Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for the Fabrication and Deployment of a Multi-Purpose Canister-Based System for the Management of Civilian Spent Nuclear Fuel

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for

the Fabrication and Deployment of a Multi-Purpose Canister-Based System

for the Management of Civilian Spent Nuclear Fuel

AGENCY: United States Department of Energy (DOE).

ACTION: Notice of intent.

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

SUMMARY: DOE announces its intent to prepare an Environmental Impact

Statement (EIS) pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of

1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), in accordance with the Council on

Environmental Quality Regulations for Implementing the Procedural

Provisions of NEPA (40 CFR Parts 1500-1508) and the DOE NEPA

Implementing Procedures (10 CFR Part 1021).

Under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, as amended (42 U.S.C.

10101 et seq.) (the Act), DOE is responsible for disposal of civilian

spent nuclear fuel in a high-level radioactive waste geologic

repository, and for any monitored retrievable storage of spent nuclear

fuel prior to disposal. The Department is also responsible under the

Act for transportation of spent nuclear fuel in connection with DOE's

disposal or storage. In order to carry out its responsibilities

relating to the transportation of spent nuclear fuel, and to facilitate

planning for the design of a geologic disposal facility and a possible

monitored retrievable storage facility, DOE is in the process of

deciding whether or not to fabricate and deploy a multi-purpose

canister\1\-based system that would use metal canisters capable of

holding multiple spent fuel assemblies.\2\ This system would enable

spent fuel assemblies to be loaded into a canister and sealed at the

reactor site. The sealed canister could be stored, transported, and

disposed of without repackaging or further handling of bare spent

nuclear fuel. Alternatives to the multi-purpose canister-based system

would require additional handling of the individual spent fuel

assemblies as they are transferred to different specialized casks\3\

for storage, transport, and disposal.

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

\1\A canister is the primary or sealed container for spent

nuclear fuel or vitrified high level waste.

\2\A fuel assembly is the physical arrangement of fuel rods held

together by plates and separated by spacers attached to the fuel

cladding.

\3\A cask is a large, heavily-shielded container used for

storage and/or transport of spent nuclear fuel. The cask provides

chemical, mechanical, thermal, and radiological protection, and

dissipates decay heat during handling, transportation and storage.

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

In addition to the sealed metal canisters, the multi-purpose

canister-based system would use specialized casks or overpacks\4\ for

transfer, storage, and transport of multi-purpose canisters containing

spent nuclear fuel. Multi-purpose canisters containing spent nuclear

fuel could be transported to any storage facility that may become

available and eventually to a geologic repository. At a geologic

repository, the spent nuclear fuel could remain in the multi-purpose

canister and may be placed in a disposal overpack and sealed for

disposal as a unit. The sealed disposal overpack would be designed

during the design phase of geologic repository development to meet

regulatory requirements for disposal. Centralized storage of multi-

purpose canisters, or disposal of multi-purpose canisters in a geologic

repository, would be analyzed in separate NEPA documents, as provided

by the Act.

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

\4\An overpack is a secondary (or additional) external container

for the spent nuclear fuel. The overpack provides structural

strength, radiation shielding, corrosion resistance, containment,

and engineered barrier performance for the spent nuclear fuel, as

specified under 10 CFR Parts 60, 71, and 72.

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

The subject EIS will evaluate the potential environmental impacts

of fabricating and deploying the multi-purpose canister-based system,

as well as the impacts of reasonable alternative storage and transport

systems.

DATES: To ensure that the full range of issues and alternatives related

to this proposal is addressed, DOE invites comments on the proposed

action (fabrication and deployment of the multi-purpose canister-based

system), including the scope of the subject EIS. Oral and written

comments will be considered equally in preparation of the EIS. The

public participation process is discussed below in the Supplemental

Information section.

The public scoping period begins with the publication of this

Notice of Intent in the Federal Register and will continue until

January 6, 1995. Written comments should be postmarked by that date to

ensure consideration. Comments received after that date will be

considered to the extent practicable.

ADDRESSES: Written comments on the scope of this EIS should be directed

to: U.S. Department of Energy, c/o Argonne National Laboratory, EAD,

Building 900, Mail Stop 1, 9700 South Cass Avenue, Argonne, IL 60439,

ATTN: Multi-Purpose Canister EIS Comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information on this EIS,

please contact: Mr. Gerald J. Parker, Multi-Purpose Canister EIS

Manager, Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management (RW-45), U.S.

Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC

20585, Telephone: 1-202-586-5679.

For general information on the DOE NEPA review process, please

contact: Ms. Carol M. Borgstrom, Director, Office of NEPA Oversight

(EH-25), U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW.,

Washington, DC 20585, Telephone: 1-202-586-4600 or leave a message at

1-800-472-2756.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Public Participation: All interested persons

or stakeholders, including Federal agencies, Indian tribal

organizations, State and local government agencies, public interest

groups, manufacturers of equipment, transportation interests, industry

and utility organizations, regulators, and the general public are

encouraged to participate in the EIS scoping process. Because of the

anticipated public interest and national scope of the program, DOE will

provide several means for the public to express its views and provide

comments. Comments submitted by any of these means will become part of

the official record for scoping.

Written Comments: DOE invites all interested persons to submit

comments related to the proposed fabrication and deployment of the

multi-purpose canister-based system. Written comments should be sent to

the Argonne National Laboratory address listed above. Requests for fact

sheets and related documents (which will cover such topics as the

proposed multi-purpose canister-based system, safety, transportation,

and the NEPA process) may also be made by writing to this address.

Written comments and requests for fact sheets and related documents can

be submitted to the following toll-free facsimile telephone number: 1-

800-MPC-4531 or 1-800-672-4531.

Toll-Free Telephone Line: Oral comments may be made via the

following toll-free telephone number, 1-800-MPC-3304 or 1-800-672-3304,

from 9 a.m. to 9 p.m. Eastern Standard Time, Monday through Friday.

Comments will be noted and become part of the official record for

scoping. Requests for fact sheets and related documents may also be

made by calling this toll-free telephone number.

Electronic Mail: Comments can be submitted by electronic mail to

the following INTERNET address: [email protected]. Requests

for fact sheets and related documents may also be made using this

electronic mail address.

Electronic Bulletin Board: The public may review technical

documents and provide comments via an electronic bulletin board. Call

1-800-MPC-1855 or 1-800-672-1855 for information on downloading, and

for uploading comments for inclusion in the scoping process.

Meetings: Three public scoping meetings will be held to provide and

discuss information on the subject EIS, and to receive oral and written

comments. Meetings are scheduled for November 21, 1994, in Las Vegas,

Nevada, at the Cashman Field Center, 850 Las Vegas Boulevard North;

November 30, 1994, in Chicago, Illinois, at the Clarion International

Hotel, 6810 N. Mannheim Rd.; and December 7, 1994, in the Washington

D.C., area, at the Hyatt Crystal City Hotel in Arlington, Virginia. All

meetings are scheduled from 8:30 a.m. until 9 p.m. or later, depending

upon public interest. Pre-registration to speak at a scoping meeting is

requested no later than five days prior to the meeting in that city.

Pre-registration (by providing name and organization affiliation, if

any) can be accomplished via the toll-free telephone number, the toll-

free facsimile number, electronic mail, or in writing. The meetings

will be open to the general public and on-site registration to speak

will be accommodated to the extent practicable.

Technical exhibits, informational materials, models, and videos

will be available in a separate room at each meeting site. DOE staff

and representatives will be available to discuss the program and answer

questions. Comment cards will be available for those who desire to

provide scoping comments at that time. On the day of the public

meeting, this room will be open from 8 a.m. until 9 p.m. or later,

depending upon public interest.

The three public scoping meetings will start at 8:30 a.m. DOE staff

will briefly describe: (1) the proposed multi-purpose canister-based

system; (2) the EIS procedure and the scoping process, including other

public participation opportunities such as the toll-free telephone

number, toll-free facsimile number, written comment process, electronic

mail availability, and electronic bulletin board access; and (3) the

morning's informational workshop format and the format for public

scoping. Following this introduction, informational workshops will be

held, focusing on different technical aspects of the multi-purpose

canister-based system. The four workshops will be repeated during the

morning and will cover the following topics: (1) Multi-purpose canister

design parameters and fabrication; (2) storage at reactor sites and at

other possible storage facilities; (3) transportation; and (4) surface

handling of multi-purpose canisters at a geologic repository in

preparation for disposal. These informational workshops will be

informal, and will not become part of the record for scoping.

On-the-record public scoping will begin at 1:30 p.m. Based upon

pre- registration, a list of speakers will be developed. Walk-in

registrants will be accommodated following pre-registrants. Oral

comments will be recorded by a court reporter.

Results of scoping, including a summary of comments received, will

be made available in the EIS Implementation Plan. DOE will make the

Implementation Plan available to the public for information as soon as

possible after the close of scoping but prior to issuance of the draft

EIS. The Implementation Plan will also include a statement of the

planned scope and content of the EIS, the purpose and need for agency

action, the proposed action and alternatives, target schedules,

anticipated consultation with other agencies, and a description of the

scoping process and the results of this process. Copies of the

Implementation Plan, as well as the draft and final EISs, will be

provided to anyone requesting copies of the documents. In addition,

copies will be made available for inspection during business hours at

DOE's Freedom of Information Reading Room (1E-190), Forrestal Building,

1000 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C., Monday through

Friday; and in local DOE Field Office reading rooms (locations are

listed at the end of this notice).

Purpose and Need for Agency Action: Under the Nuclear Waste Policy

Act of 1982, as amended (42 U.S.C. 10101 et seq.), DOE is responsible

for managing the disposal of spent nuclear fuel from civilian nuclear

power plants, and for possible monitored retrievable storage of spent

nuclear fuel prior to disposal. The Department is also responsible for

transportation of spent nuclear fuel in connection with DOE's disposal

or storage. In order to carry out these responsibilities, DOE needs to

develop a program for handling, storing, transporting, and disposing

spent nuclear fuel. A number of alternative technology systems may be

available to accomplish these objectives and protect the environment.

DOE needs to select one or more such systems.

Background: The Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, as amended, (the

Act), made DOE responsible for managing the disposal of high-level

radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel from civilian nuclear power

plants, and established the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste

Management for that purpose. Specifically, the Act directed DOE to

``establish a schedule for the siting, construction, and operation of

repositories that will provide a reasonable assurance that the public

and the environment will be adequately protected from the hazards posed

by high-level radioactive waste and such spent nuclear fuel as may be

disposed of in a repository.'' As discussed below, Congress also

established in the Act specific requirements applicable to DOE's NEPA

compliance activities as DOE proceeds to implement the Act's mandate.

In carrying out that mandate, DOE is developing an overall waste

management system that will include a geologic repository for permanent

disposal of waste and a possible monitored retrievable storage facility

for temporary storage. The requirements for developing these facilities

are explicitly set forth in the Act. These facilities are described

below.

Geologic Repository: On May 27, 1986, the then-Secretary of Energy,

as required by the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, nominated five

sites in Mississippi, Nevada, Texas, Utah, and Washington as suitable

for characterization for a possible geologic repository and recommended

to the President that three of these sites--the Yucca Mountain site in

Nevada, the Deaf Smith County site in Texas, and the Hanford site in

Washington--be characterized as candidate sites for a first repository.

The Secretary's recommendation was approved by the President.

In 1987, Congress passed the Nuclear Waste Policy Amendments Act,

which directed that DOE conduct repository site-characterization

activities only at the Yucca Mountain site in Nye County, Nevada. If,

after site characterization, Yucca Mountain is found by DOE to be

suitable as a geologic repository, it is expected to be available for

receiving spent nuclear fuel by the year 2010.

The Nuclear Waste Policy Amendments Act stipulates that if the

Yucca Mountain site is found suitable, DOE's decision to recommend to

the President the development of the Yucca Mountain site as a geologic

repository will be supported by an EIS. The statute specifically

provides that this EIS need not consider the following issues (which

otherwise might require consideration under NEPA): (1) The need for a

geologic repository, (2) alternatives to geologic disposal, and (3)

alternative sites to Yucca Mountain. The scope of a geologic repository

EIS will be discussed in a Notice of Intent that DOE has scheduled to

be issued in the Federal Register in 1995.

Monitored Retrievable Storage Facility: The Nuclear Waste Policy

Amendments Act also provided two processes for siting and constructing

a monitored retrievable storage facility. Under one process, DOE would

survey and evaluate potentially suitable sites. Under the other

process, the Nuclear Waste Negotiator (a position established by the

Nuclear Waste Policy Amendments Act) would attempt to find a State or

Indian tribe willing to host a monitored retrievable storage facility.

DOE is currently supporting the efforts of the Nuclear Waste

Negotiator to find a suitable site for a monitored retrievable storage

facility. For either siting process, the Act requires that DOE's

application to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for a construction

authorization be accompanied by an EIS.

Current Practices for On-Site Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel: Spent

nuclear fuel assemblies consist of an array of zircalloy or stainless

steel rods filled with uranium dioxide pellets, which have reached the

end of their useful life in a nuclear reactor. Spent fuel assemblies

from commercial power reactors are initially stored under water in

specially designed pools at the reactor sites. The spent nuclear fuel

is both thermally hot and highly radioactive. At many commercial

reactor sites, the quantity of spent fuel assemblies is approaching the

maximum storage capacity of the pools. Although pool capacity can be

increased by fuel rod consolidation or re-racking, as reactors continue

to operate and more spent nuclear fuel is generated, other means for

temporary storage of spent nuclear fuel are being implemented. One

storage option is the construction of additional at-reactor storage, or

independent spent fuel storage installations, which would provide dry

storage of spent nuclear fuel. The first licensed dry cask storage

facility began operation in 1986. Since then, several other dry cask

storage facilities have been licensed.

The Department's Energy Information Administration projects that 22

spent fuel storage pools will have reached their maximum storage

capacity before the end of 1998; therefore, additional storage capacity

would be required. Utilities are currently using dry cask storage at

reactor sites for this additional storage capacity. The need for spent

nuclear fuel storage will increase whether or not DOE deploys the

multi-purpose canister-based system or any of its alternatives.

Multi-purpose Canister-based System: The multi-purpose canister-

based system would replace or supplement existing technologies for

storage and transport of spent nuclear fuel. While the Act makes DOE

responsible for the transportation, monitored retrievable storage, and

disposal of spent nuclear fuel, multi-purpose canister technology is

not a specific requirement of the Act. Rather, it is one means of

providing for spent nuclear fuel transportation that, because of its

multi-purpose design, would also facilitate the Department's planning

for disposal facilities and possible monitored retrievable storage,

while assisting commercial reactor operators in satisfying their need

to plan for additional storage of the spent nuclear fuel that is

accumulating at the civilian reactor sites.

In 1992, DOE investigated the feasibility of using a multi-purpose

canister-based system, i.e., a standardized set of sealed canisters,

transportation casks, and storage overpacks to handle spent nuclear

fuel. Under this approach, spent fuel assemblies would be placed in

sealed canisters that would remain sealed during transport and storage,

and that would be compatible with disposal. Because this approach would

minimize the handling of individual fuel assemblies, preliminary

evaluations indicated that such a multi-purpose canister-based system

could provide cost, feasibility, health and safety, environmental

impact, and risk advantages over other existing and proposed waste

management systems. Additionally, the multi-purpose canister-based

system could be used to accept a majority of existing fuel sizes and

configurations, and would allow the establishment of standardized

handling procedures.

The investigation of the multi-purpose canister concept involved

the development of a conceptual design, numerous supporting studies,

evaluations of alternative cask and canister concepts, and input from

stakeholders. Based on these activities, the decision was made to

invite private vendors to submit designs for components of the multi-

purpose canister-based system. On June 3, 1994, a package of

information was provided to individuals responding to a DOE contractor

(TRW Environmental Safety Systems, Inc.) request for proposals

announcement, which was published in the May 11, 1994, issue of the

Commerce Business Daily. One or more design contracts are expected to

be awarded in early 1995. The request for proposals established broad

criteria sufficient to allow for varied design approaches.

The varied design approaches expected to be received in response to

the request for proposals will be reviewed by DOE and a range of

reasonable alternatives will be submitted to the Nuclear Regulatory

Commission for certification of their compliance with the Commission's

regulations for transport and storage of spent nuclear fuel (10 CFR

Parts 71 and 72). DOE expects that each vendor team will submit a

package of up to six multi-purpose canister-related Safety Analysis

Reports (up to four for storage and two for transportation). More than

one vendor team may proceed to the cask certification phase. DOE

expects these applications to represent the reasonable range of multi-

purpose canister-based system alternatives. The decision to proceed

with designs and to submit Safety Analysis Reports for a multi-purpose

canister-based system will not limit the choice of reasonable

alternatives for handling, storing and transporting spent nuclear fuel

nor prejudice the ultimate decisions on the spent nuclear fuel

management system, because DOE and/or commercial reactor operators are

free to use any Nuclear Regulatory Commission-certified technology. If

there are any meaningful differences in the environmental impacts of

varied multi-purpose canister-based system designs, they are expected

to relate to cask capacity, which determines the quantity of spent

nuclear fuel in a storage and transport unit, and therefore would

determine the total inventory of multi-purpose canisters required for

storage and transport.

DOE, in accordance with both the Council on Environmental Quality's

NEPA regulations (40 CFR Parts 1500-1508) and its own regulations for

implementing NEPA (10 CFR Part 1021), has determined that an EIS is the

appropriate level of environmental review documentation for the

proposed action. The subject EIS will analyze the environmental impacts

of fabricating and deploying a multi-purpose canister-based system as a

part of the civilian spent nuclear fuel management system.

Proposed Action: The proposed action would provide a standardized

system to handle, store, and transport spent nuclear fuel, in order to

minimize or eliminate the need for the spent nuclear fuel to be removed

from canisters or casks during storage and transportation, and, to the

extent practicable, be compatible with disposal.

DOE proposes to fabricate and deploy certain components of a multi-

purpose canister-based system. These components are: (1) Canisters

capable of holding multiple spent nuclear fuel assemblies; (2)

specialized handling and welding equipment; (3) transfer casks to

shield the canisters during loading into on-site storage casks; (4)

storage casks for sealed canisters; (5) transportation casks for rail

transport of canisters; and (6) associated equipment necessary to

deploy the multi-purpose canister-based system. If DOE decides to

deploy this system, the multi-purpose canister-based system components

could be provided to utilities building dry storage facilities and

willing to adopt the multi-purpose canister as part of their spent

nuclear fuel management system.

In evaluating the environmental impacts of the proposed action, the

following will be analyzed:

Manufacturing of multi-purpose canister-based system

components;

Packaging and handling of spent nuclear fuel as it is

transferred to canisters or casks;

Canister transfer and loading operations;

Storage of spent nuclear fuel in canisters and casks at

the reactor sites;

Spent nuclear fuel transportation from the reactor sites

to a hypothetical monitored retrievable storage facility and/or a

geologic repository (generic analysis);

Handling and storage of spent nuclear fuel at a

hypothetical monitored retrievable storage facility (generic analysis);

and

Surface activities involving the handling and disposal of

spent nuclear fuel at a geologic repository (generic analysis).

The multi-purpose canister-based system could be compatible with

the permanent disposal of spent nuclear fuel because the canister could

be encapsulated in a sealed disposal overpack for placement in a

geologic repository. Because site characterization data are not

available and the regulatory standards applicable to permanent disposal

have not yet been established by the U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, underground emplacement and post-closure impacts at a geologic

repository will not be addressed in this EIS. As previously described,

such impacts will be discussed in the geologic repository EIS.

To analyze the impacts of the multi-purpose canister-based system,

the subject EIS will use the conceptual designs that accompanied the

request for proposals information package, which was distributed on

June 3, 1994. The conceptual designs include two sizes for the multi-

purpose canister: a large capacity canister that would satisfy a 125-

ton crane hook weight limit and a small capacity canister that would

meet a 75-ton crane hook weight limit. The capacity of the large

canister would be 21 pressurized water reactor fuel assemblies or 40

boiling water reactor fuel assemblies. The small canister would have a

capacity of 12 pressurized water reactor assemblies or 24 boiling water

reactor assemblies.

A multi-purpose canister would consist of a cylindrical shell with

two lids, a spent fuel basket, and a shield plug. The spent fuel basket

would provide structural support for the spent fuel assemblies and a

path for the transfer of the heat generated by the spent nuclear fuel

into the canister shell. The spent fuel basket would also provide

criticality\5\ control to ensure that the spent nuclear fuel remains

subcritical. The cylindrical shell would provide structural support for

the fuel basket structure. For storage, the cylindrical shell and the

inner lid would provide a primary containment boundary to prevent the

release of radioactive material from the spent nuclear fuel. For

transportation and disposal, the outer lid would provide primary

containment.

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

\5\Criticality is the ability of an array of nuclear fuel to

sustain a nuclear chain reaction. Casks used for storage and

transportation of spent nuclear fuel and waste packages used for

final disposal must be designed to prevent the occurrence of

criticality, even under postulated accident conditions. The

condition of nuclear fuel before it achieves criticality is called

subcritical.

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

The material considered in the conceptual design for the multi-

purpose canister shell was 316L stainless steel; alternatives may

include other types of stainless steel. The shield plug is a metal

barrier to reduce exposure during transfer and may be required to

maintain personnel radiation exposures as low as reasonably achievable

during welding and inspection; alternative materials may include

depleted uranium and carbon steel.

The multi-purpose canister-based system conceptual design also

includes two transportation casks, one to transport the large canister

and one to transport the small canister. For transportation, the

transportation cask provides the primary containment. The structural

components of the cask body may be composed of stainless steel and an

enclosed gamma shielding material that incorporates depleted uranium

and a layer of lead. Alternative shielding materials may be lead,

depleted uranium, or a combination of the two.

Alternatives to the Proposed Action: Three alternative hardware

systems are being considered for evaluation in the EIS. These

alternatives are presented to facilitate discussion on the scope of the

EIS and are not intended to be all-inclusive or to predetermine the EIS

scope. The alternatives include: (1) no action, which is the current

technology consisting of different systems of specialized single-

purpose canisters and casks that have been certified by the Nuclear

Regulatory Commission or are presently undergoing Nuclear Regulatory

Commission certification; (2) the current technology [as in alternative

(1)] supplemented by a high-capacity rail transportation cask; and (3)

a system using transportable storage casks. These alternatives are

further described below.

Under the no-action alternative, DOE would not promote a particular

system. Under this approach, DOE expects that spent fuel assemblies

would be transferred from one single-purpose cask to another single-

purpose cask as they move through the waste-management system. Each

transfer process would require additional handling of bare spent fuel

assemblies. This non-standardized single-purpose system is currently

being used or proposed for use by utilities as their spent fuel pools

reach capacity. In addition to the currently certified rail

transportation casks, this scenario assumes that the legal weight truck

cask, currently being developed with a capacity of four pressurized

water reactor or nine boiling water reactor fuel assemblies, will also

be available. Because DOE expects this scenario to occur if DOE does

not act to implement the multi-purpose canister-based system or one of

the other alternatives, it regards this scenario as the no-action

alternative in the EIS.

The second alternative is identical to the no-action alternative,

except that the system would be supplemented by a new high-capacity

rail transportation cask. This alternative would examine the use of

rail transport to reduce the frequency of required shipments, improve

transportation efficiency, and reduce cumulative exposures near

transportation routes. Like the no-action alternative, this alternative

would require additional handling of bare spent fuel assemblies as

these assemblies are transferred from one single purpose storage or

transportation canister or cask to another. Although DOE is unaware of

any effort currently under way to obtain Nuclear Regulatory Commission

certification of such a rail cask, the rail cask is technically

feasible and may provide advantages over the no-action alternative.

The third alternative involves the development of dual-purpose

transportable storage casks (a dual-purpose cask-based system that

could be transported by rail). This system could be supplemented with

legal weight truck casks for those utilities unable to accommodate

transportable storage casks suitable for rail transport. Under this

alternative, spent fuel assemblies would be placed in a sealed cask

that may be used for dry storage and transport by rail, either to a

monitored retrievable storage facility or to a geologic repository. At

a geologic repository, individual fuel assemblies would be removed from

the transportable storage cask and repackaged in a suitable geologic

disposal package. This alternative could provide high transportation

capacities in comparison to the no-action alternative and reduce the

number of times that spent nuclear fuel would have to be handled

outside a canister or a cask. However, it would require additional

repackaging and handling of the spent nuclear fuel at a geologic

repository.

Environmental Issues: DOE has identified environmental issues

related to the multi-purpose canister-based system and the alternative

systems. The issues are presented here to facilitate scoping. The list

of issues is not intended to be all-inclusive or to predetermine the

scope of the EIS.

Since the proposed multi-purpose canister-based system would be

made available to commercial reactor operators, and would be used by

DOE in its own activities relating to the management of spent nuclear

fuel, this EIS would address in general terms potential impacts related

to deployment of the multi-purpose canister-based system or its

alternatives at all steps leading to ultimate disposal. However, the

EIS would not include site-specific analysis of the potential impacts

associated with specific reactor sites, potential monitored retrievable

storage facility sites, potential geologic repository sites, or site-

specific transportation routes. These analyses would be performed in

subsequent NEPA reviews, as appropriate.

DOE expects that the EIS would address the following issues:

Public and Worker Safety and Health. The potential health

and safety impacts to workers and the public during the handling,

packaging and storage of spent nuclear fuel at a generic nuclear power

plant site, during transportation of spent nuclear fuel, and during

handling at storage and disposal facilities. Subsequent NEPA documents

will address health effects in more detail once the specific proposed

sites and routes are identified;

Transportation. The potential risks associated with

transport of spent nuclear fuel will be assessed for shipments between

reactor sites and each hypothetical monitored retrievable storage

facility and/or a geologic repository. For purposes of analysis, two

hypothetical monitored retrievable storage facility locations will be

considered: one in the eastern region and one in the western region of

the United States. A geologic repository will be assumed to be located

at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, which is the only candidate repository site

currently authorized by law for investigation. The use of hypothetical

routes and facility locations for the monitored retrievable storage

facility and geologic repository in performing various calculations is

not meant to imply that DOE has actually made routing or site-selection

decisions at this time;

Accidents. The potential effects to the environment,

workers and the public due to reasonably foreseeable accidents during

handling, storage, and transportation, including accidents with low

probability but high consequences;

Waste Isolation. The potential impacts on the operation of

at-reactor storage sites, hypothetical monitored retrievable storage

facilities, and a geologic repository;

Waste Management. The impacts of management of solid and

liquid waste, including residues, non-hazardous, hazardous, and

radiological wastes that might result from manufacturing, storage, and

transportation;

Socioeconomic Conditions. Potential generic socioeconomic

impacts, such as impacts on employment, tax base, and public services;

Environmental Justice. Potential disproportionately high

and adverse impacts of activities on minority or low-income

populations;

Pollution Prevention. Appropriate and innovative pollution

prevention, waste minimization, and energy and water use reduction

technologies, including eliminating or significantly reducing: (a)

Acquisition of unnecessary hazardous substances, and (b) energy, water,

and related environmental impacts by promoting use of energy efficient

and renewable technologies;

Soil, Water, and Air Resources. Potential generic impacts

to soil, water, and air pathways;

Sensitive Habitat Resources. Potential generic impacts to

plants, animals, and habitat, including impacts to floodplains,

wetlands, and threatened and endangered species and their habitat; and

Cultural Resources. Potential generic impacts to cultural

resources.

Relationship to Other NEPA Reviews: The Act directs DOE to

characterize only one site, Yucca Mountain, Nye County, Nevada, for the

first geologic repository. If, after site characterization, the Yucca

Mountain site is found to be suitable, the Secretary of Energy may

submit to the President a recommendation that the President approve the

site for development as a geologic repository. This recommendation is

required by the Act to be accompanied by an EIS. At present, site

characterization activities are proceeding at Yucca Mountain, but a

site-suitability determination has not been made. The Act also

authorizes DOE to site, construct, and operate a monitored retrievable

storage facility subject to certain conditions. The Act states that any

DOE selection of a monitored retrievable storage facility site must be

accompanied by an environmental assessment for site selection and a

subsequent EIS for licensing, and may not occur until the Secretary has

characterized a geologic repository site and recommended to the

President the approval of the geologic repository site. At present, no

monitored retrievable storage facility site has been proposed. The Act

also provides for a negotiated, volunteer process for siting a

monitored retrievable storage facility. The Act allows the negotiated

siting of a monitored retrievable storage facility by this process

before recommendation of a geologic repository site. The Act requires

the preparation of (1) an environmental assessment for proposing a

negotiated site to Congress, and (2) an EIS for licensing. No monitored

retrievable storage site has been proposed under this voluntary

process.

DOE prepared two EIS's that supported the programmatic decision to

develop a civilian radioactive waste management system and were

available to Congress during its consideration of the Act. These two

supporting EIS's are:

Final Environmental Impact Statement: Management of

Commercially Generated Radioactive Waste, DOE/EIS-0046-F, 1980,

evaluated the environmental impacts of various alternatives associated

with the management of commercially generated waste and recommended

geologic disposal over other disposal forms; and

Final Environmental Impact Statement: U.S. Spent Fuel

Policy, DOE/EIS-0015, 1980, evaluated the environmental impacts of the

storage and transportation of spent nuclear fuel as proposed in the

draft Spent Nuclear Fuel Act of 1979. The alternatives evaluated were

at-reactor storage, regionalized storage, and centralized storage

(i.e., a monitored retrievable storage facility). The last of these was

found to have the least environmental impacts.

DOE also prepared other environmental review documents under the

Act relative to other aspects of the waste management system. The

subject EIS would use pertinent information presented in the following

environmental review documents:

Environmental Assessment, Yucca Mountain Site, Nevada

Research and Development Area, Nye County, Nevada, DOE/RW-0073, 1986;

and

Environmental Assessment for a Monitored Retrievable

Storage Facility, DOE/RW-0035, 1986.

Additional documents that may be prepared, as required by the Act,

include:

EIS for construction and operation of a geologic

repository;

Environmental Assessment for a negotiated site for a

monitored retrievable storage facility;

Environmental Assessment for the selection of a DOE-sited

monitored retrievable storage facility;

EIS for construction of a monitored retrievable storage

facility.

Additional DOE NEPA documentation related to spent nuclear fuel,

recently issued or in preparation, includes:

Programmatic Spent Nuclear Fuel Management and Idaho

National Engineering Laboratory Environmental Restoration and Waste

Management Programs Draft EIS, June 1994; and

A Proposed Policy for the Acceptance of Foreign Research

Reactor Spent Nuclear Fuel EIS, Notice of Intent, October 21, 1993 (58

FR 54366).

These two documents address spent nuclear fuel that the DOE

currently owns or proposes to acquire; the total quantity of such spent

nuclear fuel is a small fraction of the current and prospective

domestic commercial civilian spent nuclear fuel inventory. Although the

DOE-owned fuel is not being specifically considered in the development

of the multi-purpose canister, multi-purpose canister-based technology

may be appropriate for the DOE-owned spent nuclear fuel.

Supporting Documentation: Copies of the Implementation Plan, as

well as the draft and final EISs, will be made available for inspection

during business hours at DOE's Freedom of Information Reading Rooms,

which are listed below.

Department of Energy Freedom of Information Public Reading Rooms

Albuquerque Operations Office

National Atomic Museum, Building 20358, Wyoming Boulevard, P.O. Box

5400, Albuquerque, NM 871-5400, Attn: Diane Zepeda, (505) 845-4370

Bartlesville Project Office/National Institute for Petroleum and Energy

Research

BPO/NIPER Library, U.S. Department of Energy, 220 North Virginia

Avenue, P.O. Box 2128, Bartlesville, OK 74003, Attn: Josh Stroman,

(918) 337-4971

Dallas Support Office

U.S. Department of Energy, Suite 400, 1440 W. Mockingbird Lane, Dallas,

TX 75247, Attn: Gailene Reinhold, (214) 767-7040

Denver Support Office

U.S. Department of Energy, 1075 South Yukon Street, P.O. Box 26247,

Lakewood, CO 80226, Attn: Al Hymer, (303) 969-7000 x233

Bonneville Power Administration

U.S. Department of Energy, P.O. Box 3621-ALP, Portland, OR 97208, Attn:

Jo Ann Scott, (503) 230-3474/3232

Chicago Operations Office

Document Department, University of Illinois at Chicago, 801 South

Morgan Street, Chicago, IL 60607, Attn: Karen Graves, (312) 996-2738

Fernald Area Office

U.S. Department of Energy, Public Information Room, FERMCO, P.O. Box

398705, Cincinnati, OH 45239-8705, Attn: Ken Morgan, (513) 648-3131

Headquarters Office

U.S. Department of Energy, Room 1E-190, Forrestal Bldg., 1000

Independence Ave., SW., Washington, DC 20585, Attn: Denise Diggin,

(202) 586-6020

Idaho Operations Office

Idaho Public Reading Room, 1776 Science Center Drive, Idaho Falls, ID

83402, Attn: Carl R. Robertson, (208) 526-1144

Morgantown Energy Technology Center

METC Library, U.S. Department of Energy, 3610 Collins Ferry Road, P.O.

Box 880, Morgantown, WV 26505, Attn: Matt Marsteller, (304) 291-4183

Richland Operations Office

Washington State University, Tri-Cities Branch Campus, 100 Sprout Road,

Richland, WA 99352, Attn: Terri Traub, (509) 376-8583

Rocky Flats Field Office

Front Range Community, College Library, 3645 West 112th Avenue,

Westminster, CO 80030, Attn: Will-Ann Lamsens, (303) 469-4435

Nevada Operations Office

U.S. Department of Energy, Public Reading Room, 2753 South Highland

Drive, P.O. Box 98518, Las Vegas, NV 89193-8518, Attn: Charlotte Cox,

(702) 295-1459

Oak Ridge Operations Office

U.S. Department of Energy, Public Reading Room, 200 Administration

Road, P.O. Box 2001, Oak Ridge, TN 37831-8510, Attn: Jane Greenwalt,

(615) 576-1216

Oakland Operations Office

U.S. Department of Energy, Public Reading Room, EIC, 8th Floor, 1301

Clay Street, Oakland, CA 94612-5208, Attn: Lauren McNair, (510) 637-

1762

Savannah River Operations Office

Gregg-Granite Library, Univer. of S. Carolina--Aiken, 171 University

Parkway, Aiken, SC 29801, Attn: James M. Gaver, (803) 725-2889

Pittsburgh Energy Technology Center

U.S. Department of Energy, Building 922/M210, P.O. Box 10940800,

Pittsburgh, PA 15236, Attn: Ann C. Dunlap, (412) 892-6167

Southeastern Power Administration

U.S. Department of Energy, Legal Library, Samuel Elbert Building,

Public Square, Elberton, GA 30635-2496, Attn: Joel W. Seymour, (706)

283-9911

Seattle Support Office

U.S. Department of Energy, 800 Fifth Avenue, #3950, Seattle, WA 98104,

Attn: Kathy Vega, (206) 553-1132

Southwestern Power Administration

U.S. Department of Energy, Public Reading Room, P.O. Box 1619, Tulsa,

OK 74101, Attn: Marti Ayers, (918) 581-7426

Strategic Petroleum Reserve Project Management Office

U.S. Department of Energy, SPRPMO/SEB Reading Room, 900 Commerce Road,

New Orleans, LA 70123, Attn: Ulyess Washington, (504) 734-4243

Superconducting Super Collider Termination Project Office

U.S. Department of Energy, 2550 Beckleymeade Avenue, Dallas, TX 75237,

Attn: Gina Dan, (214) 708-2526

Issued in Washington, DC., on October 19, 1994.

Thomas A. Rollow,

Acting Assistant Secretary, Environment, Safety and Health.

[FR Doc. 94-26361 Filed 10-20-94; 11:41 am]

BILLING CODE 6450-01-P