Site-Wide Environmental Impact Statement Los Alamos National Laboratory

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Site-Wide Environmental Impact Statement Los Alamos National

Laboratory

AGENCY: U.S. Department of Energy.

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare a Site-Wide Environmental Impact

Statement for the Los Alamos National Laboratory.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) announces its intent to

prepare a Site-Wide Environmental Impact Statement (SWEIS) for its Los

Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), Los Alamos, New Mexico, a DOE

multiprogram research and development laboratory. The SWEIS will be

prepared pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of

1969, 42 USC 4321 et seq., the Council on Environmental Quality's NEPA

regulations [40 CFR Parts 1500-1508] and the DOE NEPA regulations [10

CFR Part 1021]. It will analyze as alternatives various levels of LANL

operations, including reasonable foreseeable new operations and

facilities.

DOE initiated a prescoping process with an Advance Notice of Intent

published in the Federal Register on August 10, 1994 [59 FR 40889].

This Notice of Intent reflects the consideration of comments provided

during the prescoping process, including comments regarding NEPA

reviews initiated or anticipated at the time of the Advance Notice of

Intent, and issues and alternatives for the SWEIS.

DATES: The DOE invites other Federal agencies, the State, Indian

Tribes, local governments, and the general public to comment on the

scope of this SWEIS. The public scoping period starts with the

publication of this notice in the Federal Register and will continue

until June 30, 1995. DOE will consider all comments received or

postmarked by that date in defining the scope of this SWEIS. Comments

received or postmarked after that date will be considered to the extent

practicable. Public scoping meetings are scheduled to be held as

follows:

June 13, 1995; Hilltop House Hotel, 400 Trinity Drive, Los Alamos,

New Mexico 87544

June 14, 1995; Sweeney Center, 201 West Marcy Street, Santa Fe, New

Mexico 87501

June 15, 1995; Northern New Mexico Community College, 1002 North

Onate Street, Espanola, New Mexico 87532

The purpose of these meetings is to receive oral and written

comments from the public. The meetings will use a workshop format to

facilitate dialogue among DOE, LANL, and the public and will provide an

opportunity for individuals to provide written or oral statements. The

DOE will publish additional notices on the dates, times, and locations

of the scoping meetings in local newspapers in advance of the scheduled

meetings. Any necessary changes will be announced in the local media.

In addition to providing oral comments at the public scoping

meetings, all interested parties are invited to record their comments,

ask questions concerning the LANL SWEIS, request speaking times,

request to be placed on the LANL SWEIS mailing or document distribution

list, or request copies of the LANL SWEIS Implementation Plan (when

available) by leaving a message on the LANL SWEIS Hotline at 1-800-898-

6623. The Hotline will have instructions on how to record your comments

and requests.

ADDRESSES: Written comments or suggestions to assist the DOE in

identifying the appropriate scope of the LANL SWEIS should be directed

to: Mr. Corey A. Cruz, U.S. Department of Energy, Albuquerque

Operations Office, P.O. Box 5400, Albuquerque, New Mexico, 87185-5400,

or by facsimile at (505) 845-6392. For express delivery services, the

appropriate address is Pennsylvania and H Streets, Kirtland Air Force

Base, Albuquerque, NM 87116.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information on the SWEIS

and the public scoping process, contact Corey Cruz at the address and

telephone number listed above.

For information on DOE's NEPA process, please contact: Carol

Borgstrom, Director, Office of NEPA Policy and Assistance (EH-42), U.S.

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

20585. Ms. Borgstrom can be reached at (202) 586-4600, by facsimile at

(202) 586-7031, or by leaving a message at 1-800-472-2756.

[[Page 25698]]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Invitation to Comment

The public is invited to participate in the scoping process and is

encouraged to comment on the preliminary alternatives and issues

identified for the LANL SWEIS. The results of the scoping process will

be documented in an Implementation Plan which will be made available to

the public and will reflect how comments provided during the scoping

process were incorporated or addressed.

Availability of Scoping Documents

Copies of all written comments, transcripts of all oral comments,

and copies of the SWEIS Implementation Plan will be available at the

following locations:

Los Alamos National Laboratory, Community Reading Room, Museum Park

Office Complex, 1450 Central Avenue, Suite 101, Los Alamos, New Mexico

87544, 505-665-2127 or 1-800-543-2342

U.S. Department of Energy, National Atomic Museum Public Reading Room,

Kirtland Air Force Base, Building 20358, Wyoming Boulevard,

Albuquerque, New Mexico 87185, 505-845-6870/4378.

A full set of comments on the Advance Notice of Intent is available

at the Los Alamos Community Reading Room.

LANL's Mission

Among other missions, DOE is responsible for the Federal

government's nuclear weapons program, research and development of

energy technologies, and basic science research. LANL is one of DOE's

primary research and development laboratories. It was established in

1943 to provide research, design, and testing for nuclear weapons and

nuclear materials, and remains one of the three laboratories in DOE's

nuclear weapons complex. Over the past 50 years, LANL's mission has

expanded to include research in energy, materials science, nuclear

safeguards and security, biomedical science, computational science,

environmental protection and cleanup, and other basic and applied

science research. LANL provides these research and science services for

DOE and other Federal agencies, universities, foreign countries, and

private industry. LANL is one of the largest multidisciplinary research

laboratories in the world, with an annual budget of approximately $1

billion and more than 10,000 contractor and subcontractor employees.

LANL covers about 43 square miles of land held as a Federal reservation

in north-central New Mexico in Los Alamos, Sandoval and Santa Fe

Counties.

A report entitled ``Alternative Futures for the DOE National

Laboratories'' (the ``Galvin Report''), prepared for the Secretary of

Energy by the Secretary of Energy Advisory Board, was completed in

February 1995. This independent review provided recommendations on the

future missions of all DOE National Laboratories. Although the DOE has

not yet fully determined which of these recommendations will be

adopted, the preliminary SWEIS alternatives are structured to allow for

inclusion of the report's recommendations specific to LANL operations.

The Role of the SWEIS in the DOE NEPA Compliance Strategy

The DOE has a policy [10 CFR 1021.330] of preparing SWEISs for

certain large, multiple-facility sites, such as LANL. The purpose of a

SWEIS is to provide DOE and its stakeholders with an analysis of the

environmental impacts caused by ongoing and reasonably foreseeable new

operations and facilities and reasonable alternatives at a DOE site, to

provide a basis for site-wide decision making, and to improve and

coordinate agency plans, functions, programs, and resource utilization.

Additionally, a SWEIS is to provide an overall NEPA baseline for a site

that is useful for tiering or as a reference when project-specific NEPA

documents are prepared. The NEPA process allows for Federal, state,

tribal, county, municipal, and public participation in the

environmental review process. A SWEIS was last prepared for LANL in

1979 [DOE/EIS-0018]. The proposed SWEIS would replace that document as

the baseline environmental impact statement regarding LANL operations.

A SWEIS is a useful aid for DOE management of its facilities and

operations. It provides the DOE decision makers and the public with

analyses of the cumulative environmental impacts of past, ongoing and

reasonably foreseeable activities at a site and contrasts these with

reasonable alternatives in order to inform decisions regarding the

resources entrusted to DOE's care. A SWEIS can be used as a way to

efficiently deal with multiple proposals and can help establish an

efficient, environmentally sound and cost effective plan for operating

the site and its facilities. In accordance with 10 CFR 1021.330(d), DOE

will evaluate the SWEIS at least every five years after its completion

to determine whether it remains adequate or should be supplemented or

replaced with a new SWEIS.

The LANL Site-Wide Analysis

The SWEIS will address operations and activities that DOE foresees

at LANL within approximately the next 10 years. The SWEIS will focus on

operating practices and facility management, specifically with the

intent to analyze the overall impacts of current and reasonably

foreseeable operations at LANL. The DOE proposes for the SWEIS to

include an analysis of land use requirements related to the operations

at LANL, as well as DOE activities as the primary Natural Resources

Trustee for LANL. The DOE proposes to use the SWEIS to analyze:

mitigation measures for impacts of LANL operations; interim nuclear

materials storage and management strategies for LANL; LANL

environmental restoration strategies; and waste management strategies

for LANL. Specific projects or facilities that are speculative and

therefore not ready for analysis would not be addressed in the SWEIS.

However, if such projects later become definite proposals for action

they would be subject to subsequent project- or facility-specific NEPA

reviews that would be tiered from the SWEIS.

The SWEIS is expected to facilitate and streamline subsequent NEPA

reviews at LANL by allowing DOE to focus on project-specific issues and

to narrow and simplify the scope of later reviews. This process is

called ``tiering'' [40 CFR 1508.28]. DOE believes that the SWEIS

analysis will provide adequate NEPA review for those activities and

projects designated and analyzed within the SWEIS.

Preliminary Alternatives

The scoping process is an opportunity for the public to assist the

DOE in determining the alternatives and issues for analysis. A

preliminary set of alternatives and issues for evaluation in the SWEIS

is identified below, after consideration of comments received during

the prescoping process. In response to prescoping comments, a

discussion of the relationship between programs and specific LANL

operations has been included in each preliminary alternative

description. Future programs and activities will be determined based on

such factors as national needs, scientific developments, budgets,

environmental impacts, the results of NEPA reviews such as the

Stockpile Stewardship and Management Programmatic Environmental Impact

Statement (PEIS) discussed below, and other considerations. Thus, the

program discussions provided below are not all-inclusive and are only

examples for the [[Page 25699]] facility operational levels described

in the alternatives. For each of the alternatives discussed, waste

management/environmental restoration activities, interim activities for

nuclear materials storage and handling, and land requirements will be

analyzed. The environmental impacts of both facilities and operations

and cumulative site-wide operations will be assessed. DOE will continue

to conduct ongoing activities as the SWEIS is being prepared.

No Action

The No Action alternative would continue current facility

operations throughout LANL in support of assigned missions. NEPA

regulations require analysis of the No Action alternative to provide a

benchmark for comparison with environmental effects of the other

alternatives. This alternative would include ongoing and proposed

activities for which the NEPA reviews will have been completed prior to

completion of the SWEIS. The current Waste Management/Environmental

Restoration program plans (i.e., actions for which NEPA review will

have been completed) will be reflected in this alternative, including

specific strategies to address anticipated waste generated by facility

and restoration operations.

This alternative reflects the current nuclear weapons program

missions at LANL. This includes support of competence in nuclear

weapons component fabrication technologies; nuclear weapons material

processing to support technology competence, process development and

improvement, and safe, secure storage of the nuclear material

inventory; acceptance and processing of neutron sources from off-site

(from licensees such as universities and corporations that no longer

need them); maintenance of the hydrodynamic test program at projected

material throughputs; destructive evaluation of plutonium components;

continued weapons and other research and development operations using

accelerators; continued operations at the Los Alamos Critical

Experiments Facility in support of existing missions; and

transportation and storage of nuclear material at currently projected

levels.

Reduced Operation

This alternative would reflect a reduction in facility operations

from those currently ongoing and planned. For example, nuclear

materials processing activities would be reduced and consolidated.

Reduced shipments and receipts of nuclear materials would also be

reflected under this alternative, as would a reduced nuclear material

inventory over the time period under analysis (as compared to inventory

projections under the other alternatives). This alternative may include

some construction projects to consolidate operations within existing

facilities, maintain existing facilities, and replace existing

facilities, if necessary. Specific waste management strategies would be

developed to address the types and quantities of waste anticipated

under this scenario. These strategies would consider off-site and on-

site treatment and disposition options.

The programmatic context for this alternative is the maintenance of

existing missions at a reduced scope. This alternative would be

represented by one or more of the following: Maintenance of capability

for fewer weapon production technologies; reduced nuclear materials

processing (only to support safe, secure storage of the LANL

inventory); support of only existing commitments regarding the

processing of neutron sources from off-site; reduction in the materials

throughput for hydrodynamic and other above ground weapon-related

experiments; destructive evaluation of fewer plutonium components each

year; reduction in weapons and other research and development use of

accelerators; a reduced inventory and number of criticality experiments

and training courses at the Los Alamos Critical Experiments Facility;

and reduced transportation and storage of nuclear materials.

Expanded Operation

This alternative would reflect an increase in facility operations

to the highest levels that can be supported by current facilities, and

would evaluate those new facilities that are reasonably foreseeable.

This could require construction projects to address safety, security

and environmental compliance as well as to support reconfiguration of

facility equipment and operations to optimize use of current

facilities' capabilities. This could also require construction projects

for reasonably foreseeable new facilities. Specific waste management

strategies would be developed to address the increased types and

quantities of waste anticipated under this scenario, considering off-

site and on-site treatment and disposition options. These waste

management strategies would include alternative approaches to

accommodate the receipt of off-site waste for treatment and disposal,

consistent with the Waste Management PEIS discussed below.

The programmatic context for this alternative is the continued

support of existing missions, and additional missions which may be

supported with the capabilities and capacities inherent in the existing

facilities or which may require new facilities. Such program activities

could include: low-level production of weapon components; increased

throughput for nuclear materials processing; increased support of

processing for off-site neutron sources; increased materials throughput

for hydrodynamic and other test activities; destructive analysis of

additional plutonium components each year; increased use of

accelerators in support of weapons and other research and development

missions; additional numbers and types of experiments at the Los Alamos

Critical Experiments Facility; and increased transportation and storage

of nuclear materials.

Other Alternatives Considered

DOE had asked in the Advance Notice of Intent whether analysis of

an alternative that would describe phasing out all LANL operations and

eventually decommissioning all facilities would be useful for

comparison to ongoing activities. In response, the DOE received seven

comments from the public. Four of the comments supported analysis of

decontamination and decommissioning for the entire site; two

recommended analysis of decontamination and decommissioning for

``nuclear'' related activities and one comment indicated the

decontamination and decommissioning alternative was not reasonable and

should not be analyzed. Of those supporting inclusion of a

decontamination and decommissioning alternative, three appeared to

support it as a determinant of useful comparative information and three

advocated actual shutdown and decommissioning of some or all of LANL.

The seven responses were obtained both orally and in writing from a

population of over 500 comments from over 250 commentors.

DOE carefully considered these comments. DOE also recognizes that

LANL has unique capabilities, diverse roles supporting a variety of

national programs, and that there is an essential near-term need to

manage and maintain the safety and stability of the existing nuclear

materials inventory. Accordingly, in view of the limited community

interest and DOE's view at this time that a decision to shut down LANL

operations within the 5-10 year timeframe of the SWEIS would be highly

unlikely, DOE plans not to expend the time and money that would be

needed to analyze an alternative involving an orderly shutdown during

[[Page 25700]] this period. The public is welcome to comment further on

this issue during the scoping period.

Preliminary List of Issues To Be Addressed

The SWEIS will describe the potential environmental impacts of the

alternatives, using available data where possible and obtaining

additional data where necessary. In accordance with the Council on

Environmental Quality Regulations (40 CFR 1500.4 and 1502.21), other

documents, as appropriate, may be incorporated into the impacts

analyses by reference, in whole or in part. The following preliminary

list of issues was identified following the prescoping process. The DOE

specifically invites suggestions for the addition or deletion of items

on this list.

1. Water resources, particularly tritium in the groundwater and

radioactive particles in streams and the Cochiti Reservoir.

2. Cultural resources, particularly regarding Native American

access to land, flora of religious or medicinal significance, and

protection of archeological and religious sites.

3. Air quality, particularly regarding compliance with Federal and

state laws, and releases of radioactive and hazardous materials due to

LANL operations.

4. Land use, particularly regarding use of DOE land by the public,

radioactive contamination of the land, and burial of radioactive and

hazardous materials.

5. Biota, particularly the effects of radioactive and hazardous

releases on elk and the food chain, threatened and endangered species,

and species of special concern.

6. Transportation, particularly regarding the risks of transporting

nuclear material on and off the LANL site, and the need for integrating

emergency plans with state, tribal, and local police and health

organizations in case of a nuclear material release during transport.

7. Socioeconomics, particularly regarding the economic impact of

LANL on the surrounding community.

8. Health effects, particularly regarding incidence of cancer in

workers and the communities surrounding LANL, and other health effects

on the public and workers.

9. Environmental justice, particularly whether or not activities at

LANL disproportionately and adversely affect minority or low-income

populations.

10. Noise/aesthetics, particularly regarding the visual, noise, and

other aesthetic impacts of LANL facilities and operations on the

surrounding communities and potential uses of adjacent land.

Additional issues raised by the public during the prescoping

process include:

National security policy (particularly the need for a

nuclear stockpile, the need for stockpile stewardship, and the effect

of LANL operations on international non-proliferation);

The goals of, and funding for, environmental restoration;

The transfer of land to Pueblos or to Los Alamos County;

Laboratory management (particularly the responsiveness of

LANL management to community concerns, the equity in LANL/DOE outreach

programs, the equity of salary and hiring policies, encouragement of

independent ideas, the management of LANL by the University of

California, and the non-profit status of LANL); and

The credibility of the DOE and LANL (reliability of

information provided by DOE and LANL, concerns regarding the actual

effect of public input on DOE decisions, and a lack of trust in the DOE

to prepare the SWEIS in accordance with the laws and regulations).

While DOE considers these issues to be outside the scope of the

SWEIS, DOE will attempt to address these concerns in the process of

interacting with the public on the SWEIS and on other issues, by

answering questions posed during the SWEIS process, directing

stakeholders to other reviews where appropriate, providing requested

information (to the extent allowed by laws and regulations), and

explaining how public comment and input is considered in each step of

the LANL SWEIS process.

Related NEPA Reviews

Currently, the DOE is analyzing several proposals for programmatic,

site-specific, and project-specific action that affect LANL either

directly or indirectly. These analyses are being performed as NEPA

reviews in several programmatic, site-wide, and project-specific EISs

and environmental assessments. The summaries below are intended to

familiarize the reader with the purpose of these other NEPA reviews and

how LANL is being considered in them.

Programmatic NEPA Reviews

The Waste Management PEIS [Notice of Intent, 55 FR 42633, October

22, 1990; also see 60 FR 4607, January 24, 1995] (formerly called the

Environmental Restoration and Waste Management PEIS) will analyze the

DOE plan to formulate and implement a national integrated Waste

Management program. LANL is one of the alternative sites proposed to

store and process transuranic radioactive waste and to store, process,

and provide on-site disposal for low-level radioactive waste, which may

include material generated at locations other than LANL. The waste

management analyses in the SWEIS will address the facilities and

operations necessary to implement a waste management strategy at LANL,

consistent with the Waste Management PEIS.

The Nuclear Weapons Complex Reconfiguration PEIS [revised Notice of

Intent, 59 FR 54175, October 28, 1994] was separated into the Tritium

Supply and Recycling PEIS and the Stockpile Stewardship and Management

PEIS. LANL is not an alternative site for the Tritium Supply and

Recycling PEIS. However, the Stockpile Stewardship and Management PEIS

will analyze changes in LANL's role in weapons research and development

and may analyze aspects of a LANL weapon component production mission.

Since public scoping for the Stockpile Stewardship and Management PEIS

has not yet been initiated, LANL's role in the alternatives for this

PEIS cannot now be predicted. The SWEIS is intended to provide the

site-specific analysis for various levels of facility operations that

could support a variety of program missions. The SWEIS will address

LANL facility operations that are expected to be of primary interest to

the public and DOE in support of potential future programs. In this

manner, DOE intends to integrate programmatic analyses for the

Stockpile Stewardship and Management PEIS with site-specific analyses

of the SWEIS.

The Programmatic Spent Nuclear Fuel Management and Idaho National

Engineering Laboratory Environmental Restoration and Waste Management

Programs PEIS includes a programmatic analysis of transporting,

processing, and storing spent nuclear reactor fuel [Notice of

Availability, Final EIS, 60 FR 20992, April 28, 1995]. LANL has

generated spent fuel and continues to store this material pending the

outcome of programmatic decisions following the spent fuel PEIS. The

nuclear material storage and handling analyses in the SWEIS will

address the continued storage and potential disposition of this fuel,

consistent with this PEIS.

The DOE is preparing a Storage and Disposition of Weapons-Usable

Fissile Materials PEIS [Notice of Intent, 59 FR 31985, June 21, 1994].

This PEIS will analyze alternatives for the long-term storage and

disposition of surplus nuclear materials, with the exception of surplus

highly enriched uranium, in [[Page 25701]] order to minimize the risk

of proliferation of nuclear weapons capability in the world. Phase I of

the project would be to provide safe, controlled, inspectable interim

storage of nuclear materials. Phase II would be long-term storage or

disposition of surplus material. Among other things, this PEIS will

analyze a new, consolidated long-term storage facility at five

candidate sites (LANL is not a candidate site), as well as continued

use of existing facilities for interim storage. On April 5, 1995, DOE

published a Notice [65 FR 17344] amending the scope of this PEIS by

removing the disposition of all surplus highly enriched uranium.

Instead, DOE will prepare a separate EIS entitled Disposition of

Surplus Highly Enriched Uranium. The scope of this EIS has not yet

finally been determined, because the public scoping period only closed

on May 1, 1995. LANL now stores some nuclear materials; since the SWEIS

addresses approximately a 10-year period, it will analyze storage and

handling of current and projected inventories prior to implementation

of the decisions from Weapons-Usable Fissile Materials PEIS.

The DOE is preparing the Medical Isotope Production at Sandia

National Laboratory/New Mexico and Los Alamos National Laboratory

Environmental Assessment for the proposal to produce medical isotopes

for medical applications such as diagnostics and chemotherapy [EA

determination, November 15, 1994]. The proposal involves irradiating

targets in a nuclear reactor at Sandia National Laboratory,

Albuquerque, processing the material, and disposing of waste.

Alternatives involving LANL facilities would only include fabricating

targets at the Chemistry and Metallurgy Research Building and disposing

of waste from target fabrication at LANL waste management areas. Target

fabrication and associated activities are ongoing at LANL and as such,

would be analyzed in the SWEIS to provide environmental impacts at a

variety of operational levels.

Ongoing LANL NEPA Reviews

The DOE is preparing an EIS for the construction and operation of

an enhanced radiographic hydrodynamic test facility at LANL. This EIS

examines the alternatives to support some of the stockpile stewardship

missions currently assigned to LANL in the absence of nuclear testing.

The preferred alternative is to complete and operate the partially

constructed Dual Axis Radiographic Hydrodynamic Test Facility. DOE

expects that all or portions of this EIS will be incorporated by

reference into the LANL SWEIS and that the decisions from this EIS will

be reflected in the LANL No Action alternative. The Record of Decision

for this EIS is scheduled for September 1995.

DOE had initiated or considered several other environmental

analyses for specific proposed projects at LANL. Those presented in the

LANL SWEIS Advance Notice of Intent are identified in Table I, with a

summary of comments received on each project through the prescoping

process and the DOE decision as to which project NEPA reviews will

proceed immediately, which will be suspended for inclusion in the

SWEIS, and those which will be deferred until after the SWEIS.

The results of the LANL project-level NEPA reviews that will

precede completion of the SWEIS will be addressed in the No Action

alternative. Projects for which NEPA reviews were suspended for

inclusion in the SWEIS will be addressed in one or more alternatives

and their impacts will be included in the cumulative impact analysis.

It is also likely that additional projects will be proposed as the

SWEIS process continues; each proposal will be reviewed to determine

whether its NEPA process should proceed separately, should be included

in the SWEIS, or should be deferred until after the SWEIS. The exact

relationship between specific proposed projects and the SWEIS

alternatives will be detailed in the Draft SWEIS.

The SWEIS Preparation Process

After the scoping period, DOE will prepare and publish the LANL

SWEIS Implementation Plan, which will be placed in the Los Alamos

National Laboratory Community Reading Room and the Atomic Museum Public

Reading Room, and made available to members of the public upon request.

This document will describe the DOE's plan for preparing the SWEIS,

based upon the results of the scoping process. The Implementation Plan

will include the revised alternatives and environmental issues which

were refined through the scoping process, and will describe how

comments received in the scoping process were considered in its

development.

The DOE intends to complete the Draft EIS in early 1996 and will

announce its availability in the Federal Register and through local

media. The DOE will hold public hearings to solicit comments on the

Draft EIS from the public, organizations, and other agencies, and will

consider all comments in the preparation of the Final EIS. The DOE

intends to complete the Final EIS in December 1996.

DOE expects to issue the Record of Decision in early 1997, but at

least 30 days after a Notice of Availability of the Final EIS is

published in the Federal Register.

Classified Material

DOE will review classified material while preparing this SWEIS.

Within the limits of classification, DOE will provide to the public as

much information as possible. Any classified material DOE needs to use

to explain the purpose and need for action, or the uses, materials, or

impacts analyzed in this SWEIS, will be segregated into a classified

appendix or supplement.

Signed in Washington, D.C., this 5th day of May 1995, for the

United States Department of Energy.

Peter Brush,

Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Environment, Safety and Health.

[[Page 25702]]

Table 1

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

Proceed with

Project ANOI recommendation Comments received independent NEPA

review?

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

Radioactive Liquid Suspend the NEPA review for this 6 comments received. 4 concurred No--as long as the

Waste Treatment project and address it in the with the recommendation; 1 existing system can

Facility. SWEIS. asserted that the existing operate safely, DOE

treatment facility is thought to intends to analyze

be leaking; 1 questioned why this proposed

this project has to be in the replacement in the

SWEIS. SWEIS.

Chemistry and Proceed immediately with the NEPA 16 comments received. 5 concurred Yes--proceed with a

Metallurgy review for project actions for with the recommendation; 5 review of the subset

Research Building maintenance of the existing indicated that additional of proposed upgrades,

Upgrades. infrastructure, for improved information was required to as recommended in the

safety of operations to workers develop a position on this ANOI. Additional

and the public, for enhanced subject; 3 indicated that DOE upgrades will be

environmental management should pursue uses for this analyzed in the

systems, and for improved facility and funding which can SWEIS.

security. Other upgrades should better benefit society; and 3

be suspended and addressed in opposed any upgrades prior to

the SWEIS. the completion of the SWEIS.

High Explosives Proceed with the NEPA review for 2 comments received. 1 concurred No--the project has

Materials Test this project immediately. with the recommendation, given been cancelled.

Facility. limited information; 1 opposed

this recommendation, proposing

that it be covered in the SWEIS.

Isotope Separator Defer the NEPA review for this 3 comments received. All 3 No--defer until after

Facility. project until after the SWEIS. concurred with the SWEIS.

recommendation.

Low Energy Proceed with the NEPA review for 3 comments received. All 3 Environmental

Accelerator this project immediately. opposed the recommendation. Assessment has been

Laboratory. completed and a

Finding of No

Significant Impact

has been issued.

Nuclear Materials The NEPA review for upgrades that 8 comments received. 3 concurred No--repair and operate

Storage Facility would increase capacity should with the recommendation; 3 up to 6.6 metric

Upgrade. be suspended and addressed in indicated that additional tons; proposed

the SWEIS. Activities to correct information was necessary capacity changes will

design deficiencies should regarding nuclear material be addressed in the

proceed based upon previous NEPA storage at LANL; 1 opposed SWEIS.

documentation. storage of weapons usable

fissile materials of any kind; 1

opposed even repairs to this

facility pending completion of

the SWEIS.

Safety Testing of Proceed with the NEPA review for 4 comments received. 2 opposed No--this subject will

Pits under this project immediately. the recommendation; 2 indicated be addressed in the

Thermal Stress. that additional information was SWEIS.

necessary regarding the benefits

of this project.

Transuranic Waste Proceed with the NEPA review for 2 comments received. Both opposed Yes--in order to

Drum Staging this project immediately. the recommendation. support staging of

Building. waste drums generated

by ongoing

activities.

Weapons Components Proceed with the NEPA review for 3 comments received. 1 comment Environmental

Test Facility this project immediately. indicated concurrence with the assessment has been

Relocation. recommendation; 1 comment completed and a

indicated that additional Finding of No

information on this project was Significant Impact

required; 1 comment indicated has been issued.

that public opinion on this

subject was moot because the

environmental assessment had

since been completed.

Decontaminate, Suspend the NEPA review for this 3 comments received. All 3 No--this subject will

Decommission, and project and address it in the concurred with the be addressed in the

Demolish SWEIS. recommendation. SWEIS.

Building, TA-33-

86.

New Sanitary Suspend the NEPA review for this 4 comments received. 3 concurred No--this subject will

Landfill. project and address it in the with the recommendation; 1 be addressed in the

SWEIS. requested that more emphasis be SWEIS.

placed on minimization of

sanitary waste.

Actinide Source Proceed with the NEPA review for 3 comments received. 2 opposed Environmental

Term Waste Test this project immediately. the recommendation; 1 indicated assessment has been

Program. that additional information was completed and a

required to reach an opinion on Finding of No

this subject. Significant Impact

has been issued.

[[Page 25703]]

Controlled Air Suspend the NEPA review for 17 comments received. 2 concurred No--this subject,

Incinerator treatment operations and address with the recommendation; 1 including the trial

Operations. that in the SWEIS; no indicated that no aspects of burn, will be

recommendations were made incinerator operations be addressed in the

regarding the NEPA review for included in the SWEIS; 2 SWEIS. This process

the proposed trial burn. indicated that additional is being placed on

information on this subject was stand-by pending

required; 5 indicated concerns completion of the

with the impacts of SWEIS.

incineration; 2 indicated

opposition to incineration of

waste; 1 indicated that

alternatives to incineration

should be examined with the same

rigor as applied to

incineration; 1 indicated LANL

needs to obey all laws enacted

for public protection; 1

indicated the need to study the

environmental impacts of the

incinerator; and 2 indicated

that all incinerator activities

(including the trial burn) be

suspended and included in the

SWEIS.

Expansion of Area Suspend the NEPA review for this 19 comments received. 5 concurred No--this subject will

G Low-Level Waste project and address it in the with the recommendation; 4 be addressed in the

Disposal Area. SWEIS. indicated that additional SWEIS.

information was required on this

subject; 1 indicated that

alternatives to burial should be

pursued; 3 indicated concern

regarding the scope and impact

of Area G expansion; 1 indicated

that environmental restoration

waste should be considered

weapons-related waste; 1

indicated that LANL is not in

full compliance with

regulations; 4 indicated

opposition to any expansion of

Area G.

Hazardous Waste Proceed with the NEPA review for 3 comments received. 2 opposed Yes--to support near-

Treatment this project immediately. the recommendation; 1 indicated term programmatic

Facility and no opinion on the recommendation. requirements.

Mixed Waste

Receiving and

Storage Facility.

High Explosives No initial recommendation was 5 comments received. 1 comment Yes--to support near-

Wastewater made regarding the NEPA review requested that DOE proceed term objectives

Treatment for this project. promptly with NEPA documentation regarding waste

Facility. for this project; 2 indicated minimization and

that additional information was management.

required on this subject; 2

requested that the NEPA

documentation for this project

be suspended and addressed in

the SWEIS.

Mixed Waste No initial recommendation was 4 comments received. 1 concurred Yes--for support of

Disposal Facility. made regarding the NEPA review with the DOE proposal; 3 opposed the environmental

for this project. However, the any action proceeding for this restoration program

DOE proposed to proceed with an project prior to completion of only. The use of this

environmental assessment for the the SWEIS. facility for other

environmental restoration waste waste sources will be

only. examined in the

SWEIS.

National Defer the NEPA review for this 3 comments received. All 3 No--defer until after

Biomedical Tracer project until after the SWEIS is concurred with the the SWEIS.

Facility. completed. recommendation.

Laundry........... Proceed with the NEPA review for 3 comments received. 2 opposed No--this subject will

this project immediately. the recommendation; 1 indicated be addressed in the

that this facility might benefit SWEIS.

from analysis in the SWEIS, but

noted insufficient information

to reach a clear decision.

Receipt and Proceed with the NEPA review for 3 comments received. All 3 Yes--to support the

Storage of this project immediately. opposed the recommendation. programmatic need for

Nuclear Material this material.

for Criticality

Experiment.

Hazardous Low- Proceed with the NEPA review for 3 comments received. All 3 Yes--to support near

Level this project immediately. indicate support of the term waste management

Radioactive, and recommendation. program activities.

Mixed Waste

Treatment Skids.

Replacement Waste Proceed with the NEPA review for 5 comments received. All 5 This proposed

Compactor. this project immediately. indicate support of the replacement has been

recommendation. categorically

excluded from further

NEPA review.

Radioisotope Heat Proceed with the NEPA review for 3 comments received. All 3 No--this subject will

Source this project immediately. indicate opposition to the be addressed in the

Fabrication. recommendation. SWEIS.

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

[[Page 25704]] [FR Doc. 95-11806 Filed 5-11-95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6450-01-P