[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 76 (Wednesday, April 20, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 23504-23506]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-08383]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY


Spent Nuclear Fuel Management, Accelerated Basin De-Inventory 
Mission for H-Canyon, at the Savannah River Site

AGENCY: Office of Environmental Management, 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) to the Savannah River Site Spent Nuclear 
Fuel Management Final Environmental Impact Statement (DOE/EIS-0279, DOE 
2000, SRS SNF EIS). The changes to the August 7, 2000, ROD memorialize 
DOE's decision to manage approximately 29.2 metric tons of heavy metal 
(MTHM) of spent nuclear fuel (SNF) and target materials (hereafter 
referred to collectively as SNF), using conventional processing without 
recovery of uranium at the H-Canyon facility at the Savannah River Site

[[Page 23505]]

(SRS). DOE anticipates that processing this SNF would begin in 2022 and 
continue for approximately 12 to 13 years. DOE will send the dissolved 
material to the liquid high-level radioactive waste (HLW) system prior 
to immobilization the material in a borosilicate glass waste form in 
the Defense Waste Processing Facility (DWPF). In the meantime, DOE will 
continue to safely store SNF and target materials in L-Basin at SRS, 
pending processing in H-Canyon.

ADDRESSES: This Amended ROD, the Supplement Analysis for the Spent 
Nuclear Fuel Accelerated Basin De-inventory Mission for H-Canyon at the 
Savannah River Site (SRS ABD SA), and related National Environmental 
Policy Act (NEPA) documents are available on the DOE NEPA website at 
www.energy.gov/nepa/nepa-documents and the SRS website at www.srs.gov/general/pubs/envbul/nepa1.htm. To request copies of these documents, 
please contact: Mr. Jeffrey Bentley, NEPA Document Manager, Savannah 
River Operations Office, U.S. Department of Energy, P.O. Box B, Aiken, 
South Carolina 29802, telephone: (803) 226-5113, email: 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#fb919e9d9d899e82d5999e958f979e82bb888988d59c948d"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="7d17181b1b0f1804531f1813091118043d0e0f0e531a120b">[email protected]</span></a>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information on the 
management of SNF at SRS, please contact Mr. Bentley as listed in 
ADDRESSES. For information on DOE's NEPA process, please contact: Mr. 
William Ostrum, DOE-Office of Environmental Management, NEPA Compliance 
Officer, U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, EM-
4.31, Washington, DC 20585 or via phone at 202-586-2513 or email at 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#db8cb2b7b7b2bab6f594a8afa9aeb69bb3aaf5bfb4bef5bcb4ad"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="c394aaafafaaa2aeed8cb0b7b1b6ae83abb2eda7aca6eda4acb5">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    DOE's purpose and need for action, as described in the SRS SNF EIS 
(DOE/EIS-0279; DOE 2000), is to develop and implement a safe and 
efficient SNF management strategy that includes preparing SNF and 
target materials stored at or expected to be shipped to SRS for 
ultimate disposition offsite.
    In the SRS SNF EIS, DOE evaluated the potential environmental 
impacts of alternatives for management of the SNF and target material. 
DOE analyzed five reasonable alternatives that could be used to manage 
SNF: No Action, Minimum Impact, Direct Disposal, Maximum Impact, and 
the Preferred Alternative. The action alternatives represent 
combinations of technologies applied to fuel groups.
    Under the Preferred Alternative in the SRS SNF EIS, DOE would 
prepare about 97 percent by volume (about 60 percent by mass) of the 
aluminum SNF (ASNF) for disposition using a melt-and-dilute process. 
The remaining 3 percent by volume (about 40 percent by mass) would be 
managed using chemical processing.
    DOE issued the Final SRS SNF EIS in March 2000 and issued a ROD on 
August 7, 2000, (65 FR 48224) selecting the Preferred Alternative. 
Since the ROD was issued, DOE has not implemented the melt-and-dilute 
technology. On April 5, 2013, DOE issued an Amended ROD to process a 
portion of the ASNF using conventional processing in lieu of the melt-
and-dilute process (78 FR 20625).
    DOE has explored various scenarios to address storage capacity 
limitations and technical issues associated with SNF and target 
materials at SRS. Due to the vast variety of ASNF at SRS, implementing 
a dry storage program, as a potential alternative to the melt-and-
dilute process, that would be effective for all SNF is technically 
challenging. Considering the storage capacity for non-aluminum SNF 
(NASNF) and the future availability of processing capabilities (H-
Canyon) and liquid HLW systems (DWPF and Tank Farms) at SRS, DOE has 
reevaluated the management approach for SNF at SRS.
    DOE previously evaluated and decided to consolidate the SNF by fuel 
type at Hanford, Idaho National Laboratory, and SRS, in the 
Programmatic Spent Nuclear Fuel Management and Idaho National 
Engineering Laboratory Environmental Restoration and Waste Management 
Programs Environmental Impact Statement (SNF PEIS) (DOE/EIS-0203) and 
associated ROD (60 FR 28680, June 1, 1995). However, the decision to 
consolidate SNF by fuel type has not been fully implemented. DOE's 
inventory of ASNF has not been consolidated at SRS, and the NASNF has 
not been consolidated at the Idaho National Laboratory. This Amended 
ROD would not change that decision made in the 1995 ROD.
    Under this Amended ROD, SNF (including both ASNF and NASNF, and 
target materials) located at SRS, would be transferred from L-Basin to 
H-Canyon for conventional processing \1\ with no uranium recovery. At 
H-Canyon, the SNF would be dissolved in hot nitric acid, producing a 
solution of highly enriched uranium (HEU), fission products, aluminum, 
and small amounts of transuranic materials such as neptunium and 
plutonium. The resulting solutions (including uranium-235) would be 
transferred to the SRS liquid HLW system and processed for 
immobilization \2\ at DWPF; HEU would not be recovered. The key benefit 
of the non-recovery scenario is that it requires only a single-unit 
process step in addition to neutralization, greatly simplifying the 
processing required in H-Canyon. Potentially, 75 percent of the H-
Canyon conventional processing systems (Head End, First Uranium Cycle, 
High-Activity Waste Evaporation, Second Uranium Cycle, Low-Activity 
Waste Evaporation, Solvent Recovery, and Acid Recovery) would not be 
used. Additionally, no blending down of HEU to low enriched uranium 
would be required. The resulting liquid waste would be sent to DWPF for 
immobilization into borosilicate glass. The HLW glass-filled, 
stainless-steel canisters from DWPF would be stored in S-Area until 
sent to a repository for disposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Conventional processing is a chemical separation process 
that involves dissolving spent nuclear fuel in nitric acid and 
separating fission products from uranium using solvent extraction. 
After conventional processing, the solution containing the fission 
products is transferred to DWPF for immobilization in glass.
    \2\ A small quantity of low-activity liquid waste would be sent 
to the Salt Waste Processing Facility and eventually disposed of in 
grout at the SRS Saltstone Disposal Facility.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In accordance with DOE NEPA regulations at 10 CFR 1021.314, DOE 
prepared the SRS ABD SA (DOE/EIS-0279-SA-07, 2022). Based on the SRS 
ABD SA, DOE has determined that a supplemental or new environmental 
impact statement is not required. DOE also concluded in the SRS ABD SA 
that the proposed change and new information is not a substantial 
change relative to the alternatives analyzed in the SRS SNF EIS and, 
thus, no further NEPA analysis is required.
    The impacts of the Proposed Action as described in the SA were 
determined to be small and would not result in releases to the 
environment or radiation doses or risks to members of the public or 
workers that would be significantly larger than those evaluated in the 
SRS SNF EIS. Annual impacts of processing the SNF described in the SA 
would remain similar to or bounded by those analyzed in the SRS SNF EIS 
since annual throughput would be similar. Since approximately 16 
percent more SNF would be processed over the life of the Proposed 
Action than the amount of SNF that was estimated to be processed under 
the SRS SNF EIS, some impacts of processing could increase by up to 16 
percent. However, the reduction in processing steps would substantially

[[Page 23506]]

reduce resource use and worker exposure and related impacts.
    Under the Proposed Action, DOE estimates that immobilization of 
liquid waste resulting from the processing of 29.2 MTHM SNF (without 
uranium recovery) would result in about 505 HLW glass-filled stainless-
steel canisters. This results in 435 more canisters from SNF processing 
than was analyzed in the previous SRS SNF EIS. In the context of the 
approximately 8,400 HLW glass-filled stainless-steel canisters that 
DOE's most recent estimate indicated would be produced at DWPF, this 
increase is not substantial (less than 7 percent), and SRS's total 
expected canisters would still be within the 10,000 canisters DOE 
evaluated in the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, 
Defense Waste Processing Facility (DOE/EIS-0082-S, November 1994) and 
no additional storage capacity would be needed.
    Although a national repository for SNF has not yet been identified, 
DOE remains committed to meeting its obligations to safely dispose of 
SNF and HLW. The estimated 505 additional HLW canisters that would 
eventually require disposal would be more than offset by the estimated 
1,000 SNF storage canisters that would have needed disposal if the SNF 
were not processed in H-Canyon.
    Under the Proposed Action, because the uranium would not be 
recovered, the fissile material concentration in the HLW glass needs to 
be as much as 2,500 grams per cubic meter to maximize the amount of 
material allowed in the H-Canyon transfers sent to the HLW sludge 
batches. Analyses indicate that increasing the fissile material content 
in the glass up to 2,500 grams per cubic meter would not constitute a 
criticality issue and would have minimal impact on key properties 
related to durability of the glass. Testing has demonstrated that the 
HLW glass produced under the Proposed Action will meet the performance 
standards of previously produced DWPF glasses.
    Implementing the Proposed Action would entail activities at H-
Canyon that are the same as or comparable to existing or historical 
operations and are largely bounded by activities evaluated in the SRS 
SNF EIS. Therefore, the Proposed Action is not expected to result in 
substantial increases to the range of cumulative impacts described in 
the SRS SNF EIS.

Amended Decision

    DOE has decided to implement the Proposed Action as described in 
the SRS ABD SA. DOE will manage up to 29.2 MTHM of SNF using 
conventional processing without uranium recovery in H-Canyon at SRS. 
DOE anticipates processing these materials beginning as early as 2022, 
and continuing approximately 12 to 13 years, consistent with program 
and policy priorities and funding. DOE will use three dissolvers in 
order to cost-effectively utilize H-Canyon and expeditiously complete 
the mission, although only two dissolvers would be operated at any one 
time. Meanwhile, SNF will continue to be stored in L-Basin at SRS, 
pending processing in H-Canyon.
    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; this has not changed. 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 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

    The proposed use of conventional processing for 29.2 MTHM of SNF, 
including target materials, as described in the SRS ABD SA (DOE/EIS-
0279-SA-07, 2022) and this amendment to DOE's 2000 SNF ROD (65 FR 
48224) takes advantage of existing processes in existing facilities. 
The activities encompassed by this amended decision will not incur 
potential health or environmental impacts significantly different from 
those analyzed in existing NEPA reviews. This amended decision reduces 
the overall cost of managing the currently stored SNF by eliminating 
the need for storage in L-Basin and maximizes near-term utilization of 
H-Canyon to expeditiously complete the mission. Further, the actions 
resulting from this Amended ROD allow processing of the remaining 
inventory of SNF stored at SRS L-Basin, converts the SNF to forms that 
are proliferation resistant and can be safely stored for long periods 
with minimal maintenance.
    As described in the SRS ABD SA, most impacts would be similar to or 
bounded by those described in the SRS SNF EIS. While the decision 
documented in this Amended ROD will increase the number of canisters of 
vitrified HLW, it is not expected to significantly affect the quantity 
of vitrified HLW canisters requiring management and would be more than 
offset by the SNF canisters that would not require disposal.
    The actions to be taken pursuant to this Amended ROD strongly 
support U.S. non-proliferation policy and goals by permanently 
dispositioning the HEU contained in the SNF. This Proposed Action is 
consistent with U.S. agreements regarding receipt of foreign research 
reactor 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.

Signing Authority

    This document of the Department of Energy was signed on April 8, 
2022, by William I. White, Senior Advisor for Environmental Management, 
Office of Environmental Management, 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 the 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 the Department of Energy. The 
administrative process in no way alters the legal effect of this 
document upon publication in the Federal Register.

    Signed in Washington, DC, on April 14, 2022.
Treena V. Garrett,
Federal Register Liaison Officer, U.S. Department of Energy.
[FR Doc. 2022-08383 Filed 4-19-22; 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>