 472-2756.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
From 1952 to 1991, DOE and its predecessor agencies reprocessed SNF
at INTEC, known prior to 1998 as the Idaho Chemical Processing Plant,
on the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) Site. Reprocessing operations
used solvent extraction systems to remove mostly uranium-235 from SNF.
The waste product from the first extraction cycle of the reprocessing
operation was liquid HLW mixed with hazardous materials, which was
stored in belowgrade stainless steel tanks at the INTEC TFF. Subsequent
extraction cycles, treatment processes, and follow-on decontamination
activities generated additional liquids that were combined to form
liquid SBW, which is generally much less radioactive than HLW generated
from the first extraction cycle. After SNF reprocessing was curtailed
in 1991, the first cycle reprocessing wastes were removed from the
tanks in the TFF and the tanks were reused to store liquid SBW. The
liquid SBW was stored in ten of the eleven 300,000-gallon belowgrade
storage tanks in the TFF. The eleventh tank was maintained as a spare
(but was contaminated with a small quantity of waste). The TFF also
includes four 30,000-gallon belowgrade tanks that were used in
reprocessing operations. The last campaign of SNF reprocessing at INTEC
was in 1991, and HLW is no longer generated at INTEC. From 1963 to
1998, DOE processed HLW and some SBW through calcination that converted
the liquid waste into a dry powder calcine. Additional SBW was
processed by calcination from 1998 to 2000. At present, approximately
4,400 cubic meters of HLW calcine remains stored in six bin sets (a
series of reinforced concrete vaults, each containing three to seven
stainless steel storage bins). Over the past several years, TFF
operations have included removing SBW from the tanks, consolidating the
remaining approximately 900,000 gallons of SBW into three 300,000-
gallon belowgrade tanks, and cleaning the emptied tanks. Tank cleaning
to remove the tank heels in the emptied tanks (the amount of liquid
remaining in each tank after lowering the tank contents to the greatest
extent possible by use of the existing transfer equipment) began in
late 2002. Seven of the 300,000-gallon tanks, the four 30,000-gallon
inactive tanks, and associated ancillary equipment have been cleaned,
and DOE plans to clean and complete closure of the remaining tanks,
piping, valve boxes, encasements, and vaults by December 31, 2012.
The Final EIS, issued in October 2002, analyzed two sets of
alternatives for accomplishing the proposed action: (1) Waste
processing alternatives for treating, storing, and disposing of liquid
SBW and NGLW stored in belowgrade tanks and solid HLW calcine stored in
bin sets at the INTEC on the INL Site; and (2) facility disposition
alternatives for final disposition of facilities directly related to
the HLW Program after its missions are complete, including any new
facilities necessary to implement the waste processing alternatives.
This Amended ROD addresses only disposition of the TFF and not waste
processing or other facilities addressed in the initial ROD.
On October 28, 2004, the NDAA was enacted. Among other provisions
of the Act, Section 3116 provides that certain wastes from reprocessing
SNF are not HLW if the Secretary, in consultation with the NRC,
determines that the criteria in Section 3116(a) have been met.
In DOE's initial ROD, published December 19, 2005 (70 FR 75165),
DOE decided, among other things, to pursue a phased decision-making
process and stated its plan to issue an Amended ROD in 2006
specifically addressing closure of the TFF, in coordination with the
Secretary's Determination under Section 3116. As explained in the
initial ROD, the State of Idaho, as a cooperating agency on the Draft
and Final EIS, stated that it would continue to coordinate with DOE and
NRC, as appropriate, regarding Section 3116 activities.
DOE submitted a Draft Section 3116 Determination concerning the TFF
to the NRC on September 7, 2005, and consulted with the NRC pursuant to
Section 3116(a) of the NDAA. Although not required by Section 3116, DOE
issued a Notice of Availability of the Draft Section 3116 Determination
in the Federal Register on September 14, 2005 (70 FR 54374), for public
review,
[[Page 68812]]
concurrent with DOE's consultation with the NRC.
The NRC consultation process has been completed. On October 20,
2006, the NRC issued its Technical Evaluation Report (TER) (NRC ADAMS
ML062490108) of the DOE Draft Section 3116 Determination. The
TER presents the results of NRC's consultation with respect to whether
DOE meets the applicable provisions of Section 3116(a) of the NDAA for
the Secretary to determine that the stabilized residuals are not HLW.
As noted in its executive summary, ``Based on the information provided
by DOE, NRC staff has concluded in this TER that there is reasonable
assurance that the applicable criteria of the NDAA can be met for
residual waste associated with the TFF.''
DOE considered the NRC's TER, as well as comments received from the
State of Idaho and the INL Site Environmental Management Citizens
Advisory Board (no additional public comments were received) on the
Draft Section 3116 Determination, before issuing the Section 3116
Determination. In the Section 3116 Determination for the TFF, the
Secretary concluded that, for reasons set forth in the Basis for
Section 3116 Determination for the Idaho Nuclear Technology and
Engineering Center Tank Farm Facility (Basis Document), and based on
DOE's consultation with the NRC, the criteria of Section 3116(a) have
been met, and therefore the stabilized residuals may be disposed of in
place. Disposal of the grouted TFF waste in place will meet the
performance objectives set forth in 10 Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR) Part 61, Subpart C. DOE estimates that this action will result in
an annual maximum exposure risk (total effective dose) to members of
the public from all pathways of well below 25 mrem. A Federal Register
Notice of Availability of the Secretary's Section 3116 Determination is
being provided separately and concurrently with this ROD.
II. Comments on the Final EIS
DOE received five letters and two emails on the Final EIS and
responded to those comments in the initial ROD. However, because DOE
deferred its decision regarding the TFF, it is appropriate to address
one additional comment made by the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) (letter on the Final EIS of November 18, 2002) in this Amended
ROD. That is, the EPA noted that ``the Final EIS did not define, in the
case of tank closures, the degree of retrieval and/or decontamination
necessary to provide a defensible basis for reclassifying residuals''.
The Basis Document addresses this comment.
III. Facility Disposition Alternatives Analyzed
The Final EIS analyzed six facility disposition alternatives: No
Action, Clean Closure, Performance-Based Closure, Closure to Landfill
Standards, Performance-Based Closure with Class A Grout Disposal, and
Performance-Based Closure with Class C Grout Disposal.\1\ Under the No
Action Alternative, the transuranic/SBW waste would remain in the Tank
Farm, and eventually over thousands of years, this waste would migrate
into the environment. Under the Clean Closure Alternative, facilities
would have the hazardous and radiological contaminants, including
contaminated equipment, removed from the site or treated so that these
contaminants would be indistinguishable from background concentrations.
Under the Performance-Based Closure Alternative, contamination would
remain that is below the levels that would impact human health and the
environment as established by regulations. Under the Closure to
Landfill Standards Alternative, wastes would be removed to the extent
practicable; however, quantities remaining would not meet clean closure
or performance-based action levels. Under the Performance-Based Closure
with Class A Grout Disposal and Performance-Based Closure with Class C
Grout Disposal Alternatives, SBW and calcine would have been separated
into high and low activity fractions, and the low-level waste fraction
would be grouted to meet either Class A or Class C levels and disposed
of in the tanks or bin sets. These six alternatives reflect different
ways to address the risk associated with disposition of residuals
remaining in facilities and closing facilities directly related to the
HLW Program at INTEC after its missions are complete. These
alternatives differ in the degree to which facilities are cleaned up
and in the type of use that could be made of the land as a result.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The names of the alternatives in the Final EIS use
terminology that is similar to terminology used in the context of
closure of hazardous waste management units under HWMA/RCRA.
However, the terminology used in the names of the EIS alternatives
and the HWMA/RCRA is not synonymous in all cases. For example, the
Clean Closure Alternative included removal of the tanks, whereas
clean closure of the tanks under HWMA/RCRA means cleaning the tanks
to action levels established in the state approved closure plan. The
INL TFF is subject to closure under HWMA/RCRA pursuant to closure
plans approved by the State of Idaho.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Preferred Facility Disposition Alternative
In the Final EIS, DOE and the State of Idaho, as a cooperating
agency, identified three of the six facility disposition alternatives
as preferred: Performance-Based Closure, Clean Closure, and Closure to
Landfill Standards. DOE and the State of Idaho weighed several factors
in identifying the Preferred Alternatives for facility disposition,
including size and complexity of facilities, volume of waste generated
during facility disposition, residual waste/contaminant risk reduction,
technical and economic feasibility, and protection of workers, the
public, and the environment.
Under the Performance-Based Closure Alternative evaluated in the
EIS, radioactive contamination would remain below levels that would
impact human health and the environment as established by regulations.
These levels, referred to as action levels, are either risk-based
(e.g., residual contaminant levels) or performance-based (e.g.,
corrosivity). Once these action levels and the action levels set forth
in the HWMA/RCRA Closure Plan approved by the State of Idaho are
achieved, the unit/facility is deemed closed according to the HWMA/RCRA
and DOE requirements. Other activities may then occur at the unit/
facility such as decontamination and decommissioning or future
operations (where nonhazardous waste can enter the unit/facility). Most
abovegrade units/facilities would be demolished and most belowgrade
facilities/units (tanks, vaults, and transfer piping) would be
stabilized and left in place. The residual contaminants would no longer
pose any unacceptable exposure (or risk) to workers, the public, and
the environment. Pursuant to HWMA/RCRA regulations, if the action
levels cannot be achieved, then the TFF and TFF system may need to be
closed in accordance with closure and post-closure regulations that
apply to landfills.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Although not part of this Amended ROD, DOE also has proposed
to cap the surface of the TFF to meet the remedial action objectives
agreed to by DOE, the State of Idaho, and the EPA pursuant to the
1991 Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order under the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act
(CERCLA). DOE's Proposed Plan for Tank Farm Soil and INTEC
Groundwater, Operable Unit 3-14 (RPT-223, 2004), which includes
capping the surface of the TFF, has been issued for public comment.
The CERCLA decision is planned for 2007. Capping would reduce water
infiltration and provide worker protection where appropriate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 68813]]
IV. Environmentally Preferable Alternative
The initial ROD, in identifying the environmentally preferred
alternative, considered: potential risk to the public (e.g., latent
cancer fatalities); potential environmental risks in the short- and
long-term, including environmental risks after loss of institutional
control; and potential short-term risk to workers. The initial ROD
identified the facility disposition alternatives that actively closed
the TFF facilities under environmentally-based standards as preferable
to the No Action Alternative. Based on the analyses in the Final EIS,
the Clean Closure Alternative is the environmentally preferred
alternative over the long-term. However, the Performance-Based Closure
Alternative would be protective of the public and environment in the
short- and long-term while minimizing short-term risks to workers.
V. Decision
DOE has decided to conduct performance-based closure of the TFF as
set forth in the Final EIS. DOE has decided to close the TFF in phases
to support continued INTEC operations, with final closure of the TFF
planned by December 2012. DOE is making the decision in this Amended
ROD following the Secretary's Determination, in consultation with the
NRC, that the grouted residuals at disposal are not HLW because they
meet the criteria in Section 3116(a) of the NDAA. By law, material
covered by such a determination is not HLW.
Performance-based closure of the TFF and TFF system pursuant to
this Amended ROD includes removing waste to the maximum extent
practical from the eleven 300,000-gallon tanks, the four 30,000-gallon
tanks, associated piping, valve boxes, encasements, and vaults, and
grouting and disposing of stabilized residuals in place.\3\ Closure of
the TFF will be undertaken pursuant to closure plans approved by the
State of Idaho under the HWMA. DOE intends for the TFF closure
activities to remove or decontaminate waste residues to meet State of
Idaho-approved action levels for hazardous constituents. If these
action levels cannot be achieved, then the TFF may be closed in
accordance with closure and post-closure regulations that apply to
landfills. The closure of the TFF will also be in accordance with
applicable DOE requirements, regulations, and Orders, which ensure that
this action will result in an annual maximum exposure risk (total
effective dose) to members of the public from all pathways of well
below 25 mrem.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Under closure pursuant to this decision, a small amount
(approximately 3/8 inch) of residual radioactive (non-HWMA/RCRA)
waste that cannot be removed would remain after completing tank
cleaning operations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The State of Idaho has commented and coordinated with DOE and NRC,
as appropriate, concerning Section 3116 of the NDAA. The State has
concurred with the performance-based closure of the TFF, subject to the
State's separate approval of individual closure plans under the HWMA/
RCRA.
This decision to conduct performance-based closure of the TFF does
not affect the decisions made in the initial ROD concerning:
performance-based closure for other existing facilities directly
related to the HLW Program; planned clean closure of newly constructed
waste processing facilities needed to implement the initial ROD; steam
reforming treatment of SBW to allow disposal at the WIPP near Carlsbad,
New Mexico (DOE's preferred disposal path) or at a geologic repository
for SNF and HLW; management of NGLW; and DOE's strategy to retrieve HLW
calcine for disposal outside the State of Idaho. Nor does this Amended
ROD affect future decisions concerning the retrieval strategy for HLW
calcine stored at the INTEC, potential calcine treatment if necessary,
and the closure of the bin sets in which the calcine is stored.
No impact resulting from operations under this decision would
require specifically designed mitigation measures. DOE will, however,
use all practicable means to avoid or minimize environmental harm when
implementing the actions described in this Amended ROD. Those measures
include employing engineering design features to meet regulatory
requirements, maintaining a rigorous health and safety program to
protect workers from radiological and chemical contaminants, monitoring
worker and environmental risk, and continuing efforts to reduce the
generation of wastes. DOE will implement the comprehensive list of
standards and requirements to protect workers, the public, and the
environment specified in Chapter 6 of the Final EIS, as appropriate.
VI. Basis for Decision
DOE's decision to implement performance-based closure methods for
disposition of the TFF is based on the analysis of the potential
environmental impacts identified in the Final EIS. The Performance-
Based Closure Alternative would minimize short-term risk to workers as
compared to the Clean Closure Alternative, while also being protective
of health and the environment in the long term. In addition, this
Amended ROD is based on consideration of regulatory requirements such
as the HWMA/RCRA, applicable DOE Orders, and cost. As part of its basis
for decision, DOE also emphasizes that, on balance, performance-based
closure would be protective of the public and environment in the short-
and long-term, while limiting the risk to workers. This decision also
takes into account the Secretary's Determination pursuant to Section
3116(a) of the NDAA.
Issued in Washington, DC, on November 19, 2006.
James A. Rispoli,
Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management.
[FR Doc. E6-20109 Filed 11-27-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P