[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 34 (Monday, February 22, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8553-8558]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-4289]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for
Electrometallurgical Treatment of Sodium-Bonded Spent Nuclear Fuel in
the Fuel Conditioning Facility at Argonne National Laboratory-West,
Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory, Idaho
AGENCY: U.S. Department of Energy.
ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Energy announces its intent to prepare an
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) pursuant to the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for the proposed electrometallurgical
treatment of Department of Energy-owned sodium-bonded spent nuclear
fuel in the Fuel Conditioning Facility at Argonne National Laboratory-
West (ANL-W). ANL-W, a center of nuclear technology development and
testing, is located on the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental
Laboratory (INEEL) site in southeastern Idaho. The Department proposes
to treat its inventory of sodium-bonded spent nuclear fuel to remove
and stabilize the reactive metallic sodium constituent and to produce
metal and ceramic waste forms, considered to be high-level waste, that
would facilitate interim storage and ultimate disposal of this
material. The EIS will evaluate reasonable action alternatives to
electrometallurgical treatment in the Fuel Conditioning Facility at
ANL-W and a no-action alternative. The Department invites the general
public, other Federal agencies, American Indian tribes, state and local
governments, and all other interested
[[Page 8554]]
parties to comment on the scope of this EIS.
DATES: To ensure consideration in the preparation of the draft EIS,
comments should be transmitted or postmarked by April 8, 1999. Comments
submitted after that date will be considered to the extent practicable.
The Department will conduct public scoping meetings in Idaho Falls
and Boise in Idaho, near the Department's Savannah River Site (SRS) in
South Carolina, and in the Washington, DC area, to provide the public
with information about the proposed project and to receive oral and
written comments on the scope of the EIS, including reasonable
alternatives and environmental issues that the Department should
consider. The dates, times, and locations for these public meetings are
as follows:
March 9, 1999 (6:00 pm-9:00 pm)
Shilo Inn, 780 Lindsay Blvd., Idaho Falls, ID 83402, (208) 523-0088
March 11, 1999 (6:00 pm-9:00 pm)
Boise Centre on the Grove, 850 West Front Street, Boise, ID 83702,
(208) 336-8900
March 15, 1999 (6:00 pm-9:00 pm)
North Augusta Community Center, 495 Brookside Avenue, North
Augusta, SC 29842, (803) 441-4290
March 18, 1999 (2:00 pm-5:00 pm)
Hyatt Regency Crystal City, 2799 Jefferson Davis Highway,
Arlington, VA 22202, (703) 418-1234
These public scoping meetings will also be announced in local media
at least 15 days prior to the meeting dates. During the first hour of
each meeting attendees may register, view displays and discuss issues
and concerns informally with Department representatives, after which
there will be a formal presentation, a follow-on question, answer, and
comment period, and the opportunity for additional informal
discussions.
ADDRESSES: Written comments 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., an interpreter for the
hearing impaired), requests to be placed on the EIS document
distribution list, and questions concerning the project should be sent
to: Susan Lesica, Document Manager, Office of Nuclear Facilities
Management, Office of Nuclear Energy, Science, and Technology, U.S.
Department of Energy, NE-40, 19901 Germantown Road, Germantown,
Maryland 20874-1290
Interested parties may also submit comments and requests by
facsimile to (877) 621-8288, or they may call (877) 450-6904 to leave a
detailed message with their comments and requests. These are both toll-
free telephone numbers. Comments and requests may also be submitted by
electronic mail to [email protected]
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For general information on the
Department of Energy NEPA process, please contact: Carol Borgstrom,
Director, Office of NEPA Policy and Assistance, Office of Environment,
Safety and Health, U.S. Department of Energy, EH-42, 1000 Independence
Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20585-0119, 202-586-4600 or leave a message
at 1-800-472-2756.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Department of Energy is responsible for the safe and efficient
management of 250 different types of spent nuclear fuel, including its
ultimate disposition (which is expected to be disposal in a geologic
repository). Some Department spent fuels may be suitable for disposal
with little or no stabilizing treatment. Other spent fuel types may not
be suitable for disposal without significant treatment or
stabilization.
One type of spent nuclear fuel that may not be suitable for
disposal without treatment is sodium-bonded spent nuclear fuel. Sodium-
bonded spent nuclear fuel contains metallic sodium, a highly reactive
material. Metallic sodium reacts vigorously with water or moist air
producing heat, potentially explosive hydrogen gas, and sodium
hydroxide, a corrosive substance. Sodium metal was used as a heat
transfer medium within the stainless steel cladding of sodium-bonded
fuel and as coolant in the nuclear reactors in which these fuels were
used. To the extent possible, the highly reactive sodium has been
removed from external surfaces of these fuels after their use, but a
portion remains bonded to the uranium metal alloy fuel within the
cladding and cannot be removed without further treatment. The presence
of reactive or pyrophoric material, such as metallic sodium, could
complicate the process of qualifying and licensing such spent fuel for
disposal, which would require data and predictive analyses sufficient
to demonstrate that emplacement of the spent fuel would not adversely
affect a repository's ability to protect the environment and public
health.
The Department believes that treatment to remove metallic sodium
and convert this spent nuclear fuel into a compact waste form would
reduce complications of disposal qualification and licensing.
Technologies for spent nuclear fuel treatment that might facilitate
such qualification and licensing should therefore be considered in
reaching a disposition decision for Department-owned sodium-bonded
fuels. One such technology for sodium-bonded spent fuel disposition is
the electrometallurgical treatment technique that the Department is
developing and demonstrating at the Argonne National Laboratory. This
technology is currently the most developed for treatment of sodium-
bonded spent fuel. In addition to electrometallurgical treatment, the
Department will examine all reasonable alternative technologies and
assess the technical risks associated with these various potential
solutions.
In a 1995 report, the National Research Council Committee on
Electrometallurgical Techniques for DOE Spent Fuel Treatment
recommended that the Department confirm the technical feasibility and
cost effectiveness of electrometallurgical treatment of its sodium-
bonded spent nuclear fuel through a technology demonstration using
sodium-bonded spent nuclear fuel that had been removed from the
Experimental Breeder Reactor-II (EBR-II) at ANL-W. Prior to acting on
the recommendation, the Department prepared the Environmental
Assessment for the Electrometallurgical Treatment Research and
Demonstration Project in the Fuel Conditioning Facility at Argonne
National Laboratory-West (DOE/EA-1148) and issued a Finding of No
Significant Impact on May 15, 1996. The demonstration project addresses
both kinds of spent fuel assemblies in the EBR-II spent nuclear fuel
inventory. These are driver fuel assemblies and blanket fuel
assemblies, and they total about 26 metric tons of heavy metal (MTHM).
One MTHM is equal to 2,200 pounds of uranium, thorium, or
plutonium. The driver fuel contains highly enriched uranium and was
used in the active region of the nuclear reactor core. Blanket fuel
contains depleted uranium and was used in areas around and near the
driver fuel in the reactor core. The demonstration project now nearing
completion involves treatment of 100 EBR-II driver assemblies and 25
EBR-II blanket assemblies (approximately 1.6 MTHM, or only 6.25% of the
EBR-II inventory) in the Fuel Conditioning Facility at ANL-W. The
research and demonstration project was initiated in June 1996 and is
scheduled to be completed in August 1999.
The National Research Council is continuing to evaluate the
electrometallurgical treatment research
[[Page 8555]]
and demonstration project. In its most recent report titled,
Electrometallurgical Techniques for U.S. Department of Energy Spent
Fuel Treatment--Spring 1998 Status Report on Argonne National
Laboratory's R&D Activity (National Academy Press, Washington, DC,
1998), the Council acknowledged progress in the demonstration and
recommended that the demonstration be carried to completion. The
Department believes that this progress and the absence of significant
roadblocks to successful completion of the demonstration warrant
proposing electrometallurgical treatment of the remainder of the EBR-II
and other sodium-bonded spent fuels (i.e., a total of 62 MTHM) and is
initiating the environmental review process under NEPA. Accordingly,
the Department is announcing its intent to prepare an EIS for the
proposed treatment of the remainder of Department sodium-bonded spent
nuclear fuel.
Data from the ongoing demonstration project will be used in
preparing the EIS. The National Research Council will issue a final
report on the technology demonstration upon completion of the
demonstration project. DOE will consider the Council's report in
reaching a decision regarding the disposition of sodium-bonded spent
nuclear fuel.
Purpose and Need for Agency Action
In a 1995 agreement with the State of Idaho [Settlement Agreement
and Consent Order issued by the Court on October 17, 1995, in the
actions Public Service Co. of Colorado v. Batt, No. CV 91-0035-S-EJL
(D. Id.), and United States v. Batt, No. CV 91-0054-EJL (D. Id.), the
Department committed to remove all spent nuclear fuel from Idaho by
2035. More than 98 percent of the Department's sodium-bonded spent
nuclear fuel is located at INEEL near Idaho Falls, Idaho, and is
subject to the requirements of the Settlement Agreement and Consent
Order. The remaining Department sodium-bonded spent nuclear fuel
included in the proposed action is at the Hanford Reservation in
Richland, Washington, the Sandia National Laboratories in Albuquerque,
New Mexico, and the Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Oak Ridge,
Tennessee. In order to remove sodium-bonded spent nuclear fuel from the
State of Idaho to meet the terms of the Settlement Agreement and
Consent Order referenced above, the Department believes the best
approach would be to stabilize or remove the reactive metallic sodium
constituent and prepare a waste form that may be more assuredly
demonstrated to be acceptable for disposal.
It is also prudent to evaluate the electrometallurgical treatment
proposal and alternative technologies now, while the Department is
performing site characterization activities for a potential geologic
repository. Contemplated waste forms resulting from treatment or
packaging of sodium-bonded spent fuel should be developed as much as
possible in parallel with any repository development to promote
consistency between the two efforts and to minimize technical risks
associated with waste form qualification and acceptance for geologic
disposal. While the alternative technologies for treatment of sodium-
bonded spent fuel may not be as mature as the electrometallurgical
treatment technology, their potential utility can be assessed in this
EIS. Should the Department decide, after completing this EIS, to pursue
a disposition path other than electrometallurgical treatment, there
will still be sufficient time to develop an alternative technology. If
a treatment technology decision is significantly delayed, however, the
Department could functionally lose its expertise and corporate
experience in the specialized electrometallurgical treatment technology
at ANL-West, which would hamper future consideration and increase the
cost of electrometallurgical treatment for sodium-bonded spent fuel
disposal. Therefore, the Department believes it is prudent to proceed
now with this EIS for electrometallurgical treatment of sodium-bonded
spent fuel.
Proposed Action
The Department proposes to treat its sodium-bonded spent nuclear
fuel \1\ using the electrometallurgical treatment process in the Fuel
Conditioning Facility at ANL-W. Electrometallurgical processing
involves the dissolution of spent nuclear fuel by use of an electric
current in a molten salt mixture. The uranium in the fuel would be
collected from a molten salt mixture at the cathode and subsequently
melted and cast into metal ingots. The metal cladding from the fuel
elements and noble metal fission products would be retrieved
undissolved from the anode, melted, and cast into metal ingots.
Remaining fission products and all transuranic elements would be
removed from the molten salt mixture by ion exchange and subsequently
isolated in a ceramic waste form. In this process, the metallic sodium
in the spent nuclear fuel would be converted to non-reactive sodium
chloride (same composition as table salt) and incorporated in the
ceramic waste form.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The Department has no plan or intention to apply this
technology to any other types of spent nuclear fuel. Nevertheless,
the Department can foresee a potential need to treat small
quantities of certain spent fuels if a non-treatment (e.g., high
integrity can) approach to disposing of such spent fuels were to be
determined not to meet disposal requirements. In that case,
electrometallurgical treatment might be among the reasonable
alternative treatment technologies that would be considered.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on available information, the Department believes the
electro-
metallurgical treatment process would produce metal and ceramic high-
level radioactive waste forms that could be qualified and licensed for
disposal. In addition, uranium would be separated from both the driver
fuel and the blanket fuel and not disposed of. The highly enriched
uranium separated from the driver fuel assemblies would be immediately
blended down in the Fuel Conditioning Facility to form low-enriched
uranium. This low-enriched uranium and the depleted uranium that would
be separated from blanket fuel assemblies would be cast as metal ingots
and stored with other uranium metal inventories at INEEL. The
disposition of these materials would be included in future Departmental
decisions regarding other similar materials.
The sodium-bonded spent nuclear fuel inventory being proposed for
electrometallurgical treatment totals approximately 62 MTHM. This
inventory of sodium-bonded spent nuclear fuel is currently stored as
follows:
Approximately 24 MTHM of EBR-II sodium-bonded driver and
blanket assemblies currently stored at ANL-W and approximately 2 MTHM
at the Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center (INTEC), both
located at INEEL.
Approximately 35 MTHM of sodium-bonded spent nuclear fuel
from the Fermi-1 reactor, currently stored at INTEC.
Less than one MTHM consisting of six irradiated sodium-
bonded fuel assemblies and a number of sodium-bonded spent nuclear fuel
pins currently stored at the Hanford Reservation near Richland,
Washington.
Less than 0.1 MTHM consisting of experimental capsules
currently stored at INTEC and Clinch River Breeder Reactor Program
experimental capsules currently stored at Sandia National Laboratories,
Albuquerque, New Mexico.
Less than 0.01 MTHM consisting of miscellaneous fast
reactor development fuel currently stored at Oak Ridge National
Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee.
[[Page 8556]]
The sodium-bonded spent nuclear fuels located at the Hanford
Reservation, Oak Ridge, and Sandia can be transported to INEEL pursuant
to the Record of Decision (60 FR 28680, June 1, 1995) for the
Department of Energy's Programmatic Spent Nuclear Fuel Management and
Idaho National Engineering Laboratory Environmental Restoration and
Waste Management Final Environmental Impact Statement (DOE/EIS-0203-F),
under the Settlement Agreement and Consent Order described above. These
spent fuels pose the same waste form acceptability issues and are
amenable to the same treatments as the EBR-II and Fermi-1 fuels stored
at INEEL.
Alternatives To Be Evaluated
The Department has identified the following alternatives to the
proposed electrometallurgical treatment of sodium-bonded spent nuclear
fuel in the Fuel Conditioning Facility at ANL-W.
A. No Action Alternative: Under this alternative, the Department
would not treat its sodium-bonded spent nuclear fuel to facilitate
disposal. Analyses will address the viability of disposal without
treatment, and the impacts of continued storage at current locations.
Both temporary storage (to await alternative technology development)
and indefinite storage (in lieu of disposal) will be considered in
these analyses. Indefinite storage of spent nuclear fuel in Idaho would
not be consistent with the Settlement Agreement and Consent Order in
which the Department committed to remove all spent nuclear fuel from
Idaho by 2035.
B. Technology Alternatives: The National Research Council
independently assessed other treatment technologies as possible
alternatives to electrometallurgical treatment for EBR-II sodium-bonded
spent nuclear fuel. It concluded that all of the alternative treatment
processes evaluated, except the Plutonium-Uranium Extraction (PUREX)
process, are at an early stage of development. Significant research,
development, and demonstrations would be required to develop these
alternative treatment processes to the level of technical maturity of
the electrometallurgical treatment process for sodium-bonded spent
fuel. However, the Department will examine and analyze these
alternative technologies:
1. PUREX Process. This solvent extraction method for separating and
purifying uranium, plutonium, and other radionuclides from spent
nuclear fuel and irradiated targets is presently practiced at the SRS
for stabilization of materials that are not suitable for prolonged
storage in their present forms, and as such pose potential health and
safety risks. In the Savannah River Site Spent Nuclear Fuel Management
EIS, the Department is currently evaluating use of the PUREX process
for stabilizing approximately 17 MTHM of previously declad EBR-II spent
nuclear fuel stored at the SRS site. Use of the PUREX facility to treat
sodium-bonded spent nuclear fuel being considered under this
alternative would require development of specific processes for
removing the stainless-steel cladding and sodium from the spent fuel.
The Department intends to evaluate the PUREX process at SRS as an
alternative to electrometallurgical treatment of the sodium-bonded
spent fuel inventory. Material streams from the PUREX process would be
uranium trioxide, plutonium metal, high-level waste in the form of
borosilicate glass canisters, and grouted low-level waste.
2. High-Integrity Cans. Under this alternative, the spent fuel
would be placed in high-integrity cans, after as little treatment as
necessary, to prepare it for disposal. This alternative would include
removal of as much of the metallic sodium as possible from the spent
fuel prior to loading it in the cans.
3. Glass Material Oxidation and Dissolution System (GMODS). The
basic concept is to combine unprocessed sodium-bonded spent nuclear
fuel and a sacrificial oxide, lead-borate glass, in a glass melter at a
temperature of 800-1000 deg.C. The uranium and the plutonium in the
spent fuel would be converted into oxides and dissolved in the glass.
Options to be analyzed are direct production of a borosilicate glass
waste form from the melt, using the melt as a feed to the PUREX
process, and coupling GMODS to the SRS Defense Waste Processing
Facility, where the melt would be fed directly to the existing glass
melter. Due to the powerful dissolution and oxidation properties of the
lead-borate glass melt, containment is a concern, and a water-cooled,
cold-wall, induction-heated melter must be used.
4. Melt and Dilute Process. The process would be similar to that
proposed for the treatment of aluminum-based spent nuclear fuels at the
SRS. The sodium-bonded spent fuel would be chopped and melted at
approximately 650 to 850 deg.C and then diluted by the addition of
depleted uranium and iron.
5. Chloride Volatility Process. This process would use the
differences in volatilities of chloride compounds to separate the
constituents of spent nuclear fuel. The major steps are: (1) high-
temperature chlorination at about 1500 deg.C and conversion of
metallic fuel and cladding to gaseous chloride compounds; (2) removal
of the transuranic chlorides and most of the fission products in a
molten zinc chloride bed at approximately 400 deg.C; (3) condensation
of the other chlorides (e.g., uranium hexachloride) in a series of
fluidized beds and condensers at successively lower temperatures; and
(4) zinc chloride regeneration/recycling. The transuranics and fission
product chlorides would then be converted into either fluorides or
oxides for disposal.
6. Direct Plasma Arc-Vitreous Ceramic Process. In this process, the
spent nuclear fuel would be melted and oxidized with the help of an
oxygen lance in a rotating furnace containing molten ceramic materials
at a temperature of 1600 deg.C or higher. A direct current plasma
torch would supply the energy required in the process. Rotation would
be used to keep the molten pool in the furnace. When the spent fuel is
homogeneously melted and oxidized throughout the ceramic, rotation
would be slowed to allow the molten vitreous ceramic to pour out by
gravity flow into a canister.
C. Location Alternatives: An alternative location for
electrometallurgical treatment on the INEEL site is the Test Area North
Hot Cell Facility. This alternative to the Fuel Conditioning Facility
at ANL-W will be evaluated in the EIS.
U.S. Nonproliferation Policy Implications
The United States does not encourage the civil use of plutonium,
and accordingly, does not itself engage in plutonium reprocessing for
either nuclear power or nuclear explosive purposes. Consistent with
this policy, the proposed action would not separate plutonium from the
processed sodium-bonded spent fuels. Further, by removing and diluting
the highly enriched uranium in the sodium-bonded driver fuel to low-
enriched uranium, the proposed project would support the U.S. goal of
minimizing civilian use of highly enriched uranium. However, to address
the concerns that the treatment of this fuel could encourage
reprocessing in other countries, the Department (Office of
Nonproliferation and National Security) will assess the
nonproliferation impacts of all the treatment technologies in the draft
EIS. This assessment will be made publicly available during the EIS
process. The combination of the information contained in the draft EIS,
the public comment in response to the draft EIS, and the
nonproliferation impacts assessment report will enable
[[Page 8557]]
the Department to make a sound decision regarding how to manage the
sodium-bonded spent nuclear fuel.
Preliminary Identification of Environmental Issues
The issues listed below have been tentatively identified for
analysis in the EIS. This list is presented to facilitate public
comment on the scope of the EIS. It is not intended to be all-inclusive
or to predetermine the potential impacts of any of the alternatives.
The Department seeks public comment on the adequacy and inclusiveness
of the following issues.
Potential impact on ecosystems, including air quality,
surface, and groundwater quality, and plants and animals.
Potential health and safety impact to on-site workers and
to the public resulting from operations, including reasonably
foreseeable accidents.
Potential health and safety, environmental, and other
impact related to the transport of spent nuclear fuel for treatment.
Considerations related to the generation, treatment,
storage, and disposal of wastes, including the potential acceptability
of waste forms at a geologic repository.
Potential cumulative impacts of electrometallurgical and
alternative treatment process operations, including relevant impact
from other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable activities at the
operation site.
Potential impact on cultural resources.
Potential socioeconomic impact, including any
disproportionate impacts on minority and low income populations.
Pollution prevention and waste minimization opportunities.
Related NEPA Documentation
NEPA documents that have been or are being prepared for activities
related to the proposed action include, but are not limited to, the
following:
U.S. Department of Energy, ``Electrometallurgical
Treatment Research and Demonstration Project in the Fuel Conditioning
Facility at Argonne National Laboratory-West; Environmental
Assessment,'' DOE/EA-1148, May 1996
U.S. Department of Energy, ``Programmatic Spent Nuclear
Fuel Management and Idaho National Engineering Laboratory Environmental
Restoration and Waste Management; Final Environmental Impact
Statement,'' DOE/EIS-0203-F, April 1995, and Record of Decision, May
30, 1995
U.S. Department of Energy, ``Savannah River Site, Spent
Nuclear Fuel Management, Draft Environmental Impact Statement,'' DOE/
EIS-0279D, December 1998
U.S. Department of Energy, ``Draft Environmental Impact
Statement for a Geologic Repository for the Disposal of Spent Nuclear
Fuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste at Yucca Mountain, Nye County,
Nevada,'' DOE/EIS-0250--in preparation
Public Involvement Opportunities
The Department encourages public involvement in the preparation of
the EIS and solicits public comments on its scope and content, as well
as public participation at the public scoping meetings in Idaho, South
Carolina, and the Washington, DC area. Department of Energy personnel
will be available at the scoping meetings to explain the proposed
project and answer questions. The Department will designate a
facilitator for the scoping meetings. At the opening of each meeting,
the facilitator will establish the order of speakers and will announce
any additional procedures necessary for conducting the meeting.
Additionally, during the first hour of each meeting attendees may
register, view displays and discuss issues and concerns informally with
Department representatives, after which there will be a formal
presentation, a question and answer, and comment period, and the
opportunity for additional informal discussions. To ensure that all
persons wishing to make a presentation during the period for questions
and answers or comments are given the opportunity to speak, a five-
minute limit may be applied for each speaker, except that public
officials and representatives of groups would be allotted ten minutes
each. The Department encourages those providing oral comments to also
submit them in writing. Comment cards will be available at the meetings
for those who prefer to submit their comments in writing. Speakers may
be asked clarifying questions to ensure that the Department
representatives fully understand the comments and suggestions made by
meeting participants, but the scoping meetings will not be conducted as
evidentiary hearings.
The Department will make transcripts of public scoping meetings,
copies of background documents, and other materials related to the
proposed project and the development of the EIS available for public
review in the following reading rooms:
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy, Freedom of Information
Reading Room, Forrestal Building, Room 1E-190, 1000 Independence
Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20585-0117, 202-586-3142
Idaho Falls, Idaho: Idaho National Engineering and Environmental
Laboratory, DOE--Idaho Operations Office Public Reading Room, 1776
Science Center Drive, Idaho Falls, ID 83415, 208-526-0271
Richland, Washington: [for vicinity of the Hanford Reservation], DOE
Public Reading Room, 2770 University Drive, CIC, Room 101L, Richland,
WA 99352, 509-372-7443, (Fax) 509-372-7444
Albuquerque, New Mexico: [for vicinity of Sandia National
Laboratories], University of New Mexico, Government Information
Department, Zimmerman Library, Albuquerque, NM 87131-1466, 505-277-0582
Aiken, South Carolina: [for vicinity of the Savannah River Site],
University of South Carolina--Aiken, Gregg-Graniteville Library, 171
University Parkway, Aiken, SC 29803, 803-648-6851
Oak Ridge, Tennessee: [for vicinity of the Oak Ridge National
Laboratory], DOE Public Reading Room, 230 Warehouse Road, Bldg 1916-T-
2, Suite 300, Oak Ridge, TN 37831, 423-241-4780 and DOE Information
Resource Center, 105 Broadway Avenue, Oak Ridge, TN 37830, 423-241-4582
NEPA Process
The EIS for Electrometallurgical Treatment of Sodium-Bonded Spent
Nuclear Fuel in the Fuel Conditioning Facility at ANL-W will be
prepared in accordance with the NEPA of 1969, the Council on
Environmental Quality's Regulations for Implementing the Procedural
Provisions of NEPA (40 CFR Parts 1500-1508), and the U.S. Department of
Energy NEPA Implementing Procedures (10 CFR Part 1021).
A 45-day comment period on the draft EIS is planned, during which
public hearings to receive comments will be held. The draft EIS is
scheduled to be issued in July 1999. 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 when the draft EIS is distributed. The final EIS, which will
consider and respond to the public comments received on the draft EIS,
is scheduled to be issued in December 1999. No sooner than 30 days
after the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's notice of availability
of the final EIS is published in the Federal Register, the Department
will issue its Record of
[[Page 8558]]
Decision and publish it in the Federal Register.
Signed in Washington, DC, this 16th day of February 1999.
Peter N. Brush,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Environment, Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. 99-4289 Filed 2-19-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
