[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 226 (Monday, November 24, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 62572-62576]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-30821]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Environmental Impact Statement for the High Flux Beam Reactor
Transition Project at the Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY
AGENCY: Department of Energy.
ACTION: Notice of intent (NOI).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
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 (NEPA), for the High Flux Beam
Reactor (HFBR) at the Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL) in Upton,
New York. The EIS will evaluate the range of reasonable alternatives
regarding the future of the reactor, as required by NEPA, including:
(1) No action (maintaining HFBR in a shutdown and defueled condition);
(2) resume operation at a power level of 30 megawatt (MW) or up to 60
MW; (3) resume operation and enhance the facility; and (4) permanent
shutdown with eventual decontamination and decommissioning (D&D). DOE
invites individuals, organizations, and agencies to present oral and/or
written comments concerning the scope of the EIS, including the
environmental issues and alternatives the EIS should analyze.
DATES: The public scoping begins with publication of this NOI in the
Federal Register and continues until January 23, 1998. Written comments
submitted by mail should be postmarked by that date to ensure
consideration. Comments mailed after that date will be considered to
the extent practicable.
DOE will conduct public scoping meetings to assist it in defining
the appropriate scope of the EIS, including the significant
environmental issues to be addressed. DOE plans to hold scoping
meetings in the vicinity of BNL in December 1997 and January 1998. The
December meeting will be held at the following date, time and location:
December 10, 1997, Mastic Beach Property Owners Association, 31
Neighborhood Road, Mastic Beach, New York 11951; Time: 4:00 p.m.-9:00
p.m.
Locations of additional scoping meetings to be held in January will
be announced through the local media as soon as possible, but at least
15 days prior to the date of the meetings.
ADDRESSES: Please direct comments or suggestions on the scope of the
EIS, requests to speak at the public scoping meetings, requests for
special arrangements to enable participation at scoping meetings (e.g.,
interpreter for the hearing-impaired) and questions concerning the
project to: Michael Holland, Brookhaven Group, U.S. Department of
Energy, 53 Bell Avenue, Bldg. 464, P.O. Box 5000, Upton, NY 11973-5000,
(516) 344-3552, telefax (516) 344-1377, or by electronic mail to
mholland@bnl.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For general information associated
with the research aspects of the HFBR, please contact: Iran Thomas,
Deputy Associate Director, Office of Basic Energy Sciences, Office of
Energy Research, U.S. Department of Energy, ER-10, Germantown, MD
20874, telephone: (301) 903-3427.
For technical information associated with reactor operation, please
contact: Robert Lange, Associate Director, Office of Facilities, Office
of Nuclear Energy,
[[Page 62573]]
U.S. Department of Energy, NE-40, 19907 Germantown Rd., Germantown, MD
20874, telephone: (301) 903-2915.
For general information on the DOE NEPA process, please contact:
Carol M. Borgstrom, Director, Office of NEPA Policy and Assistance, EH-
42, U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, S.W.,
Washington, D.C. 20585-0119, telephone: (202) 586-4600 or leave a
message on (800) 472-2756.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Brookhaven National Laboratory was established in 1947 as a
multi-disciplinary scientific research center. It is located close to
the geographic center of Suffolk County, Long Island, about 56 miles
(91 kilometers) east of New York City. The Laboratory site consists of
8.2 square miles (21.3 square kilometers, 2,130 hectares) with most
principal facilities located near the center. The Laboratory carries
out basic and applied research in the following areas: High-energy and
nuclear physics; solid state physics; materials sciences and chemical
sciences; nuclear medicine; biomedical and environmental sciences; and
selected energy technologies.
The HFBR, which is centrally located within the BNL site (about 1
mile from the eastern site boundary and 1.5 miles from the southern
boundary), was commissioned in 1965 as a scientific facility dedicated
to neutron scattering research and other research programs in solid
state physics, nuclear physics, materials technology, structural
biology, medicine and chemistry. Neutron scattering techniques are used
to study the structure and properties of materials. The HFBR has
provided about two-thirds of the Department's experimental capability
at reactors for neutron scattering.
The HFBR uses heavy water (deuterium) for cooling and a highly
enriched uranium core to produce beams of thermal neutrons that are
guided to experimental areas by nine horizontal aluminum alloy tubes
called ``beam tubes.'' In addition, there are seven vertical tubes for
irradiating research samples in the reactor. The entire reactor and its
control room are enclosed within a confinement dome. This reactor does
not produce electric power. The HFBR staff presently consists of about
110 scientists, engineers, technicians, and administrative personnel.
The HFBR scientific user community numbers about 300 researchers,
including several from Japan and Europe.
In some research areas the HFBR is the best facility in the United
States. For example, the facility's Small Angle Neutron Scattering
(SANS) capability is regarded as a particularly useful technique by
structural biologists, who represent a rapidly growing user community
for neutron scattering. The HFBR SANS offers unique capabilities for
the study of biological samples and is the best resource in the United
States for this type of work. In addition, the HFBR's Single Crystal
Neutron Diffraction equipment complements x-ray techniques in
determining the structure of complex organic molecules because of its
ability to locate hydrogen atoms. The HFBR facility has also been used
for radioisotope production, neutron activation analysis, and material
irradiation.
The reactor was originally designed for operation at a power level
of 40 megawatts (MW). An equipment upgrade in 1982 allowed operation at
60 MW, which greatly enhanced the reactor's scientific capability.
Beginning in 1991, the operating power of the reactor was limited to 30
MW until additional analysis could be performed to address safety
concerns associated with a hypothetical loss of reactor coolant
accident while operating at 60 MW. Subsequent analyses, currently under
review as part of an on-going Safety Analysis Report revision program,
indicate that the HFBR could be safely operated at 60 MW. Scientific
users have recommended operating the reactor at 60 MW, and that the
Department upgrade and modernize the scientific instrumentation and
other features such as the beam tubes.
Current Status of HFBR
On December 21, 1996, the HFBR was shut down for refueling and
maintenance, a routine activity which normally occurs almost every
month. Before the reactor returned to scheduled scientific operations,
however, monitoring indicated that a plume of tritiated water was
contaminating the groundwater in excess of drinking water standards
south and down gradient of the reactor. DOE, in cooperation with the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), New York State Department
of Conservation (NYSDEC), and Suffolk County Department of Health
Services (SCDHS), immediately initiated activities to identify and
eliminate the source of the tritium plume. These activities, now
collectively called the Tritium Remediation Project, continue as part
of the Department's commitment to remediate the contaminated
groundwater.
Data collection and analysis identified the HFBR spent fuel pool as
the likely source of the tritium plume. In May 1997, a short-term
removal action, in the form of a groundwater extraction system, was
undertaken to ensure that tritium contaminated groundwater in excess of
drinking water standards does not leave the BNL site boundary.
The short-term removal action has been incorporated into the site's
cleanup program in accordance with the Interagency Agreement among DOE,
EPA and NYSDEC entered into pursuant to the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA). A description of the
removal action taken, alternatives considered, regulatory interaction,
and public participation activities associated with the short-term
removal action are documented in the Action Memorandum for Operable
Unit III Tritium Removal Action, dated May 9, 1997, which is available
in the reading rooms identified in this notice.
The final remedial action will be determined through the CERCLA
Operable Unit III Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS)
process and will be based on additional data collected, groundwater
modeling, and evaluations of various remediation options, including
those activities which comprise the Tritium Remediation Project. The
CERCLA Record of Decision that completes this process is scheduled to
be published in the fall of 1998. The potential environmental impacts
associated with this CERCLA action will be reflected and accounted for
in the environmental analysis contained in the EIS.
In addition to the activities associated with the cleanup of the
contaminated groundwater plume, all fuel has been removed from the
reactor and the pool and shipped off-site in preparation for removing
all water from the fuel pool. Decontamination and dewatering of the
storage pool is underway in order to eliminate the current source of
the tritium to the groundwater beneath the HFBR. Operation of the
groundwater plume pumping, treatment, and recharge system continues.
The groundwater tritium plume has been characterized and modeled, and
continues to be sampled and monitored. Removal of the water from the
spent fuel pool is scheduled for completion by the end of 1997.
Purpose and Need for the Agency Action
The Department of Energy needs to make a decision regarding the
future of the HFBR at BNL. This EIS will aid DOE in its decisionmaking
process. In July
[[Page 62574]]
1997, the Department issued its ``Action Plan for Improved Management
of Brookhaven National Laboratory,'' which summarized the Department's
planned process for deciding the future of the HFBR. The Action Plan
states that the Secretary of Energy will decide the future of the HFBR
and directs an appropriate environmental review process. That review
process consists of this EIS on the HFBR, which will incorporate the
results of the tritium remediation project being conducted in
conjunction with the ongoing CERCLA process. The Secretary is scheduled
to decide upon a preferred alternative for the future of the HFBR in
early 1998 for inclusion in this EIS. As stated in the Action Plan,
that decision will take into account several factors, including: public
input from the local Long Island community; input from the HFBR
scientific user community and the DOE Basic Energy Sciences Advisory
Committee; and the value of the scientific information produced using
the HFBR. The alternatives listed in this Notice for evaluation in the
EIS reflect the full range of options available for the future of the
HFBR. The results of the EIS scoping process will be considered in
selecting the preferred alternative. The preferred alternative will be
noted in the Draft EIS, but the EIS will analyze all reasonable
alternatives, as required by NEPA.
The Conference Report accompanying Pub. L. 105-62, the Energy and
Water Development Appropriations Act of 1998, directed that an EIS be
prepared on the HFBR. The Report noted the conferees' expectation that
the EIS include a ``comprehensive survey of any environmental hazards
that the tritium leak or other contamination associated with the HFBR
pose to the drinking water and health of the people in the surrounding
communities, and that it will provide a detailed plan for
remediation.'' The EIS will provide this analysis, while concurrently
proceeding with, the Tritium Remediation Project and applicable
Interagency Agreement and CERCLA commitments. Long-term remediation
plans are being prepared under the ongoing CERCLA program and will be
discussed with the local community. Consistent with Congress'
direction, the EIS will summarize this remediation plan and program,
and assess the HFBR's potential for further contributing to groundwater
contamination.
The Report also directed the Department to drain the spent fuel
pool, meet the requirements outlined in the Suffolk County Sanitary
Code Article 12, complete seismic upgrades, and repair and seal the
floor drains. These modifications and repairs, in addition to those
indicated in (3) below, are needed to place the HFBR into a
radiologically and industrially safe condition, regardless of which
alternative is selected for the future of the HFBR, and do not result
in any adverse environmental impacts. Accordingly, since these
activities do not have an adverse impact and do not limit the choice of
reasonable alternatives, DOE intends to proceed with these activities
prior to completion of the EIS. These modifications include repairs
needed to bring the HFBR into compliance with applicable Federal,
State, and local laws and requirements, including the requirements of
Suffolk County Sanitary Code Article 12, which is relevant to reducing
risks and preventing future leaks from the facility to the groundwater.
These four specific modifications and repairs include:
(1) Several floor joints and conduit penetrations in the floor of
the HFBR would be repaired and sealed to ensure that there is no
leakage path to groundwater from any accidental spill within the
reactor confinement building. The potential for spills exists during
both reactor operations and deactivation activities, when there would
be a need to move large quantities of radioactive liquids into tanks
and drums for storage, treatment or disposal.
(2) Several piping systems and sumps in the HFBR would be modified
and repaired by replacing single-walled piping and sumps with double-
walled components, or installing new components above the floor, thus
meeting the requirements of Suffolk County Sanitary Code 12 for
protection of groundwater. These systems would be used during
operations and during deactivation activities to flush systems and
reduce contamination.
(3) The drains from the 350-foot tall stack (handles exhaust gases
from HFBR and other nearby facilities) would be repaired, along with
the collection piping and sump, to convert them from a single-walled to
a double-walled system. This would enhance the confinement integrity of
the HFBR by providing a barrier against potential accidental release of
radioactive materials to groundwater.
(4) The HFBR control room and operations level crane would be
reinforced to protect radiological monitoring and control systems, as
well as operations personnel, in the event of a design basis
earthquake. The control room and crane are needed to ensure safe
reactor operations or deactivation activities.
The Department is also evaluating a proposal to construct and
install a stainless steel liner in the spent fuel pool during the
preparation of the EIS. The installation of this impervious liner and
appurtenant leak detection system would result in the pool containing a
double-walled barrier to ensure that the storage pool would not be a
source of groundwater contamination in the future. DOE considers the
storage pool to be an essential component of the HFBR regardless of
whether or not the reactor operates. It would be needed to store spent
fuel during operations. During deactivation activities, it would be
used to handle various highly radioactive reactor components which must
be dismantled or cut apart in preparation for shipment offsite. Much of
this work would be conducted within the storage pool. A usable pool may
also be necessary for maintenance of the HFBR during an extended period
of time in its present shutdown condition. As part of the CERCLA
cleanup of Operable Unit III, the Department committed to construct and
install the liner prior to any use of the pool. As a result, the spent
fuel liner is included at this time as part of all alternatives, except
No Action. DOE specifically solicits comments on whether the liner
should be installed, along with the other modifications and repairs,
prior to completion of this EIS. After hearing public comments on this
issue, the Department may decide to include installation of the liner
as part of all alternatives, including No Action.
Alternatives To Be Evaluated
While Pub. L. 105-62 prohibited the use of funds made available
under that Act or any other act to restart the HFBR, this EIS will
analyze the following reasonable alternatives for the future of the
HFBR, as required by NEPA:
No Action Alternative
Under this alternative, the reactor would be maintained in the
current shutdown and defueled condition for the indefinite future; the
four modifications and repairs listed above would be performed. The
Department regards this as a non-preferred alternative, because it does
not resolve the future of the HFBR.
Resume Operation Alternative
The earliest date that the reactor could be restarted is October
1999, following completion of the NEPA process and all of the
modifications and repairs described above (including installation of
the spent fuel liner). This alternative includes two subalternatives:
[[Page 62575]]
a. Startup and operation of the reactor at a power level of 30 MW
(the power level prior to the shutdown).
b. Startup and operation of the reactor at a power level of 30 MW
with a planned increase in operation at a level of up to 60 MW.
Resume Operation and Enhance Facility Alternative
Under this alternative, the Department would restart the reactor
for operation at a power level of up to 60 MW, and eventually replace
the reactor vessel to extend the life of the reactor, and upgrade the
reactor (e.g., add scientific instruments) to enhance the reactor's
scientific research capabilities and increase the number of potential
reactor users. Because of budget limitations, the Department regards
this as a non-preferred alternative.
Permanent Shutdown Alternative
Under this alternative, the HFBR would be permanently shut down for
eventual decontamination and decommissioning. Additional NEPA review
would be necessary in the future for a proposal to decontaminate and
decommission the reactor. This alternative would involve terminating
the scientific research mission of the HFBR at BNL and placing the
reactor in an industrially and radiologically safe condition for an
extended period of time until a proposal were made to decontaminate and
decommission the reactor. While an analysis of the full and complete
decontamination and decommissioning is beyond the scope of this EIS,
the potential environmental impacts associated with decontamination and
decommissioning will be analyzed to the extent possible.
At this time, the Department of Energy has no preferred
alternative. As noted above, the Secretary of Energy will designate a
preferred alternative based on the results of the scoping process and
other information in early 1998.
Preliminary Environmental Analysis
The following issues have been tentatively identified for analysis
in the EIS. This list is neither intended to be all-inclusive nor is it
a predetermination of potential environmental impacts. The list is
presented to facilitate comment on the scope of the EIS. Additions to
or deletions from this list may occur as a result of the public scoping
process.
Health and Safety: potential public and occupational consequences
from routine operation and credible accident scenarios.
Waste Generation/Pollution Prevention: types of wastes expected to
be generated and stored, pollution prevention opportunities, and the
potential consequences to public safety and the environment.
Hazardous Materials: handling, storage, and use; waste management
both present and future.
Background Radiation: cosmic, rock, soil, water, and air, and the
potential addition of radiation.
Water Resources: surface and groundwater hydrology, use, and
quality, and the potential for degradation.
Air Quality: meteorological conditions, ambient background,
pollutant sources, and potential for degradation.
Earth Resources: physiography, topography, geology, and soil
characteristics.
Land Use: plans, policies and controls.
Noise: ambient, sources, and sensitive receptors.
Ecological Resources: wetlands, aquatic, terrestrial, economically/
recreationally important species, threatened and endangered species.
Socioeconomic: demography, economic base, labor pool, housing,
transportation, utilities, public services/facilities, education,
recreation, and cultural resources.
Natural Disasters: floods, hurricanes, tornadoes, and seismic
events. Unavoidable Adverse Impacts.
Natural and Depletable Resources: requirements and conservation
potential.
Environmental Justice: any potential disproportionately high and
adverse impacts to minority and low income populations.
Alternatives other than those presented in this document may
warrant examination, and new issues may be identified for evaluation.
Scoping Meetings
The purpose of this NOI is to encourage public involvement in the
EIS process and to solicit public comments on the proposed scope and
content of the EIS. DOE will hold public scoping meetings in the BNL
area to solicit both oral and written comments from interested parties.
DOE will designate a facilitator for the scoping meetings. The
facilitator may ask for clarification of statements to ensure that
representatives of the DOE fully understand the comments and
suggestions. The scoping meetings will not be conducted as evidentiary
hearings nor will there be questioning of the commentors. At the
opening of each meeting the facilitator will establish the order of
speakers and will announce any additional procedures necessary for
conducting the meetings. To ensure that all persons wishing to make a
presentation are given the opportunity, a five-minute limit may be
enforced for each speaker, with the exception of public officials and
representatives of groups, who will be allotted ten minutes each. DOE
encourages those providing oral comments to also submit them in
writing. Comment cards will also be available for those who prefer to
submit their comments in written form.
DOE will make transcripts of the scoping meetings and project-
related materials available for public review in the following reading
rooms:
1. U.S. Department of Energy, Freedom of Information Public Reading
Room, Forrestal Building, Room 1E-190, 1000 Independence Avenue, S.W.,
Washington, D.C. 20585, Telephone: (202) 586-3142.
2. Brookhaven National Laboratory Research Library, Bldg. 477A
Brookhaven Ave., Upton, NY 11973, Telephone: (516) 344-3483.
3. Longwood Public Library, 800 Middle Country Rd., Middle Island,
NY 11953, Telephone: (516) 924-6400.
4. Mastics-Moriches-Shirley Community Library, 301 William Floyd
Parkway, Shirley, NY 11967, Telephone: (516) 399-1511.
Other environmental materials available at these locations or
through the Suffolk County Interlibrary Loan System include BNL's 1977
Site-wide EIS, Annual Site Environmental Reports, and the CERCLA
Administrative record for cleanup activities.
NEPA Process
The EIS for the HFBR will be prepared according to the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969, the Council on Environmental
Quality's Regulations for Implementing the Procedural Provisions of
NEPA (40 CFR Parts 1500-1508), and DOE's NEPA Regulations (10 CFR Part
1021).
The draft EIS is scheduled to be published in the summer of 1998. A
45-day comment period on the draft EIS is planned, and public hearings
to receive comments will be held approximately three weeks after
distribution of the draft EIS. Availability of the draft EIS, the dates
of the public comment period, and information about the public meetings
will be announced in the Federal Register and in the local news media
when the draft EIS is distributed.
The final EIS, which will incorporate public comments received on
the draft EIS, is expected in November 1998. No sooner than 30 days
after a notice of availability of the final EIS is published
[[Page 62576]]
in the Federal Register, DOE will issue its Record of Decision and
publish it in the Federal Register. The Record of Decision is expected
to be issued in December 1998.
Signed in Washington, D.C., this 19th day of November, 1997.
Peter N. Brush,
Acting Assistant Secretary, Environment, Safety and Health
[FR Doc. 97-30821 Filed 11-21-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
