[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 88 (Monday, May 7, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 23010-23013]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-11384]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY


Advance Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact 
Statement for Depleted Uranium Hexafluoride Conversion Facilities

AGENCY: Department of Energy.

ACTION: Advance notice of intent.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is providing advance 
notice of its intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) 
under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) on the proposed 
construction, operation, and decontamination/decommissioning of two 
depleted uranium hexafluoride (DUF<INF>6</INF>) conversion facilities, 
at Portsmouth, Ohio and Paducah, Kentucky. DOE intends to use the 
proposed facilities to convert its inventory of DUF<INF>6</INF> to a 
more stable chemical form suitable for storage, beneficial use or 
disposal. Approximately 700,000 metric tons of DUF<INF>6</INF> in about 
57,700 cylinders are stored at DOE's Paducah, Portsmouth, and Oak 
Ridge, Tennessee, sites.
    DOE is issuing this Advance Notice pursuant to 10 CFR 1021.31(b) to 
inform the public and interested parties early about the proposed 
action, the range of alternatives, and the nature of impact analysis to 
be considered in the EIS. DOE intends later to issue a formal Notice of 
Intent (NOI) and conduct a public scoping process during which DOE will 
invite the public to comment on the scope, proposed action, and 
possible alternatives considered in the EIS. DOE seeks comments on this 
Advance Notice, and they can be submitted as explained below.

DATES: DOE plans to issue the NOI later this year. After the NOI is 
issued, DOE will conduct public scoping meetings to assist in defining 
the scope of the EIS and to identify significant issues to be 
addressed. The dates and locations of all scoping meetings will be 
announced in the NOI or subsequent Federal Register notices and in 
local media before the meetings.

ADDRESSES: Please direct comments or suggestions on the scope of the 
EIS and questions concerning the proposed project to: Kevin Shaw, U.S. 
Department of Energy, Office of Environmental Management, Office of 
Site Closure--Oak Ridge Office (EM-32), 19901 Germantown Road, 
Germantown, Maryland 20874, fax (301) 903-2978, e-mail 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#286c7d6e1e066b4745454d465c5b684d45064c474d064f475e"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="c1859487f7ef82aeacaca4afb5b281a4acefa5aea4efa6aeb7">[email protected]</span></a> (please use `A-NOI Comments' for the subject).
    For general information on the DOE NEPA process, please contact 
Carol M. Borgstrom, Director, Office of NEPA Policy and Compliance, EH-
42, U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., 
Washington, DC 20585-0119, telephone (202) 586-4600 or leave a message 
at (800) 472-2756.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Depleted UF<INF>6</INF> results from the process of making uranium 
suitable for use as fuel in nuclear reactors or for military

[[Page 23011]]

applications. The use of uranium in these applications requires 
increasing the proportion of the uranium-235 isotope found in natural 
uranium, which is approximately 0.7% (by weight), through an isotopic 
separation process. A U-235 ``enrichment'' process called gaseous 
diffusion has historically been used in the United States. The gaseous 
diffusion process uses uranium in the form of UF<INF>6</INF>, primarily 
because UF<INF>6</INF> can conveniently be used in the gas form for 
processing, in the liquid form for filling or emptying containers, and 
in the solid form for storage. Solid UF<INF>6</INF> is a white, dense, 
crystalline material that resembles rock salt.
    Over the last five decades, large quantities of uranium were 
enriched using gaseous diffusion. ``Depleted'' UF<INF>6</INF> 
(DUF<INF>6</INF>) is a product of the process and was stored at the 
three uranium enrichment sites located at Paducah, Kentucky; 
Portsmouth, Ohio; and the East Tennessee Technology Park (ETTP--
formerly known as the K-25 Site) in Oak Ridge, Tennessee. Depleted 
uranium is uranium that, through the enrichment process, has been 
stripped of a portion of the uranium-235 that it once contained so that 
it has a lower uranium-235 proportion than the 0.7 weight-percent found 
in nature. The uranium in most of DOE's DUF<INF>6</INF> has between 0.2 
to 0.4 weight-percent uranium-235.
    DOE has management responsibility for approximately 700,000 metric 
tons (MT) of DUF<INF>6</INF> contained in about 57,700 steel cylinders 
at the Portsmouth, Paducah, and ETTP sites, where it has stored such 
material since the 1950s. The characteristics of UF<INF>6</INF> pose 
potential health and environmental risks. UF<INF>6</INF> emits low 
levels of gamma and neutron radiation. Also, when released to the 
atmosphere, UF<INF>6</INF> reacts with water vapor in the air to form 
hydrogen fluoride (HF) and uranyl fluoride 
(UO<INF>2</INF>F<INF>2</INF>), both chemically toxic substances. In 
light of such characteristics, DOE stores UF<INF>6</INF> in a manner 
designed to minimize the risk to workers, the public, and the 
environment.
    In October 1992, the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (OEPA) 
issued a Notice of Violation (NOV) alleging that DUF<INF>6</INF> stored 
at the Portsmouth facility is subject to regulation under state 
hazardous waste laws applicable to the Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion 
Plant. The NOV stated that OEPA had determined DUF<INF>6</INF> to be a 
solid waste and that DOE had violated Ohio laws and regulations by not 
evaluating whether such waste was hazardous. DOE disagreed with this 
assessment, and in February 1998, DOE and OEPA reached an agreement. 
This agreement sets aside the issue of whether the DUF<INF>6</INF> is 
subject to Resource Conservation and Recovery Act regulation and 
institutes a negotiated management plan governing the storage of the 
Portsmouth DUF<INF>6</INF>. The agreement also requires DOE to continue 
its efforts to evaluate potential use or reuse of the material. The 
agreement expires in 2008.
    In 1994, DOE began work on the Programmatic Environmental Impact 
Statement for Alternative Strategies for the Long-Term Management and 
Use of Depleted Uranium Hexafluoride (DUF<INF>6</INF> PEIS). The 
DUF<INF>6</INF> PEIS was completed in 1999 and identified conversion of 
DUF<INF>6</INF> to another chemical form for use or long-term storage 
as part of a preferred management alternative. In the corresponding 
Record of Decision for the Long-Term Management and Use of Depleted 
Uranium Hexafluoride (ROD) (64 FR 43358, August 10, 1999), DOE decided 
to promptly convert the DUF<INF>6</INF> inventory to depleted uranium 
oxide, depleted uranium metal, or a combination of both. The ROD 
further explained that depleted uranium oxide will be used as much as 
possible and the remaining depleted uranium oxide will be stored for 
potential future uses or disposal, as necessary. In addition, according 
to the ROD, conversion to depleted uranium metal will occur only if 
uses are available.
    During the time that DOE was analyzing its long-term strategy for 
managing the DUF<INF>6</INF> inventory, several other events occurred 
related to DUF<INF>6</INF> management. In 1995, the Department began an 
aggressive program to better manage the DUF<INF>6</INF> cylinders, 
known as the DUF<INF>6</INF> Cylinder Project Management Plan. In part, 
this program responded to the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board 
(DNFSB) Recommendation 95-1, Safety of Cylinders Containing Depleted 
Uranium. This program included more rigorous and frequent inspections, 
a multi-year program for painting and refurbishing of cylinders, and 
construction of concrete-pad cylinder yards. Implementation of the 
DUF<INF>6</INF> Cylinder Project Management Plan has been successful, 
and, as a result, on December 16, 1999, the DNFSB closed out 
Recommendation 95-1.
    In February 1999, DOE and the Tennessee Department of Environment 
and Conservation (TDEC) entered into a consent order which included a 
requirement for the performance of two environmentally beneficial 
projects: the implementation of a negotiated management plan governing 
the storage of the small inventory (relative to other sites) of all 
UF<INF>6</INF> (depleted, low enriched, and natural) cylinders stored 
at the ETTP site, and the removal of the DUF<INF>6</INF> from the ETTP 
site or the conversion of the material by December 31, 2009.
    In July 1998, the President signed Public Law (Pub. L.) 105-204. 
This law directed the Secretary of Energy to prepare ``a plan to ensure 
that all amounts accrued on the books'' of the United States Enrichment 
Corporation (USEC) for the disposition of DUF<INF>6</INF> would be used 
to commence construction of, not later than January 31, 2004, and to 
operate, an onsite facility at each of the gaseous diffusion plants at 
Paducah and Portsmouth, to treat and recycle DUF<INF>6</INF> consistent 
with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). DOE responded to 
Pub. L. 105-204 by issuing the Final Plan for the Conversion of 
Depleted Uranium Hexafluoride (referred to herein as the ``Conversion 
Plan'') in July 1999. The Conversion Plan describes DOE's intent to 
chemically process the DUF<INF>6</INF> to create products that would 
present both a lower long-term storage hazard and provide a material 
that would be suitable for use or disposal.
    DOE initiated the Conversion Plan with the announced availability 
of a draft Request for Proposals (RFP) on July 30, 1999, for a 
contractor to design, construct, and operate DUF<INF>6</INF> conversion 
facilities at the Paducah and Portsmouth uranium enrichment plant 
sites. Based on comments received on the draft RFP, DOE revisited some 
of the assumptions about management of the DUF<INF>6</INF> inventory 
made previously in the PEIS and ROD. For example, as documented in the 
Oak Ridge National Laboratory study, Assessment of Preferred Depleted 
Uranium Disposal Forms (ORNL/TM-2000/161, June 2000), four potential 
conversion forms (triuranium octoxide (U<INF>3</INF>0<INF>8</INF>), 
uranium dioxide (U0<INF>2</INF>), uranium tetrafluoride 
(UF<INF>4</INF>), and uranium metal) were evaluated and found to be 
acceptable for near-surface disposal at low-level radioactive waste 
disposal sites such as those at DOE's Nevada Test Site and Envirocare 
of Utah, Inc. Therefore, the RFP was modified to allow for a wide range 
of potential conversion product forms and process technologies. 
However, any of the proposed conversion forms must have an assured, 
environmentally acceptable path for final disposition.
    On October 31, 2000, DOE issued a final RFP to procure a contractor 
to design, construct and operate DUF<INF>6</INF> conversion facilities 
at the Paducah and Portsmouth plant sites. The conversion plants that 
result from this procurement will convert the DUF<INF>6</INF> to a more 
stable chemical form that is suitable for either beneficial use or 
disposal. The selected

[[Page 23012]]

contractor will design the conversion plants using the technology it 
proposes and construct the plants. The selected contractor also will 
operate the plants for a five-year period, which will include 
maintaining depleted uranium and product inventories, transporting all 
uranium hexafluoride storage cylinders in Tennessee to a conversion 
plant at Portsmouth, as appropriate, and transporting converted product 
for which there is no use to a disposal site. The selected contractor 
will be expected to prepare excess material for disposal at an 
appropriate site. DOE is evaluating the five proposals it received and 
anticipates awarding a contract during the first quarter of 2002. Since 
the site specific NEPA process will not be completed prior to contract 
award, the contract will be structured such that the NEPA process will 
be completed in advance of a go/no-go decision. (See NEPA Process 
below.)

Purpose and Need for Agency Action

    DOE needs to convert its inventory of DUF<INF>6</INF> to a more 
stable chemical form for storage, use or disposal. This need follows 
directly from the decision presented in the August 1999 Record of 
Decision for Long-Term Management and Use of Depleted Uranium 
Hexafluoride, namely to begin conversion of the DUF<INF>6</INF> 
inventory as soon as possible.
    This EIS will assess the potential environmental impacts of 
constructing, operating and decontaminating/decommissioning 
DUF<INF>6</INF> conversion facilities at the Portsmouth and Paducah 
sites, as well as other reasonable alternatives. The EIS will aid 
decisionmaking on DUF<INF>6</INF> conversion by evaluating the 
environmental impacts of the range of reasonable alternatives, as well 
as providing a means for public input into the decisionmaking process. 
The Department is committed to ensuring that the public has ample 
opportunity to participate in this review.

Preliminary Alternatives

    Below is a preliminary list of alternatives to be considered in the 
EIS. This list of alternatives is subject to modifications in response 
to comments received during the public scoping process.
    Preferred Alternative. Under the preferred alternative, two 
conversion facilities would be built: One at the Paducah Gaseous 
Diffusion Plant site and another at the Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion 
Plant site. The cylinders currently stored at the ETTP site near Oak 
Ridge, Tennessee, would be transported to Portsmouth for conversion. 
The conversion products (i.e., depleted uranium as well as fluorine 
components produced during the conversion process) would be stored, put 
to beneficial uses, or disposed of at an appropriate disposal facility. 
This alternative is consistent with the Conversion Plan, which DOE 
submitted to Congress in July 1999, in response to Pub. L. 105-204. 
Technology subalternatives for the preferred alternative will include 
those technology processes identified in response to the final RFP for 
DUF<INF>6</INF> conversion services, plus any other technologies that 
DOE believes must be considered. (Technologies specify the processes 
used for conversion and the products of conversion.) Local siting 
subalternatives for building and operating conversion facilities within 
the Paducah and Portsmouth plant boundaries will be considered. Timing 
options, such as staggering the start of the construction and operation 
of the two conversion facilities, will also be considered for the 
preferred alternative.
    One Conversion Plant Alternative. An alternative of building and 
operating only one conversion facility at either the Portsmouth or the 
Paducah site will be considered. This plant could differ in size or 
production capacity from the two proposed for Portsmouth and Paducah. 
Technology and local siting subalternatives will be considered as with 
the preferred alternative.
    Use of Existing UF<INF>6</INF> Conversion Capacity Alternative. DOE 
will consider using already-existing UF<INF>6</INF> conversion capacity 
at commercial nuclear fuel fabrication facilities in lieu of 
constructing one or two new conversion plants. DOE is currently 
evaluating the feasibility of using existing conversion capacity, 
although no expression of interest has been received from such 
facilities.
    No Action Alternative. Under the ``no action'' alternative, 
cylinder management activities (handling, inspection, monitoring, and 
maintenance) would continue the ``status quo'' at the three current 
storage sites indefinitely, consistent with the DUF<INF>6</INF> 
Cylinder Project Management Plan and the consent orders, which includes 
actions needed to meet safety and environmental requirements.
    Where applicable under the alternatives listed above, 
transportation options, such as truck, rail, and barge, will be 
considered for shipping DUF<INF>6</INF> cylinders to a conversion 
facility and conversion products to a storage or disposal facility. 
Also, for each technology alternative, alternatives for conversion 
products, including storage, use, and disposal at one or more disposal 
sites, will be considered. Further, DOE would appreciate comments 
regarding whether there are additional siting alternatives for one or 
more new conversion facilities that should be considered.

Preliminary Environmental Analysis

    This EIS represents the second level of a tiered environmental 
review process being used to evaluate and implement the DUF<INF>6</INF> 
management program. Tiering refers to the process of first addressing 
general (programmatic) matters in a PEIS followed by more narrowly 
focused (project level) environmental review that incorporates by 
reference the more general discussions. The DUF<INF>6</INF> PEIS, 
issued in April 1999, was the first level of this tiered approach.
    The DUF<INF>6</INF> PEIS addressed the potential environmental 
impacts of broad strategy alternatives, including analyses of the 
general impacts of (1) continued storage of DUF<INF>6</INF> at DOE's 
current storage sites, (2) technologies for converting the 
DUF<INF>6</INF> to other chemical forms, (3) storage of conversion 
products for subsequent use or disposal, (4) use of conversion 
products, (5) transportation of materials, and (6) disposal. The ROD 
for the DUF<INF>6</INF> PEIS declared DOE's decision to promptly 
convert the DUF<INF>6</INF> inventory to a more stable chemical form. 
This tiered EIS will address specific issues associated with the 
implementation of the DUF<INF>6</INF> PEIS ROD.

NEPA Process

    The EIS for the proposed project will be prepared pursuant to the 
NEPA of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), Council on Environmental Quality 
(CEQ) NEPA Regulations (40 CFR Parts 1500--1508), and DOE's NEPA 
Implementing Procedures (10 CFR Part 1021). Following the publication 
of the Notice of Intent, DOE will hold scoping meetings, prepare and 
distribute the draft EIS for public review, hold public hearings to 
solicit public comment on the draft EIS, and publish a final EIS. Not 
less than 30 days after the publication of the U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency's (EPA's) Notice of Availability of the final EIS, 
DOE may issue a ROD documenting its decision concerning the proposed 
action.
    In addition to the above steps, DOE will consider environmental 
factors in selecting a contractor for the conversion services through 
the procurement process, including preparation of an environmental 
critique and synopsis pursuant to 10 CFR 1021.216. The environmental 
critique will evaluate the environmental data and information

[[Page 23013]]

submitted by each offeror and will be subject to the confidentiality 
requirements of the procurement process. DOE will prepare a publicly 
available environmental synopsis, based on the environmental critique, 
to document the consideration given to environmental factors in the 
contractor selection process. The environmental synopsis will be filed 
with the EPA and will be incorporated into the EIS. In accordance with 
10 CFR 1021.216(i), since the NEPA process will not be completed prior 
to contract award, the contract will be structured to allow the NEPA 
review process to be completed in advance of a go/no-go decision.

Preliminary Identification of EIS Issues

    DOE intends to address the following issues when assessing the 
potential environmental impacts of the alternatives in this EIS. 
Potential environmental impacts will be evaluated for the site-specific 
conditions found at the Portsmouth, Paducah, and ETTP sites, and at 
other sites, as appropriate. DOE invites comment on these and any other 
issues that should be addressed in the EIS:

--Potential effects on the public and workers from exposure to 
radiological and hazardous materials from normal operations and 
reasonably foreseeable accidents at the sites and during transportation 
of DUF<INF>6</INF> cylinders and conversion products between sites.
--Potential effects on air, soil, ecological resources, water quality 
and cultural resources.
--Potential socioeconomic impacts associated with the workforce needed 
for construction and operations, and environmental justice issues.
--Compliance with applicable Federal, state, local requirements and 
agreements.
--Pollution prevention, waste minimization, and energy and water use 
reduction technologies to eliminate or reduce use of energy, water, and 
hazardous substances and to minimize environmental impacts.
--Potential impacts on local and DOE-wide waste management 
capabilities.
--Potential impacts on available resources, including land, materials, 
and energy.
--Potential cumulative impacts of the past, present, and reasonably 
foreseeable future actions (including impacts resulting from the 
activities of the United States Enrichment Corporation).
--Potential irreversible and irretrievable commitment of resources.
--Relationship between short-term use of the environment and long-term 
productivity.

Related NEPA Reviews

    Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for Alternative 
Strategies for the Long-Term Management and Use of Depleted Uranium 
Hexafluoride (DOE/EIS-0269, April 1999); Final Waste Management 
Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for Managing Treatment, 
Storage, and Disposal of Radioactive and Hazardous Waste (DOE/EIS-0200-
F, May 1997); Disposition of Surplus Highly Enriched Uranium, Final 
Environmental Impact Statement (DOE/EIS-0240, June 1996); Environmental 
Assessment for the Refurbishment of Uranium Hexafluoride Cylinder 
Storage Yards C-745-K, L, M, N, and P and Construction of a New Uranium 
Hexafluoride Cylinder Storage Yard (C-745-T) at the Paducah Gaseous 
Diffusion Plant, Paducah, Kentucky (DOE/EA-1118, July 1996); 
Environmental Assessment for DOE Sale of Surplus Natural and Low 
Enriched Uranium (DOE/EA-1172, October 1996); and Environmental 
Assessment for the Lease of Land and Facilities within the East 
Tennessee Technology Park, Oak Ridge, Tennessee (DOE/EA-1175, 1997).

Scoping Meetings

    The purpose of this Advance Notice is to inform the public and 
interested parties early about DOE's plans to prepare an EIS for 
proposed DUF<INF>6</INF> conversion facilities and to encourage early 
public involvement in the EIS process. DOE intends to hold public 
scoping meetings in Oak Ridge, Tennessee; Paducah, Kentucky; and 
Portsmouth, Ohio, to solicit both oral and written comments from 
interested parties. The dates and times of such meetings will be 
announced in the NOI, which DOE plans to issue later this year, or in 
subsequent Federal Register notices and in local media before the 
meetings.

    Signed in Washington, DC, this 1st day of May, 2001.
Steven V. Cary,
Acting Assistant Secretary, Office of Environment, Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. 01-11384 Filed 5-4-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>