Record of Decision: Environmental Impact Statement for the Continued Operation of the Pantex Plant and Associated Storage of Nuclear Weapon Components

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Record of Decision: Environmental Impact Statement for the

Continued Operation of the Pantex Plant and Associated Storage of

Nuclear Weapon Components

AGENCY: Department of Energy.

ACTION: Record of decision.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Energy is issuing this Record of Decision

for the continued operation of the Pantex Plant and associated storage

of nuclear weapon components. This Record of Decision is based on the

information, analysis, and public comment contained in the Final

Environmental Impact Statement for the Continued Operation of the

Pantex Plant and Associated Storage of Nuclear Weapon Components

(Pantex Plant EIS) (DOE/EIS-0225, November 1996). The Department has

decided to implement the preferred alternative by: (1) Continuing

nuclear weapon operations involving assembly and disassembly of nuclear

weapons at the Pantex Plant; (2) implementing facility projects,

including upgrades and construction consistent with conducting these

operations; and (3) continuing to provide interim pit storage at the

Pantex Plant and increasing the storage level from 12,000 to 20,000

pits.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information on or copies

of the Pantex Plant EIS or other information related to this Record of

Decision, please call 505-845-4351 or write to: Ms. Nanette D. Founds,

Pantex Plant EIS Project Manager, EIS Project Office, U.S. Department

of Energy, Albuquerque Operations Office, P.O. Box 5400, Albuquerque,

New Mexico 87175-5400.

For information on the Department's National Environmental Policy

Act (NEPA) process, please contact: Ms. Carol M. Borgstrom, Director,

Office of NEPA Policy and Assistance, EH-42, U.S. Department of Energy,

1000 Independence Ave. SW., Washington, DC 20585, telephone 202-586-

4600 or leave a message at 800-472-2756.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Department of Energy has prepared this

Record of Decision pursuant to the Council on Environmental Quality

Regulations implementing the procedural provisions of NEPA (40 CFR

Parts 1500-1508) and the Department's NEPA implementing regulations (10

CFR Part 1021). This Record of Decision is based on the Final

Environmental Impact Statement for the Continued Operation of the

Pantex Plant and Associated Storage of Nuclear Weapon Components (DOE/

EIS-0225, November 1996), hereafter referred to as the Pantex Plant

EIS, and other factors.

Background

Until 1989, Pantex Plant activities were closely coupled with

operations at the Rocky Flats Plant, now the Rocky Flats Environmental

Technology Site, near Denver, Colorado. Two of the Rocky Flats Plant's

primary missions were: (1) The manufacture of plutonium components

(pits) which were eventually transported to the Pantex Plant for final

assembly into nuclear weapons, and (2) receipt of pits from the Pantex

Plant from disassembled weapons for recovery, reprocessing, and

fabrication of the special nuclear material into new pits. In December

1989, plutonium processing and pit fabrication operations at the Rocky

Flats Plant were curtailed by the Department of Energy pending

resolution of safety and environmental issues. The Pantex Plant

continued to disassemble weapons, but shipments of pits from dismantled

weapons between Pantex and Rocky Flats were suspended. The pits from

those weapons were staged in Zone 4 at the Pantex Plant for later

shipment to Rocky Flats. The Department had anticipated that shipments

of pits to the Rocky Flats Plant would be reinitiated when processing

activities in support of new weapons programs were resumed. Efforts to

restart plutonium processing operations continued until January 1992,

when they were terminated by the Department because of reduced

requirements for nuclear weapons production in support of the national

defense.

Because pit transfers were suspended, the Department prepared the

Environmental Assessment for Interim Storage of Plutonium Components at

[[Page 3881]]

Pantex (DOE/EA-0812, January 1994) to analyze activities necessary to

accommodate the interim storage of up to 20,000 pits from the Pantex

Plant disassembly operations. The environmental assessment did not

suggest that the environmental impacts from the storage of 20,000 pits

would be significant. However, in response to comments received from

the State of Texas, local officials, and other stakeholders, the

Department committed to store no more than 12,000 pits at the Pantex

Plant until an environmental impact statement for the site had been

completed. Accordingly, the Department issued a Finding of No

Significant Impact for interim storage of up to 12,000 pits at the

Pantex Plant (59 FR 3674, January 26, 1994).

In May 1994, the Department published a Notice of Intent (NOI) (59

FR 26635, May 23, 1994) to prepare the Pantex Plant EIS. Among

alternatives identified in the NOI for consideration in the Pantex

Plant EIS was to continue Pantex Plant nuclear weapon operations and

increase onsite storage of pits; a no action alternative continuing

Pantex Plant nuclear weapon operations but maintaining the 12,000 pit

storage level; and an alternative relocating some Pantex Plant nuclear

weapon operations and some or all pit storage activities currently

conducted at the Pantex Plant, including relocation of other nuclear

component storage from other sites. An amended Notice of Intent (60 FR

32661, June 23, 1995) was issued to redefine the scope of the Pantex

Plant EIS based on subsequent preparation of programmatic EISs,

analyses of potential interim storage locations, and public scoping

comments. Under the revised scope, the Pantex Plant EIS evaluated

potential environmental impacts of continued operation of the Pantex

Plant, including the interim storage of pits at the Pantex Plant or

alternate sites (Nevada Test Site, Savannah River Site, Hanford Site,

or Manzano Weapons Storage Facility at Kirtland Air Force Base) over an

approximately 10-year period, and alternatives for relocating some or

all Pantex Plant pit storage activities. The Pantex Plant EIS also

examines cumulative impacts to Pantex by incorporating information from

related programmatic EISs (see the discussion below entitled Other

Decisions and Environmental Impact Statements Related to the Pantex

Plant).

In March 1996, the Department published the Draft Environmental

Impact Statement for the Continued Operation of Pantex Plant and

Associated Storage of Nuclear Weapon Components and announced its

availability in the Federal Register (61 FR 15232, April 5, 1996). The

comment period for the Draft Pantex Plant EIS began on April 5, 1996,

and originally would have ended on July 5, 1996, but was extended to

July 12, 1996 (61 FR 18726, April 29, 1996). During the comment period,

public hearings were held in Amarillo, Texas; North Las Vegas, Nevada;

North Augusta, South Carolina; Albuquerque, New Mexico; and Richland,

Washington. The meetings held in Amarillo and North Augusta were

conducted in concert with the Draft Stockpile Stewardship and

Management Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (SSM PEIS) (DOE/

EIS-0236, February 1996) and the Storage and Disposition of Weapons-

Usable Fissile Material Draft Environmental Impact Statement (S&D PEIS)

(DOE/EIS-0229, February 1996). In addition, a Technical Exchange

Meeting was held in Amarillo with representatives from the State of

Texas and local governments, and the public. All comments received

during the public comment period were considered for potential changes

or additions to the Final Pantex Plant EIS. Volume III of the Final

Pantex Plant EIS contains the comments received and the Department's

responses to those comments, and identifies the areas where changes

were made to the Pantex Plant EIS.

Alternatives Considered

The scope of the Pantex Plant EIS included assessing the impacts of

operations performed at the Pantex Plant on the natural and physical

environment and the relationships of people to that environment. The

scope also included issues raised during the scoping and public comment

periods. Among the areas of public interest were plant facilities and

infrastructure, land resources (particularly agricultural resources),

geology and soils (including the current environmental restoration

program), water (particularly protection of the Ogallala aquifer), air

quality (especially related to burning of high explosives and other

material), acoustics, biotic resources, cultural resources,

socioeconomics, intrasite transportation, waste management, human

health, potential aircraft accidents, intersite transportation of

nuclear and hazardous materials, and environmental justice. In addition

to these analyses for each site, Pantex Plant potential mitigation

measures, unavoidable impacts, irreversible and irretrievable

commitment of resources, impacts on long-term productivity, and

cumulative impacts were assessed.

The Pantex Plant EIS examined impacts across a reasonable range of

activity levels by assessing the operations on 2,000, 1,000, and 500

weapons per year. These levels of weapons operations could involve any

mix of nuclear weapons assemblies, disassemblies, retrofits, rebuilds,

and quality assurance inspections. The scope also included those areas

of the environment that might be impacted at the four candidate sites

considered for the possible relocation of interim pit storage

activities from the Pantex Plant. These candidate sites were the Nevada

Test Site, near Las Vegas, Nevada; the Savannah River Site, near Aiken,

South Carolina; the Hanford Site, near Richland, Washington; and

Kirtland Air Force Base, near Albuquerque, New Mexico. The Pantex Plant

EIS assessed activities over a period of approximately 10 years. The

Pantex Plant EIS alternatives were the Proposed Action, No Action

Alternative, and Relocation of Interim Pit Storage Alternative, as

discussed in the following paragraphs.

Proposed Action (Preferred Alternative): The Department proposed to

continue nuclear weapon operations at the Pantex Plant, increase the

maximum level of interim storage from 12,000 pits to 20,000 pits, and

implement necessary facility projects consistent with conducting these

operations. Types of operations conducted at the Pantex Plant include

the assembly, disassembly, modification, and maintenance of nuclear

weapons; surveillance of the weapons stockpile; production of high

explosives components for nuclear weapons; quality assurance evaluation

and testing of weapon components; and research and development

activities supporting nuclear weapons. For the facility projects, only

the Hazardous Waste Treatment and Processing Facility involves the

construction of a new facility that will add to the overall plant

footprint. Although the Pit Reuse Facility will establish a new mission

at the Pantex Plant, an existing facility will be modified to

incorporate these new operations instead of building a new, separate

structure. The remaining four projects will be located within existing

structures vacated because of workload reductions. These projects are:

the Pit Reuse Facility, Gas Analysis Laboratory, Materials

Compatibility and Assurance Facility, Nondestructive Evaluation

Facility, and the Metrology and Health Physics Calibration and

Acceptance Facility.

No Action Alternative: The No Action Alternative is presented to

provide a baseline for comparison with the Proposed Action. Under the

No Action Alternative, the Department would continue current operations

at the

[[Page 3882]]

Pantex Plant as described under the Proposed Action, but would cease

weapons dismantlement after a storage level of 12,000 pits was reached.

Only previously approved and funded projects would be implemented under

this alternative. No new facilities would be constructed as described

under the Proposed Action. Failure to construct one of these new

projects (the Hazardous Waste Treatment and Processing Facility) would

limit the Plant's waste treatment and processing capability to a level

that would not meet the Department's objectives for improvements in

environment, safety, and health conditions and operational efficiency,

and would not fulfill an agreement reached with the State of Texas

under the Federal Facility Compliance Act.

Relocation of Interim Pit Storage Alternative: Under this

alternative, the Department would transfer pit storage operations to

another site. All other operations, upgrades, and new projects would be

the same as for the Proposed Action. There are two options under this

alternative: the relocation of up to 20,000 pits from the Pantex Plant,

or the relocation of up to 8,000 pits from the Pantex Plant, leaving

12,000 pits at the Pantex Plant. The candidate sites, which provided a

reasonable range of geographic, operational, and environmental

alternatives, were the Nevada Test Site, the Savannah River Site, the

Hanford Site, and the Manzano Weapons Storage Facility at Kirtland Air

Force Base.

Preferred Alternative

Based on its analyses, the Department announced a preferred

alternative in the Notice of Availability for the Pantex Plant Draft

EIS (61 FR 15232, April 5, 1996) and in the Final Pantex Plant EIS. The

Preferred Alternative is the Proposed Action, to continue nuclear

weapons operations at the Pantex Plant, to implement facility projects

including upgrades and construction consistent with performing these

operations, and to provide interim storage for up to 20,000 pits at the

Pantex Plant. This Record of Decision selects the Preferred Alternative

for implementation.

Evaluation of Alternatives

Only the Pantex Plant was analyzed for continued weapons

operations; however, four alternative sites (Nevada Test Site, Savannah

River Site, Hanford Reservation, and Kirtland Air Force Base) in

addition to the Pantex Plant were evaluated for interim storage of up

to 20,000 plutonium pits. Each of the alternatives were evaluated for

three potential levels of activity (operations on 2,000, 1,000, and 500

weapons per year) at the Pantex Plant. The principal differences among

the alternatives lie in the number of pits that would be stored at the

Pantex Plant and the new projects that would be implemented.

Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives

Impacts to facilities and infrastructure, land resources, air

quality, acoustics, cultural resources, and environmental justice were

determined to be similar for each of the alternatives. Water usage and

wastewater production were found to be similar (less than 1 percent

variation) under each of the alternatives. The main differences in

impacts among the alternatives would involve the disturbance to soils

and biotic resources due to construction of a new facility, radiation

exposure to workers involved in the transfer of pits, and risks

associated with aircraft accidents. These differences are generally

small.

A suite of accident scenarios was evaluated in detail to encompass

the range of accidents at the Pantex Plant that have the potential to

affect workers or members of the public. For all alternatives evaluated

in the Final Pantex Plant EIS, the dominant accident in terms of risk

from radioactive releases to the public involves the crash of an

aircraft into a weapons storage magazine, nuclear weapons assembly/

disassembly bay or cell, or a special purpose building that results in

the detonation of the conventional explosives in the weapons. The

estimated risk associated with this potential accident is 7.2 x

10-6 excess cancer fatalities per year to the population within 80

kilometers (50 miles) of the Pantex Plant.

For all alternatives evaluated in the Final Pantex Plant EIS, the

dominant accident scenario in terms of release of hazardous chemicals

to the public involves the accidental release of up to 408 kilograms

(900 pounds) of chlorine gas from the water treatment facilities.

Approximately 10 percent of the public within 80 kilometers (50 miles)

could be exposed to concentrations of chlorine that, if experienced for

over an hour, could cause mild transient adverse health effects.

The potential for accidents that pose risks to worker safety exists

at the Pantex Plant. These accidents include normal manufacturing and

heavy equipment accidents, fires, and explosions. The types of

accidents that could result in release of radioactive or hazardous

material are bounded by those accidents discussed above. Although the

accident is the same, the consequences to a worker tends to be more

severe than to a member of the public. In the case of an explosion, the

consequence to an affected worker is generally a fatality. In the case

of a chlorine release, a higher exposure to chlorine is expected for a

worker at the Pantex Plant, but no serious or long term health impacts

would result.

All alternatives would result in unavoidable worker exposures to

radiation from normal handling of plutonium pits during transfer and

storage. Under the Preferred Alternative, workers at the Pantex Plant

would receive an additional 17 person-rem as a result of storing and

handling 20,000 pits instead of the 12,000 pits currently authorized.

However, the 20,000-pit Relocation Alternative would result in an

additional exposure of up to 283 person-rem due to additional pit

handling and loading/unloading of the Safe Secure Tractor Trailers used

to transport the pits to the alternative site. The Department will

continue to strive to reduce radiological exposures to plant workers.

Radiological exposures incurred from future weapons operations will be

controlled and minimized by Pantex Plant procedures, administrative

controls, and an active As Low As Reasonably Achievable exposure

control program that promotes minimizing exposure of workers to

radiation. Limits on allowable radiological exposures to workers are

given in 10 CFR Part 835, Occupation Radiation Protection and safe

radiological worker practices are described in the Pantex Radiological

Control Manual. Health studies of Pantex Plant workers to date indicate

that there has been no significant excess cancer mortality in the

Pantex Plant area attributable to Pantex Plant operations. There have

been no verifiable indications of any short-or long-term health impacts

to workers at the Pantex Plant. Radiological exposure to non-involved

workers and members of the public from Pantex Plant operations is

effectively zero.

The Environmentally Preferable Alternative

The environmentally preferable alternative is defined as the

alternative that would cause the least impact to the physical

environment, and best protect worker and public health. According to

the analysis conducted for the Pantex Plant EIS, the Preferred

Alternative is the environmentally preferable alternative. Under the

Preferred Alternative, the Pantex Plant would implement a new project

(the Hazardous Waste Treatment and Processing Facility) to improve the

efficiency of

[[Page 3883]]

low-level radioactive, hazardous, and mixed waste processing, provide

greater environmental protection, and improve worker safety and health.

For the Pit Reuse Facility, an existing facility would be modified

instead of constructing a new facility. For the Gas Analysis

Laboratory, Materials Compatibility Assurance Facility, Nondestructive

Evaluation Facility, and Metrology and Health Physics Calibration and

Acceptance Facility, current activities would be moved into existing

facilities instead of constructing new facilities. Moving into existing

facilities is environmentally preferred to construction of new

facilities and No Action because the impacts of construction are

avoided and worker safety is improved, respectively. Retaining interim

storage of pits at the Pantex Plant would minimize the radiation

exposure to workers and the public because the pits would be handled

less than if they had to be shipped to another site for storage.

Comments on the Final Pantex Plant EIS

During the 30-day comment period which ended January 13, 1997, the

Department received two letters regarding the Pantex Plant Final EIS.

The first letter from the Environmental Protection Agency stated that

the Agency's previous comments on the Pantex Plant Draft Environmental

Impact Statement were addressed and offered no additional comments.

The second letter from the State of Tennessee, Department of

Environment and Conservation, Department of Energy Oversight Division,

expressed dissatisfaction regarding the Department's response in the

Final Pantex Plant EIS to their previous comment regarding the shipment

of depleted uranium from Pantex Plant to the Y-12 Plant at the Oak

Ridge Reservation. As noted in the Final Pantex Plant EIS, the

relocation of storage for nuclear components other than pits is not

reasonable during the time period of the Pantex Plant EIS. Accordingly,

highly enriched uranium and depleted uranium components must continue

to be shipped from the Pantex Plant to the Y-12 Plant. The decisions

announced in this Record of Decision will not affect the ongoing

depleted uranium operations at the Y-12 Plant. The Y-12 Plant currently

has existing storage capacity to accommodate the depleted uranium

returns from the Pantex Plant. The amount of depleted uranium to be

returned from the Pantex Plant is classified information. However, the

amount of depleted uranium returned coupled with the existing site

inventory will not surpass the historical maximum level of depleted

uranium stored at the Y-12 Plant. The Department, through the Oak Ridge

Operations Office, is working with the State of Tennessee to address

their concerns and will provide a briefing to appropriately cleared

State of Tennessee representatives on the depleted uranium activities

in February 1997.

Decisions

The Department is making three decisions regarding continued

operation of the Pantex Plant and associated storage of nuclear weapon

components. Details of these decisions are as follows:

(1) Continue current nuclear weapons operations: The Final Pantex

Plant EIS examines three levels of activity for weapons operations

conducted at the Pantex Plant over the next 10 years. It is expected

that the activity level for the next 3 to 5 years will be less than the

2,000 weapons level, and will then continue to decline to the 500

weapons level until SSM PEIS decisions are implemented.

(2) Implement facility projects consistent with performing current

Pantex Plant operations: Six facilities were analyzed in the Final

Pantex Plant EIS. For each facility, a proposed action, an alternative

action, and no action were examined. The following describes the

alternative selected for each facility:

Hazardous Waste Treatment and Processing Facility: The Department

has selected the Proposed Action, to construct this facility, as

described in Appendix H of the Pantex Plant EIS. Construction of the

facility will enhance Pantex Plant low-level radioactive, hazardous,

and mixed waste operations and will comply with an agreement reached

with the State of Texas under the Federal Facility Compliance Act. This

decision will be reviewed based on future decisions resulting from the

Waste Management Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) to

assure consistency with those programmatic decisions (see discussion

below under Other Decisions and Environmental Impact Statements). The

engineering design for this facility will proceed while the Department

is completing the Waste Management PEIS process.

Pit Reuse Facility: The Department has selected the Proposed

Action, to modify an existing Pantex Plant Zone 12 facility (Building

12-104) as described in Appendix H of the Pantex Plant EIS. This

decision is consistent with the SSM PEIS Record of Decision (61 FR

68014, December 26, 1996).

Gas Analysis Laboratory, Materials Compatibility Assurance

Facility, Nondestructive Evaluation Facility, and Metrology and Health

Physics Calibration and Acceptance Facility: The Department has

selected the Move to an Existing Facility Alternative at the Pantex

Plant as described in Appendix H of the Pantex Plant EIS rather than

constructing a new facility. This decision is consistent with the SSM

PEIS Record of Decision.

The decision to move into existing facilities rather than build new

ones will result in reduced environmental impacts because construction

activities will be minimized. In addition, modifying existing

facilities rather than constructing new facilities will reduce costs.

(3) Continue providing interim pit storage at Pantex Plant and

increase the authorized storage level to 20,000 pits: This decision

will allow the Pantex Plant to continue nuclear weapon dismantlement

operations scheduled over the next 10 years until disposition decisions

are made and implemented.

Mitigation Measures

Due to ongoing quality assurance, industrial hygiene, safety

analysis, and other programs at the Pantex Plant and the level of

impacts identified in the Pantex Plant EIS, no additional mitigation

measures will be adopted for continued operations or storage activities

at the Pantex Plant. However, because of a high level of public

interest, activities associated with reducing the risk from aircraft

accidents are worth special consideration here. Due to public concern

regarding the risk of an aircraft crash at the Pantex Plant, an

Overflight Working Group was formed, consisting of representatives of

the Department of Energy, the Federal Aviation Administration, the U.S.

Air Force, the State of Texas and the public, to address ways to reduce

the number of aircraft flying over the Pantex Plant. Recommendations

included such actions as modifying the path of approaching and

departing aircraft from the Amarillo Airport to avoid flying over the

Pantex Plant boundary, and installing additional equipment at the

airport to aid in vectoring aircraft away from areas where nuclear

material is kept. The Department has committed to implement the risk

reduction measures recommended by this Overflight Working Group.

During preparation of the Pantex Plant EIS, the Pantex Plant also

undertook mitigation measures to afford the public greater protection

from a plutonium dispersal accident should such an accident occur.

Physical

[[Page 3884]]

modifications to assembly cell doors were started to significantly

reduce the amount of radioactive material that could leak from a cell

in case of an accident. These modifications are projected to be

completed by 1998.

Future Analytical Activities

The aircraft crash accident analysis of the Final EIS was based

upon the Draft Department of Energy Standard, Accident Analysis for

Aircraft Crash into Hazardous Facilities (July 1996). The Department

will further refine the analysis of potential aircraft crash scenarios

through Safety Analysis Reports, which will be prepared in accordance

with the Final Standard, which was published in October 1996. The Basis

for Interim Operation is the current safety authorization document for

Pantex until formal Safety Analysis Reports can be completed and

approved. This document will incorporate by reference the aircraft

crash analyses. The analysis in the Final Pantex Plant EIS

substantiates prior analyses that aircraft crashes at the Pantex Plant

do not present a significant risk to Pantex workers or the surrounding

communities. The Department, through the Safety Analysis Reports, will

prepare more detailed, building-specific analyses for aircraft crash

accidents. During this process, the Department will continue to apprise

the State of Texas of our progress. Once complete, the Department will

provide the State of Texas with the opportunity to thoroughly review

all facets of the aircraft crash analyses, including evaluation, safety

standards, and implementation of mitigation measures. The Department

will encourage the Amarillo National Resource Center for Plutonium to

provide the necessary resources to the State of Texas for this effort.

Other Decisions and Environmental Impact Statements Related to the

Pantex Plant

Final Stockpile Stewardship and Management Programmatic

Environmental Impact Statement (SSM PEIS): The SSM PEIS Record of

Decision determined that there will be over time a downsizing of the

weapons assembly/disassembly and high explosive component fabrication

missions at the Pantex Plant. The decisions made today in this Record

of Decision for the operation of the Pantex Plant over the next 10

years are consistent with those determinations. The SSM PEIS also

evaluated storage alternatives for strategic reserve material

(plutonium and highly enriched uranium that has not been declared

surplus to national security needs). However, decisions on storage of

strategic reserve materials are being made in the Record of Decision

for the S&D PEIS regarding the storage of surplus materials (see

below). In these documents, the preferred alternative is Zone 12 at the

Pantex Plant for strategic reserve storage of plutonium pits and the Y-

12 Plant at the Oak Ridge Reservation in Oak Ridge, Tennessee, for

strategic reserve storage of highly enriched uranium.

Storage and Disposition of Weapons-Usable Fissile Materials Final

Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (S&D PEIS): The S&D PEIS

Record of Decision (signed January 14, 1997) selected among

alternatives for safe and secure storage of weapons-usable fissile

materials and a strategy for the disposition of surplus weapons-usable

plutonium. The Pantex Plant was selected for the storage of strategic

reserve pits and surplus pits resulting from dismantlement operations

in upgraded facilities in Zone 12. This decision included the transfer

of pits from the Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site to the

Pantex Plant (as early as 1997) for storage in Zone 4 until upgraded

facilities are available for consolidated storage in Zone 12. The

Pantex Plant is also a potential site for disposition alternatives

including a Federal government-owned mixed oxide fuel fabrication

facility and a pit disassembly/conversion facility. Additional NEPA

review will be completed before site selections are made.

Waste Management Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement

(PEIS): The Waste Management PEIS provides a Department-wide evaluation

of management alternatives for where to treat, store or dispose of

radioactive and hazardous wastes. Pantex is one of 17 sites considered

for treatment and disposal of low-level and mixed waste, as well as one

of 11 sites evaluated for hazardous waste treatment. Under all options,

Pantex would either manage only its own wastes or ship some or all of

its waste to another site. The Final Waste Management PEIS, which will

be issued shortly, will identify the Department's preferred

alternatives for management of these wastes and the role of Pantex in

these configurations.

Issued in Washington, DC, on January 17, 1997.

Hazel R. O'Leary,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 97-1865 Filed 1-24-97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6450-01-P