Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 8 / Tuesday, January 14, 2025 / Notices 3195 

documentation may be found by 

clicking on the ‘‘View Supporting 

Statement and Other Documents’’ link. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

specific questions related to collection 

activities, please contact Marcon 

Cerdeira, (202) 453–5819. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Department is especially interested in 

public comment addressing the 

following issues: (1) is this collection 

necessary to the proper functions of the 

Department; (2) will this information be 

processed and used in a timely manner; 

(3) is the estimate of burden accurate; 

(4) how might the Department enhance 

the quality, utility, and clarity of the 

information to be collected; and (5) how 

might the Department minimize the 

burden of this collection on the 

respondents, including through the use 

of information technology. Please note 

that written comments received in 

response to this notice will be 

considered public records. 

Title of Collection: District Survey on 

Use of Funds Under Title II, Part A. 

OMB Control Number: 1810–0618. 

Type of Review: Extension without 

change of a currently approved ICR. 

Respondents/Affected Public: State, 

local, and Tribal governments. 

Total Estimated Number of Annual 

Responses: 4,452. 

Total Estimated Number of Annual 

Burden Hours: 13,252. 

Abstract: The U.S. Department of 

Education is requesting clearance for a 

revision to 1810–0618 in order to 

continue collecting data annually from 

school districts about how Title II, Part 

A funds are used to support authorized 

activities and improve equitable access 

to teachers for low-income and minority 

students; including professional 

development for teachers, principals, 

and other school leaders. The reporting 

requirements are outlined in section 

2104(b) of the Elementary and 

Secondary Education Act (ESEA), as 

reauthorized by the Every Student 

Succeeds Act of 2015 (ESSA). 

The annual survey will include a state 

representative sample of traditional 

school districts, a nationally 

representative sample of charter school 

districts, and an annual request for each 

state to provide a list of districts that 

receive Title II, Part A funds and each 

district-s allocated Title II, part A 

amount. The survey will be sent to 

district Title II, Part A coordinators and 

administered using an electronic 

instrument. 

Dated: January 7, 2025. 

Kun Mullan, 

PRA Coordinator, Strategic Collections and 

Clearance, Governance and Strategy Division, 

Office of Chief Data Officer, Office of 

Planning, Evaluation and Policy 

Development. 

[FR Doc. 2025–00527 Filed 1–13–25; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Record of Decision for the Final 

Environmental Impact Statement for 

Department of Energy Activities in 

Support of Commercial Production of 

High-Assay Low-Enriched Uranium 

(HALEU) 

AGENCY: Office of Nuclear Energy, 

Department of Energy. 

ACTION: Record of decision. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of 

Energy (DOE or the Department) 

announces the Record of Decision 

(ROD) for the ‘‘Final Environmental 

Impact Statement for Department of 

Energy Activities in Support of 

Commercial Production of High-Assay 

Low-Enriched Uranium (HALEU)’’ 

(Final HALEU EIS) (DOE/EIS–0559). 

DOE prepared the Final HALEU EIS in 

accordance with the National 

Environmental Policy Act (‘‘NEPA’’) to 

evaluate the potential environmental 

impacts of activities associated with 

DOE’s Proposed Action to acquire, 

through procurement from commercial 

sources, HALEU enriched to at least 

19.75 and less than 20 weight percent 

uranium-235 (U–235) over a 10-year 

period of performance, and to facilitate 

the establishment of commercial 

HALEU fuel production. The Proposed 

Action addresses the Energy Act of 2020 

(‘‘the Energy Act of 2020’’ or in context, 

‘‘the Energy Act’’), for the acquisition of 

HALEU produced by a commercial 

entity using enrichment technology and 

making it available for commercial use 

or demonstration projects. DOE also 

evaluated the No Action Alternative. 

DOE has decided to implement the 

Proposed Action, its Preferred 

Alternative, as described in the Final 

HALEU EIS. 

ADDRESSES: Questions or comments 

should be sent to Mr. James Lovejoy, EIS 

Document Manager, by mail to U.S. 

Department of Energy, Idaho Operations 

Office, 1955 Fremont Avenue, MS 1235, 

Idaho Falls, Idaho 83415; or by email to 

HALEU-EIS@nuclear.energy.gov. The 

Final HALEU EIS and this ROD are 

available for viewing or download at 

https://www.energy.gov/ne/haleuenvironmental-impact-statement. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

information regarding the DOE HALEU 

Availability Program, visit https://

www.energy.gov/ne/haleu-availabilityprogram. For information about the 

HALEU EIS, including the Final HALEU 

EIS and this ROD, visit https://

www.energy.gov/ne/haleuenvironmental-impact-statement, or 

contact Mr. James Lovejoy at either the 

mailing address listed in the ADDRESSES

section, via email at HALEU-EIS@

nuclear.energy.gov, or by telephone: 

(208) 526–4519. For general information 

on DOE’s NEPA process, contact Mr. 

Jason Anderson at the mailing address 

listed in the ADDRESSES section, via 

email at HALEU-EIS@

nuclear.energy.gov, or by telephone: 

(208) 360–3437. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The Energy Act of 2020 directs DOE 

to ‘‘establish and carry out . . . a 

program to support the availability of 

HA–LEU for civilian domestic research, 

development, demonstration, and 

commercial use,’’ 42 U.S.C. 16281(a)(1). 

The current U.S. commercial power 

reactor fuel cycle is based on lowenriched uranium (LEU) enriched to 

less than 5 percent of U–235, but many 

advanced reactor designs require 

HALEU. 

HALEU is defined as ‘‘uranium 

having an assay greater than 5.0 weight 

percent and less than 20.0 weight 

percent of the uranium-235 isotope,’’ 42 

U.S.C. 16281(d)(4). In the United States, 

HALEU is currently made, in limited 

quantities, by blending down DOE 

stockpiles of highly enriched uranium 

(HEU) (enriched to 20% or greater), with 

natural uranium or lower enriched 

uranium (i.e., ‘‘downblending’’). 

Anticipated demand from research 

reactors, isotope production facilities, 

and advanced nuclear reactors will 

require more HALEU to be produced. 

DOE has limited capability to produce 

HALEU by downblending existing 

surplus stockpiles of HEU. Limited 

quantities of HALEU are also being 

produced under DOE contract at the 

American Centrifuge Plant in Piketon, 

Ohio, by American Centrifuge 

Operating, LLC, a wholly owned 

indirect subsidiary of Centrus Energy 

Corp. A sufficient commercial capability 

to produce HALEU through enrichment 

of natural uranium or LEU to meet 

anticipated demand does not exist in 

the United States. 

DOE projects that more than 40 metric 

tons (MT) of HALEU will be needed by 

2030 with additional amounts required 

each year thereafter to deploy a new 

fleet of advanced reactors in a timeframe 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with NOTICES
3196 Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 8 / Tuesday, January 14, 2025 / Notices 

that supports the Administration’s 2050 

net-zero emissions target. The lack of an 

adequate domestic, commercial fuel 

supply could also impede both reactor 

demonstrations being supported under 

DOE’s Advanced Reactor Demonstration 

Program and the development of future 

advanced reactor technologies. 

As indicated by many commercial 

entities that responded to DOE’s 

‘‘Request for Information (RFI) 

Regarding Planning for Establishment of 

a Program to Support the Availability of 

High-Assay Low Enriched Uranium 

(HALEU) for Civilian Domestic 

Research, Development, Demonstration, 

and Commercial Use’’, 86 FR 71055 

(Dec. 14, 2021), (referred to as the 

‘‘RFI’’), there are potential timing and 

coordination issues with developing 

that capability. 

Those interested in designing, 

building, and operating advanced 

reactor designs that use HALEU fuel are 

hesitant to invest in the technology 

without a firm source of HALEU fuel. 

Likewise, those interested in providing 

HALEU fuel are hesitant to invest in 

facilities without a firm demand. As 

described in multiple responses to the 

RFI, this is a ‘‘chicken-and-egg’’ 

dilemma. 

This concern is a consistent theme in 

the industry responses to DOE’s RFI. 

Responders emphasized the opportunity 

for DOE to be an agent for stability (both 

in assuring industry and the market as 

to HALEU availability and price 

certainty) during the initial phase of 

HALEU fuel production. 

To address this issue, an initial 

public/private partnership is intended 

to accelerate development of a 

sustainable commercial HALEU supply 

capability. If successful, this partnership 

could provide the incentive for the 

private sector to incrementally expand 

the capacity in a modular fashion as a 

sustainable market develops. 

In 2023 and early 2024, the DOE 

Idaho Operations Office published two 

Requests for Proposals (RFPs) specific to 

HALEU. One covers DOE’s planned 

acquisition of HALEU as enriched 

uranium hexafluoride. The other is for 

deconversion services to deconvert 

enriched HALEU to other forms, such as 

metal or oxide, that will be used to 

fabricate fuels required by many 

advanced reactor developers. DOE’s 

‘‘Request for Proposals for High-Assay 

Low-Enriched Uranium (HALEU)— 

Enrichment Acquisition’’ (the 

‘‘Enrichment RFP’’) solicited responses 

from industry regarding DOE’s proposal 

to acquire, through procurement from 

commercial sources, HALEU as uranium 

hexafluoride (UF6) enriched to a 

minimum of 19.75 and less than 20 

weight percent U–235. 

The enriched UF6 must be 

deconverted to other forms, like oxide 

or metal, before it can be fabricated into 

HALEU fuel or put to other use. DOE’s 

Request for Proposals for the HighAssay Low-Enriched Uranium 

(HALEU)—Deconversion Acquisition 

(the ‘‘Deconversion RFP’’) solicited 

responses from industry regarding 

DOE’s proposal to acquire domestic 

HALEU deconversion services for 

HALEU and storage until future fuel 

fabrication. 

Purpose and Need for Agency Action 

The purpose of the Proposed Action 

is to fulfill Congressional direction in 

section 2001(a)(2)(D)(v) of the Energy 

Act, codified at 42 

U.S.C.16281(a)(2)(D)(v), and to facilitate 

the development of a domestic HALEU 

fuel cycle through procurement of 

HALEU. Agency action is needed to 

create a supply of HALEU fuel to power 

advanced reactors. Many advanced 

reactors are intended to operate using 

HALEU fuel, but there is currently not 

sufficient domestic supply of HALEU 

for these reactors. 

The Energy Act of 2020 directs DOE 

to ‘‘establish and carry out, through the 

Office of Nuclear Energy, a program to 

support the availability of HA–LEU for 

civilian domestic research, 

development, demonstration, and 

commercial use,’’ 42 U.S.C. 16281(a)(1). 

Section 2001(a)(2)(D)(v) of the Energy 

Act more specifically directs DOE to 

consider using enrichment technology 

to make HALEU available for 

commercial use or demonstration 

projects, where such HALEU is 

‘‘produced in the United States by—(I) 

a United States-owned commercial 

entity operating United States-origin 

technology; (II) a United States-owned 

commercial entity operating a foreignorigin technology; or (III) a foreignowned entity operating a foreign-origin 

technology.’’ 42 U.S.C. 

16281(a)(2)(D)(v). Further, section 3131 

of the National Defense Authorization 

Act for Fiscal Year 2024 (Nuclear Fuel 

Security Act of 2023), Pub. L. 118–31, 

137 Stat. 795, subtitle C, codified at 42 

U.S.C. 16282(b), among other things, 

seeks to expeditiously increase domestic 

production of HALEU to meet the needs 

of advanced nuclear reactor developers 

and the consortium established under 

section 2001(a) of the Energy Act of 

2020, codified at 42 U.S.C. 16281(a). 

There is currently insufficient private 

incentive to invest in commercial 

HALEU production due to the current 

market base. There is also insufficient 

incentive to invest in commercial 

deployment of advanced reactors 

because the domestic HALEU fuel cycle 

does not exist. Both DOE and industry 

groups have recognized that DOE action 

is needed to facilitate the development 

of the necessary infrastructure, support 

near-term research and demonstration 

needs, and support the U.S. commercial 

nuclear industry. One of the main 

challenges to establishing a commercial 

HALEU-based reactor economy is the 

upfront capital investment required to 

establish the enrichment capability to 

produce quantities of HALEU suitable 

for fabrication into the fuel needed for 

the various types of advanced reactor 

designs. 

Proposed Action 

The Proposed Action is to acquire, 

through procurement from commercial 

sources, HALEU enriched to at least 

19.75 and less than 20 weight percent 

U–235 over a 10-year period of 

performance, and to facilitate the 

establishment of commercial HALEU 

fuel production. The Proposed Action 

addresses section 2001(a)(2)(D)(v) of the 

Energy Act of 2020, for the acquisition 

of HALEU produced by a commercial 

entity using enrichment technology and 

making it available for commercial use 

or demonstration projects. 

The Final HALEU EIS addresses the 

following activities to facilitate the 

commercialization of HALEU fuel 

production and acquisition of up to 290 

MT of HALEU under the Proposed 

Action: (1) mining, extraction, and 

recovery of uranium ore producing 

triuranium octoxide (U3O8) (from in-situ 

recovery or conventional mining and 

milling sources); (2) uranium 

conversion from U3O8 to UF6 for input 

to enrichment facilities; (3) enrichment 

in up to three steps: (a) from natural 

uranium to LEU of no more than 5 

weight percent U–235, (b) from LEU to 

HALEU greater than 5 and less than 10 

weight percent U–235, and (c) to 

HALEU from 10 to less than 20 weight 

percent U–235; (4) HALEU 

deconversion from UF6 to uranium 

oxide, metal, and other forms; (5) 

storage of HALEU; (6) transportation of 

uranium/HALEU between facilities; and 

(7) DOE acquisition of HALEU of 

between at least 19.75 weight percent 

and less than 20 weight percent U–235. 

In addition to the listed activities, the 

following related actions could result 

from implementation of the Proposed 

Action: (1) fuel fabrication for a variety 

of fuel types; (2) HALEU-fueled reactor 

(demonstration and test, power, isotope 

production) operations; and (3) spent 

fuel storage and disposition. 

While the Final HALEU EIS provides 

information that could be used to 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 8 / Tuesday, January 14, 2025 / Notices 3197 

1 DOE is aware of the November 12, 2024, 

decision in Marin Audubon Society v. Federal 

Aviation Administration, No. 23–1067 (D.C. Cir. 

Nov. 12, 2024). To the extent that a court may 

conclude that the CEQ regulations implementing 

NEPA are not judicially enforceable or binding on 

this agency action, DOE has nonetheless elected to 

follow those regulations at 40 CFR parts 1500–1508, 

in addition to DOE’s regulations implementing 

NEPA at 10 CFR part 1021 to meet DOE’s 

obligations under NEPA, 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq. 

identify impacts from the construction 

and operation of HALEU fuel cycle 

facilities, the selection of specific 

locations and facilities is not a part of 

the ROD for this EIS. 

Alternatives 

The Final HALEU EIS evaluates 

potential environmental impacts for the 

Proposed Action and the No Action 

Alternative. The No Action Alternative 

is the status quo, where DOE would not 

implement the Proposed Action and no 

sufficient domestic commercial supply 

of HALEU is available. DOE would not 

be involved in establishing a 

commercial HALEU fuel cycle; 

development of a domestic commercial 

supply of HALEU would be left to 

industry. 

Potential Environmental Impacts 

Implementation of the Proposed 

Action, as well as related activities, 

would generally have SMALL to 

MODERATE environmental 

consequences. In this ROD for this EIS, 

DOE will make a decision on whether 

to move forward with the Proposed 

Action but will not select specific 

locations or facilities. For this reason, 

and to bound impacts, DOE analyzed 

construction and operation of HALEU 

facilities at existing uranium fuel cycle 

facilities, other industrial (brownfield) 

sites, and at undeveloped (greenfield) 

sites. As explained in more detail in the 

EIS, DOE’s assessment of the potential 

impacts of the Proposed Action are 

based on existing NEPA documentation 

that addresses the construction and 

operation of existing and proposed fuel 

cycle (mainly LEU fuel cycle) facilities. 

This information was reviewed by 

subject matter experts and used to 

develop the information regarding the 

potential impacts of the Proposed 

Action. This EIS uses assessment ratings 

for the categorization of the potential 

environmental impacts. When referring 

to the degree of environmental impacts, 

the EIS uses the same impacts 

assessment rating terminology from the 

existing NEPA evaluations to the extent 

possible. For reference, the Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission (NRC) generally 

defines environmental consequences as: 

• SMALL—The environmental effects 

are not detectable or are so minor that 

they will neither destabilize nor 

noticeably alter any important attribute 

of the resource. 

• MODERATE—The environmental 

effects are sufficient to alter noticeably, 

but not destabilize, important attributes 

of the resource. 

• LARGE—The environmental effects 

are clearly noticeable and are sufficient 

to destabilize important attributes of the 

resource. 

In general, constructing and operating 

modified or new HALEU fuel cycle 

facilities at existing facilities results in 

estimated potential environmental 

consequences that range from mostly 

SMALL to MODERATE. Most 

MODERATE consequences are 

associated with construction activities 

and not the HALEU operations or 

production-related processes. 

Overall, constructing and operating 

all-new HALEU fuel cycle facilities at 

previously developed industrial sites 

(brownfield sites) or previously 

undeveloped locations (greenfield sites) 

could also result in estimated potential 

environmental consequences that range 

from SMALL to MODERATE. The 

MODERATE consequences are 

associated with the uncertainties of the 

specific characteristics (particularly the 

presence of ecological and historic and 

cultural resources) of the site relative to 

construction and not the HALEU 

operations or production-related 

processes. Construction activities are 

usually transient in nature and 

mitigations would be expected to be 

incorporated, as appropriate, to 

minimize potential consequences, as 

part of the required regulatory licensing, 

permitting, and associated NEPA or 

equivalent evaluation processes. 

Therefore, as discussed in the Final 

HALEU EIS, the majority of potential 

environmental consequences would 

likely range from SMALL to 

MODERATE. 

Although DOE did not select specific 

locations or facilities in this ROD, 

implementation of the Proposed Action 

could result in HALEU fuel cycle 

facilities being sited at various locations 

in the future. The environmental 

impacts of such HALEU fuel cycle 

facilities are expected to be evaluated by 

the appropriate regulatory authority 

(e.g., the NRC, other Federal agencies or 

Agreement States). Such site-specific 

environmental evaluations are expected 

to identify the specific impacts that 

might occur. Further, DOE expects the 

relevant regulatory agency would 

determine, consistent with the Council 

on Environmental Quality (CEQ) 

regulations at 40 CFR 1501.11 related to 

tiering, to what extent this EIS could be 

utilized to support site-specific 

environmental reviews.1

Environmentally Preferable Alternative 

The No Action Alternative serves as 

the status quo, where DOE would not 

implement the Proposed Action and no 

sufficient domestic commercial supply 

of HALEU is available. Overall and at 

least in the short term, the No Action 

Alternative would have fewer potential 

adverse environmental effects than the 

Proposed Action because construction 

and operation of HALEU fuel cycle 

facilities would not occur. Development 

of a domestic commercial supply of 

HALEU would be left to industry, which 

could result in fewer, short-term, 

domestic impacts than under the 

Proposed Action Alternative. Therefore, 

the No Action Alternative would be the 

Environmentally Preferable Alternative. 

However, the No Action Alternative 

would not meet the purpose and need 

to establish a program to support the 

availability of HALEU for civilian 

domestic research, development, 

demonstration, and commercial use, 

and may not result in the potential longterm environmental benefits, identified 

in the EIS, of the Proposed Action. 

Comments on the Final HALEU EIS 

During the development of the Final 

HALEU EIS, DOE considered all the 

alternatives, information, analyses, and 

objections submitted by state, Tribal, 

and local governments as well as public 

commenters. 

DOE made more than 4,000 

notifications of the completion and 

availability of the Final HALEU EIS to 

Congressional members and 

committees; all fifty United States; 

Tribal governments and organizations; 

local governments; other Federal 

agencies; non-governmental 

organizations; and individuals. 

Following issuance of the Final HALEU 

EIS, DOE received five comments. 

As part of the comments received on 

the Final HALEU EIS, a non-profit 

organization requested DOE refrain from 

issuing a ROD on the Final HALEU EIS 

until a Nonproliferation Impact 

Assessment (NPIA) has been prepared. 

This non-profit group further requested 

that its comments be added to the EIS 

record and that the requested NPIA be 

available for public review and 

comment. DOE received similar requests 

from this organization during the 

scoping and public comment periods 

and addressed these comments in the 

Final HALEU EIS. This organization 

submitted two identical comments on 

the Final EIS by email and U.S. Mail. 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with NOTICES
3198 Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 8 / Tuesday, January 14, 2025 / Notices 

As noted in the EIS, DOE 

acknowledges that the widescale 

deployment of HALEU fuels, which 

could be facilitated by the Proposed 

Action, presents different proliferation 

challenges than the use of LEU. DOE 

will continue working with industry, 

the NRC, and the IAEA to further assess 

potential risks associated with a 

commercial HALEU fuel cycle, and the 

National Nuclear Security 

Administration (NNSA) will continue to 

strengthen its cooperation with industry 

to enhance the security and safeguards 

of new HALEU-based reactor designs. 

At the same time, DOE assesses that 

adequate structures are in place to 

manage the evolving proliferation 

challenges to acceptable levels and the 

benefits of using HALEU fuels in 

advanced reactors outweigh the 

potential proliferation risks. 

Consistent with NNSA’s and DOE’s 

consideration of, and discussion 

regarding, nonproliferation in the EIS, 

NNSA and DOE have concluded that the 

preparation of an NPIA is not necessary 

prior to the issuance of a ROD. 

DOE received one comment by email 

from a NEPA reviewer in the U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency’s 

(EPA) Region 9 Environmental Review 

Section seeking clarification as to the 

location of the HALEU acquisition. In 

response, DOE stated that DOE does not 

have site-specific information that is 

ripe to analyze in a NEPA document, 

and as the Final EIS states, DOE will not 

select specific locations and facilities as 

a part of the Record of Decision for this 

EIS. 

DOE also received comments on the 

Final HALEU EIS from the EPA Office 

of Federal Activities. This office 

previously submitted comments on the 

Draft HALEU EIS, which are available 

for review in Volume 3 of the Final 

HALEU EIS (Comment ID: 56). In 

response to the comments received on 

the Draft HALEU EIS, DOE engaged in 

follow-on discussions with EPA staff, 

which informed changes that DOE made 

in the Final HALEU EIS. 

In their comments on the Final 

HALEU EIS, EPA acknowledged DOE’s 

revisions in response to EPA’s 

comments on the Draft HALEU EIS, but 

further recommended incorporating 

site-specific monitoring data for mining 

and milling activities. In their 

comments on the Draft HALEU EIS, EPA 

also recommended that environmental 

monitoring information from mining 

and milling operations at existing 

facilities be incorporated. As stated in 

DOE’s response to EPA Comment 0056– 

1 on the Draft HALEU EIS, the Proposed 

Action involves numerous actions (e.g., 

mining, enrichment, deconversion, etc.) 

and does not propose to select sitespecific locations. Given the potential 

possibilities of all actions and locations, 

it would not be reasonable to 

accumulate and assess operating and 

environmental data for all potential 

activities. 

In its comments on the Final HALEU 

EIS, EPA recommended clearly 

disclosing the uncertainty associated 

with not utilizing monitoring data for 

mining and milling facilities assessed in 

the EIS. In preparing the HALEU EIS, 

DOE reviewed numerous NEPA 

documents, including those for uranium 

mining and milling facilities, to 

establish estimated ranges of the 

potential impacts of mining and milling 

activities to support the Proposed 

Action. DOE acknowledges the 

uncertainties associated with the 

estimated ranges of potential 

environmental consequences as specific 

sites and actions are not known. DOE 

expects that once sites are identified, 

site-specific information, including 

environmental monitoring data, would 

be used by the appropriate regulatory 

authority during the licensing and 

permitting processes. Further, in 

response to comments on the Draft 

HALEU EIS regarding legacy health 

issues related to historic uranium 

mining, milling, and enrichment 

practices, DOE reviewed a limited 

amount of monitoring data (e.g., White 

Mesa Mill) (see Volume 3, Comment 

Response 56–21) and determined that 

the data was not inconsistent with the 

associated NEPA documents’ estimated 

ranges of potential impacts. DOE 

understands and agrees that the 

uranium mining and milling portion of 

the Proposed Action is rapidly evolving 

due to international policies and 

increased demand for a domestic 

uranium supply; the estimated potential 

environmental impacts associated with 

these activities are uncertain; and, as 

discussed in the Final HALEU EIS, they 

have the potential to be large for some 

resources at some locations. 

In addition to concerns about sitespecific monitoring data for mining and 

milling activities, EPA recommended 

DOE pursue consultation with the Ute 

Mountain Ute Tribe on future actions at 

White Mesa Mill as it is the only 

operational conventional uranium mill 

in the United States. Although the Ute 

Mountain Ute Tribe did not request 

consultation on the HALEU EIS, DOE 

participated in interagency consultation 

with Ute Mountain Ute Tribal officials, 

NNSA, EPA, NRC, Senator John 

Hickenlooper, and the State of Utah 

regarding the Tribe’s concerns about 

While Mesa Mill in August 2023. During 

this consultation meeting, the Ute 

Mountain Ute Tribe expressed concerns 

about drinking water quality, air quality, 

health and safety of mill workers, lack 

of notification for the receipt of 

materials at the mill, and continued 

operations at White Mesa Mill despite 

an initial 15-year operation window. 

After hearing the Ute Mountain Ute 

Tribe’s concerns, DOE presented 

information on the HALEU EIS and 

other Federal actions that could 

potentially impact future activities at 

the mill. Ute Mountain Ute Tribal 

officials did not express specific 

concerns related to the HALEU EIS, but 

had general questions on the 

presentation, which were addressed. 

DOE continues to extend an opportunity 

for all Tribes, including the Ute 

Mountain Ute Tribe, to share feedback 

and concerns or ask questions related to 

the HALEU EIS through government-togovernment consultation as requested. 

EPA further recommended DOE 

include mitigation measures informed 

by the Ute Mountain Ute Tribe in the 

ROD. Since DOE’s Proposed Action and 

ROD do not include site selection 

activities, there are no specific actions at 

White Mesa Mill upon which to include 

mitigation measures. However, should 

specific actions concerning the White 

Mesa Mill be identified in the future, 

consultations with the Ute Mountain 

Ute Tribe and any associated mitigation 

measures would be expected to be 

conducted consistent with all applicable 

laws and regulations by the cognizant 

regulating authority. 

In EPA’s final comment, the agency 

recommended that additional 

information be provided in section 4.3.2 

of the Final HALEU EIS to support the 

project’s social cost of greenhouse gases 

(SC–GHG) analysis, including (1) the 

project time horizon, (2) the year the 

stream of SC–GHG values is discounted 

to, and (3) the application of different 

discount rates. This information is 

available in Section A.8, Greenhouse 

Gas Emissions Calculations, in Volume 

2 of the Final HALEU EIS. EPA also 

recommended that the SC–GHG analysis 

be based on three separate greenhouse 

gases (GHGs), rather than on carbon 

dioxide equivalents (CO2e). As stated in 

DOE’s response to EPA Comment 0056– 

24 on the Draft HALEU EIS, all GHGs 

estimated because of implementation of 

the Proposed Action would occur from 

the combustion of gasoline, diesel, or 

natural gas in construction and 

operational equipment, trucks, or 

worker commuter vehicles. Roughly 99 

percent of the CO2e emitted from these 

sources would occur in the form of 

carbon dioxide. Therefore, reporting 

each individual GHG, including 

methane and nitrous oxide emissions, 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 8 / Tuesday, January 14, 2025 / Notices 3199 

would not substantially add to the 

precision of the project CO2e emissions 

or SC–GHG calculations. Appendix A, 

section 8, tables A–20 and A–21 of the 

Final HALEU EIS show that the project 

SC–GHG analysis is based only on 

carbon dioxide emissions. 

DOE also received one comment from 

a member of the public expressing 

opposition. This commenter did not 

specifically oppose the Proposed Action 

or reasonably foreseeable activities but, 

instead, expressed general opposition 

against nuclear programs and 

technologies. 

DOE considered the comments 

received following issuance of the Final 

HALEU EIS and finds that they do not 

present ‘‘substantial new circumstances 

or information about the significance of 

adverse effects that bear on the 

analysis’’ 40 CFR 1502.9(d); see also 10 

CFR 1021.314(a); therefore, they do not 

require preparation of a supplement 

analysis or a supplemental EIS. 

Decision 

As discussed in the Final HALEU EIS, 

the EIS provides information to support 

decisions regarding whether or not to 

acquire HALEU from commercial 

sources and to facilitate commercial 

HALEU fuel production capability. DOE 

has decided to implement the Proposed 

Action, its Preferred Alternative, as 

described in the Final HALEU EIS. 

DOE’s Preferred Alternative is to 

acquire, through procurement from 

commercial sources, HALEU enriched 

to at least 19.75 and less than 20 weight 

percent U–235 over a 10-year period of 

performance, and to facilitate the 

establishment of commercial HALEU 

fuel production. 

Basis of Decision 

The Final HALEU EIS provided DOE 

decision-makers with important 

information regarding potential 

environmental impacts of alternatives 

and options for satisfying the purpose 

and need. DOE’s decision to implement 

the Proposed Action is based on 

consideration of Congressional 

direction, the need for agency action, 

the potential environmental impacts 

(including beneficial impacts related to 

climate change), as well as other factors, 

including public comments, strategic 

objectives, technology needs, safeguards 

and security, cost, and schedule. 

Mitigation Measures 

As stated in this EIS, decisions 

regarding locations of specific activities 

are not part of the Proposed Action. 

Therefore, no location-specific 

mitigation measures are identified in 

this ROD. 

However, implementation of the 

Proposed Action could result in HALEU 

fuel cycle facilities being sited at 

various locations. The environmental 

impacts of such HALEU fuel cycle 

facilities are expected to be evaluated by 

the appropriate regulatory authority 

(e.g., the NRC, other Federal agencies, or 

Agreement States). Such site-specific 

environmental evaluations would be 

expected to identify mitigation 

measures and/or the implementation of 

best management practices to reduce 

impacts. Mitigation measures, if needed, 

would be expected to be executed and 

tracked as required. 

Signing Authority 

This document of the Department of 

Energy was signed on December 20, 

2024, by K. Michael Goff, Principal 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Nuclear 

Energy, pursuant to delegated authority 

from the Secretary of Energy. That 

document with the original signature 

and date is maintained by DOE. For 

administrative purposes only, and in 

compliance with requirements of the 

Office of the Federal Register, the 

undersigned DOE Federal Register 

Liaison Officer has been authorized to 

sign and submit the document in 

electronic format for publication, as an 

official document of DOE. This 

administrative process in no way alters 

the legal effect of this document upon 

publication in the Federal Register. 

Signed in Washington, DC, on January 8, 

2025. 

Jennifer Hartzell, 

Alternate Federal Register Liaison Officer, 

U.S. Department of Energy. 

[FR Doc. 2025–00610 Filed 1–13–25; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Environmental Management SiteSpecific Advisory Board, Hanford 

AGENCY: Office of Environmental 

Management, Department of Energy. 

ACTION: Notice of open meeting. 

SUMMARY: This notice announces a 

hybrid meeting of the Environmental 

Management Site-Specific Advisory 

Board (EM SSAB), Hanford. The Federal 

Advisory Committee Act requires that 

public notice of this meeting be 

announced in the Federal Register. 

DATES: 

Wednesday, February 12, 2025; 8 

a.m.–3 p.m. PST. 

Thursday, February 13, 2025; 8 a.m.– 

3 p.m. PST. 

ADDRESSES: The Holiday Inn Express & 

Suites, 4525 Convention Place, Pasco, 

Washington 99301. This hybrid meeting 

will be held in-person at the Holiday 

Inn Express & Suites and virtually. To 

receive the virtual access information 

and call-in number, please contact the 

Designated Federal Officer, Kelly 

Snyder, at the telephone number or 

email listed below at least five days 

prior to the meeting. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Kelly Snyder, Designated Federal 

Officer, U.S. Department of Energy, 

Office of Environmental Management; 

Phone: (702) 918–6715; or Email: 

kelly.snyder@em.doe.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Purpose of the Board: The purpose of 

the Board is to provide advice and 

recommendations concerning the 

following EM site-specific issues: cleanup activities and environmental 

restoration; waste and nuclear materials 

management and disposition; excess 

facilities; future land use and long-term 

stewardship. The Board may also be 

asked to provide advice and 

recommendations on any EM program 

components. 

Tentative Agenda: 

Æ Consideration of Draft Advice: 

D Fiscal Year 2027 Cleanup Priorities 

Æ Tri-Party Agreement Agencies’ 

Updates 

Æ Board Business 

Public Participation: The meeting is 

open to the public. The EM SSAB, 

Hanford, welcomes the attendance of 

the public at its advisory committee 

meetings and will make every effort to 

accommodate persons with physical 

disabilities or special needs. If you 

require special accommodations due to 

a disability, please contact Kelly Snyder 

at least seven days in advance of the 

meeting at the telephone number listed 

above. Written statements may be filed 

with the Board either before or within 

five business days after the meeting. 

Individuals who wish to make oral 

statements pertaining to agenda items 

should contact Kelly Snyder. Requests 

must be received five days prior to the 

meeting and reasonable provision will 

be made to include the presentation in 

the agenda. The Designated Federal 

Officer is empowered to conduct the 

meeting in a fashion that will facilitate 

the orderly conduct of business. 

Individuals wishing to make public 

comments will be provided a maximum 

of five minutes to present their 

comments. 

Minutes: Minutes will be available at 

the following website: https://

www.hanford.gov/page.cfm/hab/

FullBoardMeetingInformation. 

Signing Authority: This document of 

the Department of Energy was signed on 


khammond on DSK9W7S144PROD with NOTICES