COVER SHEET
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY:
U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)
TITLE:
Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), Dual Axis Radiographic Hydrodynamic Test (DARHT) Facility (DOE/EIS-0228)
CONTACT:
For further information on this document, write or call:
Ms. M. Diana Webb, DARHT EIS Document Manager
U.S. Department of Energy
Los Alamos Area Office
528 35th Street
Los Alamos, New Mexico 87544
Telephone: (505) 665-6353
Fax: (505) 665-4872
Ms. Carol M. Borgstrom, Director
Office of NEPA Oversight (EH-25)
U.S. Department of Energy
1000 Independence Avenue, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20585
Telephone: (202) 586-4600, or leave a message at (800) 472-2756
ABSTRACT:
DOE proposes to provide enhanced high-resolution radiographic capability for hydrodynamic tests and dynamic experiments to help meet its mission to ensure the safety and reliability of the Nation's nuclear weapons. The DARHT Facility would include two electron accelerators to produce x-ray beams that intersect at a firing point to produce radiographs of exploding or imploding material. This EIS evaluates the potential environmental impacts of six alternatives: No Action (continue to operate the 30-year old Pulsed High Energy Radiation Machine Emitting X-Rays (PHERMEX) Facility at the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) and the Flash X-Ray (FXR) Facility at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory; DARHT Baseline (complete and operate the DARHT Facility at LANL); Upgrade PHERMEX (upgrade PHERMEX with enhanced radiography technology instead of completing the DARHT Facility); Enhanced Containment (in addition to containing all experiments involving plutonium, enclose most or all experiments under one of three options: vessel containment, building containment, or phased containment, which is the preferred alternative); Plutonium Exclusion (exclude any applications involving experiments with plutonium at the DARHT Facility); and Single Axis (complete and operate only a single axis of the DARHT Facility). The affected environment is primarily within LANL. Analyses indicate very little difference in the environmental impacts among the alternatives. The major discriminator would be contamination of soils near the firing points, health effects to workers, and amount of construction materials.
DOE issued a draft EIS on May 12, 1995, and held a formal public comment period on the draft through June 26, 1995. Two public meetings were held during the comment period. Comments received and DOE's response to those comments, are found in the second volume of this EIS. The final EIS reflects DOE's consideration of public comments.
This EIS includes a classified supplement. The draft classified supplement was made available for review by appropriately cleared parties with a need to know the classified information.
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
