2092 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 4 / Friday, January 6, 1995 / Notices

research and advanced concepts

pertinent to fossil resource conversion

and utilization limited to the nine (9)

technical topics listed below.

Topic 1—Advanced Environmental

Control Technology for Coal

Grant applications in support of

Advanced Environmental Control

Technology for Coal are only solicited

for the following subtopics:

Coal Preparation

Hot Gas Stream Cleanup

Advanced High Efficiency Emissions

Control

Waste Management

Topic 2—Advanced Coal Utilization

Grant applications in support of

Advanced Coal Utilization are only

solicited for the following subtopics:

Advanced Coal Combustion Systems

Fluid Bed Combustion (FBC)

Topic 3—Coal Liquefaction Technology

Grant applications in support of Coal

Liquefaction Technology are only

solicited for the following subtopics:

Advanced Concepts for Conversion of

Coal to Liquids

Advanced Concepts for Conversion of

Syngas to Liquids

Coal-Oil Coprocesing

Advanced Catalysts

Topic 4—Biotechnology for Fossil

Energy

Grant applications in support of

Biotechnology for Fossil Energy are only

solicited for the following subtopics:

Beneficiation of Coal Resources

Conversion of Fossil Energy Resources

Bioreactors and Bioprocess Efficiency

Enhanced Oil and Gas Recovery

Topic 5—Advanced Recovery of Oil

Grant applications in support of

Advanced Recovery of Oil are only

solicited for the following subtopics:

Recovery of Light Oil

Recovery of Heavy Oil

Oil-Field Geoscience

Topic 6—Advanced Technology for the

Recovery of Natural Gas

Grant applications in support of

Advanced Technology for the Recovery

of Natural Gas are only solicited for the

following subtopics:

Advanced Geotechnology in Production

Applications

Advanced Concepts for Natural Gas

Conversion to Liquids

Topic 7—Advanced Environmental

Considerations in the Recovery and

Processing of Oil and Natural Gas

Grant applications in support of

Advanced Environmental

Considerations in the Recovery and

Processing of Oil and Natural Gas are

only solicited for innovative methods

and concepts that allow more efficient,

effective, and economical reduction of

environmental risk from the processing

and primary, secondary, and enhanced

extraction of oil and natural gas.

Research relating to open oil spill

cleanup technologies will not be

considered.

Topic 8—Heavy Oil Upgrading and

Processing

Grant applications in support of

Heavy Oil Upgrading and Processing,

are sought for the following subtopics:

(a) Improved Understanding of the

Chemistry and the Thermodynamics of

Adding Hydrogen to Heavy Feedstocks;

(b) Improved Understanding of the

Chemistry and the Thermodynamics of

the Removal of the Contaminants, i.e.,

S, N, O, Metals, etc., from Heavy

Feedstocks;

(c) Development of New and Less

Expensive Means for Producing

Hydrogen from Feedstocks other than

Light Hydro-carbons which are

Excellent Fuels as is;

(d)Development of New and Less

Expensive Contaminant Removal

Processes for Heavy Oils along with

Environmentally Acceptable Means of

Disposing of the Contaminants when

Removed;

(e) Development of New Knowledge to

be used to Improve Catalytic Cracking

and Hydrocracking Catalysts and

Process; and

(f) Development of the Knowledge,

Catalysts and Processes Necessary to

Eliminate the Production of Petroleum

Coke or the Ability to Liquefy it so that

it can be Recycled to the Refinery.

Topic 9—Faculty/Student Exploratory

Grants

DOE is seeking grant applications

from HBCU faculty and/or students for

a supportable basic premise on any one

of the subtopics covered under the

above eight (8) technical topics. DOE

will provide ‘‘seed’’ grants to the

selected HBCU(s) to enable the faculty

and/or student researcher(s) to conduct

the proposed exploratory research and

further develop the stated premise. This

is the only topic (Topic nine (9)) under

this Program Solicitation that does not

require initial private sector

collaboration for an application to be

considered for selection.

Awards: DOE anticipates issuing

financial assistance (grants) for each

project. DOE reserves the right to

support or not support any or all

applications received in whole or in

part, and to determine how many

awards may be made through the

solicitation subject to funds available in

this fiscal year. The limitation on the

maximum DOE funding for each

selected grant to be awarded under this

Program Solicitation is as follows:

Maximum

award

Topics 1–8:

To 12 months grant duration .... $80,000

13–24 months grant duration .... 140,000

25–60 months grant duration .... 200,000

Topic 9:

To 12 months grant duration .... 10,000

Approximately one million dollars is

planned for this solicitation. The total

should provide support for

approximately four to eight R&D

proposal selections (Topics 1–8), and

approximately two to six facility/

student exploratory proposal selection

(Topic 9).

Solicitation Release Date: The

Program Solicitation is expected to be

ready for mailing on January 12, 1995.

Applications must be prepared and

submitted in accordance with the

instructions and forms in the Program

Solicitation. To be eligible, applications

must be received by the Department of

Energy by the closing date stated in the

solicitation.

Debra E. Ball,

Contracting Officer, Acquisition and

Assistance Division.

[FR Doc. 95–141 Filed 1–5–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6450–01–M

Record of Decision for Remedial

Actions at Operable Unit 4, Fernald

Environmental Management Project,

Fernald, Ohio

AGENCY: U.S. Department of Energy.

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: The Record of Decision (ROD)

for Operable Unit 4 (OU4) at the Fernald

Environmental Management Project was

signed by the Department of Energy on

November 3, 1994, and was approved by

the Environmental Protection Agency

(EPA) Region V on December 7, 1994,

with concurrence of the Ohio

Environmental Protection Agency. This

decision was made in accordance with

the provisions of the Comprehensive

Environmental Response,

Compensation, and Liability Act

(CERCLA), 42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq. For

OU4 at Fernald, the Department has

chosen to complete an integrated

CERCLA/National Environmental Policy

Act (NEPA) process. To support the

selection of a remedy for OU4, which

includes K–65 silo wastes, the
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 4 / Friday, January 6, 1995 / Notices 2093

Department prepared an integrated

Feasibility Study/Proposed PlanEnvironmental Impact Statement (FS/

PP–EIS) (DOE/EIS–0195). Subsequent to

the public involvement opportunities on

the draft and final FS/PP–EIS

documents, and after having considered

the comments received, a remedy was

selected in a joint CERCLA/NEPA ROD.

The Department is publishing this

Declaration Statement of the joint

CERCLA/NEPA ROD, as originally

signed in November 1994, as specified

in the Department NEPA regulations [10

CFR 1021.315(c)].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

For further information on the

CERCLA/NEPA ROD at Fernald,

contact: Mr. Gary Stegner, Public Affairs

Specialist, Fernald Area Office, U.S.

Department of Energy, P.O. Box 538705,

Cincinnati, Ohio 45253–8705, (513)

648–3014.

For further information on the DOE

NEPA process, contact: Ms. Carol M.

Borgstrom, Director, Office of NEPA

Oversight, EH–25, U.S. Department of

Energy, 1000 Independence Ave, SW.,

Washington, D.C. 20585, (202) 586–4600

or (800) 472–2756.

Issued in Washington, D.C., this 30th day

of December, 1994.

Clyde Frank,

Acting Assistant Secretary for Environmental

Management.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

following is the verbatim Declaration

Statement of the joint CERCLA/NEPA

ROD for Remedial Actions at OU4 at

Fernald, Ohio.

Site Name and Location

Fernald Environmental Management

Project (FEMP) Site—Operable Unit 4,

Fernald, Hamilton County, Ohio

Statement of Basis and Purpose

This decision document presents the

selected remedial action for Operable

Unit 4 of the Fernald Site in Fernald,

Ohio. This remedial action was selected

in accordance with the Comprehensive

Environmental Response,

Compensation, and Liability Act

(CERCLA), as amended by the

Superfund Amendments and

Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA),

and to the extent practicable 40 Code of

Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 300, the

National Oil and Hazardous Substances

Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP).

For Operable Unit 4 at the FEMP,

DOE has chosen to complete an

integrated CERCLA/NEPA process. This

decision was based on the longstanding

interest on the part of local stakeholders

to prepare an Environmental Impact

Statement (EIS) on the restoration

activities at the FEMP and on the

recognition that the draft document was

issued and public comments received.

Therefore, this single document is

intended to serve as DOE’s ROD for

Operable Unit 4 under both CERCLA

and NEPA; however, it is not the intent

of the DOE to make a statement on the

legal applicability of NEPA to CERCLA

actions.

The decision presented herein is

based on the information available in

the administrative record for Operable

Unit 4 and maintained in accordance

with CERCLA. The major documents

prepared through the CERCLA process

include the Remedial Investigation (RI),

the Feasibility Study (FS), and the

Proposed Plan (PP) for Operable Unit 4.

The FS and the PP also comprised

DOE’s draft EIS and were made

available for public review and

comment. This decision is also based on

the public hearing held on March 21,

1994, in Harrison, Ohio, and the public

meeting held on May 11, 1994, in Las

Vegas, Nevada following the issuance of

the Feasibility Study/Proposed PlanDraft Environmental Impact Statement

(FS/PP–DEIS). DOE has considered all

comments received during the public

comment period on the FS/PP–DEIS and

following issuance of the final EIS in the

preparation of this ROD.

The State of Ohio concurs with the

remedy and the applicable or relevant

and appropriate requirements (ARARs)

put forth in this ROD for Operable Unit

4.

Assessment of the Site

Actual or threatened releases of

hazardous substances from Operable

Unit 4, if not addressed by

implementing the response action

selected in this ROD, may present an

imminent and substantial endangerment

to public health, welfare, or the

environment.

Description of the Remedy

This is the selected remedial action

for Operable Unit 4, one of five operable

units at the FEMP. The materials within

Operable Unit 4 exhibit a wide range of

properties. Most notable would be the

elevated direct radiation associated with

the K–65 residues versus the much

lower direct radiation associated with

cold metal oxides in Silo 3. Even more

significant would be the much lower

levels of contamination associated with

the soils and building materials, like

concrete, within the Operable Unit 4

Study Area. To account for these

differences and for the varied cleanup

alternatives applying to each waste type,

Operable Unit 4 was segmented into

three subunits. These subunits are

described as follows:

Subunit A: Silos 1 and 2 contents (K–

65 residues and bentonite clay) and

the sludge in the decant sump tank

Subunit B: Silo 3 contents (cold metal

oxides)

Subunit C: Silos 1, 2, 3, and 4

structures; contaminated soils within

the Operable Unit 4 boundary,

including surface and subsurface soils

and the earthen berm around Silos 1

and 2; the decant sump tank; the

radon treatment system; the concrete

pipe trench and the miscellaneous

concrete structures within Operable

Unit 4, any debris (i.e., concrete,

piping, etc.) generated through

implementing cleanup for Subunits A

and B, and any perched groundwater

encountered during remedial

activities.

On the basis of the evaluation of final

alternatives, the selected remedy

addressing Operable Unit 4 at the FEMP

is a combination of Alternatives 3A.1/

Vit—Removal, Vitrification, and Off-site

Disposal—Nevada Test Site (NTS); 3B.1/

Vit—Removal, Vitrification, and Off-site

Disposal—NTS; and 2C—Demolition,

Removal and On-Property Disposal.

These alternatives apply to Subunits A,

B, and C respectively. The major

components of the selected remedy

include:

• Removal of the contents of Silos 1,

2, and 3 (K–65 residues and cold metal

oxides) and the decant sump tank

sludge.

• Vitrification (glassification) to

stabilize the residues and sludges

removed from the silos and decant

sump tank.

• Off-site shipment for disposal at the

NTS of the vitrified contents of Silos 1,

2, 3, and the decant sump tank.

• Demolition of Silos 1, 2, 3, and 4

and decontamination, to the extent

practicable, of the concrete rubble,

piping, and other generated

construction debris.

• Removal of the earthen berms and

excavation of contaminated soils within

the boundary of Operable Unit 4, to

achieve remediation levels. Placement

of clean backfill to original grade

following excavation.

• Demolition of the vitrification

treatment unit and associated facilities

after use. Decontamination or recycling

of debris prior to disposition.

• On-property interim storage of

excavated contaminated soils and

contaminated debris in a manner

consistent with the approved Work Plan

for Removal Action 17 (improved

storage of soil and debris) pending final

disposition in accordance with the
2094 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 4 / Friday, January 6, 1995 / Notices

Records of Decision for Operable Units

5 and 3, respectively.

• Continued access controls and

maintenance and monitoring of the

stored wastes inventories.

• Institutional controls of the

Operable Unit 4 area such as deed and

land use restrictions.

• Potential additional treatment of

stored Operable Unit 4 soil and debris

using Operable Unit 3 and 5 waste

treatment systems.

• Pumping and treatment as required

of any contaminated perched

groundwater encountered during

remedial activities.

• Disposal of Operable Unit 4

contaminated debris and soils

consistent with the Records of Decision

for Operable Units 3 and 5, respectively.

The remedy specifies off-site disposal

of vitrified contents of Silos 1, 2 and 3

at the NTS. At the time of the signing

of this ROD, The Department of

Energy—Nevada Operations Office

(DOE–NV) is in the process of preparing

a site-wide environmental impact

statement (EIS) under NEPA for the

NTS. Shipments of Operable Unit 4

vitrified waste are not proposed to begin

until after the planned completion of

the EIS for the NTS.

The planned date of completion of the

EIS for the NTS is December 1995, at

which time a Record of Decision is

expected to be issued. Shipments of

low-level waste generated from the

remediation of Operable Unit 4 are not

proposed to begin until mid-1997,

which should be after the planned

completion of the NTS site-wide EIS.

Given these timeframes, DOE does not

anticipate the NTS EIS schedule will

negatively impact the Operable Unit 4

remediation schedule discussed in the

ROD.

The containerized vitrified product

will require interim storage at the FEMP

prior to its transportation to the NTS for

disposal. The purpose of this interim

storage is two-fold; first, the vitrified

product will require verification

sampling in order to certify that each

production lot has met specific

performance and waste disposal criteria;

and second, to provide the Fernald

waste shipping program a buffer staging

area where the material can be safely

managed prior to its shipment to NTS in

accordance with DOE as low as

reasonably achievable (ALARA)

principles, ARARs identified and

included in the Operable Unit 4 ROD,

as well as in a manner protective of

human health and the environment. It

has been anticipated that the interim

storage area will be needed to

accommodate the interim handling of

approximately 90 days of vitrification

production.

The decision regarding the final

disposition of the remaining Operable

Unit 4 contaminated soil and debris will

be placed in abeyance, until completion

of the Records of Decision for Operable

Units 3 and 5 remedial actions, in order

to take full advantage of planned and in

progress waste minimization treatment

processes by these operable units.

Further, this strategy enables the

integration of disposal decisions for

contaminated soils and debris on a sitewide basis.

In the unlikely event unforeseen

circumstances preclude the integration

of Operable Unit 4 soil and debris into

the Operable Unit 3 and/or Operable

Unit 5 treatment and disposal decisions,

the disposal decision for Operable Unit

4 contaminated soils and debris will be

documented in a ROD amendment for

Operable Unit 4 in accordance with

Section 117(c) of CERCLA and United

States Environmental Protection Agency

(EPA) guidance. The ROD amendment

will provide the public and the EPA

further opportunity to review and

comment on the final disposal option

for Operable Unit 4 soils and debris. A

ROD amendment to the Operable Unit 4

ROD will not be necessary in the event

the Operable Unit 3 remedy for debris

and the Operable Unit 5 remedy for

contaminated soils can be feasibly

implemented for Operable Unit 4.

In reaching the decision to implement

this remedial alternative, DOE evaluated

other alternatives for each subunit, in

addition to no action. The other

alternatives are: (a) Subunit A—Silos 1

and 2 Contents: (1) Removal, Cement

Stabilization, Off-Site Disposal at

Nevada Test Site; (b) Subunit B—Silo 3

Contents: (1) Removal, Vitrification, OnProperty Disposal; (2) Removal, Cement

Stabilization, On-Property Disposal; (3)

Removal, Cement Stabilization, Off-Site

Disposal at Nevada Test Site; (c)

Subunit C—Silos 1, 2, 3, and 4

Structures, Soils, and Debris: (1)

Demolition, Removal, Off-Site Disposal

at Nevada Test Site; (2) Demolition,

Removal, Off-Site Disposal at Permitted

Commercial Facility.

A description of the alternatives is

provided in the Decision Summary of

the ROD, hereby incorporated by

reference for DOE’s NEPA ROD, and is

available in the Administrative Record.

CERCLA’s nine criteria set forth in 40

CFR Part 300, the National Oil and

Hazardous Substances Pollution

Contingency Plan were used to evaluate

the alternatives. The selected remedy

represents the best balance among the

alternatives with respect to these criteria

and is the environmentally preferable

alternative.

The preferred alternative for Operable

Unit 4 provides the best performance

when compared with the other

alternatives, with respect to the

evaluation criteria. This remedy will

achieve substantial risk reduction by

removing the sources of contamination,

treating the material which poses the

highest risk, shipping the treated

residues off-site for disposal, managing

the remaining contaminated soils and

debris consistent with the site-wide

strategy. The selected treatment

alternative both reduces the mobility of

the hazardous constituents and results

in significant reduction in the volume of

materials requiring disposal. The

selected remedy also provides the

highest degree of long-term

protectiveness for human health and the

environment.

Statutory Determinations

The selected remedy is protective of

human health and the environment,

complies with Federal and State

requirements that are legally applicable

or relevant and appropriate to the

remedial action, and is cost effective.

This remedy utilizes permanent

solutions and alternative treatment (or

resource recovery) technologies to the

maximum extent practicable, and

satisfies the statutory preference for

remedies that employ treatment, and

also reduce toxicity, mobility, or volume

as a principal element. This remedy will

result in contaminated debris and soil

being dispositioned by Operable Units 3

and 5, respectively. Because this remedy

will result in hazardous substances (i.e.,

contaminated soil and debris) remaining

on site, above health-based levels, a

review will be conducted every five

years after commencement of remedial

action to ensure that the remedy

continues to provide adequate

protection of human health and the

environment.

All practical means to avoid or

minimize environmental harm from

implementation of the selected remedy

have been adopted. During excavation

activities, sediment controls will be

implemented to eliminate potential

surface water runoff and sediment

deposition to Paddys Run. Final site

layout and design will include all

practicable means (e.g., sound

engineering practices and proper

construction practices) to minimize

environmental impacts.

[FR Doc. 95–345 Filed 1–5–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P