Environmental Impact Statement for the High Flux Beam Reactor Transition Project at the Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Environmental Impact Statement for the High Flux Beam Reactor

Transition Project at the Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY

AGENCY: Department of Energy.

ACTION: Notice of intent (NOI).

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

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

prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), pursuant to the

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), for the High Flux Beam

Reactor (HFBR) at the Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL) in Upton,

New York. The EIS will evaluate the range of reasonable alternatives

regarding the future of the reactor, as required by NEPA, including:

(1) No action (maintaining HFBR in a shutdown and defueled condition);

(2) resume operation at a power level of 30 megawatt (MW) or up to 60

MW; (3) resume operation and enhance the facility; and (4) permanent

shutdown with eventual decontamination and decommissioning (D&D). DOE

invites individuals, organizations, and agencies to present oral and/or

written comments concerning the scope of the EIS, including the

environmental issues and alternatives the EIS should analyze.

DATES: The public scoping begins with publication of this NOI in the

Federal Register and continues until January 23, 1998. Written comments

submitted by mail should be postmarked by that date to ensure

consideration. Comments mailed after that date will be considered to

the extent practicable.

DOE will conduct public scoping meetings to assist it in defining

the appropriate scope of the EIS, including the significant

environmental issues to be addressed. DOE plans to hold scoping

meetings in the vicinity of BNL in December 1997 and January 1998. The

December meeting will be held at the following date, time and location:

December 10, 1997, Mastic Beach Property Owners Association, 31

Neighborhood Road, Mastic Beach, New York 11951; Time: 4:00 p.m.-9:00

p.m.

Locations of additional scoping meetings to be held in January will

be announced through the local media as soon as possible, but at least

15 days prior to the date of the meetings.

ADDRESSES: Please direct comments or suggestions on the scope of the

EIS, requests to speak at the public scoping meetings, requests for

special arrangements to enable participation at scoping meetings (e.g.,

interpreter for the hearing-impaired) and questions concerning the

project to: Michael Holland, Brookhaven Group, U.S. Department of

Energy, 53 Bell Avenue, Bldg. 464, P.O. Box 5000, Upton, NY 11973-5000,

(516) 344-3552, telefax (516) 344-1377, or by electronic mail to

[email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For general information associated

with the research aspects of the HFBR, please contact: Iran Thomas,

Deputy Associate Director, Office of Basic Energy Sciences, Office of

Energy Research, U.S. Department of Energy, ER-10, Germantown, MD

20874, telephone: (301) 903-3427.

For technical information associated with reactor operation, please

contact: Robert Lange, Associate Director, Office of Facilities, Office

of Nuclear Energy,

[[Page 62573]]

U.S. Department of Energy, NE-40, 19907 Germantown Rd., Germantown, MD

20874, telephone: (301) 903-2915.

For general information on the DOE NEPA process, please contact:

Carol M. Borgstrom, Director, Office of NEPA Policy and Assistance, EH-

42, U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, S.W.,

Washington, D.C. 20585-0119, telephone: (202) 586-4600 or leave a

message on (800) 472-2756.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

The Brookhaven National Laboratory was established in 1947 as a

multi-disciplinary scientific research center. It is located close to

the geographic center of Suffolk County, Long Island, about 56 miles

(91 kilometers) east of New York City. The Laboratory site consists of

8.2 square miles (21.3 square kilometers, 2,130 hectares) with most

principal facilities located near the center. The Laboratory carries

out basic and applied research in the following areas: High-energy and

nuclear physics; solid state physics; materials sciences and chemical

sciences; nuclear medicine; biomedical and environmental sciences; and

selected energy technologies.

The HFBR, which is centrally located within the BNL site (about 1

mile from the eastern site boundary and 1.5 miles from the southern

boundary), was commissioned in 1965 as a scientific facility dedicated

to neutron scattering research and other research programs in solid

state physics, nuclear physics, materials technology, structural

biology, medicine and chemistry. Neutron scattering techniques are used

to study the structure and properties of materials. The HFBR has

provided about two-thirds of the Department's experimental capability

at reactors for neutron scattering.

The HFBR uses heavy water (deuterium) for cooling and a highly

enriched uranium core to produce beams of thermal neutrons that are

guided to experimental areas by nine horizontal aluminum alloy tubes

called ``beam tubes.'' In addition, there are seven vertical tubes for

irradiating research samples in the reactor. The entire reactor and its

control room are enclosed within a confinement dome. This reactor does

not produce electric power. The HFBR staff presently consists of about

110 scientists, engineers, technicians, and administrative personnel.

The HFBR scientific user community numbers about 300 researchers,

including several from Japan and Europe.

In some research areas the HFBR is the best facility in the United

States. For example, the facility's Small Angle Neutron Scattering

(SANS) capability is regarded as a particularly useful technique by

structural biologists, who represent a rapidly growing user community

for neutron scattering. The HFBR SANS offers unique capabilities for

the study of biological samples and is the best resource in the United

States for this type of work. In addition, the HFBR's Single Crystal

Neutron Diffraction equipment complements x-ray techniques in

determining the structure of complex organic molecules because of its

ability to locate hydrogen atoms. The HFBR facility has also been used

for radioisotope production, neutron activation analysis, and material

irradiation.

The reactor was originally designed for operation at a power level

of 40 megawatts (MW). An equipment upgrade in 1982 allowed operation at

60 MW, which greatly enhanced the reactor's scientific capability.

Beginning in 1991, the operating power of the reactor was limited to 30

MW until additional analysis could be performed to address safety

concerns associated with a hypothetical loss of reactor coolant

accident while operating at 60 MW. Subsequent analyses, currently under

review as part of an on-going Safety Analysis Report revision program,

indicate that the HFBR could be safely operated at 60 MW. Scientific

users have recommended operating the reactor at 60 MW, and that the

Department upgrade and modernize the scientific instrumentation and

other features such as the beam tubes.

Current Status of HFBR

On December 21, 1996, the HFBR was shut down for refueling and

maintenance, a routine activity which normally occurs almost every

month. Before the reactor returned to scheduled scientific operations,

however, monitoring indicated that a plume of tritiated water was

contaminating the groundwater in excess of drinking water standards

south and down gradient of the reactor. DOE, in cooperation with the

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), New York State Department

of Conservation (NYSDEC), and Suffolk County Department of Health

Services (SCDHS), immediately initiated activities to identify and

eliminate the source of the tritium plume. These activities, now

collectively called the Tritium Remediation Project, continue as part

of the Department's commitment to remediate the contaminated

groundwater.

Data collection and analysis identified the HFBR spent fuel pool as

the likely source of the tritium plume. In May 1997, a short-term

removal action, in the form of a groundwater extraction system, was

undertaken to ensure that tritium contaminated groundwater in excess of

drinking water standards does not leave the BNL site boundary.

The short-term removal action has been incorporated into the site's

cleanup program in accordance with the Interagency Agreement among DOE,

EPA and NYSDEC entered into pursuant to the Comprehensive Environmental

Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA). A description of the

removal action taken, alternatives considered, regulatory interaction,

and public participation activities associated with the short-term

removal action are documented in the Action Memorandum for Operable

Unit III Tritium Removal Action, dated May 9, 1997, which is available

in the reading rooms identified in this notice.

The final remedial action will be determined through the CERCLA

Operable Unit III Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS)

process and will be based on additional data collected, groundwater

modeling, and evaluations of various remediation options, including

those activities which comprise the Tritium Remediation Project. The

CERCLA Record of Decision that completes this process is scheduled to

be published in the fall of 1998. The potential environmental impacts

associated with this CERCLA action will be reflected and accounted for

in the environmental analysis contained in the EIS.

In addition to the activities associated with the cleanup of the

contaminated groundwater plume, all fuel has been removed from the

reactor and the pool and shipped off-site in preparation for removing

all water from the fuel pool. Decontamination and dewatering of the

storage pool is underway in order to eliminate the current source of

the tritium to the groundwater beneath the HFBR. Operation of the

groundwater plume pumping, treatment, and recharge system continues.

The groundwater tritium plume has been characterized and modeled, and

continues to be sampled and monitored. Removal of the water from the

spent fuel pool is scheduled for completion by the end of 1997.

Purpose and Need for the Agency Action

The Department of Energy needs to make a decision regarding the

future of the HFBR at BNL. This EIS will aid DOE in its decisionmaking

process. In July

[[Page 62574]]

1997, the Department issued its ``Action Plan for Improved Management

of Brookhaven National Laboratory,'' which summarized the Department's

planned process for deciding the future of the HFBR. The Action Plan

states that the Secretary of Energy will decide the future of the HFBR

and directs an appropriate environmental review process. That review

process consists of this EIS on the HFBR, which will incorporate the

results of the tritium remediation project being conducted in

conjunction with the ongoing CERCLA process. The Secretary is scheduled

to decide upon a preferred alternative for the future of the HFBR in

early 1998 for inclusion in this EIS. As stated in the Action Plan,

that decision will take into account several factors, including: public

input from the local Long Island community; input from the HFBR

scientific user community and the DOE Basic Energy Sciences Advisory

Committee; and the value of the scientific information produced using

the HFBR. The alternatives listed in this Notice for evaluation in the

EIS reflect the full range of options available for the future of the

HFBR. The results of the EIS scoping process will be considered in

selecting the preferred alternative. The preferred alternative will be

noted in the Draft EIS, but the EIS will analyze all reasonable

alternatives, as required by NEPA.

The Conference Report accompanying Pub. L. 105-62, the Energy and

Water Development Appropriations Act of 1998, directed that an EIS be

prepared on the HFBR. The Report noted the conferees' expectation that

the EIS include a ``comprehensive survey of any environmental hazards

that the tritium leak or other contamination associated with the HFBR

pose to the drinking water and health of the people in the surrounding

communities, and that it will provide a detailed plan for

remediation.'' The EIS will provide this analysis, while concurrently

proceeding with, the Tritium Remediation Project and applicable

Interagency Agreement and CERCLA commitments. Long-term remediation

plans are being prepared under the ongoing CERCLA program and will be

discussed with the local community. Consistent with Congress'

direction, the EIS will summarize this remediation plan and program,

and assess the HFBR's potential for further contributing to groundwater

contamination.

The Report also directed the Department to drain the spent fuel

pool, meet the requirements outlined in the Suffolk County Sanitary

Code Article 12, complete seismic upgrades, and repair and seal the

floor drains. These modifications and repairs, in addition to those

indicated in (3) below, are needed to place the HFBR into a

radiologically and industrially safe condition, regardless of which

alternative is selected for the future of the HFBR, and do not result

in any adverse environmental impacts. Accordingly, since these

activities do not have an adverse impact and do not limit the choice of

reasonable alternatives, DOE intends to proceed with these activities

prior to completion of the EIS. These modifications include repairs

needed to bring the HFBR into compliance with applicable Federal,

State, and local laws and requirements, including the requirements of

Suffolk County Sanitary Code Article 12, which is relevant to reducing

risks and preventing future leaks from the facility to the groundwater.

These four specific modifications and repairs include:

(1) Several floor joints and conduit penetrations in the floor of

the HFBR would be repaired and sealed to ensure that there is no

leakage path to groundwater from any accidental spill within the

reactor confinement building. The potential for spills exists during

both reactor operations and deactivation activities, when there would

be a need to move large quantities of radioactive liquids into tanks

and drums for storage, treatment or disposal.

(2) Several piping systems and sumps in the HFBR would be modified

and repaired by replacing single-walled piping and sumps with double-

walled components, or installing new components above the floor, thus

meeting the requirements of Suffolk County Sanitary Code 12 for

protection of groundwater. These systems would be used during

operations and during deactivation activities to flush systems and

reduce contamination.

(3) The drains from the 350-foot tall stack (handles exhaust gases

from HFBR and other nearby facilities) would be repaired, along with

the collection piping and sump, to convert them from a single-walled to

a double-walled system. This would enhance the confinement integrity of

the HFBR by providing a barrier against potential accidental release of

radioactive materials to groundwater.

(4) The HFBR control room and operations level crane would be

reinforced to protect radiological monitoring and control systems, as

well as operations personnel, in the event of a design basis

earthquake. The control room and crane are needed to ensure safe

reactor operations or deactivation activities.

The Department is also evaluating a proposal to construct and

install a stainless steel liner in the spent fuel pool during the

preparation of the EIS. The installation of this impervious liner and

appurtenant leak detection system would result in the pool containing a

double-walled barrier to ensure that the storage pool would not be a

source of groundwater contamination in the future. DOE considers the

storage pool to be an essential component of the HFBR regardless of

whether or not the reactor operates. It would be needed to store spent

fuel during operations. During deactivation activities, it would be

used to handle various highly radioactive reactor components which must

be dismantled or cut apart in preparation for shipment offsite. Much of

this work would be conducted within the storage pool. A usable pool may

also be necessary for maintenance of the HFBR during an extended period

of time in its present shutdown condition. As part of the CERCLA

cleanup of Operable Unit III, the Department committed to construct and

install the liner prior to any use of the pool. As a result, the spent

fuel liner is included at this time as part of all alternatives, except

No Action. DOE specifically solicits comments on whether the liner

should be installed, along with the other modifications and repairs,

prior to completion of this EIS. After hearing public comments on this

issue, the Department may decide to include installation of the liner

as part of all alternatives, including No Action.

Alternatives To Be Evaluated

While Pub. L. 105-62 prohibited the use of funds made available

under that Act or any other act to restart the HFBR, this EIS will

analyze the following reasonable alternatives for the future of the

HFBR, as required by NEPA:

No Action Alternative

Under this alternative, the reactor would be maintained in the

current shutdown and defueled condition for the indefinite future; the

four modifications and repairs listed above would be performed. The

Department regards this as a non-preferred alternative, because it does

not resolve the future of the HFBR.

Resume Operation Alternative

The earliest date that the reactor could be restarted is October

1999, following completion of the NEPA process and all of the

modifications and repairs described above (including installation of

the spent fuel liner). This alternative includes two subalternatives:

[[Page 62575]]

a. Startup and operation of the reactor at a power level of 30 MW

(the power level prior to the shutdown).

b. Startup and operation of the reactor at a power level of 30 MW

with a planned increase in operation at a level of up to 60 MW.

Resume Operation and Enhance Facility Alternative

Under this alternative, the Department would restart the reactor

for operation at a power level of up to 60 MW, and eventually replace

the reactor vessel to extend the life of the reactor, and upgrade the

reactor (e.g., add scientific instruments) to enhance the reactor's

scientific research capabilities and increase the number of potential

reactor users. Because of budget limitations, the Department regards

this as a non-preferred alternative.

Permanent Shutdown Alternative

Under this alternative, the HFBR would be permanently shut down for

eventual decontamination and decommissioning. Additional NEPA review

would be necessary in the future for a proposal to decontaminate and

decommission the reactor. This alternative would involve terminating

the scientific research mission of the HFBR at BNL and placing the

reactor in an industrially and radiologically safe condition for an

extended period of time until a proposal were made to decontaminate and

decommission the reactor. While an analysis of the full and complete

decontamination and decommissioning is beyond the scope of this EIS,

the potential environmental impacts associated with decontamination and

decommissioning will be analyzed to the extent possible.

At this time, the Department of Energy has no preferred

alternative. As noted above, the Secretary of Energy will designate a

preferred alternative based on the results of the scoping process and

other information in early 1998.

Preliminary Environmental Analysis

The following issues have been tentatively identified for analysis

in the EIS. This list is neither intended to be all-inclusive nor is it

a predetermination of potential environmental impacts. The list is

presented to facilitate comment on the scope of the EIS. Additions to

or deletions from this list may occur as a result of the public scoping

process.

Health and Safety: potential public and occupational consequences

from routine operation and credible accident scenarios.

Waste Generation/Pollution Prevention: types of wastes expected to

be generated and stored, pollution prevention opportunities, and the

potential consequences to public safety and the environment.

Hazardous Materials: handling, storage, and use; waste management

both present and future.

Background Radiation: cosmic, rock, soil, water, and air, and the

potential addition of radiation.

Water Resources: surface and groundwater hydrology, use, and

quality, and the potential for degradation.

Air Quality: meteorological conditions, ambient background,

pollutant sources, and potential for degradation.

Earth Resources: physiography, topography, geology, and soil

characteristics.

Land Use: plans, policies and controls.

Noise: ambient, sources, and sensitive receptors.

Ecological Resources: wetlands, aquatic, terrestrial, economically/

recreationally important species, threatened and endangered species.

Socioeconomic: demography, economic base, labor pool, housing,

transportation, utilities, public services/facilities, education,

recreation, and cultural resources.

Natural Disasters: floods, hurricanes, tornadoes, and seismic

events. Unavoidable Adverse Impacts.

Natural and Depletable Resources: requirements and conservation

potential.

Environmental Justice: any potential disproportionately high and

adverse impacts to minority and low income populations.

Alternatives other than those presented in this document may

warrant examination, and new issues may be identified for evaluation.

Scoping Meetings

The purpose of this NOI is to encourage public involvement in the

EIS process and to solicit public comments on the proposed scope and

content of the EIS. DOE will hold public scoping meetings in the BNL

area to solicit both oral and written comments from interested parties.

DOE will designate a facilitator for the scoping meetings. The

facilitator may ask for clarification of statements to ensure that

representatives of the DOE fully understand the comments and

suggestions. The scoping meetings will not be conducted as evidentiary

hearings nor will there be questioning of the commentors. At the

opening of each meeting the facilitator will establish the order of

speakers and will announce any additional procedures necessary for

conducting the meetings. To ensure that all persons wishing to make a

presentation are given the opportunity, a five-minute limit may be

enforced for each speaker, with the exception of public officials and

representatives of groups, who will be allotted ten minutes each. DOE

encourages those providing oral comments to also submit them in

writing. Comment cards will also be available for those who prefer to

submit their comments in written form.

DOE will make transcripts of the scoping meetings and project-

related materials available for public review in the following reading

rooms:

1. U.S. Department of Energy, Freedom of Information Public Reading

Room, Forrestal Building, Room 1E-190, 1000 Independence Avenue, S.W.,

Washington, D.C. 20585, Telephone: (202) 586-3142.

2. Brookhaven National Laboratory Research Library, Bldg. 477A

Brookhaven Ave., Upton, NY 11973, Telephone: (516) 344-3483.

3. Longwood Public Library, 800 Middle Country Rd., Middle Island,

NY 11953, Telephone: (516) 924-6400.

4. Mastics-Moriches-Shirley Community Library, 301 William Floyd

Parkway, Shirley, NY 11967, Telephone: (516) 399-1511.

Other environmental materials available at these locations or

through the Suffolk County Interlibrary Loan System include BNL's 1977

Site-wide EIS, Annual Site Environmental Reports, and the CERCLA

Administrative record for cleanup activities.

NEPA Process

The EIS for the HFBR will be prepared according to the National

Environmental Policy Act of 1969, the Council on Environmental

Quality's Regulations for Implementing the Procedural Provisions of

NEPA (40 CFR Parts 1500-1508), and DOE's NEPA Regulations (10 CFR Part

1021).

The draft EIS is scheduled to be published in the summer of 1998. A

45-day comment period on the draft EIS is planned, and public hearings

to receive comments will be held approximately three weeks after

distribution of the draft EIS. Availability of the draft EIS, the dates

of the public comment period, and information about the public meetings

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

when the draft EIS is distributed.

The final EIS, which will incorporate public comments received on

the draft EIS, is expected in November 1998. No sooner than 30 days

after a notice of availability of the final EIS is published

[[Page 62576]]

in the Federal Register, DOE will issue its Record of Decision and

publish it in the Federal Register. The Record of Decision is expected

to be issued in December 1998.

Signed in Washington, D.C., this 19th day of November, 1997.

Peter N. Brush,

Acting Assistant Secretary, Environment, Safety and Health

[FR Doc. 97-30821 Filed 11-21-97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6450-01-P