FOREWORD
This environmental impact statement (eis) evaluates alternative approaches to and environmental impacts of managing wastes at the Savannah River Site (SRS). The U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE's) primary mission at SRS from the 1950s until the end of the Cold War was to produce and process nuclear materials to support defense programs. These activities generated five types of waste: liquid high-level radioactive, low-level radioactive, hazardous, mixed (radioactive and hazardous combined), and transuranic wastes. These wastes are still being generated by ongoing operations, environmental restoration, and decontamination and decommissioning of surplus facilities.
Because waste management alternatives would be implemented
over several years, DOE may issue more than one Record of Decision
based on this eis
Four waste management alternatives are evaluated in this eis. In addition to the noaction alternative, which consists of continuing current management practices, this eis examines one alternative for the limited treatment of waste, another for the extensive treatment of waste, and a third (the preferred alternative) that represents a moderate approach to waste treatment. The alternatives (except the no-action alternative) are analyzed based on three forecasts of the amounts of wastes that DOE could be required to manage over the next 30 years (1995 through 2024) at SRS. This eis evaluates siting, construction, and start-up or operation of specific waste management facilities at SRS over the next 10 years, as well as operational impacts for the 30-year forecast horizon. Ten years was selected because that is approximately the time required to get a project approved, designed, and constructed. In addition, current treatment processes may be superseded by more effective processes as technology improves. Accordingly, it is not appropriate to select technologies now for treatment processes that will not be implemented in the next decade.
Assumptions and analyses in this eis are generally consistent with those that are in or expected to be in the Waste Management Programmatic eis (DOE/eis-0200), the Tritium Supply and Recycling Programmatic eis (DOE/eis-0161), the Stockpile Stewardship and Management Programmatic eis (DOE/eis-0236), the Programmatic Spent Nuclear Fuel Management and Idaho National Engineering Laboratory Environmental Restoration and Waste Management Programs eis (DOE/eis-0203), the Proposed Nuclear Weapons Nonproliferation Policy Concerning Foreign Research Reactor Spent Nuclear Fuel eis (DOE/eis-0218), the Long-Term Storage and Disposition of Weapons-Useable Fissile Materials Programmatic eis (DOE/eis-0229), the Urgent-Relief Acceptance of Foreign Research Reactor Spent Nuclear Fuel Environmental Assessment (DOE/ea-0912), the Interim Management of Nuclear Materials at SRS eis (DOE/eis-0220D), the F-Canyon Plutonium Solutions at SRS eis (DOE/eis0219), the Defense Waste Processing Facility Supplemental eis (DOE/eis-0082S), the
Operations of the HB-Line Facility and Frame Waste Recovery Process for Production of Pu-238 Oxide (DOE/ea-0948), the Continued Operation of the Pantex Plant and Associated Storage of Nuclear Weapon Components eis (DOE/eis0225), and the SRS Proposed Site Treatment Plan for mixed waste.
DOE published a Notice of Intent to prepare this
eis in the Federal Register on April 6, 1994 (59 FR 16494).
The notice announced a public scoping period that ended on May
31, 1994, and solicited comments and suggestions on the scope
of the eis. DOE held scoping meetings during this period in Savannah,
Georgia, and North Augusta and Columbia, South Carolina, on May
12, 17, and 19, 1994, respectively. During the scoping period,
comments were received from individuals, organizations, and government
agencies. Comments received during the scoping period and DOE's
responses were used to prepare an implementation plan that defined
the scope and approach of this eis. The implementation plan was
issued by DOE in June 1994.
Transcripts of public testimony received during the
scoping process, copies of letters and comments, the implementation
plan, and reference materials cited in this eis are available
for review in the DOE Public Reading Room, located at the University
of South CarolinaAiken Campus, GreggGraniteville Library,
2nd Floor, University Parkway, Aiken, South Carolina [(803)
648-6851], and the Freedom of Information Reading Room, Room lE-190,
Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, Washington,
D.C. [(202) 586-6020].
DOE completed the draft of this eis in January 1995,
and on January 27, 1995, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) published a Notice of Availability of the document in the
Federal Register (60 FR 5386). This notice officially
started the public comment period on the draft eis, which extended
through March 31, 1995. Publication of the draft eis provided
an opportunity for public comment on the nature and substances
of the analyses included in the document.
DOE has considered comments it received during the
comment period in preparing this final eis. These comments were
received by letter, telephone, and formal statements made at public
hearings held in Barnwell, South Carolina (February 21, 1995);
Columbia, South Carolina (February 22, 1995); North Augusta, South
Carolina (February 23, 1995); Savannah, Georgia (February 28,
1995); Beaufort, South Carolina (March 1, 1995); and Hilton Head,
South Carolina (March 2, 1995). Comments and responses to comments
are in Appendix I.
Changes from the draft eis are indicated in this
final eis by vertical bars in the margin. The bars are marked
TC for technical changes, TE for editorial changes, or, if the
change was made in response to a public comment, the designated comment number as
listed in Appendix I. Many of the technical changes were the
result of the availability of updated information since publication
of the draft eis.
In May 1995, DOE announced its intention to revise
the moderate treatment alternative to include supercompaction,
size reduction (e.g., sorting, shredding, melting), and incineration
at an offsite commercial treatment facility (60 FR 26417, May
17, 1995). The proposed change from the draft eis concerned the
location of, but not the technology used in the treatment of about
40 percent of the expected volume of low-level wastes at SRS.
DOE provided an opportunity for public comment through June 12,
1995. No comments were received.
The proposed low-level waste volume reduction initiative is included in this final eis, and as announced in the May 1995 Federal Register notice, it is subject to competitive procurement practices under procedures described in DOE's NEPA implementing regulations (10 CFR 1021.216). A Request for Proposals was sent to a selected group of 47 potential bidders on May 22, 1995 with a closing date of July 20, 1995. Work under any contract awarded would begin no earlier than the start of fiscal year 1996.
In June 1995, DOE published a draft of the Environmental
Assessment for the Off-Site Volume Reduction of Low-Level Radioactive
Waste from the Savannah River Site (DOE/ea-1061) for preapproval
review by potentially affected states. The environmental assessment
describes a proposed short-term temporary method of volume reduction
for low-level waste by a commercial facility in Oak Ridge, Tennessee.
This action would reduce the volume of low-level waste at SRS
in an expedient and cost-effective manner over the near term (prior
to the start of fiscal year of 1996). Because the impacts of
the proposed action would be very small and the proposed action
would not limit the selection of alternatives under consideration,
this proposed volume reduction action qualifies as an interim
action under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) regulations
(40 CFR 1506.1).
DOE prepared this eis in accordance with the provisions
of NEPA, Council on Environmental Quality regulations (40 CFR
1500-1508), and DOE NEPA Implementing Procedures (10 CFR
1021). This eis identifies the methods used in the analyses and
the sources of information. In addition, it incorporates, directly
or by reference, information from other ongoing studies. The
document is structured as follows:
Chapter 1 provides background information, sets forth the purpose and need for action, and describes related actions evaluated in other NEPA analyses.
Chapter 2 describes the alternatives, identifies the preferred alternative, and provides a summary comparison of the environmental impacts of each alternative.
Chapter 3 describes the environment at SRS potentially affected by the alternatives addressed.
Chapter 4 provides a detailed assessment of the potential
environmental impacts of the alternatives. It also assesses unavoidable
adverse impacts and irreversible
or irretrievable commitments of resources, and cumulative impacts.
Chapter 5 identifies regulatory requirements and
evaluates their applicability to the alternatives considered.
Appendix A provides waste forecasts (i.e., estimates
of the expected, minimum, and maximum amounts of waste that could
be managed over the 30year analysis period at SRS).
Appendix B describes existing and proposed facilities
that would be needed to implement the alternatives.
Appendix C describes the cost methodology and its
application in estimating costs for facilities and processes to
treat, store, and dispose of wastes.
Appendix D discusses emerging or innovative waste
management technologies that were considered but rejected for
use on SRS wastes. The technologies are in bench, pilot, or demonstration
stages of development and are not likely to be available for implementation
in the next decade, but might be suitable for implementation at
some time during the 30year period addressed in this eis.
Appendix E furnishes a compilation of supplemental
technical data used to prepare this eis.
Appendix F describes accident scenarios related to
the facilities that could be used to manage waste at SRS. It
summarizes the potential consequences and risks to workers, the
public, and the environment from the alternatives discussed in
Chapter 2.
Appendix G is a compilation of the appendixes included
in the Federal Facility Agreement and provides information on
the commitments made by SRS to regulatory agencies to manage wastes
and spills.
Appendix H compares DOE and Nuclear Regulatory Commission
low-level waste requirements.
Appendix I contains copies of letters and hearing transcripts from the public comment period, and DOE's responses to those comments.
Appendix J is a copy of the Protected Species Survey prepared in April 1995 in support of the draft eis and agency confirmation that endangered species will not be impacted.
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
