Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Continued Operation of the Pantex Plant

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION

This chapter provides background information to facilitate a general understanding of operations conducted at Pantex Plant, the circumstances that resulted in the preparation of this Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), and the types of analyses that are presented in subsequent chapters. Chapter 1 begins with an overview of Pantex Plant, including a brief history and description of its current mission. Following this overview is a discussion of the evolution of this EIS, the decision making process, significant issues addressed in the EIS, related environmental studies, interagency cooperation, and agency consultations for implementing the alternatives. The chapter concludes with a summary of the subjects covered in other chapters of this EIS.

1.1 Introduction

The Department of Energy (DOE) (the Department) is the Federal agency responsible for ensuring the safety, reliability, and effectiveness of the Nation's nuclear deterrent. The Department's Stockpile Stewardship and Management Program integrates the expertise and capabilities of three national laboratories, four plant sites, and a field testing site to accomplish this mission. Pantex Plant is an essential element in the program and its continued operation and associated storage of nuclear components are the subjects of this Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). A major aspect of this EIS is to assess the environmental impacts of increasing the number of plutonium components (called "pits") that are to be placed in interim storage as a result of ongoing weapons dismantlement operations. This chapter provides the foundation for understanding the nature of Pantex Plant and its specific missions, the decisions that the Department faces, and the facts that bear upon these decisions. The chapter begins with a site description and a discussion of the history and mission of Pantex Plant. This is followed by a summary of the origin of this study and changes that have occurred as the EIS has evolved. Subsequent sections address the decision making process and decisions that are to be made, public involvement in identification of issues through the scoping process, the interagency cooperation in the development of this EIS, and agency consultations for implementing the alternatives.

1.2 Pantex Plant Overview

Pantex Plant is located in the Texas Panhandle, approximately 27 kilometers (17 miles) northeast of Amarillo, Texas (Figure 1.2-1). Pantex Plant is bounded on the north by Texas Farm-to-Market Road (FM) 293, on the east by FM 2373, and on the west by FM 683. To the south, DOE-owned property extends to within 1.6 kilometers (1 mile) of United States (U.S.) Highway 60 (Figure 1.2-2). Pantex Plant Site consists of land owned and leased by DOE. DOE owns approximately 3,683 hectares (9,100 acres) at Pantex Plant proper and 436 hectares (1,077 acres) of detached property, called Pantex Lake, approximately 4 kilometers (2.5 miles) northeast of the main plant site. Pantex Plant operations near its southern boundary require DOE to lease approximately 2,347 hectares (5,800 acres) of land between the plant and U.S. Highway 60 from Texas Tech University (TTU), primarily for safety and security buffer areas. DOE also leases a small facility at the Amarillo International Airport for its own transportation use. Approximately 809 hectares (2,000 acres) of Pantex Plant proper are used for industrial operations, the Burning Ground, and firing sites. Some land not actively used for plant operations is provided to TTU for agricultural purposes through a service agreement. The amount of land used for agricultural purposes is variable and subject to periodic change. Approximately 2,596 hectares (6,421 acres) of land were included in the service agreement as of April 1995.

Figure 1.2-1.--Location of Pantex Site in the Texas Panhandle. (.pdf)

Figure 1.2-2.--Location of Key Areas at Pantex Plant Site.

Approximately 476 buildings containing 230,674 square meters (2,483,020 square feet) are located on DOE-owned property. An additional 144 structures, containing 39,928 square meters (429,780 square feet), support the principal operations. The operations that take place in these buildings and structures can generally be divided into four broad categories; production, storage, administration, and support. The production category includes assembly/disassembly and applied technology buildings, representing approximately 33 percent of the site's total building floor area. Storage buildings range from weapons and component staging magazines to portable waste storage dwellings, accounting for approximately 24 percent of the site's total building floor area. The administrative and support categories account for 30 and 13 percent of the total building floor area on the site, respectively. Pantex Plant currently employs about 3,800 people. In fiscal year 1995, the operating budget was $268 million.

1.2.1 History of Pantex Plant

Pantex Plant was originally built for the U.S. Army during the early days of World War II with the mission of producing conventional munitions bombs and artillery projectiles. After the war, the plant was deactivated and lay vacant until 1949, when Texas Technological College (now TTU) purchased the site for $1.00.

PANTEX PLANT PROGRAMMATIC MISSION STATEMENT

Fabricate chemical high explosive components for nuclear weapons.
Assemble nuclear weapons for the Nation's stockpile.
Maintain and evaluate nuclear weapons in the stockpile.
Disassemble nuclear weapons being retired from the stockpile.
Store plutonium pits from dismantled weapons on an interim basis.

In 1951, the Atomic Energy Commission (predecessor of DOE) asked the Army to reclaim the main plant and surrounding land under the recapture clause of the sale agreement. Upon transfer to the Atomic Energy Commission, Pantex Plant was used to assemble nuclear weapons. Originally, there were four plants performing the weapons assembly and modification missions. However, between 1965 and 1975, the plants at Clarksville, Tennessee; Medina, Texas; and Burlington, Iowa were shut down. Since then, all nuclear weapons assembly and disassembly operations have occurred at Pantex Plant.

1.2.2 Current Mission of Pantex Plant

Pantex Plant is where DOE fulfills its responsibilities regarding the assembly and disassembly of nuclear weapons, certain maintenance and modification activities regarding the nuclear weapons stockpile, stockpile evaluation, quality assurance testing of weapon components, and research and production of high explosive(s) (HE) components for nuclear weapons. Related activities at Pantex Plant include certain quality assurance evaluations of weapons; research and development activities supporting nuclear weapons; demilitarization and sanitization of weapon parts, equipment, and related materials; waste management; environmental restoration; and onsite transportation, as required. While most of the work currently taking place at Pantex Plant relates to the disassembly of nuclear weapons, the plant must be capable of responding to any mix of assembly, disassembly, modification, or quality assurance operations that may be necessary to maintain the stockpile in the future.

Figure 1.2.2-1 describes the design elements of a typical nuclear weapon and how they interact to create a nuclear explosion. The nonnuclear components, weapon parts, equipment, and related materials resulting from weapons disassembly are demilitarized and sanitized. Activities at Pantex Plant include recycling, salvaging, and disposal, including through commercial firms. Examples of these nonnuclear components include HE, electronics, and structural parts.

The nuclear components resulting from weapons disassembly include pits, highly enriched uranium (HEU) assemblies, radioisotopic thermoelectric generators (RTGs) (encapsulated plutonium heat sources), and classified components made of or containing depleted uranium and tritium. The pit is composed of a plutonium metal core surrounded by a hermetically sealed, nonradioactive outer case. The pits are currently placed in interim storage at Pantex Plant in Modified Richmond and Steel Arch Construction (SAC) magazines.

1.2.2.1 Pantex Plant Operations

A brief description of current operations and other related activities at Pantex Plant is provided in the following sections. More detailed explanations of operations, activities, and facilities may be found in the Pantex Plant Programmatic Information Document (Pantex 1996b). Assembly of Nuclear Weapons

The assembly, modification, and repair of nuclear weapons have occurred at Pantex Plant since the early 1950's. These operations are performed in the bays and cells of Zone 12, and include HE components prepared in Zone 11. Locations of these zones are shown in Figure 1.2-2.

Weapons assembly requires written, prescribed steps to combine separate parts or subassemblies to form a new weapon. Complete weapons assembly is accomplished in the following stages:

Physics Package assembly.
Mechanical and Electronic Components assembly.
Final Package or Ultimate User Package assembly.

The physics package is a subassembly combining HE components (produced at Pantex Plant) and nuclear components (manufactured at other sites) within a protective shell. Physics package assembly entails bonding or mating the main charge subassemblies to a nuclear pit and then inserting this subassembly into a case along with other components. Mechanical and electronic components assembly entails placing the physics package in a warhead case and then installing the components for the arming, fusing, and firing systems; the neutron generator; and the gas transfer system. The final package assembly involves installing additional components and packaging the weapon for shipment.

Currently, the only weapons assembly activities in progress at Pantex Plant are modifications (retrofits and rebuilds) for weapons remaining in the stockpile and the assembly of Joint Test Assemblies (JTAs). JTAs are assemblies of components in weapon-like configurations that are delivered to the Department of Defense (DOD) for flight testing under field conditions. In these JTAs, the physics package, consisting of the cased HE and nuclear materials components of the nuclear weapon, is replaced with electronic equipment that monitors the desired test functions and simulates the unit mass.

As previously mentioned, Pantex Plant would continue to maintain the capabilities necessary to assemble new nuclear weapons in the future.

Figure 1.2.2-1.--Nuclear Weapons Design (.pdf)

Disassembly of Nuclear Weapons Weapons returned to Pantex Plant for disassembly are received, inspected, and staged in magazines at Zone 4 West preparatory to beginning the actual disassembly process. The disassembly of nuclear weapons is performed within the bays and cells of Zone 12. Disassembly includes the following activities:

Weapons staging in Zone 4, which includes inspection and verification after receipt from DOE.
A variety of specialty operations (e.g., X-ray examinations, leak testing, coding, packaging, painting, verification, etc.) in special purpose bays.
Mechanical disassembly operations in bays.
Nuclear disassembly operations in cells.
Demilitarization and sanitization of weapon components, which includes grinding, crushing, and open-air burning.
Packaging and shipping HEU and tritium components to Oak Ridge Reservation (ORR) and Savannah River Site (SRS).
Interim storage of pits at Pantex Plant.
Segregation of waste products into nonhazardous, hazardous, low-level radioactive, and low-level mixed waste categories.

Final package dismantlement begins in an assembly/disassembly bay by performing a series of verification steps to ensure that the weapon is in a safe condition and internal components are intact. The steps include tritium monitoring, electrical system test, gamma spectrometry safeguards verification, and a radiographic verification of the weapon status system.

Next, warheads are removed from the final package container and the mechanical assembly is separated. The mechanical weapon disassembly entails removing the components for arming, fusing, and firing systems; the neutron generators; the gas transfer system; and the outer weapon case.

Finally, the physics package dismantlement is accomplished in an assembly/disassembly cell by opening the case, removing the HE/pit subassembly and other components, and separating the HE main charge from the nuclear pit. The physics package may require a radiographic inspection for an evaluation before disassembly. The balance of the weapon dismantlement function involves managing the various weapon parts such as mechanical, gas transfer, and electrical components. These parts may be recertified and staged for reuse, shipped to the originating vendor site for evaluation or disposition, or demilitarized and sanitized at Pantex Plant. A diagrammatic representation of the weapons dismantlement process is shown in Figure 1.2.2.1-1.

Many nuclear weapon components and items cannot be considered for discard or disposal until demilitarization and sanitization activities are performed. Demilitarization and sanitization are manufacturing activities used to remove classified and other nuclear proliferation-sensitive information. These activities include thermal shock, thermal treating, machining, granulation, melting, mechanical crushing, fluid jet machining, chemical dissolution, grinding, cutting, or chipping and actuation.

Figure 1.2.2.1-1.--Weapons Dismantlement at Pit Storage and Pantex Plant. (.pdf)

Modification and Maintenance of Nuclear Weapons

Weapons remaining in the stockpile that require maintenance or modification are returned to Pantex Plant. Modification and maintenance activities can range from replacement of limited life components to almost total rebuilds for the purpose of retrofitting or upgrading the weapons (e.g., for improved safety or enhanced security features). Stockpile Evaluation

Stockpile evaluation involves the disassembly and evaluation of pre-selected weapons returned from DOD. The main purpose of stockpile evaluation is to determine the reliability of the weapon system based on the test results of a representative sample of each weapon system in the stockpile. The weapons returned for evaluation are divided into two categories, laboratory tests and flight tests. Following evaluation, some of the weapons are rebuilt and returned to the stockpile. As part of the laboratory tests, select weapon systems are exposed to variable temperatures for prolonged time periods to simulate environmental conditions that the weapons could be subject to during their lifetimes. This type of test is referred to as aging studies. Aging studies are conducted in environmental chambers located in Buildings 12-94 and 12-104A. Currently, these environmental chambers are not in use. Prior to use, these environmental chambers will be subject to review under NEPA and site safety management systems. Quality Assurance Testing of Weapons Components

To maintain the reliability of the Nation's nuclear weapons stockpile, a certain number of preselected weapons from each type of weapon are returned to Pantex Plant each year for component surveillance testing and evaluation. Weapons are evaluated in a selective dismantlement process whereby certain components are physically removed from the weapon, assembled into specified test configurations, and subjected to electrical and/or explosives testing. Research and Production of High Explosives and Weapons Components

Pantex Plant researches the physical and chemical characteristics of the used parts in nuclear weapons. Highly specialized explosive main charges and initiation systems are required for a weapon to produce a nuclear explosion. Research at Pantex Plant includes the use of insensitive HE for increased safety as well as refinement of HE manufacturing methods and safety procedures. Pantex Plant performs HE synthesis, formulation, machining, extrusion, testing, process development, and analytical operations in performing its HE research and development and production missions. These operations are performed in Zone 11 or Zone 12 using HE materials stored in Zone 4 East.

The products of manufacturing operations are explosive main charges, small explosive components, and other highly specialized explosive materials. Main charge subassemblies are emplaced in the physics package of a nuclear explosive during the weapon assembly process. Various small explosive subassemblies and pellets are produced from explosives, metal or plastic components, electrical components, hardware, assembly materials, and small explosive components that are manufactured offsite. Punch and die pressing, laser welding, explosive extrusion loading, and mechanical assembly of HE are some of the functions carried out at Pantex Plant. Currently, most explosives components are made for modification, random testing, and maintenance of stockpile weapons.

In March 1994, a formal literature search was conducted to investigate treatment/processing methods for HE other than OB/OD. The review identified processes currently in use (e.g., OB/OD and chemical treatment), as well as those in various stages of development. A Best Available Control Technology (BACT) analysis for air emissions from explosives treatment at Pantex Plant Burning Ground was conducted and documented in a DOE letter to the Texas Natural Resources Conservation Commission (TNRCC) dated October 15, 1993. The BACT review concluded that controlled open thermal treatment with existing administrative controls constituted BACT.

In a subsequent study, the alternatives were determined to be either technically infeasible for Pantex Plant explosives or economically infeasible on a cost-per-unit mass of air pollutants that could be controlled (Radian 1994:1). The alternative emerging explosive treatment technologies were identified as: advanced thermal treatment methods (i.e., molten salt destruction, supercritical water oxidation, and advanced plasma incineration), chemical/biological treatment methods (e.g., base hydrolysis, chemical/electrochemical oxidation, and biological oxidation), and explosives recovery/reuse technologies (e.g., critical fluid extraction, explosives as supplemental fuels, and solvent recovery).

Since 1994, the development of refined procedures for HE chemical treatment has warranted the further investigation of a base hydrolysis treatability study program to be housed in Building 11-36. Though the most commonly generated HEs resulting from dismantlement processes are HMX based, this treatability study can accommodate other types of HE (e.g., RDX, TNT, HNS, TATB, and some of their respective formulations).

Alternative methods to open burning-open detonation of HE are summarized in appendix G. Recycling and commercial use of Pantex Plant explosives are currently utilized to reduce Burning Ground activities. Interim Storage of Pits

Once the pit is removed from the weapon, it is stored at Pantex Plant as an interim measure. The term "interim storage" does not refer to a specific timeframe, but rather to the interval of time which will occur until a Record of Decision (ROD) is made on long-term storage and the site and facilities selected in that ROD are ready to receive the pits. The decision on the site and facilities for long-term pit storage will be based on analyses in the Long-Term Storage and Disposition of Weapons-Usable Fissile Materials Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (S&D PEIS) (DOE/EIS-0229).

As of August 1996, approximately 9,000 pits had accumulated at Pantex Plant as a result of dismantlement activities. Pantex Plant has the authority to provide interim storage for up to 12,000 pits. Decisions regarding interim pit storage beyond this level will be made as a result of this EIS. Pantex Plant has a sufficient number of magazines to safely accommodate 20,000 pits. Eighteen Modified Richmond and 42 SAC magazines have been identified for storage of pits. Each Modified Richmond magazine can accommodate up to 440 pits and each SAC magazine can hold up to 392 pits. The designation of 60 magazines provides for more than 20,000 storage spaces to allow for operational flexibility. Some of the excess magazine capacity may be used for staging of weapons or components. The Environmental Assessment for Interim Storage of Plutonium Components at Pantex (DOE/EA-0812) (DOE 1994w) provides a more complete discussion of the SAC and Modified Richmond magazines, as well as a general description of pit storage configurations (DOE 1994w).

The pits removed from weapons are currently packaged in AL-R8 storage containers. These containers were previously used for both transportation and storage. DOE discontinued using them for transportation in 1990, and they are currently used solely for interim storage of pits. A new, more robust storage and transport container, known as AT-400A, is being developed and tested for transportation and long-term storage. Scheduled for use beginning in 1997, the container design incorporates upcoming, more stringent regulatory requirements for transportation. The design of the AT-400A package will meet the latest Type B package certification testing requirements. The AL-R8 and AT-400A containers are further described in volume II, appendix F.

The pit storage containers would be stored in a multiple stacking configuration of containers placed horizontally on steel pallets. Pallets for this configuration have been designed to ensure structural integrity and stability in a maximum credible earthquake scenario. The pallets are placed in storage using a commercially available rotating turret forklift. The forklift has been modified to provide special shielding that reduces operator exposure to extremely low levels of radiation. This electric forklift would be used for storage, retrieval, and inventory operations.

Automated Guided Vehicles (AGVs) have also been developed to place pits in storage facilities and to assist in taking inventories using bar code readers. The use of AGVs virtually eliminates any need for humans to enter any pit storage facilities.

Operations in the storage facilities include periodic inventory and inspections. Inspections coincide with planned inventory activities (generally every 18 months) and consist of a visual inspection of facility conditions and container surfaces, as well as removal of selected containers for surveillance tests. Container integrity is further evaluated via inspection (using both destructive and nondestructive evaluation techniques) of the container surfaces (for corrosion), weld integrity, and integrity of insulation and plastic parts. Both the shielded forklift and the AGVs can carry a bar code reader, camera, and gamma spectrometer to allow inventory and inspection to be performed without operator exposure to radiation. Transportation of Weapons and Components

Pantex Plant is involved in the transportation of many different types of hazardous materials. These include nuclear explosives, nuclear components, HE components and materials, tritium, industrial chemicals, and other hazardous materials. Typical vehicles and equipment used in transport operations include forklifts, hardened trailers, Safe Secure Tractor Trailers, flatbed trailers, vans, trucks, pallet jacks, and tow motors. Approximately 30,000 transfers of radiological and explosive materials occur each year at Pantex Plant. In addition, Pantex Plant ships and receives radiological components or materials to and from other sites. To ensure the safety of operations, drivers are carefully trained, certified, subjected to physical examinations, and routinely screened for drugs and alcohol. Further information on transportation is provided in sections 4.12 and 4.16 of this volume of the EIS. Decontamination and Decommissioning Pantex Plant is currently planning to streamline operations and reduce maintenance and operating costs by consolidating operations into fewer buildings. At this time, no plans have been made for the decommissioning of any facilities at Pantex Plant. The designation of facilities is pending decisions regarding the future of Pantex Plant being made in the Stockpile Stewardship and Management Programmatic EIS (SSM PEIS) (see section 1.7).

Facilities at the plant are potentially historic resources in terms of both their age and their role in the Cold War. In accordance with the Pantex Plant Cultural Resource Management Plan being developed, the plant will consult with the Texas State Historic Preservation Office prior to initiation of any decontamination and decommissioning activity to ensure that no historic facilities are inadvertently destroyed. Separate National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4341) documentation will be prepared when plans are developed for specific decontamination and decommissioning projects.

1.2.2.2 Environmental Protection Activities

The Environmental Protection Program is continuously improving Pantex Plant's ability to ensure that missions are performed in a safe and environmentally protective manner. Currently, the program consists of nine elements:

Public communication, to inform and involve stakeholders on issues of concern.
Oversight, to work closely with State agencies in verifying and addressing impacts of facility operations to the environment.
Quality assurance, to ensure integration of quality assurance practices in environmental protection.
Compliance, to integrate environmental protection into production line and planning activities.
Pollution prevention and waste minimization, to encourage waste elimination, waste minimization, air emissions reduction, material substitution, recycling, alternative disposal method studies, energy conservation, and water conservation.
Environmental monitoring, to document emissions and effluents.
Cultural resources, to identify and manage archeological and historic resources at Pantex Plant.
Natural resources, to improve management of lands, surface water and playa wetlands, groundwater, soils, air quality, and flora and fauna at Pantex Plant.

Each of these elements is discussed in detail in the 1994 Environmental Report for Pantex Plant (DOE 1995b). The DOE Amarillo Area Office is initiating the development of a resource stewardship strategy to guide future planning and management of all environmental resources at Pantex Plant.

Because of the extent of current and planned site investigations and corrective actions, the environmental restoration program is described separately in the section that follows.

1.2.2.3 Environmental Restoration

Environmental restoration activities involve determining the nature and extent of contamination, and performing remediation as needed, in compliance with all appropriate regulatory requirements.

In 1989, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) conducted a Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) (42 U.S.C. 6901, et seq.) facility assessment to identify solid waste management units from which hazardous constituents may migrate. A total of 144 solid waste management units were originally identified at Pantex Plant. These have been organized into 14 groups for corrective action. To evaluate compliance with provisions of the RCRA permit, DOE conducts assessments and audits, and TNRCC and EPA conduct independent inspections. The environmental restoration activities at Pantex Plant will continue until all remediation work is accomplished in accordance with regulatory requirements, regardless of decisions which may be made on other aspects of the plant's mission (see section 4.5 in this volume and appendix I in volume II for further details).

Pantex Plant was placed on the National Priorities List in 1994 under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) (42 U.S.C. 9608). Pantex Plant is currently in the process of negotiating an agreement with EPA and TNRCC to integrate both RCRA and CERCLA requirements into a comprehensive site-wide strategy. The majority of environmental restoration activities are expected to be completed by the year 2000.

Although this EIS does not provide project-specific NEPA documentation for these CERCLA projects, overall effects of these projects are included in this EIS for complete assessment and full disclosure of the cumulative impacts of all operations at Pantex Plant.

1.2.2.4 Waste Management Activities

The types of wastestreams generated and managed by Pantex Plant include low-level radioactive waste (LLW), low-level mixed waste (LLMW), hazardous waste (HW), nonhazardous waste (NHW), and recyclable materials. See volume II, appendix G for a discussion of recyclable materials. Three drums of transuranic (TRU) waste were generated in 1993 as a result of an incident during weapons dismantlement. The waste is stored in an appropriately monitored facility awaiting shipment to an approved offsite management facility. No TRU waste is generated on the site as a result of normal operations.

LLW generated, processed, and stored at Pantex Plant is regularly transported to the Nevada Test Site (NTS) for disposal. Building 12-42 provides processing capabilities for LLW.

LLMW generated, processed, and treated is generally stored onsite until it can be shipped offsite for disposal. Building 11-9 and the Burning Ground provide onsite treatment capabilities for LLMW. In 1994, 32.6 cubic meters (42.6 cubic yards) of LLMW was transported to a commercial disposal facility in Utah. In 1996, 70 cubic meters (91 cubic yards) of LLMW were disposed at the same facility. Another shipment in September 1996 further reduced LLMW inventories by a total of 50 percent. Additionally, Pantex Plant is capable of treating and processing (such as compaction and repackaging) hazardous waste including LLMW in tanks and containers.

HW generated, processed, and stored at Pantex Plant is transported by commercial vendors for disposal. The Burning Ground burns HE and HE-contaminated wastes in accordance with regulatory permits.

NHW generated is managed through both onsite and offsite facilities. NHW, including oils and debris, are shipped offsite for disposal. Ordinary trash is either recycled (e.g., aluminum and paper) or shipped to the Amarillo Landfill through commercial vendors for disposal. Construction debris is disposed onsite in a landfill located in Zone 10.

Other types of waste, including asbestos, polychlorinated biphenyls, and medical wastes, are generated, processed, and stored prior to disposal through commercial vendors specifically licensed to manage each waste.

Sanitary and industrial wastewater is treated onsite in the Waste Water Treatment Facility. Industrial wastewater from production and manufacturing of HE components is filtered in Buildings 12-43 and 11-50. All wastewater discharges are disposed of onsite (section 4.6.1.1).

Pantex Plant has a continuing program of pollution prevention and waste avoidance initiatives. These include source reduction, process changes, material substitution, and administrative policies that not only reduce waste and pollution, but also result in cost savings for taxpayers. In 1996, the Pollution Prevention and Waste Minimization (PP/WM) program at Pantex Plant received the President's "Closing the Circle" Award for achievements in recycling and waste prevention. This program saved approximately $4.5 million of taxpayer money in 1995. Appendix G in volume II presents details of the program.

The Environmental Information Document provides a detailed description of waste streams and waste management practices and facilities (Pantex 1996). The Federal Facility Compliance Act Agreed Order and approved Site Treatment Plan-Compliance Plan contain detailed descriptions of waste treatability groups and waste management milestones. Waste treatment, storage, and disposal operations are contingent on programmatic decisions resulting from the WM PEIS.

1.2.2.5 Facility Construction and Upgrade

Several operations essential to the assembly, disassembly, and maintenance of weapon systems are currently housed in outmoded facilities. To continue Pantex Plant's mission, it is necessary to shift these operations to other existing and newer facilities or to construct new facilities that would maximize worker safety and allow for greater efficiency in meeting all regulatory requirements. An average of one or two new construction projects are funded annually. In 1995, Pantex Plant received $26.4 million for construction and equipment. The Programmatic Information Document provides more detail on future construction/modification projects (Pantex 1996b). Those projects that are at a stage of development where sufficient detail is known to perform a NEPA analysis are discussed in this EIS (see volume II, appendix H). As plans for other projects become more detailed and ready for the decision making process, NEPA review will be conducted prior to authorization.

1.3 Evolution of this Environmental Impact Statement

The operations of Pantex Plant were assessed previously in a site-wide EIS (DOE/EIS-0098) published in 1983 (DOE 1983a). The scope of operations at Pantex Plant included the staging of pits prior to transfer to other DOE sites for processing. A new site-wide EIS was in the planning stage, but had not been scheduled, when pit transfer activities were suspended for operational reasons and, later, disarmament commitments. The Environmental Assessment for Interim Storage of Plutonium Components at Pantex (DOE/EA-0812) assessed the impacts of interim storage (DOE 1994w).

Prior to the release of this Environmental Assessment, the Secretary of Energy advanced the schedule for the planned Pantex Plant EIS and committed the Department to consider alternate sites for interim storage (Letter 1994). Additionally, the Secretary of Energy directed that the S&D PEIS be prepared to analyze the long-term storage of plutonium in all forms, including pits, and the ultimate disposition of the material. Additional details on the evolution of the S&D PEIS are provided in section 1.7.3.

Volume I, chapter 2 of the SSM PEIS discusses in detail the national security policies, responsibilities, strategies, and directives placed on DOE. For the reasonably foreseeable future, the START II protocol is most useful in helping define a specific time period to bound the reasonably foreseeable future.

The START I Treaty and the START II protocol only control the number of strategic nuclear weapons that can be loaded on treaty-specified and verified strategic missiles and bombers. These nuclear weapons are limited to 6,000 by the START I Treaty and 3,500 by the START II protocol. The treaties do not control the total stockpile or the composition of strategic and nonstrategic nuclear weapons. The U.S. stockpile will be larger than 6,000 under START I and 3,500 under START II since the stockpile includes retaining weapons for nonstrategic nuclear forces, including DOD operational spares and spares to replace weapons attrited by DOE surveillance testing.

1.4 The Decision Making Process and Decisions to be Made

This Pantex Plant EIS provides both DOE and the public with information on the potential environmental impacts associated with the Proposed Action and Alternatives. This EIS covers all current and reasonably foreseeable facilities and activities at Pantex Plant, interim storage requirements for pits from weapons dismantlement, and the transportation of classified components shipped from Pantex Plant. This EIS was also scoped to address alternate locations for interim pit storage (i.e., until longer-term storage decisions are made and implemented). Accordingly, it also addresses potential environmental impacts at NTS, SRS, Hanford Site, and Kirtland Air Force Base (KAFB) should one of these installations be chosen as an alternative site for the interim storage of up to 20,000 pits.

There are two additional DOE NEPA documents that address the storage of pits. The SSM PEIS addresses the long-term storage of pits that will be needed for national security requirements (strategic reserve pits). The S&D PEIS addresses storage of all pits, including pits that have already been, or later may be, declared surplus to national security requirements, and the approach for dispositioning surplus pits.

The Proposed Action in this EIS was designed specifically to encompass the interim storage of pits from weapons dismantlement until such time as longer-term decisions regarding storage and disposition could be made and implemented. The Preferred Alternative for the interim storage of pits in this EIS is to continue to store them at Pantex Plant. The Preferred Alternative in the Draft SSM PEIS provides for the long-term storage of strategic reserve pits at whatever site is selected for the assembly/disassembly function in the future weapons complex; the Draft SSM PEIS identifies Pantex Plant as the preferred site for that function.

The Draft S&D PEIS analyzed a number of alternatives and suboptions for the storage of pits and other forms of surplus material pending disposition, but it did not identify a Preferred Alternative for the storage of pits. Several alternative sites, including Pantex Plant, were analyzed for the mission of storing surplus material pending disposition. The Draft S&D PEIS contemplated the possible transfer of surplus material to Pantex Plant for storage around the year 2004, after upgrades to existing storage facilities in Zone 12 had been completed. The Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site (RFETS) was identified in the Draft S&D PEIS as one source of this surplus material.

The Final S&D PEIS will include an alternative that is a refinement of the Draft S&D PEIS alternatives described above. Under this alternative, pits could be transferred from RFETS to Pantex Plant as early as 1997 and stored temporarily in existing Zone 4 facilities until the upgraded facilities in Zone 12 are available. The environmental impacts associated with transferring surplus pits from RFETS to Pantex Plant, including the impacts of their storage at Pantex Plant, will be included in the Final S&D PEIS. The potential addition of RFETS pits at Pantex Plant would not exceed the storage limit of 20,000 pits proposed and analyzed in this EIS. Moreover, surplus RFETS pits that could come to Pantex Plant would have the same characteristics, as analyzed in the S&D PEIS, as pits currently or previously stored at Pantex Plant. (Refer to sections 1.7.2 and 1.7.3 for more information on the SSM PEIS and the S&D PEIS, respectively.) If this alternative were selected in the ROD for the S&D PEIS, surplus pits already at Pantex Plant would continue to be stored there pending disposition and, in addition, surplus pits from RFETS would be transferred to Pantex Plant in the near term for storage, also pending disposition.

At this time DOE projects that the Records of Decision (RODs) for both the SSM PEIS and the S&D PEIS will be issued in late 1996 or early 1997, at or about the same time as the ROD for this EIS, and that decisions on the longer-term storage of pits will be made in the RODs of the two PEISs. As described above, if DOE selects the Pantex Plant storage alternatives in the SSM PEIS and the S&D PEIS, strategic reserve pits would be stored at Pantex Plant indefinitely and surplus pits (including the pits currently at RFETS) would be stored at Pantex Plant until DOE implements decisions regarding their disposition. The ROD for this EIS will take into consideration the decision-making process for the PEISs when making a decision on the interim storage of pits.

However, if there is a significant delay in RODs for either PEIS, or if DOE does not make a decision on the long-term storage of pits in those RODs, then a decision will be needed on the location of interim storage of pits, uninformed by a decision on long-term storage. In any event, this EIS was completed with the analysis of interim storage alternatives, including addressing the issues and comments received from the public on this EIS, to support a decision relating to the storage of pits until a long-term storage decision has been made and implemented.

DOE encourages interested parties to comment, during the period between issuance of the Final PEISs and issuance of the RODs, on the Preferred Alternative for the SSM PEIS and the alternatives for the S&D PEIS as they affect the storage of pits at Pantex Plant.

The DOE decision-making process for the interim storage of pits will consider the analysis presented in this Final EIS along with mission requirements, costs, other technical factors, the national interest, and public input. The Secretary of Energy will then issue a ROD. The ROD may be issued no sooner than 30 days after the Final EIS. The ROD will explain all factors, including environmental impacts, that DOE considered in reaching its decision. The ROD will specify the alternative or alternatives that are considered to be environmentally preferable.

If the selected alternative is different from the environmentally preferred alternative, the ROD will present the rationale for the Department's selection. Specifically, the ROD will document the decision as to how operations at Pantex Plant would be conducted, at which site(s) interim pit storage should be performed and in what quantity, and what mitigative measures should be taken. As discussed in section 3.1, the ROD may combine aspects of various alternatives in the decision.

If mitigation measures are adopted as part of the agency's decision, these will be summarized in the ROD, as applicable, and included in a Mitigation Action Plan. The Mitigation Action Plan would explain how and when mitigation measures will be implemented. The Mitigation Action Plan must be in place prior to taking any action that is the subject of a mitigation commitment.

1.5 Comment Period, Public Hearings, and the Analysis of Comments

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. A Notice of Availability of the Draft EIS was published in the Federal Register (61 FR 15232) on April 5, 1996. The comment period for the Draft EIS began on April 5, 1996, and originally was to end on July 5, 1996. However, at the request of stakeholders in the Amarillo, Texas area, the ending date was extended to July 12, 1996, for a comment period of 98 days. Any comments received after that date were included to the extent practicable.

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. In addition, a separate Technical Exchange Meeting was held in Amarillo, Texas, with representatives of the State of Texas, City of Amarillo, Panhandle Water Conservation District No. 3, the University Consortium (Texas Tech University, Texas A&M University, University of Texas, and West Texas A&M University), Amarillo Economic Development Corporation, Pantex Plant Citizens Advisory Board, and members of the public.

All public meeting comments were combined with comments received by all other means (e.g., hand-ins, faxes, letters, e-mail, etc.) during the public comment period. All comments were categorized by subject area and were considered for potential changes or additions to the EIS. For further information, see volume III of this EIS.

1.6 Changes Since the Issuance of the Draft EIS

Since the March 1996 issuance of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Continued Operation of the Pantex Plant and Associated Storage of Nuclear Weapon Components, there have been several changes in information, regulatory status, and related EISs, as well as a revision of the Draft DOE Standard for Aircraft Crash Analysis. In addition, comments from agencies, organizations, and the public requested elaboration and additional assessment of numerous issues. These changes are reflected in this Final Pantex Plant EIS.

New and updated information has been included in the discussions for almost all environmental resources. The new information includes a different pit repackaging concept and a reduced scope for the proposed Hazardous Waste Treatment and Processing Facility (HWTPF). The new pit repackaging concept is still at a very early planning stage and is not detailed in this Final EIS. However, the foreseeable impacts have been bounded to the extent possible in the infrastructure, waste management, and human health sections. Appendix H includes discussion of both a large and a small version of the HWTPF. Since the Draft EIS, the smaller version has become the preferred alternative for this facility. The impacts of the larger version are still discussed in the appropriate sections of the EIS in order to bound the impacts. None of the new or updated information results in a significant difference in the impacts assessed.

The regulatory status of several permits has changed since the Draft EIS. The new permitted levels and resulting changes in operations have been taken into account in the assessment of impacts.

Updated information regarding related EISs has been added in the Summary, section 1.4, section 1.7, and in the discussions of cumulative impacts where appropriate. The information was updated in this EIS as a result of advances in the decision-making process in the related EISs.

The methodologies for assessing the risk of an aircraft crash and for assessing the cumulative impacts have changed to a degree since the Draft EIS. The aircraft crash methodology has been in development throughout the preparation of the Draft and Final EIS. The July 1996 Draft was used for this Final EIS. The assessment of cumulative impacts, which has been changed to more accurately reflect the potential impacts, is discussed in more detail in section 4.21 of volume I of the Final EIS.

The changes due to comments received during the comment period are detailed in volume III of the Final EIS and discussed briefly in the Summary.

1.7 Related National Environmental Policy Act Studies

There are several other ongoing NEPA documents for programs or activities that could also have impacts at Pantex Plant. These include the following:

The Waste Management PEIS for Managing Treatment, Storage, and Disposal of Radioactive and Hazardous Waste (WM PEIS).
The Long-Term Stockpile Stewardship and Management PEIS (formerly part of the Reconfiguration PEIS).
The Storage and Disposition of Weapons-Usable Fissile Materials PEIS.
The Site-Wide EIS for Continued Operation of the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL).
The EIS for the Nevada Test Site and Off-Site Locations in the State of Nevada.

Each of these documents is briefly described in subsections 1.7.1 through 1.7.5. The impacts of these programs on Pantex Plant are addressed in the "Cumulative Impacts" sections of this EIS to the extent that information relevant to Pantex Plant from the other documents is currently available.

1.7.1 The Waste Management Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for Managing Treatment, Storage, and Disposal of Radioactive and Hazardous Waste (DOE/EIS-0200)

DOE is preparing the WM PEIS to evaluate the potential environmental impacts of alternative configurations of DOE's waste treatment, storage, and disposal facilities (DOE 1995t). On the basis of the evaluations in the WM PEIS and other information, DOE will decide whether to consolidate the management of some or all of its five types of waste and, if it does select consolidation, the Department would also select sites that will manage each type of waste. The WM PEIS evaluates consolidation over the next 20 years. In contrast, the Pantex Plant EIS evaluates site-specific impacts over a 10-year period.

Of the 54 sites for which DOE has waste management responsibility, 17 are considered "major" DOE sites in the WM PEIS and are candidates to receive wastes generated at other sites, to host disposal facilities, or manage HLW. Pantex Plant is a major site considered in the WM PEIS and is a potential site for management of its own LLMW, LLW, and HW. Currently, Pantex Plant has only three drums of TRU waste and no HLW. The TRU waste is awaiting shipment to an approved offsite management and disposal facility. After the TRU waste is shipped offsite, Pantex Plant is not expected to handle TRU waste or HLW in the future. This is contingent upon decisions contained in the WM PEIS, SSM PEIS, and S&D PEIS.

To assist DOE in making decisions about whether and where to consolidate waste management, the WM PEIS considers 36 alternatives organized into four major alternative categories (No Action, Decentralized, Regionalized, and Centralized). The following bullets describe the alternative categories and how each alternative could impact waste management at Pantex Plant:

No Action alternatives involve the use of only existing or planned waste management facilities.

No Action status quo would be pursued. Only existing or currently planned (i.e., funded) facilities would be operated or constructed at Pantex Plant. Waste currently shipped offsite would continue to be shipped offsite.

Decentralized alternatives locate waste management facilities where waste is currently located or where it will be generated, treated, or disposed of in the future.

Decentralized Under this alternative, Pantex Plant would treat and dispose of its LLMW and LLW onsite. All HW would continue to be shipped to commercial facilities.

Regionalized alternatives locate waste management facilities at several sites throughout the Nation.

Regionalized Under a few alternatives, Pantex Plant would treat and/or dispose of all its LLMW and LLW onsite. However, under most alternatives, Pantex Plant would ship its LLMW and LLW to one or more of DOE's other sites for treatment and disposal. Under all alternatives, HW would continue to be sent to other DOE sites or commercial vendors.

Centralized alternatives locate large waste management facilities at only one or two sites.

Centralized Under all alternatives, Pantex Plant would ship all its LLMW and LLW to a single DOE site for treatment and disposal. Centralized management of HW was not analyzed.

The Pantex Plant EIS discusses the cumulative impacts of these activities at Pantex Plant. Alternatives analyzed in the WM PEIS for Pantex Plant do not include receipt of wastes from other sites.

Differences in waste volume projections in the WM PEIS and this EIS are a result of different databases. The WM PEIS used waste load forecasts developed for the 1992 Integrated Database (IDB) for LLW; the 1994 Mixed Waste Inventory Report (MWIR) for LLMW; and both the 1992 IDB and the 1993 MWIR for TRU waste. Where more recent data could impact programmatic decision making, updated forecasts and analysis are presented in the Final WM PEIS. DOE plans to update the estimates of LLW at Pantex Plant in the Final WM PEIS. The Pantex Plant EIS uses the Pantex Plant Environmental Information Document, the Agreed Order, and approved Plans containing 1995 and 1996 waste stream inventories. Cumulative Impacts of alternatives in the WM PEIS and Pantex Plant EIS are presented in volume I, section 4.13.5.1. The Pantex Plant PP/WM program originally implemented in 1991, has significantly reduced waste volumes. Appendix G in volume II of this EIS discusses in detail the PP/WM program.

1.7.2 The Stockpile Stewardship and Management Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (DOE/EIS-0236)

Stockpile stewardship includes activities required to maintain a high level of confidence in the safety, reliability, and performance of nuclear weapons in the absence of underground testing, and to be prepared to test weapons if directed by the President. Stockpile management activities include maintenance, evaluation, repair, or replacement of weapons in the existing stockpile.

Pantex Plant currently performs missions that are examined in the SSM PEIS. The ROD for this PEIS is expected to determine which facilities at Pantex Plant should be upgraded, downsized, or replaced as part of the future SSM program.

The SSM PEIS evaluated three alternatives relative to Pantex Plant operations: the No Action Alternative, which would allow Pantex Plant to continue providing the weapons assembly and disassembly capabilities, storage of pits, and HE fabrication capability; the Downsize Existing Capability Alternative, which includes downsizing the assembly/disassembly and HE fabrication capability, providing the capability to perform nonintrusive modification for pit reuse, and evaluating the possible storage of strategic reserve materials (plutonium in the form of pits and uranium in the form of canned subassemblies); and the Relocate Capability Alternative, which includes transferring the weapons assembly/disassembly capability to NTS and HE fabrication to LANL and/or Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory; and a complete phase-out of facilities at Pantex Plant.

In the Draft SSM PEIS, DOE announced as its preferred alternative a portion of the Downsize Existing Capability Alternative. That is, assembly/disassembly operations would remain at Pantex Plant; however, no preferred alternative was identified for HE fabrication. Other alternatives in the Draft SSM PEIS, entitled No Action and Relocate Capability, respectively, would have maintained Pantex Plant at its present size, or would have relocated the Pantex Plant activities to another location, were not the Department's preferred alternative. The Final SSM PEIS was issued on November 8, 1996, with a preferred alternative which stated that both assembly/disassembly operations and HE fabrication would remain at Pantex Plant, but would be downsized. The analysis contained in the Final SSM PEIS with respect to Pantex Plant is not significantly different from that presented in the Draft SSM PEIS. The Record of Decision for the SSM PEIS can be issued no earlier than December 16, 1996.

The SSM PEIS evaluated the remaining stockpile in the year 2005 and beyond. The Pantex Plant EIS does not address the impacts of these alternatives. It does, however, incorporate by reference, the effects identified in the WM PEIS as part of the discussion of cumulative impacts at Pantex Plant.

1.7.3 The Storage and Disposition of Weapons-Usable Fissile Materials Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (DOE/EIS-0229)

The S&D PEIS is evaluating alternatives for the long-term storage of weapons-usable fissile materials and for the disposition of weapons-usable plutonium declared surplus to national defense needs by the President. The S&D PEIS generally evaluates storage beginning in the year 2005 with impact evaluation conducted through the year 2055. Storage of weapons-usable fissile materials includes both pit and non-pit forms.

The interim storage of HEU was addressed in the Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Interim Storage of Enriched Uranium Above the Maximum Historical Storage Level at the Y-12 Plant, Oak Ridge, Tennessee (DOE/EA-0929) (DOE 1994).

Disposition of surplus HEU is the subject of a separate EIS, Disposition of Surplus Highly Enriched Uranium Final Environmental Impact Statement (DOE/EIS-0240). The Final EIS was issued on June 17, 1996, and the ROD was issued on July 29, 1996.

DOE decided to implement a program to make surplus HEU non-weapons-usable by blending it down to low-enriched uranium (LEU). DOE will gradually sell up to 85 percent of the resulting LEU over time for commercial use as fuel feed for nuclear power plants to generate electricity (including HEU and natural uranium that will be transferred to the United States Enrichment Corporation), and will dispose of the remaining LEU as LLW. This decision does not affect the Pantex Plant because no activity relating to HEU disposition would occur at Pantex Plant.

DOE sites currently storing weapons-usable fissile materials include Pantex Plant, Hanford Site, Idaho National Engineering Laboratory, Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site, SRS, LANL, and ORR. The S&D PEIS is considering four alternatives for the long-term storage of fissile material: No Action, Upgrade Storage Facilities, Consolidate Plutonium at one site, and Collocate Plutonium and HEU at one site. The S&D PEIS is currently examining for long-term storage the same four DOE interim storage sites considered in this EIS as well as ORR. The Pantex Plant EIS includes a discussion of the cumulative impacts of locating a potential storage facility at Pantex Plant, and incorporates and summarizes relevant information from the S&D PEIS.

The Draft S&D PEIS analyzed, as part of its storage alternatives, transfer of RFETS surplus material, including pits, to Pantex Plant. The Draft S&D PEIS considered, as an alternative, the storage of surplus material, including both surplus pits from disassembled weapons and material from RFETS, in existing buildings in Zone 12 at Pantex Plant. These buildings would require upgrades before they could be used for storage, however, and the S&D PEIS estimated that the upgrades could be completed by the year 2004. The environmental impacts of this action were discussed for cumulative purposes throughout Chapter 4 in the Draft Pantex EIS.

The Final S&D PEIS will include an alternative involving the transfer of pits from RFETS to Pantex Plant that is a refinement of the alternatives presented in the Draft S&D PEIS. Under this alternative, materials would be removed from RFETS as soon as practicable in order to assist in the cleanup of that site. Pits now at RFETS could be transferred to Pantex Plant as early as 1997 and stored in Zone 4, in the same facilities as pits from disassembled weapons, until the upgraded facilities in Zone 12 are ready. Other fissile materials at RFETS, in the form of metals and oxides, would be transferred to the Savannah River Site under this alternative.

If this alternative were selected in the ROD for the S&D PEIS, surplus pits already at Pantex Plant would continue to be stored there pending disposition and, in addition, surplus pits from the RFETS would be transferred to Pantex Plant in the near term for storage, also pending disposition. The total number of pits that could potentially be stored at Pantex Plant, including those brought from RFETS, would not exceed the storage limit of 20,000 pits proposed and analyzed in this EIS. Moreover, surplus RFETS pits that could come to Pantex Plant would have the same characteristics, as analyzed in the S&D PEIS, as pits currently or previously stored at Pantex Plant.

The Final S&D PEIS will contain environmental analyses of the various elements of this alternative including: intersite transportation of the pits from RFETS to Pantex Plant; packaging operations both at RFETS and Pantex Plant; storage of the pits, first in Zone 4, and then in Zone 12; and intrasite transportation from Zone 4 to Zone 12. The environmental impacts of this action have been added to the cumulative impact discussion in Chapter 4 of this Final EIS. These impacts would occur sooner, but would be smaller than the impacts of the Collocation Storage Alternative.

The Collocation Storage Alternative and the Evolutionary Light Water Reactor Disposition Alternative from the S&D PEIS are discussed in this Pantex Plant EIS, because those alternatives, if they occurred at Pantex Plant, could potentially have the greatest impacts to the Pantex Plant Site. It is important to note that these are conservative bounding impacts.

The Final S&D PEIS will designate a preferred alternative for the storage of fissile materials. Furthermore, for disposition, the PEIS will contemplate further site-specific tiered NEPA documentation, as appropriate, before any specific site is selected. If different alternatives or a site other than Pantex Plant were selected in the ROD (and tiered RODs) for the S&D PEIS, then impacts to Pantex Plant from storage and disposition would be reduced and might not occur.

1.7.4 The Site-Wide Environmental Impact Statement for Continued Operation of the Los Alamos National Laboratory (DOE/EIS 0238)

This site-wide EIS will address foreseeable laboratory operations and planned activities over an approximately 10-year period, paralleling the timeframe considered in the Pantex Plant EIS. The EIS will focus on operating practices and facility management, and provide an analysis of all activities at LANL and all DOE land management activities related to operations at LANL. The Pantex Plant EIS is related to the activities at LANL in that Pantex Plant ships RTGs and pits (for evaluation) to LANL. The Pantex EIS addresses transportation of these components to and from LANL.

1.7.5 The Environmental Impact Statement for the Nevada Test Site and Off-Site Locations in the State of Nevada (DOE/EIS 0243)

This site-wide EIS addresses projects and activities at the NTS, the Tonopah Test Range, portions of the Nellis Air Force Range Complex, the Central Nevada Test Area, and the Project Shoal Area. These programs include ongoing activities for the stewardship of the Nation's nuclear weapons stockpile, management of radioactive waste, and environmental restoration. This EIS also examines newer programs such as the proposed Solar Enterprise Zone sites at NTS, Dry Lake Valley, Eldorado Valley, and Coyote Spring Valley.

The EIS addresses potential environmental impacts including those resulting from transportation and disposal of wastes that are generated onsite and offsite of NTS. The Pantex Plant EIS is related to activities at NTS in that Pantex Plant currently ships LLW to NTS for disposal. Continuation of LLW shipments to NTS is also within the scope of the WM PEIS. Impacts of interim pit storage are within the scope of the Pantex Plant EIS only.

1.8 Interagency Cooperation

During the public scoping for the Pantex Plant EIS, DOE received comments recommending that DOD sites be considered as alternative storage sites.

DOE formally requested that the Nuclear Weapons Council Staff identify the viability of available DOD sites for pit storage. In all, 60 DOD sites were assessed for a possible pit storage mission. One of these sites, the Manzano Weapons Storage Area at KAFB, was subsequently selected for consideration as an alternative in the EIS. Upon DOE request, and Pursuant to 40 CFR 1501.6, the U.S. Air Force agreed to become a Cooperating Agency and participated in the preparation of this EIS.

1.9 Agency Consultations for Implementing the Alternatives

Coordination of NEPA documents with other environmental review requirements is required by CEQ regulations (40 CFR 1502.25) and DOE NEPA implementing regulations (10 CFR 1021). The objective is to ensure an integrated assessment and compliance with statutes including, but not limited to, the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (16 U.S.C. 661 et seq.), the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), and the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), as well as applicable State laws and regulations.

This EIS examines impacts of the Proposed Action and Alternatives at Pantex Plant, NTS, SRS, Hanford Site, and KAFB. Since the natural environment and potential impacts at each site differ, DOE identified relevant Federal and State agencies that may require formal consultations regarding each site. As part of the consultation process, the March 1996 Draft EIS was provided to each of these agencies for review and comment. Additional details of regulatory requirements are provided in chapter 6 of this EIS.

1.10 Organization of the Environmental Impact Statement

This Final EIS is comprised of the Summary and three volumes:

Volume I, 11 chapters of the main report.
Volume II, 10 appendixes.
Volume III, the public comments, analyses, and responses.

In volume I, chapter 2 describes the purpose and need for action. Chapter 3 describes the Proposed Action and Alternatives and concludes with a comparison of the environmental impacts of each of the alternatives.

Chapters 4 through 6 provide the core of the environmental impact analysis and actions necessary to implement each alternative. Chapter 4 describes the affected environment and environmental consequences at Pantex Plant. This chapter examines potential environmental impacts within 14 environmental resource and issue areas at Pantex Plant for each of the alternatives. In a similar manner, chapter 5 describes the affected environment and environmental consequences at each of the alternative pit storage sites that were considered for the Pit Storage Relocation Alternative. Chapter 6 describes the environmental compliance requirements for implementing the alternatives.

Chapters 7 through 11 provide supplementary information about this EIS and references for the reader. Chapter 7 provides the list of references cited in the EIS. Chapter 8 contains the list of preparers, and chapter 9 presents the list of agencies, organizations, and persons to whom copies of this EIS were sent. Chapter 10 provides a glossary of terms used in this EIS and chapter 11 is the index.

In Volume II, 10 appendixes are provided for detailed supporting information. Appendix A describes the methodologies applied in the determination of environmental impacts. Appendixes B, C, D, E, F, and I contain additional discussion and data supporting the air quality, water resources, human health, aircraft accident, transportation, and soil quality analyses, respectively. Appendix G addresses the current and planned activities to further objectives for pollution prevention and waste minimization. AppendixáH contains a detailed description of six proposed Pantex Plant projects and an assessment of the impacts associated with their construction and operation. Appendix J includes copies of correspondence with consulting agencies. Volume III describes the public comment and public hearing processes. All public meeting comments were combined with comments received by all other means (e.g., hand-ins, faxes, letters, e-mail, etc.) during the public comment period. All comments were categorized by subject area and were considered for potential changes or additions to the EIS. In addition, volume III details the comments received, the analysis and categorization of the comments, the responses to the comments, and indicates what changes were made in the EIS in response to the comments. Volumes I and II have been marked with a line down the left side of the text columns to indicate where changes or additions have been made to the EIS text.

NEWSLETTER

Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list

Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD)

PANTEX PLANT PROGRAMMATIC MISSION STATEMENT