Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for Disposal of Decommissioned, Defueled Cruiser, Ohio, and Los Angeles Class Naval Reactor Plants

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Navy

Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for

Disposal of Decommissioned, Defueled Cruiser, Ohio, and Los Angeles

Class Naval Reactor Plants

AGENCIES: Department of the Navy and Department of Energy.

SUMMARY: The Department of Navy, with the Department of Energy as a

cooperating agency, announces its intent to prepare an Environmental

Impact Statement pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of

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

Environmental Quality Regulations for Implementing the Procedural

Provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act (40 CFR parts 1500-

1508), and to conduct a series of public scoping meetings. This

Environmental Impact Statement will address final disposal of

decommissioned, defueled reactor plants from cruisers and OHIO

(Trident) and LOS ANGELES (SSN 688) Class submarines and will analyze

the associated reasonably foreseeable environmental impacts. The

disposal of future reactor compartments from vessels that have not yet

been commissioned (e.g., SEAWOLF Class of submarines) will be

addressed, as appropriate, in future National Environmental Policy Act

documents. By participating as a cooperating agency in this

Environmental Impact Statement, the Department of Energy expects to be

able to adopt this Environmental Impact Statement, if appropriate, to

fulfill its environmental review obligations under the National

Environmental Policy Act.

In accordance with the Council on Environmental Quality National

Environmental Policy Act regulations, the Department of the Navy is

preparing this Environmental Impact Statement to focus on the potential

for significant environmental impacts and to consider reasonable

alternatives.

Because of the common design characteristics of the reactor plants

and their reactor compartments, the method currently being used by

Puget Sound Naval Shipyard in Bremerton, Washington to dispose of

submarine reactor compartments is the preferred alternative for

disposal of the defueled reactor plants from cruisers and OHIO and LOS

ANGELES Class submarines. Briefly, this alternative would involve

draining the piping systems, tanks, vessels, and other components to

the maximum extent practical, sealing the radioactive systems, removing

the reactor compartment and sealing it to provide a high integrity

welded steel package. The reactor compartment package would be

transported by barge out of Puget Sound through the Straits of Juan de

Fuca, down the Washington coast, and up the Columbia River to the Port

of Benton where it would be loaded onto an overland transporter for the

short movement to the Department of Energy's low level radioactive

waste burial grounds at Hanford, Washington.

The reactor plants contain radioactivity due to neutron irradiation

of structural alloys forming the reactor plant components. The reactor

compartment packages would comply with the shipping container

requirements of the Department of Transportation, the Nuclear

Regulatory Commission, and the Department of Energy. Disposal of the

reactor compartments would be in accordance with Department of Energy

requirements for low level radioactive waste disposal. Disposal of the

reactor compartments would be regulated by the State of Washington due

to the lead shielding contained within the reactor compartments and by

the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency due to the small quantity of

polychlorinated biphenyls in materials within the reactor compartment

such as insulation, electrical cables, and rubber parts.

The Navy also will evaluate in detail a ``no action'' alternative.

In this alternative, the defueled ships would be maintained in

waterborne protective storage for an indefinite period of time at the

inactive ships facilities at Puget Sound Naval Shipyard and Norfolk

Naval Shipyard.

Several other alternatives will be examined. These alternatives

include sea disposal, land disposal at other sites, land disposal or

reuse of subdivided portions of the reactor plant, and above ground

storage or disposal.

DATES: The Navy invites interested agencies, organizations, and the

general public to submit written comments or suggestions concerning the

scope of the issues to be addressed, alternatives to be analyzed, and

the environmental impacts to be addressed in the Draft Environmental

Impact Statement. The public also is invited to attend scoping meetings

in which oral comments and suggestions will be received. Oral and

written comments will be considered equally in preparation of the

Environmental Impact Statement. Those not desiring to submit comments

or suggestions at this time, but who would like to receive a copy of

the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for review when it is issued,

should write to Puget Sound Naval Shipyard at the address below. When

the Draft Environmental Impact Statement is complete, its availability

will be announced in the Federal Register and in the local news media.

Public hearings will be held, and comments will be solicited on this

document.

Written comments postmarked by March 21, 1994 will be considered in

preparation of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement. Comments

postmarked after that date will be considered to the extent

practicable. Oral and written comments will be received at public

scoping meetings to be held at the locations and times indicated as

follows:

Bremerton, Washington, March 10, 1994, 7pm-10pm

Best Western Bayview Inn, 5640 Kitsap Way

Richland, Washington, March 11, 1994, 7pm-10pm

Shiloh Inn--Rivershore, 50 Comstock

Olympia, Washington, March 14, 1994, 7pm-10pm

Ramada Inn--Governor House, 621 So. Capitol Way

Portland, Oregon, March 15, 1994, 7pm-10pm

Red Lion Inn--Jantzen Beach, 909 N. Hayden Island Dr.

Portsmouth, Virginia, March 17, 1994, 7pm-10pm

Holiday Inn, 8 Crawford Parkway

The meetings will be chaired by a presiding officer but will not be

conducted as evidentiary hearings; speakers will not be cross examined

although the presiding officer, Department of the Navy, and Department

of Energy representatives present may ask clarifying questions. To

ensure that everyone has an adequate opportunity to speak, five minutes

will be allotted for each speaker. Depending on the number of persons

requesting to speak, the presiding officer may allow more time for

elected officials, or speakers representing multiple parties, or

organizations. Persons wishing to speak on behalf of organizations

should identify the organization. Persons wishing to speak may either

notify Puget Sound Naval Shipyard in writing at the address below or

register at the meetings. Persons registering at the meetings will be

called on to speak if time permits. Written comments also will be

accepted at the meetings.

ADDRESSES: Written comments, suggestions on the scope of the Draft

Environmental Impact Statement, or requests to speak at the public

hearings should be submitted to Mr. Robert Minnitti, Puget Sound Naval

Shipyard, Bremerton, Washington 98314-5000.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

The United States Navy placed the world's first nuclear powered

submarine, the NAUTILUS, into service in 1954. The first nuclear

powered cruiser, the LONG BEACH, was commissioned in 1961. As of the

end of 1993, the U.S. Navy had 106 nuclear-powered submarines and 15

nuclear-powered surface ships in operation. Today, over 40% of the

Navy's principal combatants are nuclear powered.

At the end of their useful lifetime, when the cost of continued

operation is not justified by their military capability, or when they

are no longer needed, the defueled reactor compartments from these

ships require disposal. In the late 1970s and early 1980s, the Navy

evaluated a number of options for disposing of the pre-LOS ANGELES

class nuclear powered submarine reactor compartments as the ships were

beginning to approach the end of their design life. The options

examined included disposal of the reactor compartment at an existing

land burial site, with the non-radioactive remainder of the submarine

disposed of either by sinking at sea or by cutting up for sale as scrap

metal, and disposal by sinking the entire submarine in the deep ocean.

The ``no action'' alternative of long term protective storage also was

examined. The Navy's 1984 Final Environmental Impact Statement and

Record of Decision concluded that permanent disposal would be

environmentally safe and feasible using either the land burial or deep

ocean option. The Record of Decision issued by the Secretary of the

Navy stated that ``No unacceptable environmental impacts associated

with either option have been identified as a result of the analysis or

through the public review process'', and that ``Based on consideration

of all current factors bearing on a disposal action of this kind

contemplated, the Navy has decided to proceed with disposal of the

reactor compartments by land burial.'' The Navy has successfully

pursued this course of action and, as of the end of 1993, has safely

shipped 35 submarine reactor compartments to the Department of Energy's

burial grounds at Hanford, Washington.

Today the Navy faces the necessity of downsizing the fleet to an

extent that was not envisioned before the end of the Cold War. Over the

next few years a number of major surface combatants, including nuclear

powered cruisers, will be removed from service. Some LOS ANGELES Class

submarines are scheduled for removal from service. Eventually, the Navy

will also need to decommission OHIO Class submarines. These classes of

nuclear powered ships were not considered in the 1984 Environmental

Impact Statement. The total number of cruiser, OHIO, and LOS ANGELES

Class reactor compartments is approximately 100. The purpose of this

Environmental Impact Statement will be to assess the potential

environmental impact of disposing of defueled reactor compartments from

nuclear powered cruisers and the LOS ANGELES and OHIO Class submarines.

Preliminary Description of Alternatives

1. Preferred Alternative

Because of the common design characteristics of the reactor plants

and their reactor compartments, the method currently being used by

Puget Sound Naval Shipyard in Bremerton, Washington to dispose of

submarine reactor compartments is the preferred alternative for

disposal of the defueled cruiser, OHIO and LOS ANGELES Class reactor

plants. Briefly, this alternative would involve draining the piping

systems, tanks, vessels, and other components to the maximum extent

practical, sealing the radioactive systems, removing the reactor

compartment and sealing it to provide a high integrity welded steel

package, and transporting the package first by barge up the Columbia

River and then a short distance over land to the Department of Energy's

low level radioactive waste burial grounds at Hanford, Washington. The

reactor compartment packages would be placed in a trench, backfilled

with earth, and covered by an engineered cap to minimize future water

infiltration.

2. No Action

This alternative would involve keeping defueled nuclear powered

ships in waterborne protective storage for an indefinite period of

time. Puget Sound Naval Shipyard and Norfolk Naval Shipyard have

inactive ships storage facilities for defueled nuclear powered ships.

Rather than temporarily storing the ships until their reactor

compartments can be removed, the ``no action'' alternative would result

in a much larger number of ships in storage. This option would require

periodic ship inspections as well as performance of drydocking

preservations. If no permanent disposal alternative is available, the

``no action'' alternative will occur by default.

3. Other Alternatives

Several other alternatives will be examined including the

following:

The detailed evaluation of sea disposal contained in the Navy's

1984 Environmental Impact Statement will be used and updated in this

Environmental Impact Statement to take into account the number and

radioactivity content of the cruiser, OHIO, and LOS ANGELES Class

reactor compartments. The 1984 Environmental Impact Statement concluded

that sea disposal could be performed in an environmentally safe manner

with no significant adverse effect. However, the 1984 Record of

Decision noted that Congress passed an amendment which restricted the

issuance of permits for sea disposal of radioactive material and

required Congressional approval before such a permit could be issued,

and the Environmental Protection Agency stated that additional

regulations may be required before a permit request could be reviewed.

Also, in November 1993, the United States voted along with the majority

of other signatories to the London Convention to ban sea disposal of

low level radioactive waste subject to a scientific review in 25 years.

Therefore, this alternative would now be precluded by treaty.

Disposal sites other than the Department of Energy's burial site at

Hanford will be considered for disposal of reactor compartment

packages. Criteria to be considered in site evaluation will include

availability of barge unloading facilities, navigability of waterways,

bridge clearances, and overland transport requirements.

Land disposal or reuse of subdivided portions of the reactor plant

would involve the cutting up of the defueled reactor plant into smaller

pieces. This option would require evaluation of locations and methods

to dismantle and package the reactor plant components and determination

of appropriate locations and methods for final disposal or reuse of the

resulting subdivided portions of the reactor plant.

Placement of the reactor compartments above ground in specially

designed buildings or in an arid environment will be evaluated as an

interim storage measure, and as a permanent disposal method. As in the

case of the burial option, the above ground storage evaluation will

consider the long term migration potential of long lived radionuclides.

Preliminary Identification of Environmental Issues

The following issues, subject to consideration of comments received

in response to public scoping, have been tentatively identified for

analysis in the Environmental Impact Statement. This list is presented

to facilitate public comment on the scope of the Environmental Impact

Statement. It is not intended to be all inclusive nor is it intended to

be a predetermination of impacts.

1. Potential impacts to the public and on-site workers from

radiological and non radiological releases caused by activities to be

conducted within the context of the proposed action and alternatives.

2. Potential environmental impacts, including air and water quality

impacts, caused by the proposed action and alternatives.

3. Potential transportation impacts as a result of the proposed

action and alternatives.

4. Potential effect on endangered species, floodplain/wetlands, and

archeological/historical sites as a result of the proposed action and

alternatives.

5. Potential impacts from postulated accidents as a result of the

proposed action and alternatives.

6. Potential socioeconomic impacts to the surrounding communities

as a result of implementing the proposed actions and alternatives.

7. Potential cumulative impacts from the proposed action and other

past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions.

8. Potential irreversible and irretrievable commitment of

resources.

Dated: February 5, 1994.

B. DeMars,

Admiral, U.S. Navy, Director, Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program.

Dated: February 7, 1994.

Michael P. Rummel,

LCDR, JAGC, USN, Federal Register Liaison Officer.

[FR Doc. 94-4283 Filed 2-23-94; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3810-AE-P