[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 133 (Tuesday, July 12, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 45138-45140]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-16439]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
National Nuclear Security Administration
Amended Record of Decision for the Continued Operation of the Y-
12 National Security Complex
AGENCY: National Nuclear Security Administration, Department of Energy.
ACTION: Record of decision.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), a
separately organized agency within the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE),
is amending its July 20, 2011, Record of Decision for the Continued
Operation of the Y-12 National Security Complex (2011 ROD) (76 FR
43319) to reflect its decision to implement a revised approach for
meeting enriched uranium (EU) requirements, by upgrading existing EU
processing buildings and constructing a new Uranium Processing Facility
(UPF). Additionally, NNSA has decided to separate the single-structure
UPF design concept into a new design consisting of multiple buildings,
with each constructed to safety and security requirements appropriate
to the building's function. This revised approach is a hybrid of two
alternatives previously analyzed in the 2011 Final Site-Wide
Environmental Impact Statement for the Y-12 National Security Complex,
DOE/EIS-0387 (Y-12 SWEIS). The scope of this Amended ROD is limited to
actions which have been found necessary to sustain Y-12's capability to
conduct EU processing operations in a safe and secure environment.
Those actions are also addressed in a Supplement Analysis (SA) (DOE/
EIS-0387-SA-01), issued by NNSA in April 2016. All other defense
mission activities and non-defense mission activities conducted at Y-12
under the alternative selected for implementation in the 2011 ROD are
outside the scope of this decision. As a result of preparing the SA,
NNSA has determined that no further National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) analysis is needed to support this Amended ROD.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information on this
Amended ROD, the SA, or to receive a copy of the SA, contact: Ms. Pam
Gorman, SA Document Manager, U.S. Department of Energy, National
Nuclear Security Administration, UPF Project Office, P.O. Box 2050, Oak
Ridge, TN 37831-8116; or [email protected]; or (865) 576-9918.
For information on the DOE NEPA process, contact: Ms. Carol M.
Borgstrom, Director, Office of NEPA
[[Page 45139]]
Policy and Compliance (GC-54), U.S. Department of Energy, 1000
Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585, (202) 586-4600, or leave
a message at (800) 472-2756. This Amended ROD, the SA, and related NEPA
documents are available on the DOE NEPA Web site at www.energy.gov/nepa.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Y-12 is NNSA's primary site for uranium operations, including EU
processing and storage, and is one of the primary manufacturing
facilities for maintaining the U.S. nuclear weapons stockpile. In the
Y-12 SWEIS, NNSA analyzed the potential environmental impacts of
ongoing and future operations and activities at Y-12. Five alternatives
were analyzed in the Y-12 SWEIS: (1) No Action Alternative (maintain
the status quo), (2) UPF Alternative, (3) Upgrade in-Place Alternative
(4) Capability-sized UPF Alternative, and (5) No Net Production/
Capability-sized UPF Alternative (the environmentally preferable
alternative in the 2011 Y-12 SWEIS). In the 2011 ROD, NNSA decided to
implement the preferred alternative from the Y-12 SWEIS, the
Capability-sized UPF Alternative, and to construct and operate a
single-structure Capability-sized UPF at Y-12 as a replacement for
certain existing buildings.
In January 2014, as a result of concerns about UPF cost and
schedule growth, the Acting Administrator of the NNSA requested that
the Director of the Oak Ridge National Laboratory lead a ``project peer
review'' of the UPF. The result of that review, the ``Final Report of
the Committee to Recommend Alternatives to the Uranium Processing
Facility Plan in Meeting the Nation's Enriched Uranium Strategy'' (the
Red Team Report) was released in April 2014. The Red Team Report
emphasized the importance of UPF in the context of a broader set of
uranium mission requirements: Sustaining and modernizing EU
manufacturing capabilities, reducing material at risk (MAR) in Y-12's
EU processing facilities, making investments in enduring buildings,
constructing new floor space and enabling transition of critical
Building 9212 capabilities into the UPF no later than 2025.
Under the revised strategy that resulted from this review, NNSA
would: (1) Construct and operate a new facility (the UPF) consisting of
multiple buildings rather than the single-structure UPF facility
analyzed in the Y-12 SWEIS, and (2) perform necessary maintenance and
upgrades to some existing EU facilities. In the revised UPF design
approach, the multiple UPF buildings would each be constructed to
safety and security requirements appropriate to the building's
function. The revised strategy is described in detail in Chapter 3 of
the SA (and referred to, therein, as the proposed action).
NEPA Process for Amending the ROD
The Y-12 SWEIS evaluated the potential impacts of the reasonable
range of alternatives for continuing EU processing operations at Y-12
and provided a basis for the 2011 ROD. The Y-12 SWEIS provides much of
the basis for this current decision. As discussed in the Summary,
NNSA's revised strategy of upgrading existing EU buildings and
constructing UPF with multiple buildings is different from the
Capability-sized UPF that NNSA selected in the 2011 ROD. Instead, it is
a hybrid approach that combines elements of the Upgrade in-Place
Alternative and the Capability-sized UPF Alternative, Alternatives (3)
and (4).
NNSA prepared an SA (DOE/EIS-0387-SA-01) in accordance with Council
on Environmental Quality and DOE regulations implementing NEPA (40 CFR
1502.9(c) and 10 CFR 1021.314(c)) to determine whether the preparation
of a new or Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) would be
required. In preparing the SA, NNSA considered new information relevant
to environmental concerns that has emerged since the 2011 Y-12 SWEIS
and also examined other ongoing or proposed actions at Y-12 and within
the surrounding region of influence to determine whether these
presented any potentially significant cumulative impacts.
Summary of Impacts
Section 2.1 of the SA discusses environmental changes at Y-12 and
in the surrounding region, which have occurred since publication of the
Y-12 SWEIS and that are relevant to the analysis in the SA. Information
from the U.S. Geologic Survey (USGS) 2014 Update of the United States
National Seismic Hazard Maps is included in this section of the SA.
The SA analyzes the potential impacts of the proposed action on
land use, aesthetics, climate and air quality, geology and soils, water
resources, ecological resources, cultural resources, infrastructure and
utilities, socioeconomics, waste management, human health and safety,
accidents and intentional destructive acts, transportation, and
environmental justice. Section 4.2 of the SA provides: (1) A summary of
the potential environmental impacts from the Y-12 SWEIS, (2) the
estimate of potential impacts specific to the proposed action, and (3)
a more detailed analysis of potential impacts for those NEPA resource
areas where NNSA determined that there might be potentially significant
new circumstances or information relevant to environmental concerns.
Table 4-1 of the SA presents this information in a comparative fashion
for each resource area.
As presented in Table 4-1, impacts to climate and air quality,
geology and soils, water resources, cultural resources, infrastructure
and utilities, socioeconomics, waste management, transportation, and
environmental justice would be bounded by the analysis in the Y-12
SWEIS. With respect to ecological resources, since publication of the
2011 Y-12 SWEIS, the northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis)
has been listed as threatened by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS), and Y-12 falls within the range for this species. However,
NNSA does not anticipate any significant adverse effects to this
special status species. As discussed in the SA, the activities
associated with the proposed action would occur on an existing highly
industrial site. Also, the potentially impacted habitat for the
northern long-eared bat habitat overlaps with that of the Indiana bat
and gray bat. Accordingly, NNSA determined that the proposed action
described in the SA would not require a revision of the 2011 Y-12 SWEIS
Biological Assessment. The USFWS concurs with NNSA's ``no effect''
determinations for the federally endangered gray bat (Myotis
grisescens), Indiana bat (Myotis sodalist), and threatened northern
long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis).
Potential impacts to human health, from either normal EU processing
operations or accidents (including intentional destructive acts), would
also be bounded by the analysis in the Y-12 SWEIS. Both the 2011 Y-12
SWEIS and the SA evaluated the safety of the continued use of existing
facilities and concluded that all radiation doses from normal
operations would be below regulatory standards with no statistically
significant impact on the health and safety of workers or the public.
With regard to seismic risks specifically, both the 2011 Y-12 SWEIS and
the SA evaluated the potential impacts of the release of radioactive
materials to the environment that could result from severe seismic
events. For both the public and workers, less than 1 latent cancer
fatality from radiological
[[Page 45140]]
exposures would be expected for any of the seismic accident scenarios
evaluated. Further, the risk \1\ assessments for these seismic accident
scenarios are bounded by those of other severe accidents for all
facilities associated with EU operations at Y-12. This conclusion has
not changed as a result of the new USGS seismic map for the eastern
Tennessee area. NNSA has taken and will continue to take steps to
reduce the MAR administrative limits for existing EU facilities to
further reduce the radiological consequences of potential accidents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Although ``risk'' is a term that can be used to express the
general concept that an adverse effect could occur, in DOE
quantitative assessments it refers to the numeric product of the
probability and consequences.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Although land disturbance and visual impacts would be slightly
greater than the analysis in the Y-12 SWEIS (due to transmission line
construction), those impacts would not be significant.
The analysis in the SA indicates that the potential environmental
impacts of the NNSA's revised strategy would not be significantly
different or significantly greater than those NNSA identified in the Y-
12 SWEIS. For the resource areas analyzed, no differences or only minor
differences in potential environmental impacts would be expected to
result. Detailed descriptions of these differences are presented in
Table 4-1 of the SA. After comparing the analysis of potential
environmental impacts associated with the proposed actions in the SA to
those analyzed in the Y-12 SWEIS, NNSA determined that preparation of a
supplemental or new EIS is not warranted.
Based on the analysis in the SA, NNSA's revised strategy is not a
substantial change to the proposals covered by the Y-12 SWEIS, nor does
it represent significant new circumstances or information relevant to
environmental concerns, and is adequately supported by existing NEPA
documentation, including the Y-12 SWEIS and additional NEPA analyses
(identified in Section 1.4 of the SA) prepared to address specific
activities at Y-12. Thus, consistent with 10 CFR 1021.315(e), the
existing 2011 ROD for the Y-12 SWEIS can be amended, and no further
NEPA documentation is required to implement the proposed action at Y-
12.
Environmentally Preferable Alternative
In the 2011 ROD, NNSA designated the No Net Production/Capability-
sized UPF Alternative (Alternative 5) as the environmentally preferable
alternative. NNSA believes that alternative is still the
environmentally preferable alternative.
Amended Decision
NNSA has decided to continue to operate Y-12 to meet the stockpile
stewardship mission critical activities assigned to the site. NNSA will
meet EU requirements using the proposed action described in Section 3.0
of the SA. That proposed action is a hybrid approach of upgrading
existing EU buildings and separating the single-structure UPF into
multiple buildings, with each constructed to safety and security
requirements appropriate to the building's function.
Basis for Decision
National security policies continue to require NNSA to maintain the
nation's nuclear weapons stockpile, as well as its core technical
competencies and capabilities. As was the case when NNSA issued its
Record of Decision for the Y-12 SWEIS in 2011, NNSA's decisions are
based on its mission responsibilities and its need to sustain Y-12's
ability to operate in a manner that allows it to fulfill its
responsibilities in an environmentally sound, timely, and fiscally
prudent manner. NNSA continues to require Y-12 EU processing facilities
to provide reliable, long-term enriched uranium processing capability
with modern technologies and equipment, improved security posture for
Special Nuclear Material; reduced accident risks; improved health and
safety for workers and the public; improved operational efficiency; and
reduction in the cost of operating and maintaining key facilities.
This amended decision will enable NNSA to maintain the required
expertise and capabilities to deliver uranium products while
modernizing production facilities. This amended decision will also
avoid many of the safety risks of operating aged buildings and
equipment by relocating processes that cannot be sustained in existing,
enduring buildings. It will also allow NNSA to reduce the risks of EU
operations through process improvements enabled by NNSA's investments
in developing new technologies to apply in Y-12 facilities. Through an
extended life program, mission-critical existing and enduring buildings
and infrastructure will be maintained and/or upgraded, further
enhancing safety and security at the Y-12 site.
Mitigation Measures
Y-12 will continue to operate in compliance with environmental
laws, regulations, policies, and within a framework of contractual
requirements. In the 2011 ROD, NNSA adopted the measures identified in
the 2011 Y-12 SWEIS, to avoid, minimize and mitigate environmental
impacts from the Capability-sized UPF Alternative (Alternative 4). NNSA
will continue to impose contractual requirements for actions necessary
to comply with the identified mitigation measures.
Additionally, as a result of consultations with the USFWS, NNSA is
extending by one month the time frame for tree cutting restrictions,
established for the protection of roosting and swarming bats. These
contractually required restrictions will now remain in effect annually
from March 31st through November 15th.
Issued in Washington, DC, on July 5th, 2016.
Frank G. Klotz,
Under Secretary for Nuclear Security Administrator, National Nuclear
Security Administration.
[FR Doc. 2016-16439 Filed 7-11-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-P