Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 66 / Friday, April 5, 2013 / Notices 20625 

1Conventional processing is a chemical 

separations process that involves dissolving spent 

fuel in nitric acid and separating fission products 

from uranium using solvent extraction. 

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) 

prior to any permit action. The Corps 

may ultimately make a determination to 

permit or deny the proposed project or 

a modified version of the proposed 

project. The primary Federal concerns 

are dredging, dredged material disposal, 

addition of permanent structures in and 

over navigable waters of the U.S., and 

transport of dredged material for the 

purpose of ocean disposal. 

Pursuant to the California 

Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) the 

LAHD will serve as Lead Agency in 

preparing an Environmental Impact 

Report (EIR) for its consideration of 

development approvals within its 

jurisdiction. The Corps and LAHD have 

agreed to jointly prepare a Draft EIS/EIR 

to optimize efficiency and avoid 

duplication. The Draft EIS/EIR is 

intended to be sufficient in scope to 

address the Federal, state and local 

requirements and environmental issues 

concerning the proposed activities and 

permit approvals. 

1. Project Site and Background 

Information. The project site is located 

on Terminal Island within in an 

industrial area of the East Basin region 

of the Port of Los Angeles. The site is 

within the Port of Los Angeles 

Community Plan area in the City of Los 

Angeles, adjacent to the communities of 

San Pedro and Wilmington, and 

approximately 20 miles south of 

downtown Los Angeles. The purpose of 

the project is to improve marine 

shipping and maritime commerce by 

optimizing the container-handling 

efficiency and capacity at Berths 212– 

224, accommodate berthing and 

loading/unloading the largest container 

ships, and increase on-dock rail 

facilities to accommodate projected 

peak increases in container movement 

into and out of the terminal at Berths 

212–224 resulting from the handling of 

larger ships. 

2. Proposed Action: The LAHD has 

proposed to redevelop the existing 

container terminal at Berths 212–224. 

Yusen Terminals Inc. [YTI] operates the 

existing 185-acre container terminal 

under a lease agreement (LAHD Permit 

No. 692). The proposed project would 

result in dredging of approximately 

25,000 cubic yards of sediment from 

Berths 212–224 to increase depth at 

existing berths; disposal of dredged 

material at either an offshore site 

(LA–2), confined disposal facility (CDF), 

or other approved location; wharf 

improvements including installation of 

new subsurface sheet pile and king piles 

to stabilize the existing wharf prior to 

dredging, installation of four new 100- 

gauge and modification (i.e., 

heightening, additional boom length) of 

six existing gantry cranes for a total of 

14 operational cranes at full build-out; 

and backland improvements such as 

additional on-dock rail, paving, coldplaning, etc., on approximately 160 

acres of the site. 

3. Issues: Potentially significant issues 

associated with the project include: 

Aesthetics/visual impacts, air quality 

emissions, biological resource impacts, 

environmental justice, geologic impacts 

related to seismicity, hazards and 

hazardous materials, hydrology and 

water quality, noise, traffic and 

transportation, and cumulative impacts 

from past, present and reasonably 

foreseeable future projects. 

4. Alternatives. The Draft EIS/EIR will 

include a co-equal analysis of several 

alternatives. Project alternatives will be 

further developed during this scoping 

process. Additional alternatives that 

may be developed during scoping will 

also be considered in the Draft EIS/EIR. 

5. Scoping Process. The Corps and 

LAHD will jointly conduct a public 

scoping meeting for the proposed 

project to receive public comment 

regarding the appropriate scope and 

preparation of the Draft EIS/EIR. 

Participation by Federal, state, and local 

agencies and other interested 

organization and persons is encouraged. 

This meeting will be conducted in 

English and Spanish. 

6. Electronic Access and Filing 

Addresses: Comments may be submitted 

by electronic mail (email) to: 

theresa.stevens@usace.army.mil. 

Electronic mail comments should 

include the commenter’s physical or 

electronic mailing address, the project 

title and the Corps file number. 

7. The Draft EIS/EIR is expected to be 

available for public review and 

comment in the fall 2013, and a public 

meeting will be held after its 

publication. 

Dated: March 19, 2013. 

David J. Castanon, 

Chief, Regulatory Division. 

[FR Doc. 2013–07968 Filed 4–4–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3720–58–P 

DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES 

SAFETY BOARD 

Extension of Hearing Record Closure 

Date 

AGENCY: Defense Nuclear Facilities 

Safety Board. 

ACTION: Extension of hearing record 

closure date. 

SUMMARY: The Defense Nuclear 

Facilities Safety Board (Board) 

published a document in the Federal 

Register on January 22, 2013, (78 FR 

4393), as amended, February 19, 2013, 

(78 FR 11632). The publication 

concerned notice of a hearing and 

meeting on March 14, 2013, regarding 

safety culture, emergency preparedness, 

and safety issues at the Pantex Plant. 

The Board stated in the January 22, 

2013, hearing notice that the hearing 

record would remain open until April 

15, 2013, for the receipt of additional 

materials. 

Extension of Time: The Board now 

extends the period of time for which the 

hearing record will remain open to June 

15, 2013, to further accommodate, 

among other things, submission of 

answers to questions taken for the 

record during the course of the public 

hearing. 

Contact Person for Further 

Information: Marcelyn Atwood, General 

Manager, Defense Nuclear Facilities 

Safety Board, 625 Indiana Avenue NW., 

Suite 700, Washington, DC 20004–2901, 

(800) 788–4016. This is a toll-free 

number. 

Dated: April 2, 2013. 

Peter S. Winokur, 

Chairman. 

[FR Doc. 2013–07969 Filed 4–4–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3670–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Spent Nuclear Fuel Management at the 

Savannah River Site 

AGENCY: U.S. Department of Energy. 

ACTION: Amended Record of Decision. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of 

Energy (DOE) is amending its August 7, 

2000, Record of Decision (ROD) 

pursuant to the Savannah River Site 

Spent Nuclear Fuel Management Final 

Environmental Impact Statement, 

Aiken, SC (DOE/EIS–0279, 2000; SRS 

SNF EIS). In the 2000 ROD, DOE 

decided to develop and demonstrate the 

‘‘melt and dilute’’ technology to manage 

approximately 28.6 metric tons of heavy 

metal (MTHM) of aluminum-clad SNF, 

consistent with its preferred alternative 

identified in the SRS SNF EIS. 

DOE now amends that decision and 

will manage approximately 3.3 MTHM 

from the currently projected inventory 

of 22 MTHM at SRS using conventional 

processing 1 at the H-Canyon facility at 

SRS, as described and evaluated under 

the Conventional Processing Alternative 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

20626 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 66 / Friday, April 5, 2013 / Notices 

2Target materials are residual materials left after 

the desired isotopes have been removed from the 

targets. For example, target materials could be 

residual materials from the production in a research 

reactor of molybdenum-99, which decays to 

technetium-99, a medical isotope. Targets may be 

shaped as plates, pins, or cylinders. Target 

materials are not high-level radioactive waste. 

3 DOE developed five alternatives that could be 

used to manage SNF: No Action; Minimum Impact; 

Direct Disposal; Maximum Impact; and the 

Preferred Alternative; these alternatives and the fuel 

groups are described in the SRS SNF EIS and 

summarized in the 2000 ROD. 

4On June 1, 1995, DOE announced that, among 

other actions, aluminum-clad SNF would be 

consolidated at SRS for management and nonaluminum-clad SNF would be consolidated at the 

Idaho National Laboratory (INL) (60 FR 28680; June 

1, 1995). In keeping with this decision, when DOE 

announced its decision to implement a new foreign 

research reactor spent fuel acceptance policy, DOE 

stated that aluminum-clad fuel would be shipped 

to SRS and non-aluminum-clad fuel would be 

shipped to the INL (61 FR 25092; May 17, 1996). 

in the SRS SNF EIS. The quantity of 3.3 

MTHM is the minimum amount of SNF 

necessary to avoid the need for costly 

modifications to the L-Basin that would 

allow DOE to accommodate expected 

receipts of SNF for the foreseeable 

future. This includes up to 200 High 

Flux Isotope Reactor (HFIR) cores 

generated at the Oak Ridge National 

Laboratory and approximately 1,000 

bundles of aluminum-clad SNF 

currently stored at SRS, as well as target 

residue materials 2 containing enriched 

uranium (including target materials 

from Canada that contain liquid Highly 

Enriched Uranium (HEU) of U.S. origin). 

DOE anticipates that processing this 

SNF and target residue material would 

begin as early as 2014 and continue 

approximately four years. As a result of 

this amended decision, HEU in the SNF 

and target materials will be downblended to low-enriched uranium 

(LEU). This end product will not be 

useable in nuclear weapons, but will be 

available for use in commercial power 

reactors such as those operated by the 

Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) to 

generate electricity. DOE will continue 

to safely store the aluminum-clad SNF 

not addressed in this Amended ROD in 

L-Basin at SRS, pending future analysis 

and DOE decisions. 

In accordance with DOE regulations 

for implementing the National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), DOE 

has prepared a Supplement Analysis 

(SA) to examine previous NEPA 

analyses of the management of SNF at 

SRS, particularly the SRS SNF EIS and 

the Proposed Nuclear Weapons 

Nonproliferation Policy Concerning 

Foreign Research Reactor Spent Nuclear 

Fuel Environmental Impact Statement 

(DOE/EIS–0218, 1996, FRR EIS) tiered 

from the Programmatic Spent Nuclear 

Fuel Management and Idaho National 

Engineering Laboratory Environmental 

Restoration and Waste Management 

Programs Final Environmental Impact 

Statement (DOE/EIS–0203, 1995), to 

determine whether DOE’s amended 

decision would make substantial 

changes in its proposed actions or 

whether there are significant new 

circumstances or information relevant to 

environmental concerns and bearing on 

the proposed action or its potential 

impacts. Based on the SA, DOE has 

determined that a supplemental or new 

EIS is not required. 

The actions to be taken pursuant to 

this Amended ROD strongly support 

U.S. non-proliferation policy and goals 

by permanently dispositioning HEU. In 

particular, this amended decision 

implements the U.S. and Canadian 

agreement reached at the Nuclear 

Security Summit in March 2012 to 

expand efforts to return U.S.-origin HEU 

currently stored in Canada to the U.S. 

The commitment supports international 

efforts to consolidate and dispose of 

HEU and to combat nuclear terrorism. 

The actions addressed in this amended 

decision will free existing storage space 

in L-Basin, avoiding the need and cost 

required to provide additional new 

space in the Basin. This in turn will 

allow for continued receipt of Foreign 

Research Reactor SNF (FRR SNF), 

adequate storage for HFIR cores, 

continued operation of HFIR in support 

of DOE’s research and development 

mission, dispositioning of HEU out of 

South Carolina, and cost-effective use of 

DOE’s H-Canyon processing facility at 

SRS. 

ADDRESSES: This Amended ROD, the SA 

for SRS SNF Management, and related 

NEPA documents are available on the 

DOE NEPA Web site at 

www.nepa.energy.gov and the SRS Web 

site at www.srs.gov/general/pubs/ 

envbul/nepa/htm. To request copies of 

these documents, please contact: 

Mr. Andrew R. Grainger, NEPA 

Compliance Officer, Savannah River 

Operations Office, U.S. Department of 

Energy, P.O. Box B, Aiken, South 

Carolina 29802, Telephone: (803) 

952–8001, Email: 

drew.grainger@srs.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

further information on the management 

of SNF at SRS, please contact Mr. 

Grainger as listed above. 

For information on DOE’s NEPA 

process, please contact: 

Ms. Carol M. Borgstrom, Director, Office 

of NEPA Policy and Compliance, GC– 

54, U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 

Independence Avenue SW., 

Washington, DC 20585, Telephone: 

(202) 586–4600, or leave a message at 

(800) 472–2756, Email: 

askNEPA@hq.doe.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

DOE’s purpose and need for action, as 

described in the SRS SNF EIS, is to 

develop and implement a safe and 

efficient SNF management strategy that 

includes preparing aluminum-clad SNF 

and target material stored at SRS, or 

expected to be shipped to SRS, for 

ultimate disposition offsite. 

In the SRS SNF EIS, DOE grouped the 

SNF to be managed based on 

characteristics such as fuel size, 

physical and chemical properties, and 

radionuclide inventory. The fuel groups 

and the seven technologies that could be 

used to prepare the SNF for disposition 

are described in the SRS SNF EIS. The 

potential environmental impacts 

associated with the use of these 

technologies, including conventional 

processing, were analyzed in the SRS 

SNF EIS. In the ROD for the SRS SNF 

EIS (65 FR 48224; August 7, 2000), DOE 

identified the Minimum Impact 

Alternative as the environmentally 

preferable alternative, but selected the 

Preferred Alternative.3

To implement the Preferred 

Alternative described in the SRS SNF 

EIS, DOE decided to use a combination 

of technologies, including melt and 

dilute, to manage the SNF. The melt and 

dilute technology was to be used to treat 

all Group B fuel (about 20 MTHM of 

Material Test Reactor fuel from foreign 

and domestic reactors), all Group C fuel 

(about 8 MTHM of oxide and silicide 

foreign and domestic reactor fuel) 

except failed fuel (which DOE would 

treat by conventional processing), and 

most Group D materials (about 0.6 

MTHM of foreign research reactor 

targets). DOE estimated that these fuels 

and target materials would total 

approximately 28.6 MTHM, based on 

quantities then stored at SRS and 

estimated quantities located at domestic 

and foreign reactor locations scheduled 

or eligible to ship fuel to SRS.4 These 

shipments began in 1996 and are 

continuing. DOE now estimates that 

there are approximately 22 MTHM of 

SNF and target material at or eligible to 

be sent to SRS. This is less than the 28.6 

MTHM evaluated in the SRS SNF EIS 

because DOE now expects to receive 

less FRR SNF than originally estimated. 

The FRR EIS evaluated alternatives 

for return to the United States of SNF 

and target materials containing HEU 

enriched in the United States and 

supplied to foreign countries. Return of 

HEU for safe storage and disposition 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 66 / Friday, April 5, 2013 / Notices 20627 

5One H-Canyon dissolver currently supports 

dissolution of plutonium metal, preparatory to 

oxidizing it in the HB-Line to prepare plutonium 

oxide feed material for the Mixed Oxide Fuel 

Fabrication Facility (see Interim Action 

Determination, Use of H-Canyon/HB-Line to 

Prepare Feed for Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication 

Facility at the Savannah River Site, June 2012). 

advances the United States nuclear 

material nonproliferation goals. 

Appendix B1.5 of the FRR EIS discusses 

the two methods for preparing the target 

residue materials for transport: calcining 

and oxidizing. In the FRR EIS, DOE 

assumed that target residue material 

would be transported in solid form, and 

DOE evaluated the impacts of 

transportation accordingly. In Appendix 

B.2.1.2 of the FRR EIS, DOE explained 

that foreign research reactor shipments 

would be carried out in accordance with 

regulations set by the Department of 

Transportation (49 CFR parts 171 

through 178) and the Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission (NRC) (10 CFR 

part 71); those regulations remain in 

place. In the FRR ROD, DOE decided, 

consistent with the programmatic 

decision to consolidate storage by fuel 

type, to transport to and store 

aluminum-clad SNF and target material 

at the SRS. 

Supplement Analysis 

In accordance with DOE NEPA 

regulations at 10 CFR 1021.314, DOE 

prepared an SA for the SRS SNF EIS 

and the FRR EIS (DOE/EIS–0279–SA–01 

and DOE/EIS–0218–SA–06, March 

2013) to consider a proposal to process 

the minimum quantity of SNF necessary 

to avoid the need for costly 

modifications to the L-Basin that would 

allow DOE to accommodate expected 

receipts of SNF for the foreseeable 

future. To do this, DOE estimated that 

processing approximately 1000 bundles 

of SNF and up to 200 HFIR cores 

currently stored at SRS would provide 

the minimum necessary amount of 

storage space. This could be 

accomplished over approximately a 

four-year period and equates to 

approximately 3.3 MTHM of the 

currently projected 22 MTHM total 

inventory. DOE would continue to 

safely store the remaining SNF in LBasin at SRS, pending future analysis 

and DOE decisions. DOE also evaluated 

plans to receive FRR target residue 

material from Canada in accordance 

with U.S. acceptance policy and 

consistent with U.S. nonproliferation 

objectives. The target material, 

containing U.S.-origin HEU in liquid 

form, would be shipped in Type B casks 

certified by NRC. 

The SA compared the proposal to the 

relevant NEPA reviews to determine 

whether the proposal would make 

substantial changes in the proposed 

actions identified in the SRS SNF EIS or 

FRR EIS, or whether there are 

significant new circumstances or 

information relevant to environmental 

concerns and bearing on the proposed 

action or its impacts, consistent with the 

Council on Environmental Quality 

NEPA implementing regulations at 40 

CFR Parts 1502.9. DOE analyzed the use 

of conventional processing for SNF in 

lieu of the melt and dilute technology, 

which was never developed due to 

technical issues involving the off-gas 

system and funding limitations. The 

conventional processing approach is 

consistent with U.S. nuclear nonproliferation goals in that HEU would be 

eliminated and plutonium present in 

the SNF would not be separated from 

the fission products. Processing of the 

approximately 3.3 MTHM of SNF and 

target residue materials in H-Canyon 

will result in plutonium-bearing highlevel waste (HLW) that will be vitrified 

in the Defense Waste Processing Facility 

(DWPF) at SRS, creating up to 

approximately 24 canisters of vitrified, 

proliferation-resistant HLW. This 

increase is not significant in the context 

of the approximately 7,000 canisters 

DOE estimates will be otherwise 

produced by the DWPF, and is within 

the DWPF production and SRS planned 

storage capabilities. 

In the SA, DOE evaluated the addition 

of a third dissolver in H-Canyon to 

return the dissolving capacity for SNF to 

the level supported by H-Canyon’s offgas system and processing capability,5

which are the capacities evaluated in 

the SRS SNF EIS. Installation and 

operation of a third dissolver in HCanyon will take place entirely within 

H-Canyon and will not result in any 

land disturbance. Construction waste 

generated will be managed using 

existing SRS facilities and procedures. 

Operation of a third dissolver is within 

H-Canyon’s dissolving capacity for SNF 

and is supported by existing systems, 

e.g., off-gas system. DOE would 

continue to use one existing dissolver to 

process plutonium material; plutonium 

dissolution does not require use of the 

off-gas treatment system or H-Canyon’s 

solvent extraction capacity and raffinate 

systems. The air and liquid releases and 

other impacts of operating two 

dissolvers and the associated systems to 

process SNF would not significantly 

differ from those reported in the SRS 

SNF EIS, because the evaluation of the 

potential environmental impacts 

associated with conventional processing 

assumed the use of two dissolvers. 

In the SA, DOE also evaluated the 

transportation, receipt, and processing 

of target residue materials in liquid form 

(from Canada) rather than solid form 

and found that the potential 

environmental impacts would not 

significantly differ from results 

presented in the FRR EIS and the SRS 

SNF EIS. For this analysis, DOE 

assumed that the NRC would certify use 

of an existing Type-B cask for the target 

residue materials. NRC consideration of 

the certification request is ongoing. 

Based on conclusions reached in the 

SA, DOE determined that the 

preparation of a supplemental or new 

EIS is not required. 

Amended Decision 

DOE has decided to manage up to 200 

HFIR cores, approximately 1,000 

bundles of SNF, and target residue 

materials containing HEU (including 

target residue materials containing 

liquid HEU from Canada) using 

conventional processing in H-Canyon at 

SRS. This SNF and these target residue 

materials, totaling approximately 3.3 

MTHM, include material from Groups 

B, C, and D identified in the SRS SNF 

EIS. HEU recovered during conventional 

processing will be down-blended to 

create LEU feedstock for fuel fabrication 

for commercial nuclear reactors. The 

shipments of target residue materials in 

liquid form from Canada will comply 

with all applicable transportation 

regulations in both countries to ensure 

environmental protection and the safety 

of the involved workers and the general 

public. No target material or waste from 

processing target material will be 

returned to Canada. DOE will 

implement minor modifications to HCanyon to receive liquid HEU as 

described in the SA. 

DOE anticipates processing these 

materials beginning as early as 2014 and 

continuing approximately four years, 

consistent with program and policy 

priorities. DOE will install a third 

dissolver in H-Canyon in addition to 

two existing dissolvers, in order to costeffectively utilize H-Canyon, and 

expeditiously complete the mission. 

The aluminum-clad SNF not 

addressed in this amended ROD will 

remain safely in wet storage in L-Basin 

at SRS, pending future analysis and 

DOE decisions. The water chemistry 

will continue to be rigorously controlled 

to prevent any corrosion reactions 

between the storage tubes, fuel, and the 

basin water. 

No environmental impacts resulting 

from operations under this amended 

decision would require specific 

mitigation measures. DOE will continue 

its current practices and policies to use 

all practicable means to avoid or 

minimize environmental harm and 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

20628 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 66 / Friday, April 5, 2013 / Notices 

6The Secretary’s Strategy for the Management 

and Disposal of Used Nuclear Fuel and High-level 

Radioactive Waste, January 2013, endorses the key 

principles of the 2012 Blue Ribbon Commission on 

America’s Nuclear Future report and represents an 

initial basis for discussions among the 

Administration, the Congress, and other 

stakeholders toward a sustainable path forward for 

disposition of nuclear waste. 

impacts to workers when implementing 

the actions described herein. For 

example, DOE will continue to evaluate 

and implement, as appropriate, physical 

modifications to the H-Canyon facility 

and process chemistry changes that 

would reduce personnel exposure, 

facility effluents, and waste generation. 

Basis for Decision 

This amended decision reduces the 

overall cost of managing the currently 

stored fuel by eliminating the need for 

additional SNF storage racks in the LBasin SNF storage facility and allows for 

future receipt of foreign and domestic 

SNF, including continued receipt of 

HFIR cores from the Oak Ridge National 

Laboratory in support of DOE’s research 

and development mission. In addition, 

this amended decision will maximize 

near-term utilization of H-Canyon and 

expeditiously complete the mission 

This amended decision supports 

DOE’s ongoing approach for reducing 

the proliferation risks inherent in stocks 

of HEU by down-blending surplus HEU 

to LEU. The LEU would be available for 

use in commercial reactors such as 

those operated by TVA. In addition, 

operation of H-Canyon to process the 

SNF is consistent with section 3137 of 

the Floyd D. Spence Defense 

Authorization Act for fiscal year (FY) 

2001 (Pub. L. 106–398), as amended by 

section 3115 of the National Defense 

Authorization Act for FY 2004 (Pub. L. 

108–136), regarding the continued 

operation and maintenance of a high 

state of readiness of the H-Canyon 

facility at SRS. 

Given the expense involved in 

designing and constructing a new melt 

and dilute capability, and because an 

alternative processing technology 

(conventional processing) is readily 

available, DOE determined that melt 

and dilute is an unnecessarily costly 

duplication of treatment capability for 

aluminum-clad SNF. Conventional 

processing and down-blending the HEU 

to LEU, with vitrification rather than the 

recovery of plutonium, furthers the 

Nation’s non-proliferation goals. 

Although the Secretary of Energy has 

determined that Yucca Mountain is not 

a workable option for a geologic 

repository, DOE remains committed to 

meeting its obligations to safely dispose 

of SNF and HLW.6 While this Amended 

ROD will increase the number of 

canisters of vitrified HLW, this is not 

expected to significantly affect the 

quantity of vitrified HLW requiring 

management. 

Separately, the receipt of target 

residue materials from Canada in liquid 

form under the U.S. Foreign Research 

Reactor Acceptance Policy does not 

present significant new health or 

environmental concerns or impacts as 

described in the SA. The repatriation of 

U.S.-origin HEU from Canada will help 

ensure national and international safety 

and security by downblending this 

material to LEU that would be available 

for beneficial use in power reactors. 

This action is consistent with U.S. 

agreements regarding receipt of FRR 

materials in which involved countries 

with the economic ability to do so 

contribute to the costs of transportation 

and U.S. receipt, processing and 

disposition of the materials. 

In summary, the proposed use of 

conventional processing for a limited 

quantity of SNF as described in this 

amendment to DOE’s 2000 SNF ROD 

takes advantage of existing processes in 

existing facilities. It will allow nearterm progress in processing a portion of 

the inventory analyzed in the SRS SNF 

EIS currently stored on the site, thus 

freeing storage space for expected 

material receipts and avoiding the cost 

of creating additional space. The 

activities encompassed by this amended 

decision will not incur potential health 

or environmental impacts significantly 

different from those analyzed in existing 

NEPA reviews. These activities will 

strongly contribute to DOE’s 

commitment to the United States’ 

nuclear non-proliferation goals and are 

consistent with the U.S. and Canadian 

agreement reached at the Nuclear 

Security Summit in March 2012 to 

expand efforts to return U.S.-origin HEU 

currently stored in Canada to the U.S. 

Further, the actions resulting from this 

Amended ROD will contribute to the 

production of material that can be put 

to beneficial energy production for 

public use, thereby dispositioning some 

HEU out of South Carolina; and will 

contribute to an overall safe, secure, and 

cost-effective strategy for ongoing 

management of SNF and target residue 

materials at SRS. 

Issued in Washington, DC on March 29, 

2013. 

David Huizenga, 

Senior Advisor for Environmental 

Management. 

[FR Doc. 2013–07994 Filed 4–4–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy 

Wireless Metering Challenge 

AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, U.S. Department of 

Energy. 

ACTION: Notice of availability; request 

for comments. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of 

Energy (DOE) Office of Energy 

Efficiency and Renewable Energy 

(EERE) requests comments on the draft 

version of the Wireless Power Meter 

Challenge Specification. This draft is a 

set of performance specifications 

applicable to energy efficiency metering 

devices for use at the electrical panel 

level within commercial buildings. The 

specifications are intended to spur the 

development of new technologies in the 

wireless electric metering space. 

DATES: Comments on the Wireless Meter 

Challenge Specification must be 

received by 5 p.m. Eastern Standard 

Time April 26, 2013. 

DOE will be holding a webinar on 

April 30, 2013. Information regarding 

the webinar is provided in the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section. 

ADDRESSES: Comments may be 

submitted by electronic mail to 

wireless.meter@ee.doe.gov. 

For further information on how to 

submit comments, please see the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

questions regarding the submission of 

comments, technical questions, and 

questions regarding the Challenge, 

contact Jason Koman, Building 

Technologies Office, Mailstop EE–2J, 

Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, U.S. Department of 

Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue 

SW., Washington, DC 20585. Phone 

number: (202) 287–1578. Email: 

Jason.Koman@ee.doe.gov. 

For legal questions contact 

Christopher Calamita, U.S. Department 

of Energy, Office of the General Counsel, 

Forrestal Building, GC–71, 1000 

Independence Avenue SW., 

Washington, DC 20585. Phone number: 

(202) 586–1777. Email: 

christopher.calamita@hq.doe.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EERE is 

developing a challenge specification to 

spur the development of new, low cost 

wireless electric metering devices. In 

order to take action to reduce energy 

usage, owners and operators need to 

know how energy is being used in their 

buildings. Metering data provides 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES