WorldWideScience

Sample records for final environmental statement

  1. 40 CFR 124.61 - Final environmental impact statement.

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-07-01

    ... 40 Protection of Environment 21 2010-07-01 2010-07-01 false Final environmental impact statement... environmental impact statement. No final NPDES permit for a new source shall be issued until at least 30 days after the date of issuance of a final environmental impact statement if one is required under 40 CFR 6...

  2. 16 CFR 1.85 - Final environmental impact statements.

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-01-01

    ... 16 Commercial Practices 1 2010-01-01 2010-01-01 false Final environmental impact statements. 1.85... Final environmental impact statements. (a) After the close of the comment period, the Bureau responsible for the matter will consider the comments received on the draft environmental impact statement and...

  3. 23 CFR 771.125 - Final environmental impact statements.

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-04-01

    ... 23 Highways 1 2010-04-01 2010-04-01 false Final environmental impact statements. 771.125 Section... ENVIRONMENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AND RELATED PROCEDURES § 771.125 Final environmental impact statements. (a)(1..., economic, or environmental impacts of the action may need to be more fully explored; (iii) the impacts of...

  4. Final environmental statement for the geothermal leasing program

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    1973-12-31

    This second of the four volumes of the Geothermal Leasing Program final impact statement contains the individual environmental statements for the leasing of federally owned geothermal resources for development in three specific areas: Clear Lake-Geysers; Mono Lake-Long Valley; and Imperial Valley, all in California. It also includes a summary of the written comments received and departmental responses relative to the Draft Environmental Impact Statement issued in 1971; comments and responses on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement; consultation and coordination in the development of the proposal and in the preparation of the Draft Environmental Statement; and coordination in the review of the Draft Environmental Statement.

  5. Southpoint power plant final environmental impact statement

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1999-01-01

    This document is the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) for a proposed lease of acreage on the Fort Mojave Indian Reservation in Mohave County, Arizona for development of a natural gas fired 500 megawatt combined cycle power plant. The Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) serves as the federal lead agency and the Fort Mojave Indian Tribe (FMIT) and the Western Area Power Administration (WAPA) are cooperating agencies for the EIS process. The purpose of this document is to provide information to the public and to interested public agencies regarding the environmental consequences of the approval of a long-term lease for the construction and operation of the proposed Southpoint power plant. The FEIS, prepared by Hallock/Gross, Inc. under the direction of the BIA and in cooperation with the FMIT and WAPA, addresses the comparative analysis of alternatives and evaluates the environmental consequences of such alternatives on various resources and addresses public comments. A number of technical reports were used in the preparation of the Draft EIS and FEIS and are available for review as Appendices to this document under separate cover that can be reviewed at the BIA offices which are listed

  6. Resource Programs: Final Environmental Impact Statement

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1993-02-01

    Every two years, BA prepares a Resource Program, which identifies the resource actions BA will take to meet its obligation to serve the forecasted power requirements of its customers. The Resource Programs Environmental Impact Statement (RPEIS) is a programmatic environmental document that will support decisions made in several future Resource Programs. Environmental documents tiered to this EIS may be prepared on a site-specific basis. The RPEIS includes a description of the environmental effects and mitigation for the various resource types available in order to evaluate the trade-offs among them. It also assesses the environmental impacts of adding thirteen alternative combinations of resources to the existing power system. The alternatives represent the range of actions BA could take to meet its load obligations. Each of the alternatives allows BA to meet the almost 5,000 average megawatt load increase that could occur with high load growth, or an equivalent need for resources caused by a combination of load growth and any future loss of resources

  7. 10 CFR 51.93 - Distribution of final environmental impact statement and supplement to final environmental impact...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-01-01

    ... 10 Energy 2 2010-01-01 2010-01-01 false Distribution of final environmental impact statement and supplement to final environmental impact statement; news releases. 51.93 Section 51.93 Energy NUCLEAR... Environmental Impact Statements-General Requirements § 51.93 Distribution of final environmental impact...

  8. Final Environmental Impact Statement Resource Programs

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1993-02-01

    BPA's preferred alternative is the Emphasize Conservation Alternative. System and environmental costs are low. Environmental impacts from conservation are minimal. This alternative is cost-effective and environmentally responsible; only the High Conservation Alternative has lower costs and fewer environmental impacts. However, there is some concern about the cost-effectiveness, reliability, and commercial availability of the high conservation resources. If the supply of the additional conservation potential was confirmed and it became cost-effective, the High Conservation Alternative would be preferred. The Draft Resource Programs EIS was released for public review during the summer of 1992. Comments received by letter or in the public hearing held June 16, 1992, were used to revise and update data and analyses of the EIS (public comments and BPA's responses are contained in Volume III of the Final EIS). In addition, a number of revisions were made in the Chapter 3 material describing each resource type, and in Chapter 4 and the Summary, to assure consistency with the modeling and analysis in Chapter 5. Additional information about the capacity aspects of each resource type and alternative has been added, and the material on conservation and its impacts has been reorganized

  9. 77 FR 14416 - Notice of Availability of a Final Environmental Impact Statement and Final Environmental Impact...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2012-03-09

    ...In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended (NEPA), and the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, as amended (FLPMA), the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has prepared a Proposed California Desert Conservation Area (CDCA) Plan Amendment (PA)/Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Ocotillo Express Wind Energy Facility (OWEF) and by this notice is announcing the availability of the Proposed PA and Final EIS/EIR.

  10. Bear Creek Project. Final environmental statement

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1977-06-01

    The Bear Creek Project consists of certain mining and milling operations involving uranium ore deposits located in Converse County, Wyoming. Mining of uranium from nine known ore bodies will take place over a period of ten years (estimated); a mill with a nominal capacity of 1000 tons per day of ore will be constructed and operated as long as ore is available. The waste material (tailings) from the mill, also produced at a rate of about 1000 tons per day, will be stored onsite in an impoundment. Environmental impacts and adverse effects are summarized

  11. Final environmental impact statement. Marquez uranium mine

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1984-01-01

    As one of many activities TVA has undertaken to ensure an adequate supply of uranium for these plants, TVA has proposed to underground mine, through its operator, the uranium deposits located in the Canon de Marquez in McKinley County, New Mexico. Construction and operation of the underground mine would be expected to have the following environmental effects: (a) a temporary change in land use for 48.5 hectares from wildlife habitat and recreation to mineral extraction; (b) a minor alteration in topography near the proposed pond sites due to reclamation of waste rock piles; (c) minimal impacts on land due to limited vehicular traffic and road construction; (d) temporary depression of ground water levels in the Westwater Canyon Member of the Morrison Formation in the mine vicinity during mine life; (e) short-term project-induced impacts to surface water and shallow ground water quality; (f) a temporary decrease in air quality in the vicinity of the mining operations due to fugitive dust and exhaust emissions from combustion-driven mining and support vehicles and releases of radon and short-lived radon progeny from ventilation shafts and ore piles; (g) a temporary decrease of plant and animal species at the mine site; (h) a minor and temporary effect on aquatic systems downstream from the mine and settling ponds due to sedimentation; and (i) a minor increase of noise levels in the immediate vicinity of mine shafts and vents. The no action alternative and alternatives for securing uranium ore by other methods were considered but were found insufficient to meet TVA objectives. None of the alternatives explored were environmentally preferable. TVA also evaluated site specific alternatives including the following: different shaft and support building siting, mining techniques, and reclamation options. 25 figures, 20 tables

  12. Wildlife mitigation program final environmental impact statement

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1997-03-01

    BPA is responsible for mitigating the loss of wildlife habitat caused by the development of the Federal Columbia River Power System. BPA accomplishes this mitigation by funding projects consistent with those recommended by the Northwest Power Planning Council (Council). The projects are submitted to the Council from Indian Tribes, state agencies, property owners, private conservation groups, and other Federal agencies. future wildlife mitigation actions with potential environmental impacts are expected to include land acquisition and management, water rights acquisition and management, habitat restoration and improvement, installation of watering devices, riparian fencing, and similar wildlife conservation actions. BPA needs to ensure that individual wildlife mitigation projects are planned and managed with appropriate consistency across projects, jurisdictions, and ecosystems, as well as across time. BPA proposes to standardize the planning and implementation of individual wildlife mitigation projects funded by BPA. Alternative 1 is the No Action alternative, i.e., not to establish program-wide standards. Five standardizing (action) alternatives are identified to represent the range of possible strategies, goals, and procedural requirements reasonably applicable to BPA-funded projects under a standardized approach to project planning and implementation. All action alternatives are based on a single project planning process designed to resolve site-specific issues in an ecosystem context and to adapt to changing conditions and information

  13. Griffith energy project final environmental impact statement

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1999-03-01

    Griffith Energy Limited Liability Corporation (Griffith) proposes to construct and operate the Griffith Energy Project (Project), a natural gas-fired, combined cycle power plant, on private lands south of Kingman, Arizona. The Project would be a merchant plant which means that it is not owned by a utility and there is currently no long-term commitment or obligation by any utility to purchase the capacity and energy generated by the power plant. Griffith applied to interconnect its proposed power plant with the Western Area Power Administration's (Western) Pacific Northwest-Pacific Southwest Intertie and Parker-Davis transmission systems. Western, as a major transmission system owner, needs to provide access to its transmission system when it is requested by an eligible organization per existing policies, regulations and laws. The proposed interconnection would integrate the power generated by the Project into the regional transmission grid and would allow Griffith to supply its power to the competitive electric wholesale market. Based on the application, Western's proposed action is to enter into an interconnection and construction agreement with Griffith for the requested interconnections. The proposed action includes the power plant, water wells and transmission line, natural gas pipelines, new electrical transmission lines and a substation, upgrade of an existing transmission line, and access road to the power plant. Construction of segments of the transmission lines and a proposed natural gas pipeline also require a grant of right-of-way across Federal lands administered by the Bureau of Land Management. Public comments on the Draft EIS are addressed in the Final EIS, including addenda and modifications made as a result of the comments and/or new information

  14. Griffith Energy Project Final Environmental Impact Statement

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    N/A

    1999-04-02

    Griffith Energy Limited Liability Corporation (Griffith) proposes to construct and operate the Griffith Energy Project (Project), a natural gas-fuel, combined cycle power plant, on private lands south of Kingman, Ariz. The Project would be a ''merchant plant'' which means that it is not owned by a utility and there is currently no long-term commitment or obligation by any utility to purchase the capacity and energy generated by the power plant. Griffith applied to interconnect its proposed power plant with the Western Area Power Administration's (Western) Pacific Northwest-Pacific Southwest Intertie and Parker-Davis transmission systems. Western, as a major transmission system owner, needs to provide access to its transmission system when it is requested by an eligible organization per existing policies, regulations and laws. The proposed interconnection would integrate the power generated by the Project into the regional transmission grid and would allow Griffith to supply its power to the competitive electric wholesale market. Based on the application, Western's proposed action is to enter into an interconnection and construction agreement with Griffith for the requested interconnections. The proposed action includes the power plant, water wells and transmission line, natural gas pipelines, new electrical transmission lines and a substation, upgrade of an existing transmission line, and access road to the power plant. Construction of segments of the transmission lines and a proposed natural gas pipeline also require a grant of right-of-way across Federal lands administered by the Bureau of Land Management. Public comments on the Draft EIS are addressed in the Final EIS, including addenda and modifications made as a result of the comments and/or new information.

  15. 76 FR 12342 - Notice of Availability of Record of Decision for the Final Environmental Impact Statement...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2011-03-07

    ... Final Environmental Impact Statement/Overseas Environmental Impact Statement for Gulf of Mexico Range... set forth in Alternative 2, described in the Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)/Overseas Environmental Impact Statement (OEIS) as the Preferred Alternative. The purpose for the proposed action is to...

  16. 10 CFR 51.91 - Final environmental impact statement-contents.

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-01-01

    ... 10 Energy 2 2010-01-01 2010-01-01 false Final environmental impact statement-contents. 51.91... Implementing Section 102(2) Final Environmental Impact Statements-General Requirements § 51.91 Final environmental impact statement—contents. (a)(1) The final environmental impact statement will include responses...

  17. 10 CFR 51.94 - Requirement to consider final environmental impact statement.

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-01-01

    ... 10 Energy 2 2010-01-01 2010-01-01 false Requirement to consider final environmental impact...-Regulations Implementing Section 102(2) Final Environmental Impact Statements-General Requirements § 51.94 Requirement to consider final environmental impact statement. The final environmental impact statement...

  18. Columbia River system operation review. Final environmental impact statement

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1995-11-01

    This Appendix C of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Columbia River System discusses impacts on andromous fish and juvenile fish transportation. The principal andromous fish in the Columbia basin include salmonid species (Chinook, coho, and sockeye salmon, and steelhead) and nonsalmoinid andromous species (sturgeon, lamprey, and shad). Major sections in this document include the following: background, scope and process; affected environment for salmon and steelhead, shaded, lamprey, sturgeon; study methods; description of alternatives: qualitative and quantitative findings

  19. 10 CFR 51.118 - Final environmental impact statement-notice of availability.

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-01-01

    ... 10 Energy 2 2010-01-01 2010-01-01 false Final environmental impact statement-notice of... environmental impact statement—notice of availability. (a) Upon completion of a final environmental impact statement or any supplement to a final environmental impact statement, the appropriate NRC staff director...

  20. 77 FR 44267 - Notice of Availability of the Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for Solar Energy...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2012-07-27

    ...] Notice of Availability of the Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for Solar Energy... Environmental Impact Statement for Solar Energy Development in Six Southwestern States (Final Programmatic EIS... RMP Amendments, references, and additional information regarding solar energy development are...

  1. Initial Northwest Power Act Power Sales Contracts : Final Environmental Impact Statement. Volume 1, Environmental Analysis.

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    United States. Bonneville Power Administration.

    1992-01-01

    This is volume 1 of the final environmental impact statement of the Bonneville Power Administration Information is included on the following: Purpose of and need for action; alternatives including the proposed action; affected environment; and environmental consequences.

  2. 76 FR 65746 - Notice of Availability of Joint Final Environmental Impact Statement/Final Environmental Impact...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2011-10-24

    ...In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended (NEPA), and the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, as amended (FLPMA), the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) have prepared a Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) as a joint environmental analysis document for Tule Wind, LLC's Tule Wind Project (Tule Project) and the San Diego Gas and Electric's (SDG&E) East County Substation Project (ECO Project) and by this notice are announcing the availability of the Final EIS/EIR. By this Notice the BLM is also segregating the public lands within the Tule Project application area from appropriation under the public land laws including the Mining Law, but not the Mineral Leasing or Material Sales Act, for a period of 2 years.

  3. 10 CFR 51.92 - Supplement to the final environmental impact statement.

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-01-01

    ... 10 Energy 2 2010-01-01 2010-01-01 false Supplement to the final environmental impact statement. 51...-Regulations Implementing Section 102(2) Final Environmental Impact Statements-General Requirements § 51.92 Supplement to the final environmental impact statement. (a) If the proposed action has not been taken, the...

  4. Waste Isolation Pilot Plant: Final supplement environmental impact statement

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1990-01-01

    The purpose of this Supplement Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) is to update the environmental record established in 1980 by evaluating the environmental impacts associated with new information, new circumstances, and proposal modifications. This SEIS evaluates and compares the Proposed Action and two alternatives. This final SEIS for the WIPP project is a revision of the draft SEIS published in April 1989. It includes responses to the public comments received in writing and at the public hearings and revisions of the draft SEIS in response to the public comments. Revisions of importance have been identified in this final SEIS by vertical lines in the margins to highlight changes made in response to comments. Volumes 1 through 3 of the final SEIS contain the text, appendices, and the summary comments and responses, respectively. Volumes 6 through 13 of the final SEIS contain reproductions of all of the comments received on the draft SEIS, and Volumes 4 and 5 contain the indices to Volumes 6 through 13. An Executive Summary and/or Volumes 1 through 5 of the final SEIS have been distributed to those who received the draft SEIS or requested a copy of the final SEIS. Volume 5 contains indices to public comments

  5. Final environmental impact statement. Waste Isolation Pilot Plant

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1980-10-01

    This volume contains the appendices for the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP). Alternative geologic environs are considered. Salt, crystalline rock, argillaceous rock, and tuff are discussed. Studies on alternate geologic regions for the siting of WIPP are reviewed. President Carter's message to Congress on the management of radioactive wastes and the findings and recommendations of the interagency review group on nuclear waste management are included. Selection criteria for the WIPP site including geologic, hydrologic, tectonic, physicochemical compatability, and socio-economic factors are presented. A description of the waste types and the waste processing procedures are given. Methods used to calculate radiation doses from radionuclide releases during operation are presented. A complete description of the Los Medanos site, including archaeological and historic aspects is included. Environmental monitoring programs and long-term safety analysis program are described

  6. Final environmental impact statement. Waste Isolation Pilot Plant

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    1980-10-01

    This volume contains the appendices for the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP). Alternative geologic environs are considered. Salt, crystalline rock, argillaceous rock, and tuff are discussed. Studies on alternate geologic regions for the siting of WIPP are reviewed. President Carter's message to Congress on the management of radioactive wastes and the findings and recommendations of the interagency review group on nuclear waste management are included. Selection criteria for the WIPP site including geologic, hydrologic, tectonic, physicochemical compatability, and socio-economic factors are presented. A description of the waste types and the waste processing procedures are given. Methods used to calculate radiation doses from radionuclide releases during operation are presented. A complete description of the Los Medanos site, including archaeological and historic aspects is included. Environmental monitoring programs and long-term safety analysis program are described. (DMC)

  7. Final generic environmental impact statement on decommissioning of nuclear facilities

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1988-08-01

    This final generic environmental impact statement was prepared as part of the requirement for considering changes in regulations on decommissioning of commercial nuclear facilities. Consideration is given to the decommissioning of pressurized water reactors, boiling water reactors, research and test reactors, fuel reprocessing plants (FRPs) (currently, use of FRPs in the commercial sector is not being considered), small mixed oxide fuel fabrication plants, uranium hexafluoride conversion plants, uranium fuel fabrication plants, independent spent fuel storage installations, and non-fuel-cycle facilities for handling byproduct, source and special nuclear materials. Decommissioning has many positive environmental impacts such as the return of possibly valuable land to the public domain and the elimination of potential problems associated with increased numbers of radioactively contaminated facilities with a minimal use of resources. Major adverse impacts are shown to be routine occupational radiation doses and the commitment of nominally small amounts of land to radioactive waste disposal. Other impacts, including public radiation doses, are minor. Mitigation of potential health, safety, and environmental impacts requires more specific and detailed regulatory guidance than is currently available. Recommendations are made as to regulatory decommissioning particulars including such aspects as decommissioning alternatives, appropriate preliminary planning requirements at the time of commissioning, final planning requirements prior to termination of facility operations, assurance of funding for decommissioning, environmental review requirements. 26 refs., 7 figs., 68 tabs

  8. 10 CFR 51.90 - Final environmental impact statement-general.

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-01-01

    ... 10 Energy 2 2010-01-01 2010-01-01 false Final environmental impact statement-general. 51.90... Implementing Section 102(2) Final Environmental Impact Statements-General Requirements § 51.90 Final environmental impact statement—general. After receipt and consideration of comments requested pursuant to §§ 51...

  9. 10 CFR 51.97 - Final environmental impact statement-materials license.

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-01-01

    ... 10 Energy 2 2010-01-01 2010-01-01 false Final environmental impact statement-materials license. 51...-Regulations Implementing Section 102(2) Final Environmental Impact Statements-Materials Licenses § 51.97 Final environmental impact statement—materials license. (a) Independent spent fuel storage installation (ISFSI...

  10. 75 FR 1359 - Notice of Availability of Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Proposed Construction of...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-01-11

    ... Environmental Impact Statement for the Proposed Construction of the Western Wake Regional Wastewater Management... Environmental Impact Statement for the proposed construction of the Western Wake Regional Wastewater Management... initial Web version of the Final Environmental Impact Statement had problems with the Web links. The web...

  11. 75 FR 26272 - Final Environmental Impact Statement; Environmental Education Center, Yosemite National Park...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-05-11

    ... DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service Final Environmental Impact Statement; Environmental Education Center, Yosemite National Park, Mariposa County, CA; Notice of Approval of Record of Decision SUMMARY: Pursuant to Sec. 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (Pub. L. 91...

  12. Superconducting Super Collider: Final environmental impact statement: Volume 1

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1988-12-01

    This Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) provides as much information as possible at this stage of the project development regarding the potential environmental impacts of the proposed construction and operation of a Superconducting Super Collider (SSC) at each of the site alternatives. However, the DOE recognizes that further review under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) is required prior to construction and operation of the proposed SSC project at the selected site based on more detailed design and to identify specific mitigation measures which can be incorporated into final design. Accordingly, following selection of a site for the proposed SSC, the DOE will prepare a Supplemental EIS to address in more detail the impacts of constructing and operating the proposed SSC at the selected site and alternatives for mitigating those impacts. To measure the effects of constructing the SSC at any of the seven alternative sites, the DOE determined which aspects of the human environment would be significantly affected. The EIS describes the baseline conditions at each of the seven site alternatives, the trends underway resulting in changes, the potential environmental impacts expected if the SSC were sited, possible mitigations of adverse impacts, and resulting residual adverse impacts

  13. Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, New York final environmental impact statement

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    Liverman, J.L.

    1977-07-01

    Generally, data used for the statement were those which had been accumulated through the calendar year 1973. Since 1973, Environmental Monitoring Reports have been published for calendar years 1974 and 1975. A review of these more recent documents reveals that the data contained therein lead to no significant change in the conclusions drawn in this Environmental Impact Statement. Past Laboratory operations were considered only insofar as they contribute to continuing environmental impacts. Environmental effects were considered solely with respect to off-site consequences, the only exception being those cases where on-site effects have had or will have an impact on the long-term productivity of the Laboratory site

  14. 2004 Power marketing program final EIS - final environmental impact statement. Volume 2 - appendices

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1997-02-01

    This volume contains appendices to the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) for the Power Marketing Program proposal of the Western Area Power Administration. The FEIS identified peaking power scheduling as the environmentally preferred alternative, and presented the analysis of alternatives and environmental impacts. Sixteen appendices to the FEIS are included in this document. The appendices are: Statutory and Legal Framework; Sierra Nevada Region Customer Groups and Economic Regions; Renewable Technology Cost Information Matrix; Hydrological Assumptions; Recreation Resources; Archaeological and Historical Resources; Incremental Power Resources; Air Quality Regulatory Structure; Energy Generation; Stage Contents Relationships for Regulating Reservoirs; Power Costs; Socioeconomic Impacts; Projected Air Resource Impacts; Land use, Water Quality, and Solid Waste Impact Factors; Draft Environmental Impact Statement Comments and Responses, and Contractor Disclosure Statements. 21 figs., 24 tabs

  15. 77 FR 74027 - Winter Use Plan, Final Environmental Impact Statement Amended Record of Decision, Yellowstone...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2012-12-12

    ...] Winter Use Plan, Final Environmental Impact Statement Amended Record of Decision, Yellowstone National... Availability of Amended Record of Decision for the Final Environmental Impact Statement for a Winter Use Plan... Record of Decision for the Winter Use Plan for Yellowstone National Park, located in Idaho, Montana, and...

  16. Final environmental statement, Liquid Metal Fast Breeder Reactor Program. Volume 1

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1975-12-01

    Information is presented under the following section headings: LMFBR program options and their compatibility with the major issues affecting commercial development, Proposed Final Environmental Statement for the LMFBR program, December 1974, WASH-1535, supplemental material, and material relating to Proposed Final Environmental Statement review

  17. 77 FR 16558 - General Management Plan/Final Environmental Impact Statement, Hampton National Historic Site...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2012-03-21

    ... Management Plan/Final Environmental Impact Statement, Hampton National Historic Site, Maryland AGENCY...) announces the availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the General Management Plan.../Baltimore County Library, 320 York Avenue, Towson, Maryland 21204. Baltimore County Tourism Office and...

  18. 78 FR 24734 - Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Construction and Operation of an Infantry Platoon...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2013-04-26

    ... DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Department of the Army Final Environmental Impact Statement for the... Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS), Southwest of Range 20, is not operationally feasible and has been.... The Army identified and analyzed environmental and socioeconomic impacts associated with the proposed...

  19. 76 FR 6455 - Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) for the Growth, Realignment, and...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2011-02-04

    ... alternative, the Army would retain its aviation force structure at its current levels, configurations, and.... The primary environmental issues evaluated include impacts to air quality, soil, airspace, cultural... DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Department of the Army Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement...

  20. Nevada Test Site, Nye County, Nevada. Final environmental impact statement

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1977-09-01

    This environmental statement for the Nevada Test Site (NTS) considers underground nuclear detonations with yields of one megaton or less, along with the preparations necessary for such detonations. The testing activities considered also include other continuing and intermittent activities, both nuclear and nonnuclear, which can best be conducted in the remote and controlled area of the Nevada Test Site. These activities are listed, with emphasis on weapons testing programs which do not remain static

  1. Nevada Test Site, Nye County, Nevada. Final environmental impact statement

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    NONE

    1977-09-01

    This environmental statement for the Nevada Test Site (NTS) considers underground nuclear detonations with yields of one megaton or less, along with the preparations necessary for such detonations. The testing activities considered also include other continuing and intermittent activities, both nuclear and nonnuclear, which can best be conducted in the remote and controlled area of the Nevada Test Site. These activities are listed, with emphasis on weapons testing programs which do not remain static.

  2. Rocky Flats Plant site, Golden, Jefferson County, Colorado. Final environmental impact statement (final statement to ERDA 1545-D)

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1980-04-01

    This final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) incorporates a number of changes as a result of the comments and suggestions received on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement. The major additions and revisions of this first of the three-volume statement are discussed. Chapter titles are: summary; background; environmental impacts; unavoidable adverse environmental effects; alternatives; relationship between short-term uses and long-term productivity; relationship to land-use plans; irreversible and irretrievable commitments of resources; and, environmental trade-off analysis. Chapter 2 includes updated information on seismic stability of the area and seismic design criteria are presented. A mechanism for dissemination of the data from seismic studies in progress is specified. The Plant's personnel protection program with respect to nonradioactive materials, Plant security systems, and the emergency plans of the Plant and the State of Colorado are discussed in greater detail. Material on the environmental monitoring program was updated to reflect current monitoring and measuring conditions. Discussions of various soil sampling methods, plutonium background levels in soil, and plutonium soil standards, are presented. The dose calculations in Chapter 3 were extended to include comparisons of organ doses to natural background organ doses as well as the dose to the whole body. Doses to women and children are considered by exposure pathway as well as those for Standard Man. All credible accident scenarios were reviewed and details updated. A comprehensive discussion of genetic and health effects is presented in Appendices G-2 through G-4. Chapter 5 was revised to reflect the effort and cost involved in decontaminating soil, both on-site and offsite, relative to various decontamination criteria which might be employed

  3. Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for stockpile stewardship and management

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1996-09-01

    The Department of Energy (DOE) has been directed by the President and Congress to maintain the safety and reliability of the reduced nuclear weapons stockpile in the absence of underground nuclear testing. In order to fulfill that responsibility, DOE has developed a Stockpile Stewardship and Management Program to provide a single highly integrated technical program for maintaining the continued safety and reliability of the nuclear stockpile. The Stockpile Stewardship and Management Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) describes and analyzes alternative ways to implement the proposed actions for the Stockpile Stewardship and Management Program. This document contains Volume II which consists of Appendices A through H

  4. Columbia River system operation review. Final environmental impact statement

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1995-11-01

    Since the 1930's, the Columbia River has been harnessed for the benefit of the Northwest and the nation. Federal agencies have built 30 major dams on the river and its tributaries. Dozens of non-Federal projects have been developed as well. The dams provide flood control, irrigation, navigation, hydro-electric power generation, recreation, fish and wildlife, and streamflows for wildlife, anadromous fish, resident fish, and water quality. This is Appendix F of the Environmental Impact Statement for the Columbia River System, focusing on irrigation issues and concerns arrising from the Irrigation and Mitigation of impacts (M ampersand I) working Group of the SOR process. Major subheadings include the following: Scope and process of irrigation/M ampersand I studies; Irrigation/M ampersand I in the Columbia Basin Today including overview, irrigated acreage and water rights, Irrigation and M ampersand I issues basin-wide and at specific locations; and the analysis of impacts and alternative for the Environmental Impact Statement

  5. Savannah River Site waste management. Final environmental impact statement - addendum

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1995-07-01

    The purpose of this environmental impact statement is to help DOE decide how to manage over the next 30 years liquid high-level radioactive, low-level radioactive, mixed, hazardous, and transuranic wastes generated during 40 years of past operations and on-going activities (including management of wastes received from offsite) at Savannah River Site (SRS) in southwestern South Carolina. The wastes are currently stored at SRS. DOE seeks to dispose of the wastes in a cost-effective manner that protects human health and the environment. In this document, DOE assesses the cumulative environmental impacts of storing, treating, and disposing of the wastes, examines the impacts of alternatives, and identifies measures available to reduce adverse impacts. Evaluations of impacts on water quality, air quality, ecological systems, land use, geologic resources, cultural resources, socio-economics, and the health and safety of onsite workers and the public are included in the assessment

  6. Savannah River Site Waste Management Final Environmental Impact Statement Addendum

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1995-07-01

    The purpose of this environmental impact statement is to help DOE decide how to manage over the next 30 years liquid high-level radioactive, low-level radioactive, mixed, hazardous, and transuranic wastes generated during 40 years of past operations and on-going activities (including management of wastes received from offsite) at Savannah River Site (SRS) in southwestern South Carolina. The wastes are currently stored at SRS. DOE seeks to dispose of the wastes in a cost-effective manner that protects human health and the environment. In this document, DOE assesses the cumulative environmental impacts of storing, treating, and disposing of the wastes, examines the impacts of alternatives, and identifies measures available to reduce adverse impacts. Evaluations of impacts on water quality, air quality, ecological systems, land use, geologic resources, cultural resources, socio-economic, and the health and safety of onsite workers and the public are included in the assessment

  7. Final environmental statement related to the operation of River Bend Station (Docket No. 50-458)

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1985-01-01

    This Final Environmental Statement contains the second assessment of the environmental impact associated with the operation of River Bend Station, pursuant to the National Environment Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) and Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 51, as amended, of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission regulations. This statement examines the environment, environmental consequences and mitigating actions, and environmental and economic benefits and costs

  8. Telephone Flat Geothermal Development Project Environmental Impact Statement Environmental Impact Report. Final

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    None

    1999-02-01

    This Final Environmental Impact Statement and Environmental Impact Report (Final EIS/EIR) has been prepared to meet the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Proposed Action includes the construction, operation, and decommissioning of a 48 megawatt (gross) geothermal power plant with ancillary facilities (10-12 production well pads and 3-5 injection well pads, production and injection pipelines), access roads, and a 230-kilovolt (kV) transmission line in the Modoc National Forest in Siskiyou County, California. Alternative locations for the power plant site within a reasonable distance of the middle of the wellfield were determined to be technically feasible. Three power plant site alternatives are evaluated in the Final EIS/EIR.

  9. Humeca Uranium Mill. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's final environmental statement

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1976-04-01

    The Humeca Uranium Mill is a carbonate-leach uranium ore refining plant with a capacity of about 500 tons of ore per day. Although the present licensing action does not extend to mining, the statement considers the environmental impact of the combined mining and milling project to be conducted by Rio Algom Corporation. The environmental impact, including adverse and beneficial environmental effects of the Rio Algom Uranium Mill, is as follows. (1) Temporary (about 10 years) reassignment of use of about 120 acres of land out of the total 2,573 acres controlled by Rio Algom Corporation. (2) The removal of an estimated 8.4 million pounds of uranium concentrates as a natural resource. This material will eventually be used to produce approximately 6.09 x 10 6 megawatt-days of electricity. (3) Removal and diversion of approximately 100 gallons per minute of local groundwater. (4) Stimulation of the local economy through payment of taxes and direct employment of about 200 persons in San Juan County over the next 10 years. Rio Algom estimates they will pay out over $11 million in salaries over this period of time. (5) The creation of stabilized tailings piles covering about 45 acres involving approximately 1,850,000 tons of solids containing solidified waste chemical and radioactive uranium and its daughter products. (6) Discharge of small quantities of chemicals and radioactive materials (that are not expected to produce discernible effects) into the local environs

  10. 76 FR 9054 - Notice of Availability of Final Environmental Impact Statement for the AREVA Enrichment Services...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2011-02-16

    ... Statement for the AREVA Enrichment Services LLC Proposed Eagle Rock Enrichment Facility in Bonneville County... published the Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the AREVA Enrichment Services LLC (AES) Proposed Eagle Rock Enrichment Facility (EREF). On December 30, 2008, AES submitted a license application...

  11. 77 FR 46516 - Notice of Availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement, Including a Programmatic...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2012-08-03

    ... Impact Statement, Including a Programmatic Agreement, for the Clark, Lincoln, and White Pine Counties...) has prepared a Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and a Programmatic Agreement (PA), which is.... 100 N., Nephi Beaver Library, 55 W. Center St., Beaver FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Penny Woods...

  12. Final environmental impact statement. Waste Isolation Pilot Plant

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1980-10-01

    In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, the US Department of Energy (DOE) has prepared this document as environmental input to future decisions regarding the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP), which would include the disposal of transuranic waste, as currently authorized. The alternatives covered in this document are the following: (1) Continue storing transuranic (TRU) waste at the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory (INEL) as it is now or with improved confinement. (2) Proceed with WIPP at the Los Medanos site in southeastern New Mexico, as currently authorized. (3) Dispose of TRU waste in the first available repository for high-level waste. The Los Medanos site would be investigated for its potential suitability as a candidate site. This is administration policy and is the alternative preferred by the DOE. (4) Delay the WIPP to allow other candidate sites to be evaluated for TRU-waste disposal. This environmental impact statement is arranged in the following manner: Chapter 1 is an overall summary of the analysis contained in the document. Chapters 2 and 4 set forth the objectives of the national waste-management program and analyze the full spectrum of reasonable alternatives for meeting these objectives, including the WIPP. Chapter 5 presents the interim waste-acceptance criteria and waste-form alternatives for the WIPP. Chapters 6 through 13 provide a detailed description and environmental analysis of the WIPP repository and its site. Chapter 14 describes the permits and approvals necessary for the WIPP and the interactions that have taken place with Federal, State, and local authorities, and with the general public in connection with the repository. Chapter 15 analyzes the many comments received on the DEIS and tells what has been done in this FEIS in response. The appendices contain data and discussions in support of the material in the text

  13. Final environmental impact statement. Waste Isolation Pilot Plant

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    1980-10-01

    In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, the US Department of Energy (DOE) has prepared this document as environmental input to future decisions regarding the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP), which would include the disposal of transuranic waste, as currently authorized. The alternatives covered in this document are the following: (1) Continue storing transuranic (TRU) waste at the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory (INEL) as it is now or with improved confinement. (2) Proceed with WIPP at the Los Medanos site in southeastern New Mexico, as currently authorized. (3) Dispose of TRU waste in the first available repository for high-level waste. The Los Medanos site would be investigated for its potential suitability as a candidate site. This is administration policy and is the alternative preferred by the DOE. (4) Delay the WIPP to allow other candidate sites to be evaluated for TRU-waste disposal. This environmental impact statement is arranged in the following manner: Chapter 1 is an overall summary of the analysis contained in the document. Chapters 2 and 4 set forth the objectives of the national waste-management program and analyze the full spectrum of reasonable alternatives for meeting these objectives, including the WIPP. Chapter 5 presents the interim waste-acceptance criteria and waste-form alternatives for the WIPP. Chapters 6 through 13 provide a detailed description and environmental analysis of the WIPP repository and its site. Chapter 14 describes the permits and approvals necessary for the WIPP and the interactions that have taken place with Federal, State, and local authorities, and with the general public in connection with the repository. Chapter 15 analyzes the many comments received on the DEIS and tells what has been done in this FEIS in response. The appendices contain data and discussions in support of the material in the text.

  14. 76 FR 68503 - Winter Use Plan, Final Environmental Impact Statement, Yellowstone National Park, Idaho, Montana...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2011-11-04

    ... DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service Winter Use Plan, Final Environmental Impact.... ACTION: Notice of availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Winter Use Plan... Winter Use Plan for Yellowstone National Park, located in Idaho, Montana, and [[Page 68504

  15. 76 FR 13429 - Notice of Availability of Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Proposed Blackfoot Bridge...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2011-03-11

    ...] Notice of Availability of Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Proposed Blackfoot Bridge Mine... Blackfoot Bridge Mine. DATES: The Final EIS is now available for public review. The BLM Record of Decision... of Availability of the Final EIS in the Federal Register. ADDRESSES: Copies of the Blackfoot Bridge...

  16. Final environmental statement, Liquid Metal Fast Breeder Reactor Program. Volume 3

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1975-12-01

    Included are copies of thirty-four comment letters on the Proposed Final Environmental Statement together with the ERDA replies to these letters. The letters were received from Federal, State, and local agencies, environmental and public interest groups, members of the academic and industrial communities, and individual citizens

  17. Final environmental statement, Liquid Metal Fast Breeder Reactor Program. Volume 2

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1975-12-01

    Included are copies of fifty-six comment letters on the Proposed Final Environmental Statement together with the ERDA replies to these letters. The letters were received from Federal, State, and local agencies, environmental and public interest groups, members of the academic and industrial communities, and individual citizens

  18. Telephone Flat Geothermal Development Project Environmental Impact Statement Environmental Impact Report. Final: Comments and Responses to Comments

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    None

    1999-02-01

    This document is the Comments and Responses to Comments volume of the Final Environmental Impact Statement and Environmental Impact Report prepared for the proposed Telephone Flat Geothermal Development Project (Final EIS/EIR). This volume of the Final EIS/EIR provides copies of the written comments received on the Draft EIS/EIR and the leady agency responses to those comments in conformance with the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

  19. Final environmental impact statement supplement for wastewater management systems, North Jefferson County, Kentucky wastewater facilities

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1992-12-01

    The Final Environmental Impact Statement Supplement (FEISS) serves to update the wastewater treatment alternatives presented in the original EIS (The North County Area Environmental Impact Statement, Jefferson County, KY, July 1984), determine the best alternative, and compare that alternative to the Louisville and Jefferson County Metropolitan Sewer District's North County Action Plan (NCAP). The NCAP was determined to have the greatest cost effectiveness, lowest environmental impact, and best implementability and reliability and so is the preferred alternative in the FEISS. Significant environmental impacts of the alternative are described and mitigative measures discussed

  20. Final environmental statement for La Crosse Boiling Water Reactor: (Docket No. 50-409)

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1980-04-01

    A Final Environmental Statement for the Dairyland Power Cooperative for the conversion from a provisional to a full-term operating license for the La Crosse Boiling Water Reactor, located in Vernon County, Wisconsin, has been prepared by the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. This statement provides a summary of environmental impacts and adverse effects of operation of the facility, and a consideration of principal alternatives (including removal of LACBWR from service, alternative cooling methodology, and alternative waste treatment systems). Also included are the comments of federal, state, and local governmental agencies and certain non-governmental organizations on the La Crosse Draft Environmental Statement and staff responses to these comments. After weighing environmental, economic, and technical benefits and liabilities, the staff recommends conversion from a provisional operating license to a full-term operating license, subject to specific environmental protection limitations. An operational monitoring program shall be established as part of the Environmental Technical Specifications. 64 refs., 20 figs., 48 tabs

  1. Environmental Impact Statement. March 2011. Interim storage, encapsulation and final disposal of spent nuclear fuel

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    2011-07-01

    An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) shall be prepared and submitted along with applications for permissibility and a licence under the Environmental Code and a licence under the Nuclear Activities Act for new nuclear facilities. This Environmental Impact Statement has been prepared by Svensk Kaernbraenslehantering AB (the Swedish Nuclear Fuel and Waste Management Co, SKB) to be included in the licence applications for continued operation of Clab (central interim storage facility for spent nuclear fuel) in Simpevarp in Oskarshamn Municipality and construction and operation of facilities for encapsulation (integrated with Clab) and final disposal of spent nuclear fuel in Forsmark in Oesthammar Municipality

  2. Environmental Impact Statement. March 2011. Interim storage, encapsulation and final disposal of spent nuclear fuel

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    2011-01-01

    An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) shall be prepared and submitted along with applications for permissibility and a licence under the Environmental Code and a licence under the Nuclear Activities Act for new nuclear facilities. This Environmental Impact Statement has been prepared by Svensk Kaernbraenslehantering AB (the Swedish Nuclear Fuel and Waste Management Co, SKB) to be included in the licence applications for continued operation of Clab (central interim storage facility for spent nuclear fuel) in Simpevarp in Oskarshamn Municipality and construction and operation of facilities for encapsulation (integrated with Clab) and final disposal of spent nuclear fuel in Forsmark in Oesthammar Municipality

  3. Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant expansion: final environmental statement. Volume 1

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    1977-09-01

    Volume 1 is comprised of chapters on: background and description; environmental impacts of add-on gaseous diffusion plant; unavoidable adverse environmental effects; alternatives; relationship between short-term uses and long-term productivity; relationship of program to land-use plans, policies, and controls; irreversible and irretrievable commitments of resources; cost-benefit analysis; and response to comment letters. (LK)

  4. Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant expansion: final environmental statement. Volume 1

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1977-09-01

    Volume 1 is comprised of chapters on: background and description; environmental impacts of add-on gaseous diffusion plant; unavoidable adverse environmental effects; alternatives; relationship between short-term uses and long-term productivity; relationship of program to land-use plans, policies, and controls; irreversible and irretrievable commitments of resources; cost-benefit analysis; and response to comment letters

  5. 77 FR 62256 - Notice of Availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Mount Hope Project...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2012-10-12

    ... of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Mount Hope Project, Eureka County, NE AGENCY... prepared a Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Mount Hope Project and by this notice is... Register. ADDRESSES: Copies of the Mount Hope Project Final EIS are available at the Battle Mountain...

  6. 76 FR 12096 - McCloud-Pit Project; Notice of Availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2011-03-04

    ... Project; Notice of Availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Mccloud-Pit... Pit Rivers in Shasta County, California and has prepared a final environmental impact statement (EIS... and the alternatives for relicensing the McCloud-Pit Project. The final EIS documents the views of...

  7. Expansion of U. S. uranium enrichment capacity. Final environmental statement

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    1976-04-01

    Reasonably foreseeable environmental, social, economic, and technological costs and benefits of postulated expansion of U. S. enrichment capacity through the year 2000 and reasonably available alternatives to such expansion are described. Both the gas centrifuge and gaseous diffusion methods for the enrichment of uranium are considered in this impact assessment. (JGB)

  8. Tank Waste Remediation System, Hanford Site, Richland, Washington. Final Environmental Impact Statement. Volume IV

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1996-08-01

    This document, Volume 4, describes the current safety concerns associated with the tank waste and analyzes the potential accidents and associated potential health effects that could occur under the alternatives included in this Tank Waste Remediation System (TWRS) Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Hanford Site, Richland, Washington

  9. 75 FR 10308 - Fire Management Plan, Final Environmental Impact Statement, Record of Decision, Grand Canyon...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-03-05

    ... DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service Fire Management Plan, Final Environmental Impact... Statement for the Fire Management Plan, Grand Canyon National Park. SUMMARY: Pursuant to the National... the Record of Decision for the Fire Management Plan, Grand Canyon National Park, Arizona. On January...

  10. 75 FR 49504 - Notice of Availability of Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Goethals Bridge...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-08-13

    ... Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Goethals Bridge Replacement Project AGENCY: Coast Guard... the 82-year old Goethals Bridge across the Arthur Kill between Staten Island, NY, and Elizabeth, NJ... proposed Goethals Bridge Replacement Project. DATES: The review period for the FEIS will close on September...

  11. 75 FR 51479 - Notice of Availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Chevron Energy...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-08-20

    ... Solutions/Solar Millennium Blythe Solar Power Plant and Proposed California Desert Conservation Area Plan... Proposed California Desert Conservation Area (CDCA) Plan Amendment/Final Environmental Impact Statement... impacts of the project on air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, water resources...

  12. 76 FR 67178 - Wells Hydroelectric Project; Notice of Availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2011-10-31

    ... DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 2149-152] Wells Hydroelectric Project; Notice of Availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Wells... application for license for the Wells Hydroelectric Project (FERC No. 2149), located on the Columbia River in...

  13. 76 FR 24050 - Coral Reef Restoration Plan, Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement, Biscayne National...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2011-04-29

    ... DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service [2310-0003-422] Coral Reef Restoration Plan... for the Coral Reef Restoration Plan, Biscayne National Park. SUMMARY: Pursuant to the National... availability of a Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for the Coral Reef Restoration Plan (Plan...

  14. 76 FR 77249 - Winter Use Plan, Final Environmental Impact Statement Record of Decision, Yellowstone National...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2011-12-12

    ... DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service Winter Use Plan, Final Environmental Impact... Impact Statement for a Winter Use Plan, Yellowstone National Park. SUMMARY: Pursuant to Sec. 102(2)(C) of... Winter Use Plan for Yellowstone National Park, located in Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming. On December 5...

  15. Columbia River system operation review. Final environmental impact statement. Appendix J, recreation

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1995-11-01

    This Appendix J of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Columbia River System discusses impacts on the recreational activities in the region. Major sections include the following: scope and processes; recreation in the Columbia River Basin today - by type, location, participation, user characteristics, factors which affect usage, and managing agencies; recreation analysis procedures and methodology; and alternatives and their impacts

  16. Columbia River System Operation Review : Final Environmental Impact Statement, Appendix J: Recreation.

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    Columbia River System Operation Review (U.S.)

    1995-11-01

    This Appendix J of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Columbia River System discusses impacts on the recreational activities in the region. Major sections include the following: scope and processes; recreation in the Columbia River Basin today - by type, location, participation, user characteristics, factors which affect usage, and managing agencies; recreation analysis procedures and methodology; and alternatives and their impacts.

  17. 77 FR 74865 - Notice of Availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Searchlight Wind...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2012-12-18

    ... of pad mounted transformers at the base of each turbine, underground collection lines, new access....241A; 13-08807; MO 450004530; TAS: 14X5017] Notice of Availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Searchlight Wind Energy Project, Clark County, NV AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management...

  18. Final environmental impact statement: US Spent Fuel Policy. Executive summary

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1980-05-01

    The analysis of the environmental impacts for storage of domestic fuel shows that the impacts for the full range of alternatives considered are relatively small compared with available resources or background exposure of the population from natural radiation sources. The differences in impacts of storage of domestic fuel are attributed to the amount of fuel stored in Independent Spent Fuel Storage (ISFS) facilities, the storage time, and, to a lesser degree, the differences in spent fuel transportation. The differences between comparable alternatives of implementing the policy or not implementing the policy are small. The difference in impacts of storage of foreign fuel are attributed to the amount of fuel received under the policy and to the disposition mode analyzed. The impact of storage of foreign fuel (a small fraction of the amount of domestic fuel considered) is also small. As a result of the small differences in environmental impacts of all cases considered for foreign fuel, environmental impacts probably will not strongly influence the selection of the case that best meets US nonproliferation goals. Proliferation benefits of the various cases analyzed vary significantly. The structure and level of fee charged for storage of spent fuel will affect the degree of participation in the spent fuel storage program by utilities. However, the range of participation is within the range of alternatives analyzed in the draft EISs on storage of US and foreign fuels, for which the environmental effects were found to be relatively small. The fee computed on the basis of full recovery of government costs should not significantly affect the cost of generating nuclear power

  19. Non-Federal participation in AC Intertie: Final environmental impact statement

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1994-01-01

    This document contains the appendices for the Non-Federal Participation in AC Intertie Final Environmental Impact Statement. It contains all the supporting materials, documents and data for the EIS in nine appendices: A. Life-of-facilities capacity ownership proposal; B. Long-term Intertie access policy; C. Glossary; D. Biological assessment and supporting materials; E. Environmental impacts of generic resource types; F. Technical information on analysis methods and results; G. Affected environment supporting documentation; H. Public involvement activities; and I. Bibliography

  20. Columbia River system operation review. Final environmental impact statement

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1995-11-01

    This study attempts to identify and analyze the impacts of the System Operating Strategy (SOS) alternatives on cultural resources. The impacts include effects on Native American traditional cultural values, properties and practices. They also include effects on archeological or historic properties meeting the criteria of the National Register of Historic Places. In addition to responding to the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), this analysis addresses the requirements of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), the Archeological Resources Protection Act (ARPA), the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), the Native American Religious Freedom Act (NARFA), and other relevant legislation. To meet their legally mandated cultural resources requirements, the SOR agencies will develop agreements and Implementation Plans with the appropriate State Historic Preservation Officers (SHPOs), Tribes, and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) detailing the measures necessary to best manage the resource. The planning and implementation activities will be staged over a number of years in consultation with affected Tribes

  1. Columbia River final environmental impact statement. Appendix B: Air quality

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1995-11-01

    The System Operation Review (SOR) is a study and environmental compliance process being used by the three Federal agencies to analyze future operations of the system and river use issues. The goal of the SOR is to achieve a coordinated system operation strategy for the river that better meets the needs of all river users. This technical appendix addresses only the effects of alternative system operating strategies for managing the Columbia River system. This appendix consists of eight chapters. Chapter 1 describes the air quality issues that were raised in the SOR scoping process and provides an overview of the study process used to evaluate air quality effects from various system operation alternatives. Chapter 2 describes the Federal, state, and local programs that regulate air quality and discusses the air quality standards that are relevant to the analysis. It also gives an overview of the limatology of the region and the existing air quality in the Columbia River Basin, including areas of non-attainment for relevant air quality standards. Chapter 3 presents the methods this study uses for the analysis of air quality and for the evaluation of human health effects from air pollutants. Chapter 4 provides the study results for the System Operating Strategy (SOS) alternatives and potential mitigation measures. Chapter 5 compares impacts on air quality and human health across alternatives, and discusses mitigation measures and cumulative effects. Chapters 6, 7, and 8 contain the list of preparers, glossary, and references, respectively. Technical exhibits supporting the analysis are also included

  2. Navajo transmission project. Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS)

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1997-08-01

    Dine Power Authority, a Navajo Nation enterprise, proposes to construct a 500 kilovolt transmission line planned to deliver electrical power from the Shiprock Substation in northwestern New Mexico to the Marketplace Substation in southern Nevada. The line would relieve constraints on transmission of electricity west from the Four Corners area; improve operational flexibility and reliability of the overall system; and allow increased economical transfers, sales, and purchases in the Rocky Mountains/Four Corners/Desert Southwest region. Also, the project allows an opportunity for the Navajo Nation to participate in the electrical utility industry and promote economic development to benefit the people of the Navajo Nation. Six alternatives were considered and include (1) energy conservation and electric load management, (2) new generation facilities, (3) use of existing transmission systems, (4) alternative transmission technologies, (5) no action, and (6) the proposed action. For the proposed action, the following alternative routes and ancillary facility locations are addressed in the EIS: four alternative routes and five substations in the eastern portion of the project area; and six alternative routes, three substation sites, and a microwave communication facility in the western portion of the project area. The existing condition of the environmental resources in the project area is described, and potential impacts on those resources as a result of the proposed action are addressed. The impacts of the proposed action would be caused mainly by access roads, tower sites, and other associated facilities on soils, vegetation, wildlife, and cultural and paleontological resources; and the impact of the transmission line's presence on visual resources and land uses. Public comments on the draft EIS are addressed in this FEIS

  3. 75 FR 19991 - Notice of Availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the UNEV Refined Liquid...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-04-16

    ...-82385] Notice of Availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the UNEV Refined Liquid...) has prepared a Proposed Resource Management Plan Amendment (RMPA)/Final Environmental Impact Statement..., Tooele, Juab, Millard, Beaver, Iron, and Washington Counties in Utah; and Lincoln and Clark Counties in...

  4. 77 FR 61020 - Notice of Availability of Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Sigurd to Red Butte No. 2...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2012-10-05

    ...; UTU-83067] Notice of Availability of Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Sigurd to Red Butte... (BLM) has prepared a Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Sigurd to Red Butte No. 2--345...; Utah School and Institutional Trust Lands Administration; Millard, Sevier, Beaver, Iron, and Washington...

  5. 78 FR 43224 - Notice of Availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Proposed Sun Valley to...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2013-07-19

    ....XXX; AZA35079] Notice of Availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Proposed Sun... Land Management (BLM) has prepared a Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the proposed Sun..., operate, and maintain a 500/230-kV overhead transmission line from the Sun Valley Substation to the Morgan...

  6. Beaufort Sea planning area oil and gas Lease Sale 170. Final environmental impact statement

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1998-02-01

    This environmental impact statement (EIS) assesses Lease Sale 170 proposed for August 1998 and comprised of 363 lease blocks in the Beaufort Sea planning area. The analysis addresses the significant environmental and socioeconomic concerns identified in the scoping process. Scoping consisted of input from State and Federal agencies, the petroleum industry, Native groups, environmental and public interest groups, and concerned individuals. The potential effects expected from the interaction between environmental resources and OCS-related activities were determined with respect to available scientific information and traditional knowledge. This EIS incorporates information from the Final EIS for the Beaufort Sea OCS Sale 144 (USD01, MMS, 1996a)

  7. Fuel Receiving and Storage Station. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's final environmental statement

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1976-01-01

    The following items are covered: the site, the station, environmental effects of site preparation and station construction, environmental effects of station operation, effluent and environmental monitoring programs, environmental effects of accidents, need for BFRSS, benefit-cost analysis of alternatives, generic environmental impact statements, and discussion of and response to comments received on the draft environmental statement

  8. Initial Northwest Power Act Power Sales Contracts : Final Environmental Impact Statement. Volume 4, Comments and Responses.

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    United States. Bonneville Power Administration.

    1992-01-01

    This volume of the Initial Northwest Power Act Power Sales Contracts Final Environmental Impact Statement (Final EIS) contains public comments addressing the Initial Northwest Power Act Power Sales Contracts Draft EIS, August 1990 and Bonneville Power Administration`s (BPA) responses. The Introduction provides information about the process BPA follows in addressing these comments. Part I contains a listing of the Alternative Actions evaluated in the Final EIS; Part II is organized by Alternatives and includes summaries of the comments and BPA responses; Part III provides copies of the original comments letters, and, for ease of identification, are coded in the margins according to the alternative(s) addressed.

  9. Final Environmental Statement related to the operation of Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit 2 (Docket No. 50-412)

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1985-09-01

    This Final Environmental Statement contains the second assessment of the environmental impact associated with Beaver Valley Power Station Unit 2 pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) and Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 51, as amended, of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission regulations. This statement examines the environment, environmental consequences and mitigating actions, and environmental benefits and costs, and concludes that the action called for is the issuance of an operating license for Beaver Valley Unit 2

  10. 76 FR 70169 - Draft Supplement 2 to Final Environmental Statement Related to the Operation of Watts Bar Nuclear...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2011-11-10

    ... Environmental Statement Related to the Operation of Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Unit 2; Tennessee Valley Authority... on NUREG-0498, ``Final Environmental Statement, Supplement 2, Related to the Operation of Watts Bar... the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Stephen J. Campbell, Chief, Watts Bar Special Projects Branch...

  11. 75 FR 30055 - Notice of Availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Graymont Western U.S...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-05-28

    ... Final EIS evaluated three alternatives: No Action, the Proposed Action, and Alternative A, Modified Pit... 252X; MTM78300] Notice of Availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Graymont... of 1969 and the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, a Final Environmental Impact...

  12. Uranium milling, project M-25. Volume I. summary and text. Final generic environmental impact statement

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1980-09-01

    The Final Generic Environmental Impact Statement (GEIS) on Uranium Milling focuses primarily upon the matter of mill tailings disposal. It evaluates both the costs and benefits of alternative tailings disposal modes and draws conclusions about criteria which should be incorporated into regulations. Both institutional and technical controls are evaluated. Health impacts considered were both short and long term. Restatement and resolution of all public comments received on the draft (GEIS) are presented. There are three volumes: Volume I is the main text and Volumes II and III are supporting appendices

  13. Columbia River System Operation Review : Final Environmental Impact Statement, Main Report Exhibits.

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    Columbia River System Operation Review (U.S.)

    1995-11-01

    This Volume is a part of the Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Columbia River System. This volume contains technical exhibits of cultural resources and commentary on the (System Operation Review) SOR process. The Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation comment is the majority of the material in the volume, in the Consultation Plan, Identification of trust resources; Criteria for the selection of a System Operating Strategy; comment on rights protection and implementation of Federal Trust responsibility; analysis of the draft EIS. Comment by other Native American Tribes and groups is also included: Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation; Kootenai Tribe of Idaho; Spokane Tribe of Indians; Coeur d` Alene tribe.

  14. Columbia River system operation review: Final environmental impact statement. Main report exhibits

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1995-11-01

    This Volume is a part of the Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Columbia River System. This volume contains technical exhibits of cultural resources and commentary on the (System Operation Review) SOR process. The Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation comment is the majority of the material in the volume, in the Consultation Plan, Identification of trust resources; Criteria for the selection of a System Operating Strategy; comment on rights protection and implementation of Federal Trust responsibility; analysis of the draft EIS. Comment by other Native American Tribes and groups is also included: Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation; Kootenai Tribe of Idaho; Spokane Tribe of Indians; Coeur d' Alene tribe

  15. Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement, Lake Darling Flood Control Project, Souris River, North Dakota and Final Feature Environmental Impact Statement, Velva Flood Control, Velva, North Dakota.

    Science.gov (United States)

    1983-11-01

    1500-1508) identify a process called "tiering" and define it as "...the coverage of general matters in broader environmental impact statements (such as...Mr. John Clouse Mr. C. R. Danks Sherwood, ND 58782 Rural Route Route 2 Foxholm, ND 58738 King’s Court Minot, ND 58701 Dr. A. B. Brudirk Mrs. Veronica

  16. WPPSS Nuclear Project No. 2: Final environmental statement (DOCKET No. 50-397)

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1981-12-01

    The proposed action is the issuance of an operating license to the Washington Public Power Supply System (WPPSS) for the startup and operation of the Washington Nuclear Project Number 2 (WNP-2) located on the Columbia River in Benton County, about 19 km (12 mi) north of Richland, Washington. The facility will employ a boiling water reactor to produce 3323 megawatts thermal (MWt). A steam turbine-generator will use this heat to provide a nominal gross electrical output of 1150 megawatts (MWe). The exhaust steam will be condensed by cooled water from six circular mechanical-draft cooling towers with water taken from and returned to the Columbia River. The information in this statement represents the second assessment of the environmental impact associated with the WNP-2 pursuant to the guidelines of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) and 10 CRF Part 51 of the Commission's Regulations. After receiving an application to construct this plant, the staff carried out a review of impacts that would occur during its construction and operation. That evaluation was issued as a Final Environmental Statement (construction phase). The construction of Unit 2 about 86% complete. The staff estimated a fuel-loading date of September 1983. In March 1977, the applicant applied for an operating license for the unit and submitted the required safety and environmental reports in support of the application. 20 figs., 19 tabs

  17. Final environmental impact statement, construction and operation of the Spallation Neutron Source. Volume 2

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1999-04-01

    DOE issued the ''Draft Environmental Impact Statement: Construction and Operation of the Spallation Neutron Source'' in December 1998. This document was made available for review by federal agencies; tribal governments; the state of Tennessee, New Mexico, Illinois, and New York; local governments; and the general public. DOE invited comments on the accuracy and adequacy of the DEIS and any other matters pertaining to environmental review of the document. The formal review and comment period extended from December 24, 1998 until February 8, 1999. DOE considered all comments submitted after the review and comment period. This appendix to the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) contains the 206 comments received and the DOE responses to these comments. It consists of four chapters. Chapter 1 provides an introduction to the contents of this appendix and discusses the general methodology DOE used for documenting, considering, and responding to the review comments on the DEIS. Chapter 2 summarizes the principal issues of public concern collectively reflected by the comments and presents DOE's responses to these issues. The full texts of the comments on the DEIS are presented in Chapter 3. Chapter 4 contains DOE's written responses to these comments and the locations of textual changes in the FEIS that were made in response to the comments

  18. Waste Isolation Pilot Plant disposal phase final supplemental environmental impact statement. Volume 2: Appendices

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1997-09-01

    The purpose of the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Disposal Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS-II) is to provide information on environmental impacts regarding the Department of Energy's (DOE) proposed disposal operations at WIPP. The Proposed Action describes the treatment and disposal of the Basic inventory of TRU waste over a 35-year period. The Action Alternatives proposed the treatment of the Basic Inventory and an Additional Inventory as well as the transportation of the treated waste to WIPP for disposal over a 150- to 190-year period. The three Action Alternatives include the treatment of TRU waste at consolidation sites to meet WIPP planning-basic Waste Acceptance Criteria, the thermal treatment of TRU waste to meet Land Disposal Restrictions, and the treatment of TRU waste by a shred and grout process. SEIS-II evaluates environmental impacts resulting from the various treatment options; the transportation of TRU waste to WIPP using truck, a combination of truck and regular rail service, and a combination of truck and dedicated rail service; and the disposal of this waste in the repository. Evaluated impacts include those to the general environment and to human health. Additional issues associated with the implementation of the alternatives are discussed to provide further understanding of the decisions to be reached and to provide the opportunity for public input on improving DOE's Environmental Management Program. This volume contains the following appendices: Waste inventory; Summary of the waste management programmatic environmental impact statement and its use in determining human health impacts at treatment sites; Air quality; Life-cycle costs and economic impacts; Transportation; Human health; Facility accidents; Long-term consequence analysis for proposed action and action alternatives; Long-term consequence analysis for no action alternative 2; and Updated estimates of the DOE's transuranic waste volumes

  19. Bonneville Power Administration Transmission System Vegetation Management Program - Final Environmental Impact Statement

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    N/A

    2000-06-23

    Bonneville is responsible for maintaining a network of 24,000 kilometers (km) or 15,000 miles (mi.) of electric transmission lines and 350 substations in a region of diverse vegetation. This vegetation can interfere with electric power flow, pose safety problems for us and the public, and interfere with our ability to maintain these facilities. We need to (1) keep vegetation away from our electric facilities; (2) increase our program efficiency and consistency; (3) review herbicide use (under increased public scrutiny); and (4) maximize the range of tools we can use while minimizing environmental impact (Integrated Vegetation Management). This Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) establishes Planning Steps for managing vegetation for specific projects (to be tiered to this Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)). In addition to No Action (current practice), alternatives are presented for Rights-of-way, Electric Yards, and Non-electric Facilities (landscaping, work yards). Four vegetation control methods are analyzed manual, mechanical, herbicide, and biological. Also evaluated are 23 herbicide active ingredients and 4 herbicide application techniques (spot, localized, broadcast, and aerial). For rights-of-way, we consider three sets of alternatives: alternative management approaches (time-driven or establishing low-growing plant communities); alternative method packages; and, if herbicides are in a methods package, alternative vegetation selections (noxious weeds, deciduous, or any vegetation). For electric yards, one herbicide-use alternative is considered. For non-electric facilities, two method package alternatives are considered. For rights-of-way, the environmentally preferred alternative(s) would use manual, mechanical, and biological control methods, as well as spot and localized herbicide applications for noxious and deciduous plant species; the BPA-preferred alternative(s) would add broadcast and aerial herbicide applications, and would use herbicides

  20. Dual axis radiographic hydrodynamic test facility. Final environmental impact statement, Volume 2: Public comments and responses

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    NONE

    1995-08-01

    On May 12, 1995, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) issued the draft Dual Axis Radiographic Hydrodynamic Test Facility Environmental Impact Statement (DARHT EIS) for review by the State of New Mexico, Indian Tribes, local governments, other Federal agencies, and the general public. DOE invited comments on the accuracy and adequacy of the draft EIS and any other matters pertaining to their environmental reviews. The formal comment period ran for 45 days, to June 26, 1995, although DOE indicated that late comments would be considered to the extent possible. As part of the public comment process, DOE held two public hearings in Los Alamos and Santa Fe, New Mexico, on May 31 and June 1, 1995. In addition, DOE made the draft classified supplement to the DARHT EIS available for review by appropriately cleared individuals with a need to know the classified information. Reviewers of the classified material included the State of New Mexico, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Defense, and certain Indian Tribes. Volume 2 of the final DARHT EIS contains three chapters. Chapter 1 includes a collective summary of the comments received and DOE`s response. Chapter 2 contains the full text of the public comments on the draft DARHT EIS received by DOE. Chapter 3 contains DOE`s responses to the public comments and an indication as to how the comments were considered in the final EIS.

  1. Cook Inlet Planning Area oil and gas lease sale 149: Final environmental impact statement. Volume 2

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1996-01-01

    This environmental impact statement discusses a proposed oil and gas lease sale in the Cook Inlet Planning Area, analyzes its potential effects on the environment, describes alternatives, presents major issues determined through the scoping process and staff analyses, and evaluates potential mitigating measures. During the Draft Environmental Impact Statement comment period, written statements and oral testimonies were provided by various governmental agencies, organizations, businesses, and individuals. This report contains a review and analysis of comments received on the above issues. Appendices are included which contain resource estimates and various issues relating to oil spills

  2. Final environmental statement related to operation of White Mesa Uranium Project, Energy Fuels Nuclear, Inc

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1979-05-01

    Environmental impact statements are presented under the following headings: the existing environment; mining and milling operations; air quality; land use; mineral resources; soils; radiological impacts; socioeconomic impacts; environmental effects of accidents; monitoring programs; unavoidable adverse environmental impacts; relation between short-term uses of the environment and long-term productivity; irreversible and irretrievable commitments

  3. Tank Waste Remediation System, Hanford Site, Richland, Washington. Final Environmental Impact Statement. Volume VI

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1996-08-01

    The U.S. Department Of Energy and the Washington State Department of Ecology added Appendix L (Volume 6), Response to Public Comments, to the Tank Waste Remediation System (TWRS) Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Hanford Site, Richland, Washington, to fully address and respond to public comments on the Draft EIS. In addition, DOE considered public comments, along with other factors such as programmatic need, short- and long-term impacts, technical feasibility, and cost, in arriving at DOE's preferred alternative. During the public comment period for the Draft EIS, more than 350 individuals, agencies, Tribal Nations, and organizations provided comments. This volume represents a broad spectrum of private citizens; businesses; local, State, and Federal officials; Tribal Nations; and public interest groups

  4. Columbia River System Operation Review : Final Environmental Impact Statement, Appendix O: Economic and Social Impact.

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    Columbia River System Operation Review (U.S.)

    1995-11-01

    This Appendix O of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Columbia River System measures the economic and social effects of the alternative system operation strategies and includes both geographic and methodology components. Areas discussed in detail include the following: purpose, scope and process; an economic history of the Columbia River Basin and its use today including the Columbia River and Socio-economic development in the Northwest and Major uses of the River System; Analysis procedures and methodologies including national economic evaluation, the concepts, analysis of assumptions, analysis for specific river uses, water quality, Regional evaluation, analysis, and social impacts; alternatives and impacts including implementation costs, andromous fish, resident fish and wildlife, flood control, irrigation and municipal and industrial water supply, navigation impacts, power, recreation, annual costs, regional economic analysis. Extensive comparison of alternatives is included.

  5. Interim Columbia and Snake rivers flow improvement measures for salmon: Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS)

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    1993-03-01

    Public comments are sought on this final SEIS, which supplements the 1992 Columbia River Salmon Flow Measures Options Analysis (OA)/Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The Corps of Engineers, in cooperation with the Bonneville Power Administration and the Bureau of Reclamation proposes five alternatives to improve flows of water in the lower Columbia-Snake rivers in 1993 and future years to assist the migration of juvenile and adult anadromous fish past eight hydropower dams. These are: (1) Without Project (no action) Alternative, (2) the 1992 Operation, (3) the 1992 Operation with Libby/Hungry Horse Sensitivity, (4) a Modified 1992 Operation with Improvements to Salmon Flows from Dworshak, and (5) a Modified 1992 Operation with Upper Snake Sensitivity. Alternative 4, Modified 1992 Operations, has been identified as the preferred alternative.

  6. Columbia River system operation review: Final environmental impact statement. Appendix O, economic and social impact

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1995-11-01

    This Appendix O of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Columbia River System measures the economic and social effects of the alternative system operation strategies and includes both geographic and methodology components. Areas discussed in detail include the following: purpose, scope and process; an economic history of the Columbia River Basin and its use today including the Columbia River and Socio-economic development in the Northwest and Major uses of the River System; Analysis procedures and methodologies including national economic evaluation, the concepts, analysis of assumptions, analysis for specific river uses, water quality, Regional evaluation, analysis, and social impacts; alternatives and impacts including implementation costs, andromous fish, resident fish and wildlife, flood control, irrigation and municipal and industrial water supply, navigation impacts, power, recreation, annual costs, regional economic analysis. Extensive comparison of alternatives is included

  7. Final environmental impact statement: US Spent Fuel Policy. Comment letters on draft statements and major comments with DOE responses

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1980-05-01

    Notice of availability of the draft environmental impact statement for storage of US spent power reactor fuel was published by DOE in the Federal Register on September 6, 1978. A subsequent notice was published in the Federal Register on December 14, 1978, on the availability of the draft EISs on storage of foreign fuel, on charge for spent fuel storage, and a supplement to the draft EIS on storage of US fuel. Copies of the draft EISs were distributed for review and comment by appropriate Federal agencies, state governments, and other organizations and individuals who were known to have an interest in spent fuel storage activities and those who requested them. Comments and views concerning the draft EISs were requested from other interested agencies, organizations, and individuals by means of the Federal Register notices. Approximately 1600 copies each of the draft Domestic, Foreign, and Charge EISs were distributed for comment. The closing date for comments to be received on the draft EISs was February 15, 1979. Copies of the EISs (upon publication) and comment letters received were placed for public inspection in DOE public document rooms at 10 locations throughout the country. To the extent practicable, comments received after the closing date were also considered in the preparation of the final EIS. A total of 78 comment letters (some with supplements) were received. These comment letters are reproduced in their entirety in Section I of this volume. Approximately 600 specific comments were identified in these letters

  8. Waste Isolation Pilot Plant disposal phase final supplemental environmental impact statement. Summary

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1997-09-01

    The purpose of the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Disposal Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS-II) is to provide information on environmental impacts regarding the Department of Energy''s (DOE) proposed disposal operations at WIPP. The Proposed Action describes the treatment and disposal of the Basic inventory of TRU waste over a 35-year period. The Action Alternatives proposed the treatment of the Basic Inventory and an Additional Inventory as well as the transportation of the treated waste to WIPP for disposal over a 150- to 190-year period. The three Action Alternatives include the treatment of TRU waste at consolidation sites to meet WIPP planning-basic Waste Acceptance Criteria, the thermal treatment of TRU waste to meet Land Disposal Restrictions, and the treatment of TRU waste by a shred and grout process. SEIS-II evaluates environmental impacts resulting from the various treatment options; the transportation of TRU waste to WIPP using truck, a combination of truck and regular rail service, and a combination of truck and dedicated rail service; and the disposal of this waste in the repository. Evaluated impacts include those to the general environment and to human health. Additional issues associated with the implementation of the alternatives are discussed to provide further understanding of the decisions to be reached and to provide the opportunity for public input on improving DOE''s Environmental Management Program

  9. Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Space Nuclear Thermal Propulsion (SNTP) program

    Science.gov (United States)

    1991-09-01

    A program has been proposed to develop the technology and demonstrate the feasibility of a high-temperature particle bed reactor (PBR) propulsion system to be used to power an advanced second stage nuclear rocket engine. The purpose of this Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) is to assess the potential environmental impacts of component development and testing, construction of ground test facilities, and ground testing. Major issues and goals of the program include the achievement and control of predicted nuclear power levels; the development of materials that can withstand the extremely high operating temperatures and hydrogen flow environments; and the reliable control of cryogenic hydrogen and hot gaseous hydrogen propellant. The testing process is designed to minimize radiation exposure to the environment. Environmental impact and mitigation planning are included for the following areas of concern: (1) Population and economy; (2) Land use and infrastructure; (3) Noise; (4) Cultural resources; (5) Safety (non-nuclear); (6) Waste; (7) Topography; (8) Geology; (9) Seismic activity; (10) Water resources; (11) Meteorology/Air quality; (12) Biological resources; (13) Radiological normal operations; (14) Radiological accidents; (15) Soils; and (16) Wildlife habitats.

  10. Waste Isolation Pilot Plant disposal phase final supplemental environmental impact statement. Volume 3: Comment response document

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1997-09-01

    The purpose of the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Disposal Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS-II) is to provide information on environmental impacts regarding the Department of Energy''s (DOE) proposed disposal operations at WIPP. The Proposed Action describes the treatment and disposal of the Basic inventory of TRU waste over a 35-year period. The Action Alternatives proposed the treatment of the Basic Inventory and an Additional Inventory as well as the transportation of the treated waste to WIPP for disposal over a 150- to 190-year period. The three Action Alternatives include the treatment of TRU waste at consolidation sites to meet WIPP planning-basic Waste Acceptance Criteria, the thermal treatment of TRU waste to meet Land Disposal Restrictions, and the treatment of TRU waste by a shred and grout process. SEIS-II evaluates environmental impacts resulting from the various treatment options; the transportation of TRU waste to WIPP using truck, a combination of truck and regular rail service, and a combination of truck and dedicated rail service; and the disposal of this waste in the repository. Evaluated impacts include those to the general environment and to human health. Additional issues associated with the implementation of the alternatives are discussed to provide further understanding of the decisions to be reached and to provide the opportunity for public input on improving DOE''s Environmental Management Program. This volume provides responses to public comments on the Draft SEIS-II. Comments are related to: Alternatives; TRU waste; DOE credibility; Editorial; Endorsement/opposition; Environmental justice; Facility accidents; Generator site operations; Health and safety; Legal and policy issues; NEPA process; WIPP facilities; WIPP waste isolation performance; Purpose and need; WIPP operations; Site characterization; Site selection; Socioeconomics; and Transportation

  11. Zachary-Fort Lauderdale pipeline construction and conversion project: final supplement to final environmental impact statement. Docket No. CP74-192

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    None

    1980-05-01

    This Final Supplement to the Final Environmental Impact Statement (Final Supplement) evaluates the economic, engineering, and environmental aspects of newly developed alternatives to an abandonment/conversion project proposed by Florida Gas Transmission Company (Florida Gas). It also updates the staff's previous FEIS and studies revisions to the original proposal. Wherever possible, the staff has adopted portions of its previous FEIS in lieu of reprinting portions of that analysis which require no change. 60 references, 8 figures, 35 tables.

  12. Tank Waste Remediation System, Hanford Site, Richland, Washington. Final Environmental Impact Statement. Volume I

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1996-08-01

    This document, Volume 1 of the Final Environmental Impact Statement, analyzes the potential environmental consequences related to the Hanford Site Tank Waste Remediation System (TWRS) alternatives for management and disposal of radioactive, hazardous, and mixed waste, and the management and disposal of approximately 1,930 cesium and strontium capsules located at the Hanford Site. This waste is currently or projected to be stored in 177 underground storage tanks and approximately 60 miscellaneous underground storage tanks. This document analyzes the following alternatives for remediating the tank waste: No Action, Long-Term Management, In Situ Fill and Cap, In Situ Vitrification, Ex Situ Intermediate Separations, Ex Situ No Separations, Ex Situ Extensive Separations, Ex Situ/In Situ Combination 1, and Ex Situ/In Situ Combination 2. This document also addresses a Phased Implementation alternative (the DOE and Ecology preferred alternative for remediation of tank waste). Alternatives analyzed for the cesium and strontium capsules include: No Action, Onsite Disposal, Overpack and Ship, and Vitrify with Tank Waste. The DOE and Ecology preferred alternative for the cesium and strontium capsules is the No Action alternative

  13. Final Hanford Comprehensive Land-Use Plan Environmental Impact Statement, Hanford Site, Richland, Washington

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    N/A

    1999-10-01

    This Final ''Hanford Comprehensive Land-Use Plan Environmental Impact Statement'' (HCP EIS) is being used by the Department of Energy (DOE) and its nine cooperating and consulting agencies to develop a comprehensive land-use plan (CLUP) for the Hanford Site. The DOE will use the Final HCP EIS as a basis for a Record of Decision (ROD) on a CLUP for the Hanford Site. While development of the CLUP will be complete with release of the HCP EIS ROD, full implementation of the CLUP is expected to take at least 50 years. Implementation of the CLUP would begin a more detailed planning process for land-use and facility-use decisions at the Hanford Site. The DOE would use the CLUP to screen proposals. Eventually, management of Hanford Site areas would move toward the CLUP land-use goals. This CLUP process could take more than 50 years to fully achieve the land-use goals.

  14. Positron--electron storage ring project: Stanford Linear Accelerator Center, Stanford, California. Final environmental statement

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1976-08-01

    A final environmental statement is given which was prepared in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act to support the Energy Research and Development Administration project to design and construct the positron-electron colliding beam storage ring (PEP) facilities at the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center (SLAC). The PEP storage ring will be constructed underground adjacent to the existing two-mile long SLAC particle accelerator to utilize its beam. The ring will be about 700 meters in diameter, buried at depths of 20 to 100 feet, and located at the eastern extremity of the SLAC site. Positron and electron beams will collide in the storage ring to provide higher energies and hence higher particle velocities than have been heretofore achieved. Some of the energy from the collisions is transformed back into matter and produces a variety of particles of immense interest to physicists. The environmental impacts during the estimated two and one-half years construction period will consist of movement of an estimated 320,000 cubic yards of earth and the creation of some rubble, refuse, and dust and noise which will be kept to a practical minimum through planned construction procedures. The terrain will be restored to very nearly its original conditions. Normal operation of the storage ring facility will not produce significant adverse environmental effects different from operation of the existing facilities and the addition of one water cooling tower. No overall increase in SLAC staff is anticipated for operation of the facility. Alternatives to the proposed project that were considered include: termination, postponement, other locations and construction of a conventional high energy accelerator

  15. 78 FR 64003 - Notice of Availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Jump Creek, Succor...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2013-10-25

    ...] Notice of Availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Jump Creek, Succor Creek, and... Field Office Jump Creek, Succor Creek and Cow Creek Watersheds grazing permit renewal, and by this... in the Federal Register. ADDRESSES: Copies of the Jump Creek, Succor Creek and Cow Creek Watersheds...

  16. 76 FR 47608 - Notice of Availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Rice Solar Energy, LLC...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2011-08-05

    ... Availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Rice Solar Energy, LLC Rice Solar Energy... Desert Conservation Area (CDCA) Plan Amendment for the Rice Solar Energy Project (RSEP) in Riverside... proposed Rice Solar Energy Project (Project) is a 150 megawatt (MW) solar electric power plant that would...

  17. 78 FR 50051 - Notice of Availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Tarmac King Road...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2013-08-16

    ... DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers Notice of Availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Tarmac King Road Limestone Mine Proposed in Levy County... from limestone extraction, material stockpiling, roads, and other infrastructure over a period of...

  18. 75 FR 60804 - Notice of Availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the West Butte Wind Power...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-10-01

    ... Wind Power Right-of-Way, Crook and Deschutes Counties, OR AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior... Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the West Butte Wind Power Right-of-Way and by this Notice... Register notice. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steve Storo, BLM West Butte Wind Power Right of Way...

  19. 77 FR 64543 - Notice of Availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Mount Hope Project...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2012-10-22

    ... DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Land Management [LLNVB01000 L51100000.GN0000.LVEMF12CF010 241A; NVN-082096; NVN-084632; NVN-091272; 12-08807; MO 4500039779; TAS: 14X5017] Notice of Availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Mount Hope Project, Eureka County, NV Correction...

  20. 78 FR 11672 - Notice of Availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Alta East Wind Project...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2013-02-19

    ... DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Land Management [CACA-052537, LLCAD05000, L51010000.LVRWB11B4520.FX0000] Notice of Availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Alta East Wind Project, Kern County, CA, and Proposed Land Use Plan Amendment AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior...

  1. Indian Point Nuclear Generating Plant Unit No. 3 (Docket No. 50-286): Final environmental statement: Volume 2

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1975-02-01

    This document contains nine appendices to Volume I, The Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Indian Point Nuclear Generating Plant Unit Number Three. Topics covered include thermal discharges to the Hudson River; supplemental information relating to biological models; radiation effects on aquatic biota; conditions, assumptions, and parameters used in calculating radioactive releases; meteorology for radiological dispersion calculations; life history information of important fish species in the Hudson River near Indian Point; additional information on cooling towers considered as alternatives; data and calculations for assessment of predicted electrical demand; and comments on draft environmental statement

  2. Final Hanford Site Solid (Radioactive and Hazardous) Waste Program Environmental Impact Statement Richland, Washington

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    Collins, M.S.; Borgstrom, C.M.

    2004-01-01

    The Hanford Site Solid (Radioactive and Hazardous) Waste Program Environmental Impact Statement (HSW EIS) provides environmental and technical information concerning U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) proposed waste management practices at the Hanford Site. The HSW EIS updates analyses of environmental consequences from previous documents and provides evaluations for activities that may be implemented consistent with the Waste Management Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (WM PEIS) Records of Decision (RODs). Waste types considered in the HSW EIS include operational low-level radioactive waste (LLW), mixed low-level waste (MLLW), immobilized low-activity waste (ILAW), and transuranic (TRU) waste (including TRU mixed waste). MLLW contains chemically hazardous components in addition to radionuclides. Alternatives for management of these wastes at the Hanford Site, including the alternative of No Action, are analyzed in detail. The LLW, MLLW, and TRU waste alternatives are evaluated for a range of waste volumes, representing quantities of waste that could be managed at the Hanford Site. A single maximum forecast volume is evaluated for ILAW. The No Action Alternative considers continuation of ongoing waste management practices at the Hanford Site and ceasing some operations when the limits of existing capabilities are reached. The No Action Alternative provides for continued storage of some waste types. The other alternatives evaluate expanded waste management practices including treatment and disposal of most wastes. The potential environmental consequences of the alternatives are generally similar. The major differences occur with respect to the consequences of disposal versus continued storage and with respect to the range of waste volumes managed under the alternatives. DOE's preferred alternative is to dispose of LLW, MLLW, and ILAW in a single, modular, lined facility near PUREX on Hanford's Central Plateau; to treat MLLW using a combination of onsite and

  3. Final environmental impact statement, Beaufort Sea oil and gas development/Northstar Project. Appendix K (continued)

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1999-02-01

    BP Exploration (Alaska) Inc. (BPXA) submitted a permit application to the US Army Engineer District, Alaska to initiate the review process for BPXA's plans to develop and produce oil and gas from the Northstar Unit. This report contains Appendices K (continued) of an Environmental Impact Statement which was undertaken to identify and evaluate the potential effects the proposed project may have on the environment

  4. Initial Northwest Power Act Power Sales Contracts : Final Environmental Impact Statement. Volume 2, Appendices A--L.

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    United States. Bonneville Power Administration.

    1992-01-01

    This report consists of appendices A-L of the final environmental impact statement for the Bonneville Power Administration. The appendices provide information on the following: Ninth circuit Court opinion in Forelaws on Board v. Johnson; guide to Northwest Power act contracts; guide to hydro operations; glossary; affected environment supporting documentation; environmental impacts of generic resource types; information on models used; technical information on analysis; public involvement activities; bibliography; Pacific Northwest Electric Power Planning and Conservation Act; and biological assessment. (CBS)

  5. Tank Waste Remediation System, Hanford Site, Richland, Washington. Final Environmental Impact Statement. Volume II

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1996-08-01

    This document, Volume 2, provides the inventory of waste addressed in this Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Tank Waste Remediation System, Hanford Site, Richland, Washington. The inventories consist of waste from the following four groups: (1) Tank waste; (2) Cesium (Cs) and Strontium (Sr) capsules; (3) Inactive miscellaneous underground storage tanks (MUSTs); and (4) Anticipated future tank waste additions. The major component by volume of the overall waste is the tank waste inventory (including future tank waste additions). This component accounts for more than 99 percent of the total waste volume and approximately 70 percent of the radiological activity of the four waste groups identified previously. Tank waste data are available on a tank-by-tank basis, but the accuracy of these data is suspect because they primarily are based on historical records of transfers between tanks rather than statistically based sampling and analyses programs. However, while the inventory of any specific tank may be suspect, the overall inventory for all of the tanks combined is considered more accurate. The tank waste inventory data are provided as the estimated overall chemical masses and radioactivity levels for the single-shell tanks (SSTs) and double-shell tanks (DSTs). The tank waste inventory data are broken down into tank groupings or source areas that were developed for analyzing groundwater impacts

  6. Final Environmental Statement related to the operation of WPPSS Nuclear Project No. 3 (Docket No. 50-508)

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1985-05-01

    This Final Environmental Statement contains the second assessment of the environmental impact associated with the Washington Public Power System Nuclear Project No. 3 (WNP-3) pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) and Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 51, as amended, of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission regulations. This statement examines the environment, environmental consequences and mitigating actions, and environmental benefits and costs. Land use and terrestrial and aquatic resource impacts will be small. Operational impacts to historic and archeological sites will be negligible. The effects of routine operations, energy transmission and periodic maintenance of rights-of-way and transmission facilities should not jeopardize any populations of endangered or threatened species. No significant impacts are anticipated from normal operational releases of radioactivity. The risk of radiation exposure associated with accidental release of radioactivity is very low. The net socioeconomic effects of the project will be beneficial

  7. Final environmental impact statement Kenetech/PacifiCorp Windpower Project Carbon County, Wyoming

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1995-08-01

    The Draft and Final Environmental Impact Statements (DEIS and FEIS) assess the environmental consequences of a proposed windpower energy development in Carbon County, Wyoming. This abbreviated FEIS revises and supplements the DEIS for the project and addresses comments expressed for the DEIS. The proposed project entails the erection of approximately 1,390 wind turbine generators and associated facilities (e.g., roads, substations, distribution and communications lines) by KENETECH Windpower, Inc. A 230-kV transmission line would be built by PacifiCorp, Inc. to connect a proposed substation on Foote Creek Rim near Arlington to the Miner's substation near Hanna. The proposed project would use standard procedures as currently employed by other right-of-way projects, plus additional project-specific and site-specific mitigation measures to ensure that project impacts are minimized on all important resources. Impacts to most resources would be negligible to moderate during the life-of-project. Potentially significant impacts from the project include avian mortality; declining avian populations; threatened, endangered, candidate, and/or state sensitive species mortality and/or habitat loss; disturbance to nearby residents due to noise; changes in visual resources; disturbance of important Native American traditional sites; changes in plant community species composition due to snow redistribution; displacement of big game due to windfarm operation; and loss of sage grouse nesting habitat. The proposed project could also have numerous beneficial impacts including increased revenues generated by taxes, increased employment, and benefits derived from using a nonpolluting resource for electric power generation

  8. Columbia River System Operation Review final environmental impact statement. Appendix Q: Regional forum

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1995-11-01

    The System Operation Review (SOR) is a study and environmental compliance process being used by the three Federal agencies to analyze future operations of the system and river use issues. The goal of the SOR is to achieve a coordinated system operation strategy for the river that better meets the needs of all river users. This technical appendix addresses only the effects of alternative system operating strategies for managing the Columbia River system. The SOR is currently developing a System Operating Strategy (SOS) that will guide the physical operations of the Columbia River system. The SOR is also addressing the institutional arrangements that must be in place to make needed changes to the SOS in the future, or make interpretations of the strategy in the light of changing water conditions or river needs. For convenience, this future institutional arrangement is referred to as ''The Columbia River Regional Forum,'' or simply ''the Forum,'' even though the nature of this institution is still to be determined. This appendix and the Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) identify the Forum as an administrative process that will not result in impacts to the environment and will not require analysis in a NEPA context. The composition of and procedures followed by a decision making body cannot--in and of themselves--be used to predict a particular decision with definable impacts on the environment. Nevertheless, because of the relationship to the other SOR actions, the SOR lead agencies have prepared this Technical Appendix to provide opportunities for review and comment on the Forum alternatives

  9. Portsmouth Gasseous Diffusion Plant site, Piketon, Ohio. Final environmental impact statement. Volume 1

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1977-05-01

    This environmental statement provides a detailed analysis of the environmental effects associated with continued operation of the Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant, one of the three government-owned uranium enrichment plants operated by the Energy Research and Development Administration (ERDA). The Portsmouth facility, which has been operating for over twenty years, is located in Pike County, Ohio, on a 4000-acre federally owned reservation. The uranium enrichment capacity of the plant is currently being increased through a cascade improvement program (CIP) and a cascade uprating program (CUP). This environmental statement evaluates the Portsmouth facility at the fully uprated CUP production level. Environmental impacts of the production of offsite electric power for the Portsmouth facility are also assessed. The bulk of this power is supplied by the Ohio Valley Electric Corporation (OVEC) from two coal-fired plants, the Clifty Creek Power Plant near Madison, Indiana, and the Kyger Creek Power Plant near Cheshire, Ohio. The remaining required power will be obtained on a system basis through OVEC from the 15 sponsoring utilities of OVEC. The draft statement was issued for public comment on February 15, 1977, and public hearing to afford the public further opportunity to comment was held in Cincinnati, Ohio, on April 5, 1977

  10. Final Environmental Statement related to the decommissioning of the Rare Earths Facility, West Chicago, Illinois. Docket No. 40-2061

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1983-05-01

    This Final Environmental Statement is issued by the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission in response to the plan proposed by Kerr-McGee Chemical Corporation for the decommissioning of their Rare Earths Facility located in West Chicago, Illinois. The statement considers the Kerr-McGee preferred plan and various alternatives to that plan. The action proposed by the Commission is the renewal of the Kerr-McGee license to allow stabilization of wastes onsite and for possession of the wastes under license for an indeterminate time. The license could be terminated at a later date if certain specified requirements were met

  11. Final environmental statement related to the operation of the Teton Uranium ISL Project (Docket No). 40-8781

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1983-08-01

    This Final Environmental Impact Statement is issued by the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission in response to the request by Teton Exploration Drilling, Inc. for the issuance of an NRC Source and Byproduct Material License authorizing operation of the proposed Teton Project to mine uranium in situ by injecting a carbonate/bicarbonate lixiviant into the ore body. The statement considers: (1) alternative of no licensing action, (2) alternative energy sources, and (3) alternatives if uranium ore is mined and refined on the site. The proposed action is to grant a Source and Byproduct Material License to the applicant subject to the stipulated license condition

  12. Proposed Tenaska Washington II Generation Project : Final Environmental Impact Statement. Volume 2: Public Involvement.

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    United States. Bonneville Power Administration.

    1994-01-01

    In regard to the proposed Tenaska Washington II Generation Project, the goal of the Bonneville Power Administration`s (BPA) Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) public involvement process is to determine the issues to be examined and pertinent analyses to be conducted and to solicit comments on the content and quality of information presented in the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS). Comments and questions are solicited from the public and government agencies during the scoping process and during the comment period and public hearing on the DEIS, to find out what is of most concern to them. The end product of the public involvement process is the Comment Report which follows in part of this volume on Public Involvement.

  13. Proposed Expansion of German Air Force Operations at Holloman AFB, New Mexico. Final Environmental Impact Statement. Volume III: Comment Letters and Responses to Comments

    National Research Council Canada - National Science Library

    1998-01-01

    The Final Environmental Impact Statement analyzed the potential environmental consequences from the proposal to beddown 30 additional German Air Force Tornado aircraft and 640 personnel at Holloman Air Force Base (AFB) New Mexico...

  14. Final waste management programmatic environmental impact statement for managing treatment, storage, and disposl of radioactive and hazardous waste. Volume II

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1997-01-01

    The Final Waste Management Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (WM PEIS) examines the potential environmental and cost impacts of strategic management alternatives for managing five types of radioactive and hazardous wastes that have resulted and will continue to result from nuclear defense and research activities at a variety of sites around the United States. The five waste types are low-level mixed waste, low-level waste, transuranic waste, high-level waste, and hazardous waste. The WM PEIS provides information on the impacts of various siting alternatives which the Department of Energy (DOE) will use to decide at which sites to locate additional treatment, storage, and disposal capacity for each waste type.Volume II is an integral part of the Office of Environmental Management''s (EM''s) Waste Management Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (WM PEIS), which portrays the impacts of EM''s waste management activities at each of the 17 major DOE sites evaluated in the WM PEIS

  15. 78 FR 32269 - Notice of Availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2013-05-29

    ..., state and local levels. While CDFW has participated in the development of this joint EIS/ EIR, the... alternatives on the human and physical environment, including, but not limited to, effects on biological... inspection at several libraries and government offices. A full list of locations where the final EIS/EIR is...

  16. Environmental impact statements concerning final deposition of spent nuclear fuels a.o

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    Larsen, B.; Schibbye, K.; Andersson, Johan; Norrby, S.; Timm, T.; Haegg, C.; Johansson, Gunnar

    1995-02-01

    Five governmental authorities concerned in licensing a swedish nuclear waste repository have outlined recommendations for what should be covered by an environmental impact statement, i.e. defined which laws should be applied, tried to develop a consensus on the handling the EIS in the licensing procedure, to identify potential problems due to prevailing (or non-existing) rules on EIS especially concerning roles and conflicts of objective

  17. Resource contingency program - Oregon. Final environmental impact statement, Hermiston power project

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1995-09-01

    The Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) has statutory responsibilities to supply electrical power to its utility, industrial, and other customers in the Pacific Northwest. In 1990, to cover the outer range of potential load growth with new resources, BPA embarked upon the Resource Contingency Program (RCP). Instead of buying or building generating plants now, BPA has purchased options to acquire power later, if and when it is needed. The decision to acquire any of these option energy projects to fulfill statutory supply obligations will be influenced by Federal system load growth, the outcome of BPA's Business Plan, required operational changes in Columbia-Snake River Hydroelectric facilities, and the loss of major generating resources. In September 1993, three option development agreements were signed with three proposed natural gas-fired, combined cycle combustion turbine CT projects near Chehalis and Satsop, Washington, and near Hermiston, Oregon. Together these three projects could supply BPA with 1,090 average megawatts (aMW) of power. Under these agreements, sponsors are obtaining permits and conducting project design work, and BPA is completing this EIS process. In September 1993, BPA published a Notice of Intent to prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) on these three proposed gas-fired combustion turbine projects and held public scoping meetings in October 1993 at each site. In February 1994, BPA released an Implementation Plan on the proposed scope of the EIS. A draft EIS on the three proposed projects was published in February 1995. The impacts of the Chehalis and Satsop projects located in Washington State will be covered in one EIS document, while the impacts of the Hermiston project located in Oregon are covered in this final EIS document. It is BPA's intent to continue to base the analysis of impacts on the assumption that all three projects may be constructed at some point in the future

  18. Resource Contingency Program - Oregon : Final Environmental Impact Statement, Hermiston Power Project.

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    United States. Bonneville Power Administration.

    1995-09-01

    The Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) has statutory responsibilities to supply electrical power to its utility, industrial, and other customers in the Pacific Northwest. In 1990, to cover the outer range of potential load growth with new resources, BPA embarked upon the Resource Contingency Program (RCP). Instead of buying or building generating plants now, BPA has purchased options to acquire power later, if and when it is needed. The decision to acquire any of these option energy projects to fulfill statutory supply obligations will be influenced by Federal system load growth, the outcome of BPA`s Business Plan, required operational changes in Columbia-Snake River Hydroelectric facilities, and the loss of major generating resources. In September 1993, three option development agreements were signed with three proposed natural gas-fired, combined cycle combustion turbine CT projects near Chehalis and Satsop, Washington, and near Hermiston, Oregon. Together these three projects could supply BPA with 1,090 average megawatts (aMW) of power. Under these agreements, sponsors are obtaining permits and conducting project design work, and BPA is completing this EIS process. In September 1993, BPA published a Notice of Intent to prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) on these three proposed gas-fired combustion turbine projects and held public scoping meetings in October 1993 at each site. In February 1994, BPA released an Implementation Plan on the proposed scope of the EIS. A draft EIS on the three proposed projects was published in February 1995. The impacts of the Chehalis and Satsop projects located in Washington State will be covered in one EIS document, while the impacts of the Hermiston project located in Oregon are covered in this final EIS document. It is BPA`s intent to continue to base the analysis of impacts on the assumption that all three projects may be constructed at some point in the future.

  19. Columbia River system operation review: Final environmental impact statement. Appendix R, Pacific Northwest Coordination agreement (PNCA)

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1995-11-01

    Currently, the Federal government coordinates the planning and operation of the Federal Columbia River Power System (FCRPS) with projects owned and operated by the region's non-Federal hydrogenerating utilities pursuant to the Pacific North-west Coordination Agreement (PNCA). The Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), the Corps of Engineers (Corps), and the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) are parties to the PNCA on behalf of the government of the United States. The PNCA is a complex agreement that provides an opportunity for the region's power producers to maximize the power system's reliability and economy while meeting their multiple-use objectives. The PNCA does not dictate the operation of the resources it coordinates. It is essentially an accounting mechanism that exchanges the power produced among the parties in order to improve the reliability of the system and reduce regional power costs. Project owners retain complete autonomy to operate as needed to meet their multiple-use requirements. The PNCA was executed in 1964 as an important component of regional plans to maximize the Northwest's hydro resource capability. Maximization also included the development of storage projects on the Columbia River in Canada pursuant to the terms of the 1964 Columbia River Treaty. Because of the link between power coordination and Treaty issues, the current parties to the PNCA, currently are contemplating entering into a replacement or renewed power coordination agreement. Because the power coordination agreement is a consensual arrangement, its ultimate provisions must be acceptable to all of its signatories. This Appendix R to the Final Environmental Impact Statement of the Columbia River System is a presentation of the Pacific North-west Coordination Agreement

  20. 2004 Power marketing program. Final environmental impact statement. Volume 1 - summary and environmental analysis

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1997-02-01

    The Sierra Nevada Region proposes to develop a plan to allocate power within its marketing areas of California and Nevada. Five alternatives were analyzed based on the possible range of operations of the Central Valley Project (CVP) hydroelectric system, levels of power purchases, and customer group allocations. Scheduling of the hydropower generating plants is the key difference across the alternatives. The peaking, preferred, renewables, and no-action alternatives are based on scheduling to emphasize peaking power. The baseload alternative assumes steady water releases. The analysis found no significant impacts overall. However, peaking operations tend to result in the greatest benefits and least negative effects to resources where impacts could be quantified. The peaking alternative was selected as the environmentally preferred alternative. The peaking alternative would add up to 317 MW of load-carrying capacity during August compared to taking no action. The preferred alternative results in up to a 262-MW gain and the baseload alternative results in a loss of 581 MW in comparison to the no-action alternative. Although it is not possible to determine where or when any lost capacity would be made up, building replacement capacity would result in land-use impacts and the use of natural and financial resources. The baseload alternative would result in more stable pool fluctuation within regulating reservoirs, which may benefit resident fish, recreation, and cultural resources; but these effects would be minor and could not be quantified. Environmental impacts within the CVP are limited to fluctuations in the regulating reservoirs. Changes in allocations to customer groups result in negligible regional economic effects. The renewables alternative is similar in CVP operation to the peaking alternative and melds 50 MW of renewables with CVP hydropower. Its environmental impacts vary, depending on the presence of biomass in the resource mix. 84 refs., 44 figs., 27 tabs

  1. Final environmental statement for decommissioning Humboldt Bay Power Plant, Unit No. 3 (Docket No. 50-133)

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1987-04-01

    The Final Environmental Statement contains the assessment of the environmental impact associated with decommissioning the Humboldt Bay Power Plant Unit 3 pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) and Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 51, as amended, of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission regulations. The proposed decommissioning would involve safe storage of the facility for about 30 years, after which the residual radioactivity would be removed so that the facility would be at levels of radioactivity acceptable for release of the facility to unrestricted access

  2. Edgemont uranium mill decommissioning, Fall River County, South Dakota (adoption as a final environmental impact statement (EIS) of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's final EIS of September 1982): final environmental impact statement

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    Anon.

    1983-01-01

    Decommissioning of the existing uranium milling facilities at Edgemont, South Dakota is proposed. In this adoption by the Tennessee Valley Authority of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's final environmental impact statement on the decommissioning, no significant deviations from that statement are presented. The project would prevent human exposure to radioactive material emitted by the defunct mill and its ancillary facilities. Reclamation of mill and waste impoundment sites would ensure their future usefulness for wildlife habitat and other purposes. Grading operations could result in occasional particulate levels that exceed federal air quality standards. As much as 105 acre-feet of water could be removed from the Pahasapa Aquifer. Disturbance of soils at the sites would degrade the quality of these soils. Approximately 501 acres of land, including 30 acres of land to be used as haul roads, would be denuded; 86 acres of farmland within the disposal site would be lost. All aquatic communities in Cottonwood Creek would be destroyed during cleanup operations, although the creek would be repopulated. Winddown tailings would increase downwind radiation levels during decommissioning activities

  3. Initial Northwest Power Act Power Sales Contracts : Final Environmental Impact Statement. Volume 3, Appendix M, Contract Copies.

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    United States. Bonneville Power Administration.

    1992-01-01

    This report, is part of the final environmental impact statement of the Bonneville Power Administration, consists of an appendix of contract copies related to the following: Detailed Index to Generic Utility Power Sales Contracts, Text of Generic Utility Contract, Detailed Index to Generic DSI Power Sales Contracts, Text of Generic DSI Contract, Text of Residential Purchase and Sale Agreement (Residential Exchange), and Detailed Index to General Contract Provisions -- GCP Form PSC-2 (Incorporated into all three types of contracts as an Exhibit).

  4. Columbia River System Operation Review : Final Environmental Impact Statement, Appendix C: Anadromous Fish and Juvenile Fish Transportation.

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    Columbia River System Operation Review (U.S.)

    1995-11-01

    This Appendix C of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Columbia River System discusses impacts on andromous fish and juvenile fish transportation. The principal andromous fish in the Columbia basin include salmonid species (Chinook, coho, and sockeye salmon, and steelhead) and nonsalmoinid andromous species (sturgeon, lamprey, and shad). Major sections in this document include the following: background, scope and process; affected environment for salmon and steelhead, shaded, lamprey, sturgeon; study methods; description of alternatives: qualitative and quantitative findings.

  5. Sierra Pacific Power Company Alturas Transmission Line Project, Final Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement. Volume 3: Appendices

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1995-11-01

    Sierra Pacific Power Company has proposed the construction and operation of a 345,000 volt overhead electric power transmission line from Alturas, California to Reno, Nevada. This Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement will assess the potential environmental impacts of the proposed project and alternatives. This report contains Appendices A--I which contain the following: glossary/abbreviations; scoping report; structure coordinate summary; air quality; biological resources; geology; noise; visual contrast rating forms; and cultural resources

  6. Final environmental impact statement. Management of commercially generated radioactive waste. Volume 1 of 3

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    1980-10-01

    This EIS analyzes the significant environmental impacts that could occur if various technologies for management and disposal of high-level and transuranic wastes from commercial nuclear power reactors were to be developed and implemented. This EIS will serve as the environmental input for the decision on which technology, or technologies, will be emphasized in further research and development activities in the commercial waste management program. The action proposed in this EIS is to (1) adopt a national strategy to develop mined geologic repositories for disposal of commercially generated high-level and transuranic radioactive waste (while continuing to examine subseabed and very deep hole disposal as potential backup technologies) and (2) conduct a R and D program to develop such facilities and the necessary technology to ensure the safe long-term containment and isolation of these wastes. The Department has considered in this statement: development of conventionally mined deep geologic repositories for disposal of spent fuel from nuclear power reactors and/or radioactive fuel reprocessing wastes; balanced development of several alternative disposal methods; and no waste disposal action. This EIS reflects the public review of and comments offered on the draft statement. Included are descriptions of the characteristics of nuclear waste, the alternative disposal methods under consideration, and potential environmental impacts and costs of implementing these methods. Because of the programmatic nature of this document and the preliminary nature of certain design elements assumed in assessing the environmental consequences of the various alternatives, this study has been based on generic, rather than specific, systems. At such time as specific facilities are identified for particular sites, statements addressing site-specific aspects will be prepared for public review and comment.

  7. Final environmental impact statement. Management of commercially generated radioactive waste. Volume 1 of 3

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1980-10-01

    This EIS analyzes the significant environmental impacts that could occur if various technologies for management and disposal of high-level and transuranic wastes from commercial nuclear power reactors were to be developed and implemented. This EIS will serve as the environmental input for the decision on which technology, or technologies, will be emphasized in further research and development activities in the commercial waste management program. The action proposed in this EIS is to (1) adopt a national strategy to develop mined geologic repositories for disposal of commercially generated high-level and transuranic radioactive waste (while continuing to examine subseabed and very deep hole disposal as potential backup technologies) and (2) conduct a R and D program to develop such facilities and the necessary technology to ensure the safe long-term containment and isolation of these wastes. The Department has considered in this statement: development of conventionally mined deep geologic repositories for disposal of spent fuel from nuclear power reactors and/or radioactive fuel reprocessing wastes; balanced development of several alternative disposal methods; and no waste disposal action. This EIS reflects the public review of and comments offered on the draft statement. Included are descriptions of the characteristics of nuclear waste, the alternative disposal methods under consideration, and potential environmental impacts and costs of implementing these methods. Because of the programmatic nature of this document and the preliminary nature of certain design elements assumed in assessing the environmental consequences of the various alternatives, this study has been based on generic, rather than specific, systems. At such time as specific facilities are identified for particular sites, statements addressing site-specific aspects will be prepared for public review and comment

  8. Final environmental statement related to the operation of Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Unit No. 3 (Docket No. 50-423)

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1984-12-01

    This Final Environmental Statement contains the second assessment of the environmental impact associated with the operation of Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Unit 3, pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) and Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 51, as amended, of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission regulations. This statement examines the environment, environmental consequences and mitigating actions, and environmental and economic benefits and costs. Land use and terrestrial and aquatic ecological impacts will be small. Operational impacts to historic and archeologic sites will be small. The effects of routine operations, energy transmission, and periodic maintenance of rights-of-way and transmission facilities should not jeopardize any populations of endangered or threatened species. No significant impacts are anticipated from normal operational releases of radioactivity. The risk of radiation exposure associated with accidental release of radioactivity is very low. The net socioeconomic effects of the project will be beneficial. On the basis of the analysis and evaluation set forth in this environmental statement, it is concluded that the action called for under NEPA and 10 CFR 51 is the issuance of an operating license for Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Unit 3. 101 references, 33 figures, 30 tables

  9. Final Environmental Statement related to the operation of Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, Unit No. 2 (Docket No. 50-410)

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1985-05-01

    This Final Environmental Statement contains the assessment of the environmental impact associated with the operation of the Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, Unit 2, pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) and Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 51, as amended, of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission regulations. This statement examines the environment, environmental consequences and mitigating actions, and environmental and economic benefits and costs

  10. Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for stockpile stewardship and management: Volume 1

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1996-09-01

    The Department of Energy (DOE) has been directed by the President and Congress to maintain the safety and reliability of the reduced nuclear weapons stockpile in the absence of underground nuclear testing. In order to fulfill that responsibility, DOE has developed Stockpile Stewardship and Maintenance Program to provide a single highly integrated technical program for maintaining the continued safety and reliability of the nuclear stockpile. The Stockpile Stewardship and Management Program Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) describes and analyzes alternative ways to implement the proposed actions for the Stockpile Stewardship and Management Program. This document contains Volume I of the PEIS

  11. High Performance Fuel Laboratory, Hanford Reservation, Richland, Washington. Final environmental impact statement

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1977-09-01

    The High Performance Fuel Laboratory (HPFL) will provide pilot scale tests of manufacturing processes, equipment, and handling systems and of accountability and safeguards, methods, and equipment while keeping radiological and chemical exposures of the workers, public, and environment at the lowest practicable levels. The experience gained from designing, constructing and operating the HPFL can be used in future commitments to commercial fuel fabrication plants in the late 1980s and beyond for processing of nuclear fuel. The HPFL site is located in the 400 Area of the 559-square mile, federally owned Hanford Reservation. This environmental impact statement considers effects of the HPFL under normal conditions and in the event of an accident

  12. 77 FR 67345 - Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (EIS/EIR) for the Clearwater...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2012-11-09

    ...The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) in conjunction with the Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County (Sanitation Districts) has completed a Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (EIS/EIR) for the Clearwater Program. The Clearwater Program is a comprehensive planning effort undertaken by the Sanitation Districts for the Joint Outfall System, a regional wastewater management system serving approximately 4.8 million people in 73 cities and unincorporated areas in Los Angeles County. A major component of the Clearwater Program is the evaluation of alternatives for construction of a new ocean outfall and rehabilitation of the existing ocean outfalls. Both activities would entail discharge of dredged and fill material in waters of the United States, work in navigable waters of the United States, and the transport of dredged material for ocean disposal. These activities would require authorization from the Corps pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act, and Section 103 of the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act, respectively. The Draft EIS/EIR was circulated for a 57-day review period from February 13, 2012 through April 10, 2012. The Corps and the Sanitation Districts reviewed and provided responses to 19 agency comments and 33 public comments in preparing the Final EIS/EIR. The Final EIS/EIR, including a Draft 404(b)(1) alternatives analysis, is available for a 31-day review period from November 9, 2012 through December 10, 2012. The document is accessible via the World- Wide Web at www.ClearwaterProgram.org. Alternatively, printed copies are available at the following locations: Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County, 1955 Workman Mill Road, Whittier, California; Carson Regional Library, 151 East Carson Street, Carson, California; Los Angeles Public Library, San Pedro Branch, 931 South Gaffey Street, San Pedro, California; and Los Angeles Public Library, Wilmington

  13. Decommissioning of eight surplus production reactors at the Hanford Site, Richland, Washington. Addendum (Final Environmental Impact Statement)

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    1992-12-01

    The first section of this volume summarizes the content of the draft environmental impact statement (DEIS) and this Addendum, which together constitute the final environmental impact statement (FEIS) prepared on the decommissioning of eight surplus plutonium production reactors at Hanford. The FEIS consists of two volumes. The first volume is the DEIS as written. The second volume (this Addendum) consists of a summary; Chapter 9, which contains comments on the DEIS and provides DOE`s responses to the comments; Appendix F, which provides additional health effects information; Appendix K, which contains costs of decommissioning in 1990 dollars; Appendix L, which contains additional graphite leaching data; Appendix M, which contains a discussion of accident scenarios; Appendix N, which contains errata; and Appendix 0, which contains reproductions of the letters, transcripts, and exhibits that constitute the record for the public comment period.

  14. Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS)/Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR). Otis Air National Guard Base, Wastewater Treatment Facility

    Science.gov (United States)

    1990-06-01

    and G.E. Ness, 1982, Survival of Vibrio cholerae and Escherichia coli in Estuarine Water and Sediments, Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 43...and publications in areas of water and wastewater treatment. David Tomasko, Ph.D., 1985. University of New Mexico . Staff Hydrogeologist. Research...Reserve in California. We are working on EIS’s for the U.S. Air Force Base Closings in realignment in California, New Mexico and Washington, and a very

  15. Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for stockpile stewardship and management: Volume 3

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1996-09-01

    The Department of Energy (DOE) has been directed by the President and Congress to maintain the safety and reliability of the reduced nuclear weapons stockpile in the absence of underground nuclear testing. In order to fulfill that responsibility, DOE has developed a Stockpile Stewardship and Management Program to provide a single highly integrated technical program for maintaining the continued safety and reliability of the nuclear stockpile. The Stockpile Stewardship and Management Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) describes and analyzes alternative ways to implement the proposed actions for the Stockpile Stewardship and Management Program. This document consists of Volume III, Appendix I entitled ''National Ignition Facility Project-Specific Analysis,'' which investigates the environmental impacts resulting from constructing and operating the proposed National Ignition Facility

  16. Final environmental statement related to the operation of Midland Plant, Units 1 and 2. Docket Nos. 50-329 and 50-330, Consumers Power Company

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1982-07-01

    This final environmental statement contains the second assessment of the environmental impact associated with operation of the Midland Plant, Units 1 and 2 pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) and 10 CFR Part 51, as amended, of the NRC's regulations. This statement examines: the purpose and need for the Midland project, alternatives to the project, the affected environment, environment consequences and mitigating actions, and environmental and economic benefits and costs

  17. Radiological health review of the final environmental impact statement. Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. Volumes 1 and 2

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1981-01-01

    Pursuant to the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, the Department of Energy has provided in the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) a comprehensive review of the potential radiological impact of the proposed Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, referred to in the FEIS as, the authorized alternative. The EEG has reviewed this document to determine (a) the changes made in comparison with the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS); (b) the adequacy of the DOE's evaluation of the potential radiological impact; (c) the thoroughness of the DOE's response to the comments of the EEG on the DEIS; and (d) other issues which should be addressed by DOE more fully prior to beginning construction of the WIPP. Based on our review of the FEIS, the Department of Energy has incorporated and addressed the majority of the concerns, questions and recommendations that the EEG provided to them in our August 1979 review of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement on WIPP and the FEIS provides a generally satisfactory evaluation of the potential radiological impact. There are, however, a number of areas that have yet to be adequately treated by DOE and should be acted upon and resolved prior to beginning construction of the WIPP. The more important issues are included and are discussed in more detail in our December 8, 1980 and January 15, 1981 comments on the FEIS

  18. Generic environmental impact statement for license renewal of nuclear plants. Final report

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1996-05-01

    This GEIS examines the possible environmental impacts that could occur as a result of renewing the licenses of individual nuclear power plants under 10 CFR 54. To the extent possible, it establishes the bounds and significance of these potential impacts. The analysis encompasses all operating light-water reactors. For each type of environmental impact, the GEIS attempts to establish generic findings covering as many plants as possible. While plant and site-specific information is used in developing the generic findings, the NRC does not intend for the GEIS to be a compilation of individual plant environmental impacts statements. This document has three principal objectives: (1) to provide an understanding of the types and severity of environmental impacts that may occur as a result of license renewal, (2) to identify and assess those impacts that are expected to be generic to license renewal, and (3) to support rulemaking (10 CFR 51) to define the number and scope of issues that need to be addressed by the applicants in plant-by-plant license renewal proceedings

  19. Columbia River System Operation Review final environmental impact statement. Appendix G: Land use and development

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1995-11-01

    The System Operation Review (SOR) is a study and environmental compliance process being used by the three Federal agencies to analyze future operations of the system and river use issues. The goal of the SOR is to achieve a coordinated system operation strategy for the river that better meets the needs of all river users. The SOR began in early 1990, prior to the filing of petitions for endangered status for several salmon species under the Endangered Species Act. The comprehensive review of Columbia River operations encompassed by the SOR was prompted by the need for Federal decisions to (1) develop a coordinated system operating strategy (SOS) for managing the multiple uses of the system into the 21st century; (2) provide interested parties with a continuing and increased long-term role in system planning (Columbia River Regional Forum); (3) renegotiate and renew the Pacific Northwest Coordination Agreement (PNCA), a contractual arrangement among the region's major hydroelectric-generating utilities and affected Federal agencies to provide for coordinated power generation on the Columbia River system; and (4) renew or develop new Canadian Entitlement Allocation Agreements. The review provides the environmental analysis required by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). This technical appendix addresses only the effects of alternative system operating strategies for managing the Columbia River system. The environmental impact statement (EIS) itself and some of the other appendices present analyses of the alternative approaches to the other three decisions considered as part of the SOR

  20. Final environmental impact statement, Beaufort Sea oil and gas development/Northstar Project. Appendix A: BP Exploration (Alaska) Inc. Final project description - Revision 1, March 27, 1997

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1999-02-01

    BP Exploration (Alaska) Inc. (BPXA) submitted a permit application to the US Army Engineer District, Alaska to initiate the review process for BPXA's plans to develop and produce oil and gas from the Northstar Unit. This report contains Appendix A of an Environmental Impact Statement which was undertaken to identify and evaluate the potential effects the proposed project may have on the environment. This document is the Northstar Development Project, Final Project Description, Revision 1 for BPXA Northstar Project

  1. Safety research experiment facilities, Idaho National Engineering Laboratory, Idaho. Final environmental impact statement

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    Liverman, J.L.

    1977-09-01

    This environmental statement was prepared for the Safety Research Experiment Facilities (SAREF) Project. The purpose of the proposed project is to modify some existing facilities and provide a new test facility at the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory (INEL) for conducting fast breeder reactor (FBR) safety experiments. The SAREF Project proposal has been developed after an extensive study which identified the FBR safety research needs requiring in-reactor experiments and which evaluated the capability of various existing and new facilities to meet these needs. The proposed facilities provide for the in-reactor testing of large bundles of prototypical FBR fuel elements under a wide variety of conditions, ranging from those abnormal operating conditions which might be expected to occur during the life of an FBR power plant to the extremely low probability, hypothetical accidents used in the evaluation of some design options and in the assessment of the long-term potential risk associated with wide-acale deployment of the FBR

  2. Superconducting Super Collider: Final environmental impact statement: Volume 2, Comment/response document: Summary and index

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1988-12-01

    This volume is divided into five parts as follows: Summary and Index; Letters submitted by commenters in response to the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) from date of issue through October 17, 1988; Transcripts of testimony at the public hearings conducted by the DOE in the vicinity of each site alternative; Letters postmarked after October 17, 1988; and Comment responses to both the letters and the testimony. This summary and index is published as a guide to the reader in reviewing this document. The summary is of the approximately 7000 comments received by the DOE from a total of about 5700 commenters. It was prepared as a general reference and guide to the readers of this volume. The Index follows the summary. The first index is an alphabetical listing of commenters (of both letters and transcripts) and indicates the number each commenter was assigned. The commenter numbers guide the reader to DOE comment responses in Volume 2B which are in numerical order

  3. Columbia River System Operation Review : Final Environmental Impact Statement, Appendix N: Wildlife.

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    Columbia River System Operation Review (U.S.)

    1995-11-01

    The Columbia River System is a vast and complex combination of Federal and non-Federal facilities used for many purposes including power production, irrigation, navigation, flood control, recreation, fish and wildlife habitat and municipal and industrial water supply. Each river use competes for the limited water resources in the Columbia River Basin. This technical appendix addresses only the effects of alternative system operating strategies for managing the Columbia River system. The environmental impact statement (EIS) itself and some of the other appendices present analyses of the alternative approaches to the other three decisions considered as part of the SOR. This document is the product of the Wildlife Work Group, focusing on wildlife impacts but not including fishes. Topics covered include the following: scope and process; existing and affected environment, including specific discussion of 18 projects in the Columbia river basin. Analysis, evaluation, and alternatives are presented for all projects. System wide impacts to wildlife are also included.

  4. Columbia River system operation review: Final environmental impact statement. Appendix N, wildlife

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1995-11-01

    The Columbia River System is a vast and complex combination of Federal and non-Federal facilities used for many purposes including power production, irrigation, navigation, flood control, recreation, fish and wildlife habitat and municipal and industrial water supply. Each river use competes for the limited water resources in the Columbia River Basin. This technical appendix addresses only the effects of alternative system operating strategies for managing the Columbia River system. The environmental impact statement (EIS) itself and some of the other appendices present analyses of the alternative approaches to the other three decisions considered as part of the SOR. This document is the product of the Wildlife Work Group, focusing on wildlife impacts but not including fishes. Topics covered include the following: scope and process; existing and affected environment, including specific discussion of 18 projects in the Columbia river basin. Analysis, evaluation, and alternatives are presented for all projects. System wide impacts to wildlife are also included

  5. Final Environmental Impact Statement on 10 CFR Part 61 licensing requirements for land disposal of radioactive waste

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1982-11-01

    The three-volume final environmental impact statement (FEIS) is prepared to guide and support publication of a final regulation, 10 CFR Part 61, for the land disposal of low-level radioactive waste. The FEIS is prepared in response to public comments received on the draft environmental impact statement (DEIS) on the proposed Part 61 regulation. The DEIS was published in September 1981 as NUREG-0782. Public comments received on the proposed Part 61 regulation separate from the DEIS are also considered in the FEIS. The FEIS is not a rewritten version of the DEIS, which contains an exhaustive and detailed analysis of alternatives, but rather references the DEIS and presents the final decision bases and conclusions (costs and impacts) which are reflected in the Part 61 requirements. Four cases are specifically considered in the FEIS representing the following: past disposal practice, existing disposal practice, Part 61 requirements, and an upper bound example. The Summary and Main Report are contained in Volume 1. Volume 2 consists of Appendices A - Staff Analysis of Public Comments on the DEIS for 10 CFR Part 61, and Appendices B - Staff Analysis of Public Comments on Proposed 10 CFR Part 61 Rulemaking. Volume 3 contains Appendices C-F, entitled as follows: Appendix C - Revisions to Impact Analysis Methodology, Appendix D - Computer Codes Used for FEIS Calculations, Appendix E - Errata for the DEIS for 10 CFR Part 61 and last, Appendix F - Final Rule and Supplementary Information

  6. Defense Waste Processing Facility: Savannah River Plant, Aiken, SC. Final environmental impact statement

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1982-02-01

    The purpose of this Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is to provide environmental input into both the selection of an appropriate strategy for the permanent disposal of the high-level radioactive waste (HLW) currently stored at the Savannah River Plant (SRP) and the subsequent decision to construct and operate a Defense Waste Processing Facility (DWPF) at the SRP site. The SRP is a major US Department of Envgy (DOE) installation for the production of nuclear materials for national defense. Approximately 83 x 10 3 m 3 (22 million gal) of HLW currently are stored in tanks at the SRP site. The proposed DWPF would process the liquid HLW generated by SRP operations into a stable form for ultimate disposal. This EIS assesses the effects of the proposed immobilization project on land use, air quality, water quality, ecological systems, health risk, cultural resources, endangered species, wetlands protection, resource depletion, and regional social and economic systems. The radiological and nonradiological risks of transporting the immobilized wastes are assessed. The environmental impacts of disposal alternatives have recently been evaluated in a previous EIS and are therefore only summarized in this EIS

  7. Notice of availability, final environmental impact statement, Beaufort Sea oil and gas development/Northstar Project

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1999-01-01

    BP Exploration (Alaska) Inc. (BPXA) is proposing to develop the Northstar Unit, located approximately 6 miles offshore of Point Storkensen in the Alaskan Beaufort Sea. BPXA's proposed action is a self-contained development/production facility located on a reconstructed gravel island in 39 feet of water. Also proposed is construction of two buried subsea pipelines between the island and shoreline to transport oil and gas. The pipelines would connect with onshore facilities and the Trans Alaska Pipeline System (TAPS). In response to BPXA's submittal of a permit application under Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act, Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, and Section 103 of the Marine Protection Research and Sanctuaries Act, the US Army Corps of engineers, Alaska District (Corps) determined that issuance of a permit for BPXA's proposed project constituted a major federal action that may significantly affect the quality of the human environment pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). In addition, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), determined under provisions of the Clean Water Act and 40 CFR Part 6 Subpart F that permitting by the EPA for BPXA's proposed project also constituted a major federal action that my significantly affect the quality of the human environment. As a result, preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) under NEPA was undertaken to identify and evaluate a range of reasonable alternatives and evaluate the potential effects the alternates, including BPXA's proposed project, may have on the human environment

  8. 76 FR 30942 - Notice of Availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for Improvements to the...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2011-05-27

    ... Calexico, California. The Final EIS provides GSA and its stakeholders an analysis of the environmental... Sheehan, NEPA Project Manager, Portfolio Management Division, Capital Investment Branch (9P2PTC), U.S.../nepalibrary . Dated: May 19, 2011. Samuel R. Mazzola, Director, Portfolio Management Division, Pacific Rim...

  9. 77 FR 71446 - Notice of Availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the West Chocolate...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2012-11-30

    ... telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339... geothermal energy testing and development. The Final EIS also analyzes the potential environmental impacts of... facilitate appropriate development of geothermal, solar, and wind energy in the REEA and make land use plan...

  10. 75 FR 8988 - Environmental Impact Statements; Availability

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-02-26

    ... DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Environmental Impact Statements; Availability AGENCY: National Park Service. ACTION: Notice of availability for the Record of Decision on the Final Environmental Impact...) for the final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the disposition of the Bureau of Mines property...

  11. Final environmental statement related to the operation of Callaway Plant, Unit No. 1 (Docket No. 50-483)

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1982-01-01

    The final environmental statement contains the second assessment of the environmental impact associated with operation of Callaway Plant Unit 1, pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) and 10 CFR Par 51, as amended, of the NRC's regulations. This statement examines: the purpose and need for the Callaway project, alternatives to the project, the affected environment, environmental consequences and mitigating actions, and environmental and economic benefits and costs. No water-use impacts are expected from cooling-tower markup withdrawn from, or blowdown discharged into, the Missouri River. Land-use and terrestrial- and aquatic-ecological impacts will be small. Air-quality impacts from cooling-tower drift and other emissions and dust will also be small. Impacts to historic and prehistoric sites will be negligible with the development and implementation of the applicant's cultural-resources management plan. No significant impacts are anticipated from normal operational releases of radioactivity. The risk associated with accidental radiation exposure is very low. The net socioeconomic effects of the project will be beneficial. The action called for is the issuance of an operating license for Unit 1 of the Callaway Plant. 18 figs., 16 tabs

  12. Proposed IMS infrastructure improvement project, Seward, Alaska. Final environmental impact statement

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    1994-09-01

    This Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) examines a proposal for improvements at the existing University of Alaska, Fairbanks, Institute of Marine Science (IMS), Seward Marine Center. The Exxon Valdez Oil Spill (EVOS) Trustee Council is proposing to improve the existing research infrastructure to enhance the EVOS Trustee Council`s capabilities to study and rehabilitate marine mammals, marine birds, and the ecosystem injured by the Exxon Valdez oil spill. The analysis in this document focuses on the effects associated with construction and operation of the proposed project and its proposed alternatives. The EIS gives a detailed description of all major elements of the proposed project and its alternatives; identifies resources of major concern that were raised during the scoping process; describes the environmental background conditions of those resources; defines and analyzes the potential effects of the proposed project and its alternatives on these conditions; and identifies mitigating measures that are part of the project design as well as those proposed to minimize or reduce the adverse effects. Included in the EIS are written and oral comments received during the public comment period.

  13. Final environmental impact statement. Management of commercially generated radioactive waste. Volume 2. Appendices

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    1980-10-01

    This EIS analyzes the significant environmental impacts that could occur if various technologies for management and disposal of high-level and transuranic wastes from commercial nuclear power reactors were to be developed and implemented. This EIS will serve as the environmental input for the decision on which technology, or technologies, will be emphasized in further research and development activities in the commercial waste management program. The action proposed in this EIS is to (1) adopt a national strategy to develop mined geologic repositories for disposal of commercially generated high-level and transuranic radioactive waste (while continuing to examine subseabed and very deep hole disposal as potential backup technologies) and (2) conduct a R and D program to develop such facilities and the necessary technology to ensure the safe long-term containment and isolation of these wastes. The Department has considered in this statement: development of conventionally mined deep geologic repositories for disposal of spent fuel from nuclear power reactors and/or radioactive fuel reprocessing wastes; balanced development of several alternative disposal methods; and no waste disposal action. This volume contains appendices of supplementary data on waste management systems, geologic disposal, radiological standards, radiation dose calculation models, related health effects, baseline ecology, socio-economic conditions, hazard indices, comparison of defense and commercial wastes, design considerations, and wastes from thorium-based fuel cycle alternatives. (DMC)

  14. Proposed IMS infrastructure improvement project, Seward, Alaska. Final environmental impact statement

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1994-09-01

    This Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) examines a proposal for improvements at the existing University of Alaska, Fairbanks, Institute of Marine Science (IMS), Seward Marine Center. The Exxon Valdez Oil Spill (EVOS) Trustee Council is proposing to improve the existing research infrastructure to enhance the EVOS Trustee Council's capabilities to study and rehabilitate marine mammals, marine birds, and the ecosystem injured by the Exxon Valdez oil spill. The analysis in this document focuses on the effects associated with construction and operation of the proposed project and its proposed alternatives. The EIS gives a detailed description of all major elements of the proposed project and its alternatives; identifies resources of major concern that were raised during the scoping process; describes the environmental background conditions of those resources; defines and analyzes the potential effects of the proposed project and its alternatives on these conditions; and identifies mitigating measures that are part of the project design as well as those proposed to minimize or reduce the adverse effects. Included in the EIS are written and oral comments received during the public comment period

  15. Final environmental impact statement. Management of commercially generated radioactive waste. Volume 2. Appendices

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1980-10-01

    This EIS analyzes the significant environmental impacts that could occur if various technologies for management and disposal of high-level and transuranic wastes from commercial nuclear power reactors were to be developed and implemented. This EIS will serve as the environmental input for the decision on which technology, or technologies, will be emphasized in further research and development activities in the commercial waste management program. The action proposed in this EIS is to (1) adopt a national strategy to develop mined geologic repositories for disposal of commercially generated high-level and transuranic radioactive waste (while continuing to examine subseabed and very deep hole disposal as potential backup technologies) and (2) conduct a R and D program to develop such facilities and the necessary technology to ensure the safe long-term containment and isolation of these wastes. The Department has considered in this statement: development of conventionally mined deep geologic repositories for disposal of spent fuel from nuclear power reactors and/or radioactive fuel reprocessing wastes; balanced development of several alternative disposal methods; and no waste disposal action. This volume contains appendices of supplementary data on waste management systems, geologic disposal, radiological standards, radiation dose calculation models, related health effects, baseline ecology, socio-economic conditions, hazard indices, comparison of defense and commercial wastes, design considerations, and wastes from thorium-based fuel cycle alternatives

  16. Final Site-Wide Environmental Impact Statement for the Y-12 National Security Complex

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    2001-01-01

    The National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) a separately organized agency within the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is responsible for providing the Nation with nuclear weapons and ensuring that those nuclear weapons remain safe, secure, and reliable. As one of the DOE major production facilities, the Y-12 National Security Complex has been DOE's primary site for enriched uranium processing and storage, and one of the manufacturing facilities for maintaining the U.S. nuclear weapons stockpile. In response to the end of the Cold War and changes in the world's political regimes, the emphasis of the U.S. weapons program has shifted dramatically over the past few years from developing and producing new weapons to dismantlement and maintenance of a smaller, enduring stockpile. The ''Stockpile Stewardship and Management Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement'' [SSM PEIS], DOE/EIS-0236, issued in September 1996, evaluated alternatives for maintaining the safety and reliability of the nuclear weapons stockpile without underground nuclear testing or production of new-design weapons. In the SSM PEIS Record of Decision (ROD), DOE decided to maintain the national security missions at the Y-12 National Security Complex, but to downsize Y-12 consistent with reduced requirements. These national security missions include (1) maintaining the capability and capacity to fabricate secondaries, limited life components, and case parts for nuclear response; (2) evaluating components and subsystems returned from the stockpile; (3) storing enriched uranium that is designated for national security purposes; (4) storing depleted uranium and lithium parts; (5) dismantling nuclear weapons secondaries returned from the stockpile; (6) processing uranium and lithium (which includes chemical recovery, purification, and conversion of enriched uranium and lithium to a form suitable for long-term storage and/or further use); and (7) providing support to weapons laboratories. During the

  17. 77 FR 9960 - Final Environmental Impact Statement for Extension of F-Line Streetcar Service to Fort Mason...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2012-02-21

    ... Environmental Impact Statement for Extension of F-Line Streetcar Service to Fort Mason Center, San Francisco, CA... Environmental Impact Statement for the Extension of F-Line Streetcar Service to Fort Mason Center, San Francisco... the extension of the historic streetcar F-line from Fisherman's Wharf to the Fort Mason Center, in San...

  18. Savannah River Site Spent Nuclear Fuel Management Final Environmental Impact Statement

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    N/A

    2000-04-14

    The proposed DOE action considered in this environmental impact statement (EIS) is to implement appropriate processes for the safe and efficient management of spent nuclear fuel and targets at the Savannah River Site (SRS) in Aiken County, South Carolina, including placing these materials in forms suitable for ultimate disposition. Options to treat, package, and store this material are discussed. The material included in this EIS consists of approximately 68 metric tons heavy metal (MTHM) of spent nuclear fuel 20 MTHM of aluminum-based spent nuclear fuel at SRS, as much as 28 MTHM of aluminum-clad spent nuclear fuel from foreign and domestic research reactors to be shipped to SRS through 2035, and 20 MTHM of stainless-steel or zirconium-clad spent nuclear fuel and some Americium/Curium Targets stored at SRS. Alternatives considered in this EIS encompass a range of new packaging, new processing, and conventional processing technologies, as well as the No Action Alternative. A preferred alternative is identified in which DOE would prepare about 97% by volume (about 60% by mass) of the aluminum-based fuel for disposition using a melt and dilute treatment process. The remaining 3% by volume (about 40% by mass) would be managed using chemical separation. Impacts are assessed primarily in the areas of water resources, air resources, public and worker health, waste management, socioeconomic, and cumulative impacts.

  19. Cook Inlet Planning Area oil and gas lease sale 149: Final environmental impact statement. Volume 1

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1996-01-01

    This environmental impact statement (EIS) discusses a proposed oil and gas lease sale in the Cook Inlet Planning Area, analyzes its potential effects on the environment, describes alternatives, presents major issues determined through the scoping process and staff analyses, and evaluates potential mitigating measures. Descriptions of the (1) leasing and scoping process are given in Section 1, (2) alternatives and mitigating measures in Section 2, and (3) description of the environment in Section 3. The potential effects of the lease sale are analyzed in Section 4. Alternative 1, the proposed action, is based on offering for lease 402 blocks (approximately 0.8 million hectares--1.98 million acres) in lower Cook Inlet that range from about 5 to 50 kilometers (3 to 25 mi) offshore. Alterative 2 (No Lease Sale) would cancel the proposed lease sale tentatively scheduled for April 1996. Alternative 2 (Delay the Sale) would delay the proposed sale for 2 years. Alternatives 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9 would defer from leasing areas adjacent to the lower Cook Inlet and northwestern Shelikof Strait: the size of areas deferred ranges from about 5 to 45% of the area proposed for Alternative 1. After a thorough review, the Secretary of the Interior will decide which alternative or combination of alternatives will be included in the Notice of Sale

  20. Final environmental statement related to the Plateau Resources Limited Shootering Canyon Uranium Project (Garfield County, Utah)

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1979-07-01

    The proposed action is the issuance of a Source Material License to Plateau Resources, Ltd., for the construction and operation of the proposed Shootering Canyon Uranium Project with a product (U 3 O 8 ) production limited to 2.2 x 10 5 kg (4.9 x 10 5 lb) per year. Impacts to the area from the operation of the Shootering Canyon Uranium Project will include the following: alterations of up to 140 ha (350 acres) that will be occupied by the mill, mill facilities, borrow areas, tailings areas, and roads; an increase in the existing background radiation levels of the mill area as a result of continuous but small releases of uranium, radium, radon, and other, radioactive materials during construction and operation; socioeconomic effects on the local area, particularly the proposed community of Ticaboo, where the majority of workers will be housed during project construction and operation; and production of solid waste material (tailings) from the mill at a rate of about 680 MT (750 tons) per day and deposition as a slurry in an onsite impoundment area; construction and operation of the Shootering Canyon mill will provide employment and induced economic benefits for the region but may also result in some socioeconomic stress. On the basis of the analysis and evaluation set forth in this Environmental Statement, it is proposed that any license issued for the Shootering Canyon mill should be subject to certain conditions for the protection of the environment. A list is included. Nine appendices are also included

  1. Final environmental statement: US Spent Fuel Policy. Storage of foreign spent power reactor fuel

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1980-05-01

    In October 1977, the Department of Energy (DOE) announced a Spent Fuel Storage Policy for nuclear power reactors. Under this policy, as approved by the President, US utilities will be given the opportunity to deliver spent fuel to US Government custody in exchange for payment of a fee. The US Government will also be prepared to accept a limited amount of spent fuel from foreign sources when such action would contribute to meeting nonproliferation goals. Under the new policy, spent fuel transferred to the US Government will be delivered - at user expense - to a US Government-approved site. Foreign spent fuel would be stored in Interim Spent Fuel Storage (ISFS) facilities with domestic fuel. This volume of the environmental impact statement includes effects associated with implementing or not implementing the Spent Fuel Storage Policy for the foreign fuels. The analyses show that there are no substantial radiological health impacts whether the policy is implemented or not. In no case considered does the population dose commitment exceed 0.000006% of the world population dose commitment from natural radiation sources over the period analyzed. Full implementation of the US offer to accept a limited amount of foreign spent fuel for storage provides the greatest benefits for US nonproliferation policy. Acceptance of lesser quantities of foreign spent fuel in the US or less US support of foreign spent fuel storage abroad provides some nonproliferation benefits, but at a significantly lower level than full implementation of the offer. Not implementing the policy in regard to foreign spent fuel will be least productive in the context of US nonproliferation objectives. The remainder of the summary provides a brief description of the options that are evaluated, the facilities involved in these options, and the environmental impacts, including nonproliferation considerations, associated with each option

  2. Salt Lake City Area Integrated Projects electric power marketing -- Final environmental impact statement. Volume 1: Summary

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1996-01-01

    The Colorado River Storage Project Customer Service Office of the Western Area Power Administration (Western) markets electricity produced at hydroelectric facilities operated by the Bureau of Reclamation. The facilities are known collectively as the Salt Lake City Area Integrated Projects (SLCA/IP) and include dams equipped for power generation on the Colorado, Green, Gunnison, and Rio Grande rivers and on Plateau Creek in Arizona, Colorado, Utah, Wyoming, and New Mexico. Of these facilities, only the Glen Canyon Unit, the Flaming Gorge Unit, and the Aspinall Unit (which includes Blue Mesa, Morrow Point, and Crystal dams) are influenced by Western power scheduling and transmission decisions. The environmental impact statement (EIS) alternatives, called commitment-level alternatives, reflect combinations of capacity and energy that would feasibly and reasonably fulfill Western's firm power marketing responsibilities, needs, and statutory obligations. The viability of these alternatives relates directly to the combination of generation capability of the SLCA/IP with energy purchases and interchange. The economic and natural resource assessments in this EIS include an analysis of commitment-level alternatives. Impacts of the no-action alternative are also assessed. Supply options, which include combinations of electrical power purchases and hydropower operational scenarios reflecting different operations of the dams, are also assessed. The EIS evaluates the impacts of these scenarios relative to socioeconomics, air resources, water resources, ecological resources, cultural resources, land use, recreation, and visual resources. Western has identified commitment-level alternative 1, the Post-1989 commitment level, as its preferred alternative. The impact evaluations indicate that this commitment level is also the environmentally preferred alternative

  3. 75 FR 72836 - Notice of Availability of Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Tonopah Solar Energy...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-11-26

    ... Statement for the Tonopah Solar Energy Crescent Dunes Solar Energy Project, Nye County, NV AGENCY: Bureau of... Statement (EIS) for the Crescent Dunes Solar Energy Project, Nye County, Nevada, and by this notice is... . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Tonopah Solar Energy, LLC applied to the BLM for a 7,680-acre right-of-way (ROW) on...

  4. BPA/Puget Power Northwest Washington Transmission Project Final Environmental Impact Statement.

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    United States. Bonneville Power Administration.

    1995-08-01

    Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) and Puget Sound Power & Light Company (Puget Power) propose to upgrade the existing high-voltage transmission system in the Whatcom and Skagit counties area between the towns of Custer and Sedro Woolley, including some areas within the City of Bellingham, starting in 1995. A Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the project was issued in November 1993, followed by a 45-day public comment period. Public response to the DEIS included the identification of several new transmission route alternatives in the Lake Whatcom area. BPA issued a Supplemental DEIS in April 1995 to provide a second public review-and-comment period. Rebuilding an existing 230-kV line to a double-circuit 230-kV transmission line was identified in the Supplemental DEIS as the Proposed Action. The Supplemental DEIS also examined in detail a North Shore Road alternative which was proposed by some members of the public. Public comments on the EIS were listed and responded to in the Supplemental DEIS. In May 1995, a second set of open houses and public meetings was held to review the Supplemental DEIS. Electromagnetic field (EMF) effects raised as an issue in the DEIS continued to be an issue of public concern in the meetings. The EIS has identified impacts that would generally be classified as low to moderate and localized. Effects on soils and water resources in sensitive areas (e.g., near Lake Whatcom) would be low to moderate; there would be little change in magnetic fields; noise levels would remain at existing levels; and land use and property value impacts would be minimal. Threatened and endangered species would not be adversely affected, and all proposed actions in wetlands would be covered by a Corps of Engineers Nationwide Permit. Visual and socioeconomic would be low to moderate. There would be no effect on cultural resources.

  5. Final environmental statement related to the operation of Clinton Power Station, Unit No. 1. Docket No. 50-461

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1982-05-01

    This final environmental statement contains the second assessment of the environmental impact associated with operation of Clinton Power Station Unit 1 pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) and 10 CFR Part 51, as amended, of the NRC's regulations. This statement examines: the affected environment, environmental consequences and mitigating actions, and environmental and economic benefits and costs. Land-use and terrestrial- and aquatic-ecological impacts will be small. Air-quality impacts will also be small. However, steam fog from the station's cooling lake has the potential for reducing visibility over nearby roads and bridges. A fog-monitoring program for roads and ridges near the lake has been recommended. Impacts to historic and prehistoric sites will be negligible. Chemical discharges to Lake Clinton and Salt Creek are expected to have no appreciable impacts on water quality under normal conditions and will be required to meet conditions of the station's NPDES permit. The hydrothermal analyses indicate that under certain meteorological conditions (1-in-50-year drought), the plant would have to be operated at reduced power levels in order to meet the thermal standards established by the Illinois Pollution Control Board Order PCB 81-82. The effects of routine operations, energy transmission, and periodic maintenance of rights-of-way and transmission line facilties should not jeopardize any populations of endangered or threatened species. No significant impacts are anticipated from normal operational releases of radioactivity. Contentions associated with environmental issues accepted during the operating-license hearing are related to assessment of effects of low-level radiation. The net socioeconomic effects of the project will be beneficial. The action called for is the issuance of an operating license for Unit 1 of Clinton

  6. Final Long-Term Management and Storage of Elemental Mercury Environmental Impact Statement Volume 2

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    2011-01-01

    Pursuant to the Mercury Export Ban Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-414), DOE was directed to designate a facility or facilities for the long-term management and storage of elemental mercury generated within the United States. Therefore, DOE has analyzed the storage of up to 10,000 metric tons (11,000 tons) of elemental mercury in a facility(ies) constructed and operated in accordance with the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (74 FR 31723). DOE prepared this Final Mercury Storage EIS in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) implementing regulations (40 CFR 1500–1508), and DOE’s NEPA implementing procedures (10 CFR 1021) to evaluate reasonable alternatives for a facility(ies) for the long-term management and storage of elemental mercury. This Final Mercury Storage EIS analyzes the potential environmental, human health, and socioeconomic impacts of elemental mercury storage at seven candidate locations: Grand Junction Disposal Site near Grand Junction, Colorado; Hanford Site near Richland, Washington; Hawthorne Army Depot near Hawthorne, Nevada; Idaho National Laboratory near Idaho Falls, Idaho; Kansas City Plant in Kansas City, Missouri; Savannah River Site near Aiken, South Carolina; and Waste Control Specialists, LLC, site near Andrews, Texas. As required by CEQ NEPA regulations, the No Action Alternative was also analyzed as a basis for comparison. DOE intends to decide (1) where to locate the elemental mercury storage facility(ies) and (2) whether to use existing buildings, new buildings, or a combination of existing and new buildings. DOE’s Preferred Alternative for the long-term management and storage of mercury is the Waste Control Specialists, LLC, site near Andrews, Texas.

  7. Final Long-Term Management and Storage of Elemental Mercury Environmental Impact Statement Volume1

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    2011-01-01

    Pursuant to the Mercury Export Ban Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-414), DOE was directed to designate a facility or facilities for the long-term management and storage of elemental mercury generated within the United States. Therefore, DOE has analyzed the storage of up to 10,000 metric tons (11,000 tons) of elemental mercury in a facility(ies) constructed and operated in accordance with the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (74 FR 31723).DOE prepared this Final Mercury Storage EIS in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) implementing regulations (40 CFR 1500–1508), and DOE’s NEPA implementing procedures (10 CFR 1021) to evaluate reasonable alternatives for a facility(ies) for the long-term management and storage of elemental mercury. This Final Mercury Storage EIS analyzes the potential environmental, human health, and socioeconomic impacts of elemental mercury storage at seven candidate locations:Grand Junction Disposal Site near Grand Junction, Colorado; Hanford Site near Richland, Washington; Hawthorne Army Depot near Hawthorne, Nevada; Idaho National Laboratory near Idaho Falls, Idaho;Kansas City Plant in Kansas City, Missouri; Savannah River Site near Aiken, South Carolina; and Waste Control Specialists, LLC, site near Andrews, Texas. As required by CEQ NEPA regulations, the No Action Alternative was also analyzed as a basis for comparison. DOE intends to decide (1) where to locate the elemental mercury storage facility(ies) and (2) whether to use existing buildings, new buildings, or a combination of existing and new buildings. DOE’s Preferred Alternative for the long-term management and storage of mercury is the Waste Control Specialists, LLC, site near Andrews, Texas.

  8. Final Environmental Impact Statement to construct and operate the Crownpoint Uranium Solution Mining Project, Crownpoint, New Mexico

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1997-02-01

    This Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) addresses the proposed action of issuing a combined source and 11e(2) byproduct material license and minerals operating leases for Federal and Indian lands to Hydro Resources, Inc. (HRI). This action would authorize HRI to conduct in-situ leach uranium mining in McKinley County, New Mexico. Such mining would involve drilling wells to access the ore bodies, then recirculating groundwater with added oxygen to mobilize uranium found in the ore. Uranium would then be removed from the solution using ion exchange technology in processing plants located at three separate sites. As proposed by HRI, a central plant would provide drying and packaging equipment for the entire project. The Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the proposed action was prepared by an interagency review group comprising staff from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, and the Bureau of Land Management, and published in October 1994. After evaluating the environmental impacts of the proposed action in the DEIS, the reviewing agencies concluded that the appropriate action was to issue the requested license and proposed leases authorizing HRI to proceed with the project. This FEIS reevaluates the proposed licensing action on the basis of written and oral comments received on the DEIS and on additional information obtained in 1995 and 1996. The FEIS describes and evaluates (1) the purpose of and need for the proposed action, (2) alternatives to the proposed action, (3) the environmental resources that could be affected by the proposed action and alternatives, (4) the potential environmental consequences of the proposed action and alternatives, and (5) the economic costs and benefits associated with the proposed action. Based on this assessment, the FEIS makes recommendations concerning the requested license and proposed leases

  9. 75 FR 29574 - Final Legislative Environmental Impact Statement for the Harvest of Glaucous-Winged Gull Eggs by...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-05-26

    ... for the Harvest of Glaucous-Winged Gull Eggs by the Huna Tlingit in Glacier Bay National Park AGENCY... Impact Statement for the Harvest of Glaucous-Winged Gull Eggs by the Huna Tlingit in Glacier Bay National... Environmental Impact Statement (LEIS) for the harvest of glaucous-winged gull eggs by the Huna Tlingit in...

  10. Columbia River System Operation Review final environmental impact statement. Appendix T: Comments and responses

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1995-11-01

    The System Operation Review (SOR) is a study and environmental compliance process being used by the three Federal agencies to analyze future operations of the system and river use issues. The goal of the SOR is to achieve a coordinated system operation strategy for the river that better meets the needs of all river users. This technical appendix addresses only the effects of alternative system operating strategies for managing the Columbia River system. This appendix documents the public and agency review of the SOR Draft EIS and how the SOR agencies used the review to formulate the FINAL EIS. The appendix includes a summary of the review process, a discussion of the nature of the comments, a list of all commentors, reproductions of comment letters, and responses to all comments. Changes in the EIS text in response to comments are noted in the responses

  11. Waste Isolation Pilot Plant disposal phase final supplemental environmental impact statement. Volume 1, Chapters 1--6

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1997-09-01

    The purpose of the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Disposal Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS-II) is to provide information on environmental impacts regarding the Department of Energy's (DOE) proposed disposal operations at WIPP. The Proposed Action describes the treatment and disposal of the Basic inventory of TRU waste over a 35-year period. The Action Alternatives proposed the treatment of the Basic Inventory and an Additional Inventory as well as the transportation of the treated waste to WIPP for disposal over a 150- to 190-year period. The three Action Alternatives include the treatment of TRU waste at consolidation sites to meet WIPP planning-basic Waste Acceptance Criteria, the thermal treatment of TRU waste to meet Land Disposal Restrictions, and the treatment of TRU waste by a shred and grout process. SEIS-II evaluates environmental impacts resulting from the various treatment options; the transportation of TRU waste to WIPP using truck, a combination of truck and regular rail service, and a combination of truck and dedicated rail service; and the disposal of this waste in the repository. Evaluated impacts include those to the general environment and to human health. Additional issues associated with the implementation of the alternatives are discussed to provide further understanding of the decisions to be reached and to provide the opportunity for public input on improving DOE's Environmental Management Program. Chapters 1--6 include an introduction, background information, description of the proposed action and alternatives, description of the affected environments, environmental impacts, and consultations and permits

  12. 75 FR 19989 - Final Environmental Impact Statement for Drought Management Planning at the Kerr Hydroelectric...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-04-16

    ... Drought Management Planning at the Kerr Hydroelectric Project, Flathead Lake, MT AGENCY: Bureau of Indian... Impact Statement (FEIS) for Drought Management Planning at the Kerr Hydroelectric Project, Flathead Lake... drought management planning at the Kerr Hydroelectric Project no sooner than 30 days following the...

  13. Flood Control, Roseau River, Roseau and Kittson Counties, Minnesota. Final Environmental Impact Statement. Supplement.

    Science.gov (United States)

    1981-09-01

    business, and entrepreneur acquisition of presently marginal lands. The perceived result of withdrawal would be the shift of Roseau County from a com...impact statement (5S1) for this project we* plsed oa Eile witb the Council on Invironmenal Quality (CEQ) in April 1972. Because of incresing eaviromatal

  14. 78 FR 40496 - Notice of availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Proposed Hollister...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2013-07-05

    ... exploration. The proposed project would augment the existing mine water management facilities that include water treatment facilities and rapid infiltration basins by adding underground dewatering wells and by... Statement for the Proposed Hollister Underground Mine Project, Elko County, NV AGENCY: Bureau of Land...

  15. Proposed Tenaska Washington II Generation Project : Final Environmental Impact Statement. Volume 1: Environmental Analysis and Technical Appendices.

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    United States. Bonneville Power Administration.

    1994-01-01

    BPA is considering whether to purchase electrical power from a proposed privately-owned combustion-turbine electrical generation plant in Washington. The plant would be fired by natural gas and would use combined-cycle technology to generate 240 average megawatts (aMW) of energy. The plant would be developed, owned, and operated by Tenaska Washington Partners II, L.P. The project would be located about 19 kilometers (12 miles) southeast of downtown Tacoma in the Frederickson Industrial Area, Pierce County. The proposed plant would occupy about half of a 6.4-hectare (16-acre) parcel and would be consistent with the industrial character of its surroundings. The proposed site is currently undeveloped and zoned for industrial use by the county. Main environmental concerns identified in the scoping process and in comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) include: (1) potential air quality impacts, such as emissions and their contribution to the {open_quotes}greenhouse{close_quotes} effect; (2) potential health and safety impacts, such as nuisance odors, plant safety, visibility and heat-emission systems which may affect low-flying planes and potential health effects of electric and magnetic fields; and (3) potential water quality and quantity impacts, such as the amount of wastewater to be discharged, the source and amount of water required for plant operation. These and other issues are discussed in detail in the EIS. The proposed project already includes many features designed to reduce environmental impacts. Based on investigations performed for the EIS, no significant unavoidable adverse environmental impacts associated with the proposed project were identified, and no evidence emerged to suggest that the proposed action is controversial. The EIS is being mailed to numerous agencies, groups, and individuals (see Section 8.0). There will be a 30-day no-action period before any decisions are made and the Record of Decision is signed.

  16. Final Environmental Impact Statement for the construction and operation of Claiborne Enrichment Center, Homer, Louisiana (Docket No. 70-3070)

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    Zeitoun, A. [Science Applications International Corp., Germantown, MD (United States)

    1994-08-01

    This two-volume Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) was prepared by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in accordance with regulation 10 CFR Part 51, which implements the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Volume 1 contains the assessment of the potential environmental impacts for licensing the construction and operation of a proposed gaseous centrifuge enrichment facility to be built in Claiborne Parish, Louisiana, by Louisiana Energy Services, LP. (LES). The proposed facility would have a production capacity of about 866 metric tons annually of up to 5 weight percent enriched UF{sub 6}, using a proven centrifuge technology. Included in the assessment are construction, both normal operations and potential accidents (internal and external events), and the eventual decontamination and decommissioning (D&D)- of the site. Issues addressed include the purpose and need for the facility, the alternatives to the proposed action, potential disposition of the tails, the site selection process, and environmental justice. The NRC staff concludes that the facility can be constructed and operated with small and acceptable impacts on the public and the environment. The FEIS supports issuance of a license to the applicant, Louisiana Energy Services, to authorize construction and operation of the proposed facility.

  17. Final environmental impact statement: US Spent Fuel Policy. Charge for spent fuel storage

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1980-05-01

    The United States Government policy relating to nuclear fuel reprocessing, which was announced by President Carter on April 7, 1977, provides for an indefinite deferral of reprocessing, and thus commits light water reactor (LWR) plants to a once-through fuel cycle during that indefinite period. In a subsequent action implementing that policy, the Department of Energy (DOE) on October 18, 1977 announced a spent fuel policy which would enable domestic, and on a selective basis, foreign utilities to deliver spent fuel to the US Government for interim storage and final geologic disposal, and pay the Government a fee for such services. This volume addresses itself to whether the fee charged for these services, by its level or its structure, would have any effect on the environmental impacts of implementing the Spent Fuel Policy itself. This volume thus analyzes the fee and various alternatives to determine the interaction between the fee and the degree of participation by domestic utilities and foreign countries in the proposed spent fuel program for implementing the Spent Fuel Policy. It also analyzes the effect, if any, of the fee on the growth of nuclear power

  18. Columbia River System Operation Review final environmental impact statement. Appendix I: Power

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1995-11-01

    The System Operation Review (SOR) is a study and environmental compliance process being used by the three Federal agencies to analyze future operations of the system and river use issues. The goal of the SOR is to achieve a coordinated system operation strategy for the river that better meets the needs of all river users. This technical appendix addresses only the effects of alternative system operating strategies for managing the Columbia River system. This appendix discusses the work performed by the SOR Power Work Group. The Power Work Group (PWG) had several major responsibilities: first, to determine the effects of each of the various system operating strategies (SOS) on the Northwest regional power system; second, given these effects, to determine what, if any, actions are required to meet forecasted regional energy consumption; and finally, to estimate the cost for serving the forecasted regional energy consumption. The Northwest regional power system consists of Federal and non-Federal hydroelectric power projects (hydropower or hydro projects) on the main stem of the Columbia and Snake Rivers, numerous smaller hydro projects on other river reaches, and a number of thermal plants (coal, nuclear and combustion turbines)

  19. Final environmental statement on the transportation of radioactive material by air and other modes

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1977-12-01

    Volume 2 contains only chapter 8 of the statement. Seven chapters and 8 appendixes are presented in Volume 1. Chapter 8 is presented to provide a brief outline of the major changes made since the issuance of the draft version of this report (NUREG-0034), most of which were in response to comments received during the public review period and to give detailed responses to each of these comments. A list of all comments received is given in an appendix

  20. Final programmatic environmental impact statement for the Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action Ground Water Project. Volume 2

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1996-10-01

    The purpose of the Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action (UMTRA) Ground Water Project is to eliminate, reduce, or address to acceptable levels the potential health and environmental consequences of milling activities. One of the first steps in the UMTRA Ground Water Project is the preparation of the Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS). This report contains the comments and responses received on the draft PEIS

  1. 77 FR 65401 - Notice of Availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Restoration Design...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2012-10-26

    ... environmentally responsible production of renewable energy and allows the permitting of future renewable energy..., including solar and wind energy technologies, and to establish a baseline set of environmental protection...), which are BLM-administered lands that are suitable for the development of solar and wind energy...

  2. 77 FR 26316 - Progress Energy Florida; Final Environmental Impact Statement for Combined Licenses for Levy...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2012-05-03

    ... at 600 Gilbert Street, Bronson. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Douglas Bruner, Environmental.... Bruner may be contacted by telephone at 301-415-2730 or via email at Douglas.Bruner@nrc.gov . Dated at...

  3. Department of the Navy final environmental impact statement for a container system for the management of naval spent nuclear fuel

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1996-11-01

    This Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) addresses six general alternative systems for the loading, storage, transport, and possible disposal of naval spent nuclear fuel following examination. This EIS describes environmental impacts of (1) producing and implementing the container systems (including those impacts resulting from the addition of the capability to load the containers covered in this EIS in dry fuel handling facilities at Idaho National Engineering Laboratory (INEL)); (2) loading of naval spent nuclear fuel at the Expended Core Facility or at the Idaho Chemical Processing Plant with subsequent storage at INEL; (3) construction of a storage facility (such as a paved area) at alternative locations at INEL; and (4) loading of containers and their shipment to a geologic repository or to a centralized interim storage site outside the State of Idaho once one becomes available. As indicated in the EIS, the systems and facilities might also be used for handling low-level radiological waste categorized as special case waste. The Navy's preferred alternative for a container system for the management of naval spent fuel is a dual-purpose canister system. The primary benefits of a dual-purpose canister system are efficiencies in container manufacturing and fuel reloading operations, and potential reductions in radiation exposure

  4. Construction and operation of a tritium extraction facility at the Savannah River Site. Final environmental impact statement

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1999-03-01

    DOE proposes to construct and operate a Tritium Extraction Facility (TEF) at H Area on the Savannah River Site (SRS) to provide the capability to extract tritium from commercial light water reactor (CLWR) targets and from targets of similar design. The proposed action is also DOE's preferred alternative. An action alternative is to construct and operate TEF at the Allied General Nuclear Services facility, which is adjacent to the eastern side of the SRS. Under the no-action alternative DOE could incorporate tritium extraction capabilities in the accelerator for production of tritium. This EIS is linked to the Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for Tritium Supply and Recycling, from which DOE determined that it would produce tritium either in an accelerator or in a commercial light water reactor. The purpose of the proposed action and alternatives evaluated in this EIS is to provide tritium extraction capability to support either tritium production technology. The EIS assesses the environmental impacts from the proposed action and the alternatives, including the no action alternative

  5. 47 CFR 1.1314 - Environmental impact statements (EISs).

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-10-01

    ... 47 Telecommunication 1 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false Environmental impact statements (EISs). 1.1314... Procedures Implementing the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 § 1.1314 Environmental impact statements (EISs). (a) Draft Environmental Impact Statements (DEISs) (§ 1.1315) and Final Environmental...

  6. 77 FR 38821 - Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Menominee Indian Tribe of Wisconsin's Proposed Fee...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2012-06-29

    ..., with the Menominee Indian Tribe of Wisconsin (Tribe), the National Indian Gaming Commission (NIGC), the... III gaming would be conducted inside the existing clubhouse until the new casino is built. The FEIS..., environmental justice, cumulative effects, indirect effects and mitigation. The BIA has afforded other...

  7. 76 FR 55155 - Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Proposed Keystone XL Project

    Science.gov (United States)

    2011-09-06

    ... border of the U.S. and Canada for the transport of crude oil across the U.S./Canada international... proposed Project that is designed to transport crude oil produced from oil sands in the Western Canadian... security; environmental, cultural, and economic impacts. Before making a decision on the proposed Project...

  8. 77 FR 39253 - Final Environmental Impact Statement on the Denali Park Road Vehicle Management Plan, Denali...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2012-07-02

    ... online at the NPS Planning, Environmental and Public Comment Web site at http://parkplanning.nps.gov/dena... served well as a way to manage vehicle use, while providing high quality visitor opportunities to see... framework for vehicle use based on indicators and standards for visitor experiences and resource protection...

  9. Expansion of U.S. uranium enrichment capacity. Final environmental statement

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1976-04-01

    Reasonably foreseeable environmental, social, economic, and technological costs and benefits of postulated expansion of U. S. enrichment capacity through the year 2000 and reasonably available alternatives to such expansion are described. Both the gas centrifuge and gaseous diffusion methods for the enrichment of uranium are considered in this impact assessment

  10. 76 FR 29217 - Notice of Availability of the Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for the...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2011-05-20

    ... support tern and plover populations on the Missouri River in a safe, efficient and cost-effective manner... Avenue, Omaha, NE 68102-4901, or by e-mail: [email protected] . For inquires from the media... recreation. After detailed consideration of the environmental and social impacts, and cumulative effects, of...

  11. 75 FR 75492 - Notice of Availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the One Nevada...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-12-03

    ... Library, 950 Campton Street, Ely, Nevada BLM Nevada State Office, 1340 Financial Blvd., Reno, Nevada BLM... of an existing 345 kV transmission line at the new substation; an expansion of one existing... 2009. Nineteen comments were received and taken into consideration in the preparation of the Final EIS...

  12. 78 FR 8577 - Final Environmental Impact Statement; Izembek National Wildlife Refuge Proposed Land Exchange...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2013-02-06

    ... the threatened Steller's eider, threatened sea otter, threatened Steller sea lion, tundra swan, black... DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service [FWS-R7-R-2012-N206; FXRS12650700000-134.... SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce the availability of a final...

  13. Final Environmental Impact Statement and Environmental Impact Report for continued operation of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and Sandia National Laboratories, Livermore

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1992-08-01

    This Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (EIS/EIR) is prepared pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). This document analyzes the potential environmental impacts of the proposed action: continued operation, including near-term (within 5 to 10 years) proposed projects, of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) and Sandia National Laboratories, Livermore (SNL, Livermore). Additionally, this document analyzes a no action alternative involving continuing operations at FY 1992 funding levels without further growth, a modification of operations alternative to reduce adverse environmental impacts of operations or facilities, and a shutdown and decommissioning alternative of UC discontinuing its management of LLNL after the current contract expires on September 30, 1992. This document assesses the environmental impacts of the Laboratories' operations on air and water quality, geological and ecological systems, occupational and public health risks, prehistoric and historic resources, endangered species, floodplains and wetlands, socioeconomic resources, hazardous waste management, site contamination, and other environmental issues. The EIS/EIR is divided into five volumes and two companion reports. This volume contains the Final EIS/EIR, which in part relies on the detailed information in the appendices, and comprehensively discusses the proposed action, the alternatives, and the existing conditions and impacts of the proposed action and the alternatives

  14. Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report for continued operation of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and Sandia National Laboratories, Livermore

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1992-08-01

    This Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (EIS/EIR) is prepared pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). This document analyzes the potential environmental impacts of the proposed action: continued operation, including near-term (within 5 to 10 years) proposed projects, of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) and Sandia National Laboratories, Livermore (SNL, Livermore). Additionally, this document analyzes a no action alternative involving continuing operations at FY 1992 funding levels without further growth, a modification of operations alternative to reduce adverse environmental impacts of operations or facilities, and a shutdown and decommissioning alternative of UC discontinuing its management of LLNL after the current contract expires on September 30, 1992. This document assesses the environmental impacts of the Laboratories' operations on air and water quality, geological and ecological systems, occupational and public health risks, prehistoric and historic resources, endangered species, floodplains and wetlands, socioeconomic resources, hazardous waste management, site contamination, and other environmental issues. The EIS/EIR is divided into five volumes and two companion reports. This volume contains the Final EIS/EIR technical appendices which provide technical support for the analyses in Volume 1 and also provide additional information and references

  15. Final environmental statement. Final addendum to Part II: Manufacture of floating nuclear power plants by Offshore Power Systems. DOCKET-STN--50-437

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1978-06-01

    This Addendum to Part II of the Final Environmental Statement related to manufacture of floating nuclear power plants by Offshore Power Systems (OPS), NUREG-0056, issued September 1976, was prepared by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. The staff's basic evaluation is presented in NUREG-0056. The current Addendum provides further consideration of a number of topics discussed in NUREG-0056, particularly additional consideration of shore zone siting at estuarine and ocean regions. This Summary and Conclusions recapitulates and is cumulative for Part II of the FES and the current Addendum. Augmentations to the Summary and Conclusions presented in Part II of the FES and arising from the evaluations contained in this Addendum are italicized

  16. Columbia River System Operation Review final environmental impact statement. Appendix P: Canadian Entitlement Allocation Agreements (CEAA)

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1995-11-01

    The System Operation Review (SOR) is a study and environmental compliance process being used by the three Federal agencies to analyze future operations of the system and river use issues. The goal of the SOR is to achieve a coordinated system operation strategy for the river that better meets the needs of all river users. This technical appendix addresses only the effects of alternative system operating strategies for managing the Columbia River system. The purpose of this technical appendix is to provide the environmental review necessary to enter into agreements regarding the distribution between Federal and non-Federal project owners with respect to delivery of the Canadian Entitlement obligation to Canada for the period 1998 through 2024

  17. 10 CFR 51.95 - Postconstruction environmental impact statements.

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-01-01

    ... NRC staff will prepare a supplement to the final environmental impact statement on the construction... 10 Energy 2 2010-01-01 2010-01-01 false Postconstruction environmental impact statements. 51.95... Implementing Section 102(2) Final Environmental Impact Statements-Production and Utilization Facilities § 51.95...

  18. Columbia River System Operation Review final environmental impact statement. Appendix K: Resident fish

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1995-11-01

    The System Operation Review (SOR) is a study and environmental compliance process being used by the three Federal agencies to analyze future operations of the system and river use issues. The goal of the SOR is to achieve a coordinated system operation strategy for the river that better meets the needs of all river users. This technical appendix addresses only the effects of alternative system operating strategies for managing the Columbia River system. In this appendix the Resident Fish Work Group (RFWG) has attempted to characterize and evaluate impacts of dam operation on an extremely complex and diverse integrated resource. Not only is this required under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for SOR, there are resident fish populations that have status under the Federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) or equivalent state regulations (Kootenai River white sturgeon, Snake River white sturgeon, sandroller, shorthead and torrent sculpins, bull trout, westslope cutthroat trout, redband trout, and burbot). The RFWG has also attempted to develop operating alternatives that benefit not only resident fish, but anadromous fish, wildlife, and other human interests as well. The authors have recognized the co-evolution of resident fish, anadromous fish, and other integrated resources in the basin

  19. 75 FR 39668 - Notice of Availability of Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Proposed Rio del Oro...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-07-12

    ... Environmental Impact Statement for the Proposed Rio del Oro Specific Plan Project, in Sacramento County, CA... Street, Room 1480, Sacramento, CA 95814-2922, or via e-mail to [email protected] . FOR... available for review by appointment only at USACE, Sacramento District, 1325 J Street, Sacramento, CA 95814...

  20. 76 FR 80409 - Draft Supplement 2 to Final Environmental Statement Related to the Operation of Watts Bar Nuclear...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2011-12-23

    ... Environmental Statement Related to the Operation of Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Unit 2; Tennessee Valley Authority..., Related to the Operation of Watts Bar Nuclear Plant [WBN], Unit 2--Draft Report for Comment'' (draft SFES.... Stephen J. Campbell, Chief, Watts Bar Special Projects Branch, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing...

  1. 77 FR 1720 - Final Environmental Impact Statement for the White-Tailed Deer Management Plan, Rock Creek Park

    Science.gov (United States)

    2012-01-11

    ... Environmental Impact Statement for the White-Tailed Deer Management Plan, Rock Creek Park AGENCY: National Park...), Rock Creek Park, Washington, DC The Plan will support long-term protection, preservation, and restoration of native vegetation and other natural and cultural resources in Rock Creek Park. DATES: The NPS...

  2. Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Nevada Test Site and off- site locations in the state of Nevada: Reader's guide

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1996-08-01

    This Reader's Guide is designed to help you find information in the US Departments of Energy's Nevada Test Site Environmental Impact Statement (NTS EIS). This Guide is divided into four sections: an introduction to the NTS EIS, specific topics, number conversions and scientific notations and public reading room locations

  3. Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Treatment and Management of Sodium-Bonded Spent Nuclear Fuel

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    2000-01-01

    DOE is responsible for the safe and efficient management of its sodium-bonded spent nuclear fuel. This fuel contains metallic sodium, a highly reactive material; metallic uranium, which is also reactive; and in some cases, highly enriched uranium. The presence of reactive materials could complicate the process of qualifying and licensing DOE's sodium-bonded spent nuclear fuel inventory for disposal in a geologic repository. Currently, more than 98 percent of this inventory is located at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL), near Idaho Falls, Idaho. In addition, in a 1995 agreement with the State of Idaho, DOE committed to remove all spent nuclear fuel from Idaho by 2035. This EIS evaluates the potential environmental impacts associated with the treatment and management of sodium-bonded spent nuclear fuel in one or more facilities located at Argonne National Laboratory-West (ANL-W) at INEEL and either the F-Canyon or Building 105-L at the Savannah River Site (SRS) near Aiken, South Carolina. DOE has identified and assessed six proposed action alternatives in this EIS. These are: (1) electrometallurgical treatment of all fuel at ANL-W, (2) direct disposal of blanket fuel in high-integrity cans with the sodium removed at ANL-W, (3) plutonium-uranium extraction (PUREX) processing of blanket fuel at SRS, (4) melt and dilute processing of blanket fuel at ANL-W, (5) melt and dilute processing of blanket fuel at SRS, and (6) melt and dilute processing of all fuel at ANL-W. In addition, Alternatives 2 through 5 include the electrometallurgical treatment of driver fuel at ANL-W. Under the No Action Alternative, the EIS evaluates both the continued storage of sodium-bonded spent nuclear fuel until the development of a new treatment technology or direct disposal without treatment. Under all of the alternatives, the affected environment is primarily within 80 kilometers (50 miles) of spent nuclear fuel treatment facilities. Analyses indicate

  4. Columbia River System Operation Review final environmental impact statement. Appendix E: Flood control

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1995-11-01

    The System Operation Review (SOR) is a study and environmental compliance process being used by the three Federal agencies to analyze future operations of the system and river use issues. The goal of the SOR is to achieve a coordinated system operation strategy for the river that better meets the needs of all river users. This technical appendix addresses only the effects of alternative system operating strategies for managing the Columbia River system. The Corps of Engineers, Bonneville Power Administration, and Bureau of Reclamation conducted a scoping process consisting of a series of regionwide public meetings and solicitation of written comments in the summer of 1990. Comments on flood control issues were received from all parts of the Columbia river basin. This appendix includes issues raised in the public scoping process, as well as those brought for consideration by members of the Flood Control Work Group

  5. Columbia River System Operation Review final environmental impact statement. Appendix M: Water quality

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1995-11-01

    The System Operation Review (SOR) is a study and environmental compliance process being used by the three Federal agencies to analyze future operations of the system and river use issues. The goal of the SOR is to achieve a coordinated system operation strategy for the river that better meets the needs of all river users. This technical appendix addresses only the effects of alternative system operating strategies for managing the Columbia River system. Analysis of water quality begins with an account of the planning and evaluation process, and continues with a description of existing water quality conditions in the Columbia River Basin. This is followed by an explanation how the analysis was conducted. The analysis concludes with an assessment of the effects of SOR alternatives on water quality and a comparison of alternatives

  6. Sequoyah Uranium Hexafluoride Plant (Docket No. 40-8027): Final environmental statement

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1975-02-01

    The proposed action is the continuation of Source Material License SUB-1010 issued to Kerr-McGee Nuclear Corporation authorizing the operation of a uranium hexafluoride manufacturing facility located in Sequoyah County, Oklahoma, close to the confluence of the Illinois and Arkansas Rivers. The plant produces high purity uranium hexafluoride using uranium concentrates (yellowcake) as the starting material. It is currently designed to produce 5000 tons of uranium per year as uranium hexafluoride and has been in operation since February 1970 without significant environmental incident or discernible offsite effect. The manufacturing process being used includes wet chemical purification to convert yellowcake to pure uranium trioxide followed by dry chemical reduction, hydrofluorination, and fluorination technique to produce uranium hexafluoride. 8 figs, 12 tabs

  7. Columbia River System Operation Review final environmental impact statement. Appendix L: Soils, geology and groundwater

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1995-11-01

    The System Operation Review (SOR) is a study and environmental compliance process being used by the three Federal agencies to analyze future operations of the system and river use issues. The goal of the SOR is to achieve a coordinated system operation strategy for the river that better meets the needs of all river users. This technical appendix addresses only the effects of alternative system operating strategies for managing the Columbia River system. This appendix addresses the study of geology, soils, and groundwater concerns relative to the System Operation Review (SOR). Chapter 1 provides an overview of the study, scope, and process for this resource area. In order, the respective sections of this chapter discuss the relevant issues for the study, and the means by which the SOR team carried out the study

  8. Final environmental statement related to the operation of Limerick Generating Station, Units 1 and 2, Docket Nos. 50-352 and 50-353, Philadelphia Electric Company

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1989-08-01

    In April 1984 the staff of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission issued its Final Environmental Statement (NUREG-0974) related to the operation of Limerick Generating Station, Units 1 and 2, (Docket Nos. 50-352 and 50-353), located on the Schuylkill River, near Pottstown, in Limerick Township, Montgomery and Chester Counties, Pennsylvania. The NRC has prepared this supplement to NUREG-0974 to present its evaluation of the alternative of facility operation with the installation of further severe accident mitigation design features. The NRC staff has discovered no substantial changes in the proposed action as previously evaluated in the Final Environmental Statement that are relevant to environmental concerns nor significant new circumstances or information relevant to environmental concerns and bearing on the licensing of Limerick Generating Station, Units 1 and 2. 15 refs., 10 tabs

  9. Final waste management programmatic environmental impact statement for managing treatment, storage, and disposal of radioactive and hazardous waste. Summary

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1997-05-01

    This Waste Management Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (WM PEIS) is a nationwide study examining the environmental impacts of managing five types of radioactive and hazardous wastes generated by past and future nuclear defense and research activities at a variety of sites located around the United States. The five waste types are low-level mixed waste (LLMW), low-level waste (LLW), transuranic waste (TRUW), high-level waste (HLW), and hazardous waste (HW)

  10. Columbia River System Operation Review final environmental impact statement. Appendix A: River Operation Simulation (ROSE)

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1995-11-01

    The System Operation Review (SOR) is a study and environmental compliance process being used by the three Federal agencies to analyze future operations of the system and river use issues. The goal of the SOR is to achieve a coordinated system operation strategy for the river that better meets the needs of all river users. This technical appendix addresses only the effects of alternative system operating strategies for managing the Columbia River system. The River Operation Simulation Experts (ROSE) work group is comprised of representatives of the Corps, BPA, Reclamation, NMFS, Pacific Northwest Utilities Conference Committee (PNUCC), and Northwest Power Planning Council (NPPC). ROSE was responsible for using computer hydroregulation models to simulate the operation of the river system for all of the alternatives evaluated in screening and full scale analysis in SOR. These models are complex computer programs which sequentially route streamflows through each dam in the system, calculating the streamflows, reservoir elevations, spill, power generation and other information at each project and pertinent locations on the river system. ROSE first reviewed specifications of proposed alternatives to determine whether such alternatives were formulated adequately to be run on hydroregulation models

  11. Columbia River System Operation Review final environmental impact statement. Appendix H: Navigation

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1995-11-01

    The System Operation Review (SOR) is a study and environmental compliance process being used by the three Federal agencies to analyze future operations of the system and river use issues. The goal of the SOR is to achieve a coordinated system operation strategy for the river that better meets the needs of all river users. This technical appendix addresses only the effects of alternative system operating strategies for managing the Columbia River system. The Navigation Technical Appendix presents the analysis of the various SOR alternatives in terms of their potential affects on the congressionally authorized navigation system within the Columbia and Snake river waterways. The focus of the study, impacts to the authorized navigation, improvements/developments, reflects on one of the continuing historical missions of the US Army Corps of Engineers: to promote safe commercial navigation of the nation's waterways benefiting the development of commerce within the US. The study and evaluation process involved Scoping, Screening and Full Scale Evaluation. During screening two models were developed; one was used to evaluate the effects of the various alternatives on navigation through the Snake River Projects and the other the effects on the Dworshak Pool. Full Scale Analysis was expanded to included a study of effects throughout the system

  12. Tank Waste Remediation System, Hanford Site, Richland, Washington. Final environmental impact statement. Summary

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1996-08-01

    This document analyzes the potential environmental consequences related to the Hanford Site Tank Waste Remediation System (TWRS) alternatives for management and disposal of radioactive, hazardous, and mixed waste, and the management and disposal of approximately 1,930 cesium and strontium capsules located at the Hanford Site. This waste is currently or projected to be stored in 177 underground storage tanks and approximately 60 miscellaneous underground storage tanks. This document analyzes the following alternatives for remediating the tank waste: No Action, Long-Term Management, In Situ Fill and Cap, In Situ Vitrification, Ex Situ Intermediate Separations, Ex Situ No Separations, Ex Situ Extensive Separations, Ex Situ/In Situ Combination 1, and Ex Situ/In Situ Combination 2. This document also addresses a Phased Implementation alternative (the DOE and Ecology preferred alternative for remediation of tank waste). Alternatives analyzed for the cesium and strontium capsules include: No Action, Onsite Disposal, Overpack and Ship, and Vitrify with Tank Waste. The DOE and Ecology preferred alternative for the cesium and strontium capsules is the No Action alternative

  13. Final environmental impact statement, construction and operation of the Spallation Neutron Source Facility. Summary

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1999-04-01

    DOE proposes to construct and operate a state-of-the-art, short-pulsed, spallation neutron source comprised of an ion source, a linear accelerator, a proton accumulator ring, and an experiment building containing a liquid mercury target and a suite of neutron scattering instrumentation. The proposed Spallation Neutron Source would be designed to operate at a proton beam power of 1 megawatt. The design would accommodate future upgrades to a peak operating power of 4 megawatts. These upgrades may include construction of a second proton accumulator ring and a second target. This document analyzes the potential environmental impacts from the proposed action and the alternatives. The analysis assumes a facility operating at a power of 1 MW and 4 MW over the life of the facility. The two primary alternatives analyzed in this FEIS are: the proposed action (to proceed with building the Spallation Neutron Source) and the No-Action Alternative. The No-Action Alternative describes the expected condition of the environment if no action were taken. Four siting alternatives for the Spallation Neutron Source are evaluated: Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN, (preferred alternative); Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, IL; Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY; and Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM

  14. Final environmental statement on the transportation of radioactive material by air and other modes

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1977-12-01

    An assessment is presented of the environmental impact from transportation of shipments of radioactive material into, within, and out of the United States. It is intended to serve as background material for a review by the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) of regulations dealing with transportation of radioactive materials. The impetus for such a review results not only from a general need to examine regulations to ensure their continuing consistency with the goal of limiting radiological impact to a level that is as low as reasonably achievable, but also from a need to respond to current national discussions of the safety and security aspects of nuclear fuel cycle materials. Chapters are included on regulations governing the transportation of radioactive materials, radiological effects, transport impact under normal conditions, impacts of transportation accidents, alternatives, and security and safeguards. A standard shipments model is also included along with a demographic model, excerpts from federal regulations, data on Pu, Population dose formulas, a list of radioactive material incidents, accident analysis methodology, and an analysis of risk assessment sensitivity

  15. Final environmental impact statement, construction and operation of the Spallation Neutron Source. Volume 1

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1999-04-01

    DOE proposes to construct and operate a state-of-the-art, short-pulsed, spallation neutron source comprised of an ion source, a linear accelerator, a proton accumulator ring, and an experiment building containing a liquid mercury target and a suite of neutron scattering instrumentation. The proposed Spallation neutron Source would be designed to operate at a proton beam power of 1 megawatt. The design would accommodate future upgrades to a peak operating power of 4 megawatts. These upgrades may include construction of a second proton accumulator ring and a second target. This document analyzes the potential environmental impacts from the proposed action and the alternatives. The analysis assumes a facility operating at a power of 1 MW and 4 MW over the life of the facility. The two primary alternatives analyzed in this FEIS are: the proposed action (to proceed with building the Spallation Neutron Source) and the No-Action Alternative. The No-Action Alternative describes the expected condition of the environment if no action were taken. Four siting alternatives for the Spallation Neutron Source are evaluated: Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN, (preferred alternative); Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, IL; Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY; and Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM

  16. Columbia River System Operation Review : Final Environmental Impact Statement, Appendix D: Cultural Resources.

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    Columbia River System Operation Review (U.S.)

    1995-11-01

    This study attempts to identify and analyze the impacts of the System Operating Strategy (SOS) alternatives on cultural resources. The impacts include effects on Native American traditional cultural values, properties and practices. They also include effects on archeological or historic properties meeting the criteria of the National Register of Historic Places. In addition to responding to the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), this analysis addresses the requirements of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), the Archeological Resources Protection Act (ARPA), the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), the Native American Religious Freedom Act (NARFA), and other relevant legislation. To meet their legally mandated cultural resources requirements, the SOR agencies will develop agreements and Implementation Plans with the appropriate State Historic Preservation Officers (SHPOs), Tribes, and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) detailing the measures necessary to best manage the resource. The planning and implementation activities will be staged over a number of years in consultation with affected Tribes.

  17. Proposed modifications to the Lower Mokelumne River Project, California: FERC Project No. 2916-004. Final environmental impact statement

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    1993-11-01

    This final environmental impact statement (FEIS) has been prepared for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) to consider modifications to the existing Lower Mokelumne River Project (LMRP) (FERC Project No. 2916-004) in California. Chinook salmon and steelhead trout populations in the lower Mokelumne River have experienced recent declines and fish kills associated, in part, with discharges from Camanche Dam. The California Department of Fish and Game and the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance have asked the Commission to investigate and correct these problems. A wide range of different mitigation actions has been proposed by parties participating in the scoping of this proceeding, and staff has evaluated these proposed actions in this assessment. The staff is recommending a combination of flow and non-flow modifications to the existing license, including new minimum flow and minimum pool elevation requirements at Camanche Reservoir, ramping rates on dam releases, interim attraction and out-migrant spike flows, instream habitat improvements, and a series of studies and monitoring to determine feasible means for solving off-site fish passage problems.

  18. Columbia River system operation review: Final environmental impact statement. Main report

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1995-11-01

    The System Operation Review (SOR) Final EIS addresses four actions: (a) need to develop coordinated strategy for managing the multiple uses of the Federal Columbia River system (System Operating Strategy [SOS]); (b) need to provide interested parties other than management agencies with a long-term role in system planning (Forum); (c) need to renew or change current Canadian Entitlement Allocation Agreements (CEAA); and (d) need to renegotiate and renew the Pacific Northwest Coordination Agreement (PNCA). SOS alternatives analyzed are: (1) operation prior to Endangered Species Act listings of salmon stocks; (2) current operations (no action); (3) stable storage project operation; (4) natural river operation; (5) fixed drawdown; (6) operating strategies proposed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Marine Fisheries Service, State fisheries agencies, Native American tribes, and Federal operating agencies; and (7) Preferred Alternative. The seven Forum alternatives analyzed are: (1) decisionmaking by the SOR lead agencies (preferred alternative); (2) decisionmaking by SOR lead agencies and recommendations by an existing regional entity; (3) decisionmaking by SOR lead agencies and recommendations by a new regional entity; (4) decisionmaking by a Federal consultation forum; (5) decisionmaking by a new entity; (6) decisionmaking by one Federal operating agency; (7) decisionmaking by a Federal agency other than an operating agency. PNCA alternatives analyzed are: (1) no replacement contract; (2) contract to maximize regional power benefits; (3) roll over existing PNCA; (4) current PNCA with modified operating procedures (preferred alternative); (5) current PNCA with nonpower modifications. CEAA alternatives include: (1) no action (no replacement of current allocation agreements); (2) entitlement allocation: 55 percent Federal; 45 percent non-Federal; (3) entitlement allocation: 70 percent Federal, 30 percent non-Federal (preferred alternative); (4) no agreement

  19. Columbia River System Operation Review : Final Environmental Impact Statement, Main Report.

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    Columbia River System Operation Review (U.S.); United States. Bonneville Power Administration; United States. Army. Corps of Engineers. North Pacific Division; United States. Bureau of Reclamation. Pacific Northwest Region.

    1995-11-01

    The System Operation Review (SOR) Final EIS addresses four actions: (a) need to develop coordinated strategy for managing the multiple uses of the Federal Columbia River system (System Operating Strategy [SOS]); (b) need to provide interested parties other than management agencies with a long-term role in system planning (Forum); (c) need to renew or change current Canadian Entitlement Allocation Agreements (CEAA); and (d) need to renegotiate and renew the Pacific Northwest Coordination Agreement (PNCA). SOS alternatives analyzed are: (1) operation prior to Endangered Species Act listings of salmon stocks; (2) current operations (no action); (3) stable storage project operation; (4) natural river operation; (5) fixed drawdown; (6) operating strategies proposed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Marine Fisheries Service, State fisheries agencies, Native American tribes, and Federal operating agencies; and (7) Preferred Alternative. The seven Forum alternatives analyzed are: (1) decisionmaking by the SOR lead agencies (preferred alternative); (2) decisionmaking by SOR lead agencies and recommendations by an existing regional entity; (3) decisionmaking by SOR lead agencies and recommendations by a new regional entity; (4) decisionmaking by a Federal consultation forum; (5) decisionmaking by a new entity; (6) decisionmaking by one Federal operating agency; (7) decisionmaking by a Federal agency other than an operating agency. PNCA alternatives analyzed are: (1) no replacement contract; (2) contract to maximize regional power benefits; (3) roll over existing PNCA; (4) current PNCA with modified operating procedures (preferred alternative); (5) current PNCA with nonpower modifications. CEAA alternatives include: (1) no action (no replacement of current allocation agreements); (2) entitlement allocation: 55 percent Federal; 45 percent non-Federal; (3) entitlement allocation: 70 percent Federal, 30 percent non-Federal (preferred alternative); (4) no agreement.

  20. Final programmatic environmental impact statement for the uranium mill tailings remedial action ground water project. Volume I

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    None

    1996-10-01

    This programmatic environmental impact statement (PElS) was prepared for the Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action (UMTRA) Ground Water Project to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). This PElS provides an analysis of the potential impacts of the alternatives and ground water compliance strategies as well as potential cumulative impacts. On November 8, 1978, Congress enacted the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act (UMTRCA) of 1978, Public Law, codified at 42 USC §7901 et seq. Congress found that uranium mill tailings " ... may pose a potential and significant radiation health hazard to the public, and that every reasonable effort should be made to provide for stabilization, disposal, and control in a safe, and environmentally sound manner of such tailings in order to prevent or minimize other environmental hazards from such tailings." Congress authorized the Secretary of Energy to designate inactive uranium processing sites for remedial action by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). Congress also directed the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to set the standards to be followed by the DOE for this process of stabilization, disposal, and control. On January 5, 1983, EPA published standards (40 CFR Part 192) for the disposal and cleanup of residual radioactive materials. On September 3, 1985, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit set aside and remanded to EPA the ground water provisions of the standards. The EPA proposed new standards to replace remanded sections and changed other sections of 40 CFR Part 192. These proposed standards were published in the Federal Register on September 24, 1987 (52 FR 36000). Section 108 of the UMTRCA requires that DOE comply with EPA's proposed standards in the absence of final standards. The Ground Water Project was planned under the proposed standards. On January 11, 1995, EPA published the final rule, with which the DOE must now comply. The PElS and the Ground Water Project are

  1. Final programmatic environmental impact statement for the uranium mill tailings remedial action ground water project. Volume I

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1996-01-01

    This programmatic environmental impact statement (PElS) was prepared for the Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action (UMTRA) Ground Water Project to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). This PElS provides an analysis of the potential impacts of the alternatives and ground water compliance strategies as well as potential cumulative impacts. On November 8, 1978, Congress enacted the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act (UMTRCA) of 1978, Public Law, codified at 42 USC §7901 et seq. Congress found that uranium mill tailings ' ... may pose a potential and significant radiation health hazard to the public, and that every reasonable effort should be made to provide for stabilization, disposal, and control in a safe, and environmentally sound manner of such tailings in order to prevent or minimize other environmental hazards from such tailings.' Congress authorized the Secretary of Energy to designate inactive uranium processing sites for remedial action by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). Congress also directed the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to set the standards to be followed by the DOE for this process of stabilization, disposal, and control. On January 5, 1983, EPA published standards (40 CFR Part 192) for the disposal and cleanup of residual radioactive materials. On September 3, 1985, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit set aside and remanded to EPA the ground water provisions of the standards. The EPA proposed new standards to replace remanded sections and changed other sections of 40 CFR Part 192. These proposed standards were published in the Federal Register on September 24, 1987 (52 FR 36000). Section 108 of the UMTRCA requires that DOE comply with EPA's proposed standards in the absence of final standards. The Ground Water Project was planned under the proposed standards. On January 11, 1995, EPA published the final rule, with which the DOE must now comply. The PElS and the Ground Water Project are in

  2. Final environmental impact statement. Proton--Proton Storage Accelerator Facility (ISABELLE), Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, New York

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1978-08-01

    An Environmental Impact Statement for a proposed research facility (ISABELLE) to be built at Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL) is presented. It was prepared by the Department of Energy (DOE) following guidelines issued for such analyses. In keeping with DOE policy, this statement presents a concise and issues-oriented analysis of the significant environmental effects associated with the proposed action. ISABELLE is a proposed physics research facility where beams of protons collide providing opportunities to study high energy interactions. The facility would provide two interlaced storage ring proton accelerators, each with an energy up to 400 GeV intersecting in six experimental areas. The rings are contained in a tunnel with a circumference of 3.8 km (2.3 mi). The facility will occupy 250 ha (625 acres) in the NW corner of the existing BNL site. A draft Environmental Impact Statement for this proposed facility was issued for public review and comment by DOE on February 21, 1978. The principal areas of concern expressed were in the areas of radiological impacts and preservation of cultural values. After consideration of these comments, appropriate actions were taken and the text of the statement has been amended to reflect the comments. The text was annotated to indicate the origin of the comment. The Appendices contain a glossary of terms and listings of metric prefixes and conversions and symbols and abbreviations

  3. Final Environmental Impact Statement for the JEA Circulating Fluidized Bed Combustor Project

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    N/A

    2000-06-30

    This EIS assesses environmental issues associated with constructing and demonstrating a project that would be cost-shared by DOE and JEA (formerly the Jacksonville Electric Authority) under the Clean Coal Technology Program. The project would demonstrate circulating fluidized bed (CFB) combustion technology at JEA's existing Northside Generating Station in Jacksonville, Florida, about 9 miles northeast of the downtown area of Jacksonville. The new CFB combustor would use coal and petroleum coke to generate nearly 300 MW of electricity by repowering the existing Unit 2 steam turbine, a 297.5-MW unit that has been out of service since 1983. The proposed project is expected to demonstrate emission levels of sulfur dioxide (SO{sub 2}), oxides of nitrogen (NO{sub x}), and particulate matter that would be lower than Clean Air Act limits while at the same time producing power more efficiently and at less cost than conventional coal utilization technologies. At their own risk, JEA has begun initial construction activities without DOE funding. Construction would take approximately two years and, consistent with the original JEA schedule, would be completed in December 2001. Demonstration of the proposed project would be conducted during a 2-year period from March 2002 until March 2004. In addition, JEA plans to repower the currently operating Unit 1 steam turbine about 6 to 12 months after the Unit 2 repowering without cost-shared funding from DOE. Although the proposed project consists of only the Unit 2 repowering, this EIS analyzes the Unit 1 repowering as a related action. The EIS also considers three reasonably foreseeable scenarios that could result from the no-action alternative in which DOE would not provide cost-shared funding for the proposed project. The proposed action, in which DOE would provide cost-shared finding for the proposed project, is DOE's preferred alternative. The EIS evaluates the principal environmental issues, including air quality

  4. Final Environmental Statement related to the operation of Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2 (Docket Nos. STN 50-400 and STN 50-401)

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1983-10-01

    This Final Environmental Statement contains the second assessment of the environmental impact associated with the operation of the Shoran Harris Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2, pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) and 10 CFR 51, as amended, of the NRC regulations. This statement examines the environment, environmental consequences and mitigating actions, and environmental economic benefits and costs. Land use and terrestrial and aquatic-ecological impacts will be small. Operational impacts to historic and archaeological sites will be negligible. The effects of routine operations, energy transmission, and periodic maintenance of rights-of-way and transmission facilities should not jeopardize any populations of endangered or threatened species. No significant impacts are anticipated from normal operational releases of radioactivity. The risk of radiation exposure associated with accidental release of radioactivity is very low. The net socioeconomic effects of the project will be beneficial. 19 figs., 21 tabs

  5. Final environmental statement related to the operation of St. Lucie Plant, Unit No. 2. Docket No. 50-389, Florida Power and Light Company, Orlando Utilities Commission of the City of Orlando, Florida

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1982-04-01

    This final environmental statement was prepared by the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (the staff) in accordance with the Commission's Regulations, set forth in 10 CFR Part 51, which implement the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA). Sections related to the aquatic environment were prepared in cooperation with the US Environmental Protection Agency, Region IV. This statement reviews the impact of operation of the St. Lucie Plant, Unit 2. Assessments that are found in this statement supplement those described in the Final Environmental Statement (FES-CP) that was issued in May 1974 in support of issuance of a construction permit for the unit

  6. Final Environmental Statement related to the operation of Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station, Units 1 and 2 (Docket Nos. 50-445 and 50-446)

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1989-10-01

    In September 1981, the staff of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) issued its Final Environmental Statement (NUREG-0775) related to the operation of Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station, Units 1 and 2 (Docket Nos. 50-445 and 50-446), located in Somervell County, Texas, approximately 40 miles southwest of Fort Worth, Texas. The NRC has prepared this supplement to NUREG-0775 to present its evaluation of the alternative of operating Comanche Peak with the installation of further severe-accident-mitigation design features. The NRC has discovered no substantial changes in the proposed action as previously evaluated in the Final Environmental Statement that are relevant to environmental concerns and bearing on the licensing of Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station, Units 1 and 2. 6 refs., 3 tabs

  7. Final programmatic environmental impact statement for the Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action Ground Water Project. Volume 1

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    None

    1996-04-01

    The first step in the UMTRA Ground Water Project is the preparation of this programmatic environmental impact statement (PEIS). This document analyzes the potential impacts of four alternatives for conducting the Ground Water Project. One of these alternatives is the proposed action. These alternatives do not address site-specific ground water compliance strategies because the PEIS is a planning document only. It assesses the potential programmatic impacts of conducting the Ground Water Project, provides a method for determining the site-specific ground water compliance strategies, and provides data and information that can be used to prepare site-specific environmental impacts analyses more efficiently. This PEIS differs substantially from a site-specific environmental impact statement because multiple ground water compliance strategies, each with its own set of potential impacts, could be used to implement all the alternatives except the no action alternative. In a traditional environmental impact statement, an impacts analysis leads directly to the defined alternatives. The impacts analysis for implementing alternatives in this PEIS first involves evaluating a ground water compliance strategy or strategies, the use of which will result in site-specific impacts. This PEIS impacts analysis assesses only the potential impacts of the various ground water compliance strategies, then relates them to the alternatives to provide a comparison of impacts.

  8. Final programmatic environmental impact statement for the Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action Ground Water Project. Volume 1

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1996-04-01

    The first step in the UMTRA Ground Water Project is the preparation of this programmatic environmental impact statement (PEIS). This document analyzes the potential impacts of four alternatives for conducting the Ground Water Project. One of these alternatives is the proposed action. These alternatives do not address site-specific ground water compliance strategies because the PEIS is a planning document only. It assesses the potential programmatic impacts of conducting the Ground Water Project, provides a method for determining the site-specific ground water compliance strategies, and provides data and information that can be used to prepare site-specific environmental impacts analyses more efficiently. This PEIS differs substantially from a site-specific environmental impact statement because multiple ground water compliance strategies, each with its own set of potential impacts, could be used to implement all the alternatives except the no action alternative. In a traditional environmental impact statement, an impacts analysis leads directly to the defined alternatives. The impacts analysis for implementing alternatives in this PEIS first involves evaluating a ground water compliance strategy or strategies, the use of which will result in site-specific impacts. This PEIS impacts analysis assesses only the potential impacts of the various ground water compliance strategies, then relates them to the alternatives to provide a comparison of impacts

  9. Strategic petroleum reserve, Byran Mound Salt Dome, Brazoria County, Texas. Final environmental impact statement (final supplement to FEA FES 76/77-6)

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    1977-12-01

    On January 7, 1977, the Federal Energy Administration issued a Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the development of the Bryan Mound salt dome as a storage site for the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (FES 76/77-6). On October 1, 1977, the U.S. Department of Energy was created and the programs of the Federal Energy Administration were transferred to the new Department. As such, this final supplement is being issued by the Department of Energy. The salt dome is located in Brazoria County, Texas. Since the EIS was published, it has been determined that this arrangement would be inadequate to meet the long term requirements for filling and withdrawing oil at the site, although the disposal of brine to Dow Chemical would be utilized to the maximum extent possible. Therefore, on July 15, 1977, a Draft Supplement to FES 76/77-6 was issued addressing the environmental impacts of construction and operation of two types of brine disposal systems and a new water supply system. This final supplement addresses a brine injection well system and a water intake system. Construction of this new system component would cause temporary disruption to land use, water quality, air quality, and terrestrial and aquatic ecology. The new facilities would permanently change 17 acres of land from its present use. Operation of the systems would have relatively small, short-term impacts. Use of the brine surge pit could adversely affect air quality by emitting hydrocarbon vapors (maximum rate of 51.4 tons per year). Operation of the disposal wells would increase the salinity of an already saline aquifer. All operational impacts would be relatively minor and short-term, occurring only during periods of fill or withdrawal of the storage facility.

  10. Final environmental impact statement, Beaufort Sea oil and gas development/Northstar Project. Appendices B through K

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1999-02-01

    BP Exploration (Alaska) Inc. (BPXA) submitted a permit application to the US. Army Engineer District, Alaska to initiate the review process for BPXA's plans to develop and produce oil and gas from the Northstar Unit. This report contains Appendices B--K of an Environmental Impact Statement which was undertaken to identify and evaluate the potential effects the proposed project may have on the environment

  11. Final environmental impact statement, Beaufort Sea oil and gas development/Northstar Project. Appendices L through P

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1999-02-01

    BP Exploration (Alaska) Inc. (BPXA) submitted a permit application to the US Army Engineer District, Alaska to initiate the review process for BPXA's plans to develop and produce oil and gas from the Northstar Unit. This report contains Appendices L-P of an Environmental Impact Statement which was undertaken to identify and evaluate the potential effects the proposed project may have on the environment

  12. Final environmental impact statement, Beaufort Sea oil and gas development/Northstar Project. Volume 3: Chapters 5 through 7

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1999-02-01

    BP Exploration (Alaska) Inc. (BPXA) submitted a permit application to the US Army Engineer District, Alaska to initiate the review process for BPXA's plans to develop and produce oil and gas from the Northstar Unit. This report contains chapters 5--7 of an Environmental Impact Statement which was undertaken to identify and evaluate the potential effects the proposed project may have on the environment. Attention is focused on the effects of oil on the physical, biological, and human environments

  13. Final environmental statement related to the operation of Braidwood Station, Units 1 and 2 (Docket Nos. STN 50-456 and STN 50-457)

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1984-06-01

    This Final Environmental Statement contains the second assessment of the environmental impact associated with the operation of Braidwood Station, Units 1 and 2, pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) and Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 51, as amended, of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission regulations. This statement examines the environment, environmental consequences and mitigating actions, and environmental and economic benefits and costs. Land use and terrestrial and aquatic ecological impacts will be small. Operational impacts to historic and archeologic sites will be moderate. The effects of routine operations, energy transmission, and periodic maintenance of rights of way and transmission facilities should not jeopardize any populations of endangered or threatened species. No significant impacts are anticipated from normal operational releases of radioactivity. The risk of radiation exposure associated with accidental release of radioactivity is very low. The net socioeconomic effects of the project will be beneficial. On the basis of the analysis and evaluation set forth in this environmental statement, it is concluded that the action called for under NEPA and 10 CFR 51 is the issuance of operating licenses for Braidwood Station, Units 1 and 2. 27 figures, 23 tables

  14. 77 FR 16258 - Notice of Public Scoping Meetings on an Environmental Impact Statement for Proposed Outer...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2012-03-20

    ... an Environmental Impact Statement for Proposed Outer Continental Shelf Gulf of Mexico Eastern... initiating in preparation for completing an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) under the National... and Gas Lease Sale 224: Eastern Planning Area, Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (OCS...

  15. Final environmental impact statement, Beaufort Sea oil and gas development/Northstar Project. Volume 2: Chapters 1 through 4

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1999-02-01

    BP Exploration (Alaska) Inc. (BPXA) submitted a permit application to the US Army Engineer District, Alaska (Corps) to initiate the review process for BPXA's plans to develop and produce oil and gas from the Northstar Unit. The Corps determined that issuance of a permit for BPXA's proposed project constituted a major federal action that may significant affect the quality of the human environment pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). In addition, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), upon review of BPXA's permit application, determined under provisions of the Clean Water Act and 40 CFR Part 6 Subpart F that permitting for BPXA's proposed project constituted a major federal action that may significantly affect the quality of the human environment. As a result, preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) under NEPA was undertaken to identify and evaluate a range of reasonable alternatives and evaluate the potential effects the alternatives, including BPXA's proposed project, may have on the human environment

  16. Environmental Impact Analysis Process. Final Environmental Impact Statement Supersonic Flight Operations in the Valentine Military Operations Area

    Science.gov (United States)

    1983-11-04

    Federal Activities, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. Sincerely yours,, PD k Whittington , P.E Regional Administrator Enclosure I I I I...many of the residents are deprived , disadvantaged; uninformed and part of a minority); nor is anyone certain the AF will make full restitUtion in light...only wash 217 our home away but would deprive to us of water for the pipelines that supply 217 water over the whole ranch. This reservoir has been here

  17. Final environmental impact statement, Beaufort Sea oil and gas development/Northstar Project. Volume 4: Chapters 8 through 13

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1999-02-01

    BP Exploration (Alaska) Inc. (BPXA) submitted a permit application to the US Army Engineer District, Alaska to initiate the review process for BPXA's plans to develop and produce oil and gas from the Northstar Unit. This report contains chapters 8--13 of an Environmental Impact Statement which was undertaken to identify and evaluate the potential effects the proposed project may have on the environment. Attention is focused on the following: effects of oil on the physical, biological, and human environments; effects of noise on the biological and human environments; cumulative effects on the environment; and comparison of project alternatives and their impacts

  18. 78 FR 25973 - Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Real Property Master Plan at the Presidio of...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2013-05-03

    ... to improve the learning environment and quality of life at the POM installation. The Final EIS... are also planned to Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design standards to conserve resources. The... the Chamberlain Library on the OMC. An electronic version of the Final EIS can be viewed or downloaded...

  19. Sierra Pacific Power Company Alturas Transmission Line Project, Final Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement. Volume 2: Comments and responses

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1995-11-01

    Sierra Pacific Power Company has proposed the construction and operation of a 345,000 volt overhead electric power transmission line from Alturas, California to Reno, Nevada. This Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement will assess the potential environmental impacts of the proposed project and alternatives. This report contains public comments which were received on the Draft EIR/S. Significant issues may be identified through public and agency comments

  20. Gulf of Mexico Sales 147 and 150: Central and Western planning areas. Final environmental impact statement, Volume 1: Sections 1 through 4.C

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    1993-11-01

    This Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) covers the proposed 1994 Gulf of Mexico OCS oil and gas lease sales [Central Gulf of Mexico Sale 147 (March 1994) and Western Gulf of Mexico Sale 150 (August 1994)]. This document includes the purpose and background of the proposed actions, the alternatives, the descriptions of the affected environment, and the potential environmental impacts of the proposed actions and alternatives. Proposed mitigating measures and their effects are analyzed, in addition to potential cumulative impacts resulting from proposed activities.

  1. Gulf of Mexico Sales 157 and 161: Central and western planning areas final environmental impact statement, Volume I: Sections I through IV.C

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1995-11-01

    This Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) covers the proposed 1996 Gulf of Mexico OCS oil and gas lease sales [Central Gulf of Mexico Sale 157 (March 1996) and Western Gulf of Mexico Sale 161 (August 1996)]. This document includes the purpose and background of the proposed actions, the alternatives, the descriptions of the affected environment, and the potential environmental impacts of the proposed actions and alternatives. Proposed mitigating measures and their potential effects are analyzed, in addition to potential cumulative impacts resulting from proposed activities

  2. Final waste management programmatic environmental impact statement for managing treatment, storage, and disposal of radioactive and hazardous waste. Volume III of V

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1997-01-01

    The Final Waste Management Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (WM PEIS) examines the potential environmental and cost impacts of strategic management alternatives for managing five types of radioactive and hazardous wastes that have resulted and will continue to result from nuclear defense and research activities at a variety of sites around the United States. The five waste types are low-level mixed waste, low-level waste, transuranic waste, high-level waste, and hazardous waste. The WM PEIS provides information on the impacts of various siting alternatives which the Department of Energy (DOE) will use to decide at which sites to locate additional treatment, storage, and disposal capacity for each waste type

  3. Final environmental impact statement. Management of commercially generated radioactive waste. Volume 3. Public comments hearing board report

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1980-10-01

    This EIS analyzes the significant environmental impacts that could occur if various technologies for management and disposal of high-level and transuranic wastes from commercial nuclear power reactors were to be developed and implemented. This EIS will serve as the environmental input for the decision on which technology, or technologies, will be emphasized in further research and development activities in the commercial waste management program. The action proposed in this EIS is to (1) adopt a national strategy to develop mined geologic repositories for disposal of commercially generated high-level and transuranic radioactive waste (while continuing to examine subseabed and very deep hole disposal as potential backup technologies) and (2) conduct a R and D program to develop such facilities and the necessary technology to ensure the safe long-term containment and isolation of these wastes. The Department has considered in this statement: development of conventionally mined deep geologic repositories for disposal of spent fuel from nuclear power reactors and/or radioactive fuel reprocessing wastes; balanced development of several alternative disposal methods; and no waste disposal action. This volume contains written public comments and hearing board responses and reports offered on the draft statement

  4. Final environmental impact statement. Management of commercially generated radioactive waste. Volume 3. Public comments hearing board report

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    1980-10-01

    This EIS analyzes the significant environmental impacts that could occur if various technologies for management and disposal of high-level and transuranic wastes from commercial nuclear power reactors were to be developed and implemented. This EIS will serve as the environmental input for the decision on which technology, or technologies, will be emphasized in further research and development activities in the commercial waste management program. The action proposed in this EIS is to (1) adopt a national strategy to develop mined geologic repositories for disposal of commercially generated high-level and transuranic radioactive waste (while continuing to examine subseabed and very deep hole disposal as potential backup technologies) and (2) conduct a R and D program to develop such facilities and the necessary technology to ensure the safe long-term containment and isolation of these wastes. The Department has considered in this statement: development of conventionally mined deep geologic repositories for disposal of spent fuel from nuclear power reactors and/or radioactive fuel reprocessing wastes; balanced development of several alternative disposal methods; and no waste disposal action. This volume contains written public comments and hearing board responses and reports offered on the draft statement.

  5. Final environmental impact statement, Beaufort Sea oil and gas development/Northstar Project. Volume 1: Executive summary

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1999-02-01

    BP Exploration (Alaska) Inc. (BPXA) submitted a permit application to comply with Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act to the US Army Engineer District, Alaska (Corps). The application initiated the review process for BPXA's proposed project to develop and produce oil and gas from the Northstar Unit. The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) prior to any federal action that may significantly affect the quality of the human environment. The EIS is intended to provide federal agencies with information about the consequences of a proposed project and to disclose that information to the public, soliciting their comments, prior to the agencies making decisions on the project

  6. INL Site Portion of the April 1995 Programmatic Spent Nuclear Fuel Management and Idaho National Engineering Laboratory Environmental Restoration and Waste Mamagement Programmatic Final Environmental Impact Statement

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    N/A

    2005-06-30

    In April 1995, the Department of Energy (DOE) and the Department of the Navy, as a cooperating agency, issued the Programmatic Spent Nuclear Fuel Management and Idaho National Engineering Laboratory Environmental Restoration and Waste Management Programs Final Environmental Impact Statement (1995 EIS). The 1995 EIS analyzed alternatives for managing The Department's existing and reasonably foreseeable inventories of spent nuclear fuel through the year 2035. It also included a detailed analysis of environmental restoration and waste management activities at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL). The analysis supported facility-specific decisions regarding new, continued, or planned environmental restoration and waste management operations. The Record of Decision (ROD) was signed in June 1995 and amended in February 1996. It documented a number of projects or activities that would be implemented as a result of decisions regarding INL Site operations. In addition to the decisions that were made, decisions on a number of projects were deferred or projects have been canceled. DOE National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) implementing procedures (found in 10 CFR Part 1 021.330(d)) require that a Supplement Analysis of site-wide EISs be done every five years to determine whether the site-wide EIS remains adequate. While the 1995 EIS was not a true site-wide EIS in that several programs were not included, most notably reactor operations, this method was used to evaluate the adequacy of the 1995 EIS. The decision to perform a Supplement Analysis was supported by the multi-program aspect of the 1995 EIS in conjunction with the spirit of the requirement for periodic review. The purpose of the SA is to determine if there have been changes in the basis upon which an EIS was prepared. This provides input for an evaluation of the continued adequacy of the EIS in light of those changes (i.e., whether there are substantial changes in the proposed

  7. Final programmatic environmental impact statement for the Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action Ground Water Project. Volume 1

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1996-10-01

    The purpose of the Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action (UMTRA) Ground Water Project is to eliminate, reduce, or address to acceptable levels the potential health and environmental consequences of milling activities by meeting Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) ground water standards. One of the first steps in the UMTRA Ground Water Project is the preparation of this Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS). The EPA standards allow the use of different strategies for achieving compliance with the standards. This document analyzes the potential impacts of four alternatives for conducting the Ground Water Project. Each of the four alternatives evaluated in the PEIS is based on a different mix of strategies to meet EPA ground water standards. The PEIS is intended to serve as a programmatic planning document that provides an objective basis for determining site-specific ground water compliance strategies and data and information that can be used to prepare site-specific environmental impact analyses more efficiently. DOE will prepare appropriate further National Environmental Policy Act documentation before making site-specific decisions to implement the Ground Water Project. Affected States, Tribes, local government agencies, and members of the public have been involved in the process of preparing this PEIS; DOE encourages their continued participation in the site-specific decision making process

  8. Environmental Impact Statement Filing Guidance

    Science.gov (United States)

    Describes how to submit an environmental impact statement through the e-NEPA electronic submission system. Describes how EPA submits a notice of availability in to the Federal Register and how the comment time period if set forth.

  9. Supplement to the Final Environmental Statement related to the decommissioning of the Rare Earths Facility, West Chicago, Illinois (Docket No. 40-2061): Volume 2, Appendix H

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1989-04-01

    This Supplement to the Final Environmental Statement is issued by the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission in response to the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board's ruling that the staff must supplement the Final Environmental Statement in order to evaluate the impact of permanent disposal of the Kerr-McGee Rare Earths Facility wastes located at West Chicago, Illinois. The statement considers the Kerr-McGee preferred plan and various alternatives to the plan. The action proposed by the Commission is the renewal of the Kerr-McGee license to allow disposal of wastes onsite and for possession of the wastes under license for an indeterminate time. The license could be terminated at a later date if certain specified requirements were met. NUREG-0904 was published in draft for comment in June 1987. Comments have been received and are published with their responses in this report. Volume 1 contains the main text and Appendices A thru G. Volume 2 contains the comments received and their responses

  10. Final environmental statement related to the operation of South Texas Project, Units 1 and 2 (Docket Nos. 50-498 and 50-499)

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1986-08-01

    This Final Environmental Statement contains the second assessment of the environmental impact associated with the operation of the South Texas Project, Units 1 and 2, pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) and Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 51, as amended, of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission regulations. This statement examines the environmental impacts, environmental consequences and mitigating actions, and environmental and economic benefits and costs associated with station operation. Land use and terrestrial and aquatic ecological impacts will be small. No operational impacts to historic and archeological sites are anticipated. The effects of routine operations, energy transmission, and periodic maintenance of rights-of-way and transmission facilities should not jeopardize any populations of endangered or threatened species. No significant impacts are anticipated from normal operational releases of radioactivity. The risk of radiation exposure associated with accidental release of radioactivity is very low. Socioeconomic impacts of the project are anticipated to be minimal. The action called for is the issuance of an operating license for South Texas Project, Units 1 and 2

  11. Remedial actions at the former Union Carbide Corporation uranium mill sites, Rifle, Garfield County, Colorado: Final environmental impact statement

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1990-03-01

    This appendix provides the information needed to understand the conceptual designs for the remedial action alternatives addressed in this environmental impact statement (EIS). It is intended to provide sufficient details for the reader to evaluate the feasibility and assess the impacts of each remedial action alternative. It is not intended to provide the detailed engineering necessary to implement the alternatives. Details of the preferred remedial action will be presented in the remedial action plan (RAP). The remedial action alternatives addressed in this EIS include no action, stabilization at the New Rifle site, disposal at the Estes Gulch site, and disposal at the Lucas Mesa site. All alternatives include interim actions to remediate existing health and safety hazards to the Rifle community that presently exist at the Old and New Rifle processing sites. 21 figs., 18 tabs

  12. 16 CFR 1021.14 - Environmental impact statement.

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-01-01

    ... 16 Commercial Practices 2 2010-01-01 2010-01-01 false Environmental impact statement. 1021.14 Section 1021.14 Commercial Practices CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION GENERAL ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Contents of Environmental Review Documents § 1021.14 Environmental impact statement. (a) Draft and final...

  13. 75 FR 39527 - Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-07-09

    ... ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-8991-3] Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of....epa.gov/compliance/nepa/ . Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements filed 06/28/2010 through... Transportation's Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Final 20100230 filed with the Environmental Protection...

  14. Final Environmental Impact Statement on 10 CFR Part 61 licensing requirements for land disposal of radioactive waste. Summary and main report

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1982-11-01

    The three-volume final environmental impact statement (FEIS) is prepared to guide and support publication of a final regulation, 10 CFR Part 61, for the land disposal of low-level radioactive waste. The FEIS is prepared in response to public comments received on the draft environmental impact statement (DEIS) on the proposed Part 61 regulation. The DEIS was published in September 1981 as NUREG-0782. Public comments received on the proposed Part 61 regulation separate from the DEIS are also considered in the FEIS. The FEIS is not a rewritten version of the DEIS, which contains an exhaustive and detailed analysis of alternatives, but rather references the DEIS and presents the final decision bases and conclusions (costs and impacts) which are reflected in the Part 61 requirements. Four cases are specifically considered in the FEIS representing the following: past disposal practice, existing disposal practice, Part 61 requirements, and an upper bound example. The Summary and Main Report are contained in Volume 1. Volume 2 consists of Appendices A - Staff Analysis of Public Comments on the DEIS for 10 CFR Part 61, and Appendices B - Staff Analysis of Public Comments on Proposed 10 CFR Part 61 Rulemaking. Volume 3 contains Appendices C-F, entitled as follows: Appendix C - Revisions to Impact Analysis Methodology, Appendix D - Computer Codes Used for FEIS Calculations, Appendix E - Errata for the DEIS for 10 CFR Part 61 and last, Appendix F - Final Rule and Supplementary Information

  15. Final environmental statement related to the operation of Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station, Units 1 and 2: (Docket Nos. 50-445 and 50-446)

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1981-09-01

    The proposed action is the issuance of operating licenses to the Texas Utilities Generating Company for the startup and operation of Units 1 and 2 of the Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station located on Squaw Creek Reservoir in Somervell County, Texas, about 7 km north-northeast of Glen Rose, Texas, and about 65 km southwest of Fort Worth in north-central Texas. The information in this environmental statement represents the second assessment of the environmental impact associated with the Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station pursuant to the guidelines of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) and 10 CFR Part 51 of the Commission's Regulations. After receiving an application to construct this station, the staff carried out a review of impact that would occur during its construction and operation. This evaluation was issued as a Final Environmental Statement -- Construction Phase. After this environmental review, a safety review, an evaluation by the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards, and public hearings in Glen Rose, Texas, the US Atomic Energy Commission (now US Nuclear Regulatory Commission) issued construction permits for the construction of Units 1 and 2 of the Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station. 16 figs., 34 tabs

  16. Final Environmental Statement related to the operation of Wolf Creek Generating Station, Unit No. 1. Docket No. STN 50-482, Kansas Gas and Electric Company, et al

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1982-06-01

    This final environmental statement contains the second assessment of the environmental impact associated with operation of Wolf Creek Generating Station Unit 1 pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) and 10 CFR Part 51, as amended, of the NRC's regulations. This statement examines: the affected environment, environmental consequences and mitigating actions, and environmental and economic benefits and costs. Land use and terrestrial- and aquatic-ecological impacts will be small. Air-quality impacts will also be small. However, steam fog from the station's cooling lake has the potential for reducing visibility over nearby roads and bridges. A fog-monitoring program for roads and bridges near the lake has been recommended. Impacts to historic and prehistoric sites will be negligible. Chemical discharges to the Neosho River are expected to have no appreciable impacts on water quality under normal conditions and will be required to meet conditions of the station's NPDES permit. The effects of routine operations, energy transmission, and periodic maintenance of rights-of-way and transmission line facilities should not jeopardize any populations of endangered or threatened species. No significant impacts are anticipated from normal operational releases of radioactivity. The risk associated with accidental radiation exposure is very low. The net socioeconomic effects of the project will be beneficial. The action called for is the issuance of an operating license for the Wolf Creek Generating Station Unit 1

  17. Final Environmental Impact Statement and Environmental Impact Report for continued operation of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and Sandia National Laboratories, Livermore

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1992-08-01

    This Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (EIS/EIR) is prepared pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). This document analyzes the potential environmental impacts of the proposed action: continued operation, including near-term (within 5 to 10 years) proposed projects, of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) and Sandia National Laboratories, Livermore (SNL, Livermore). Additionally, this document analyzes a no action alternative involving continuing operations at FY 1992 funding levels without further growth, a modification of operations alternative to reduce adverse environmental impacts of operations or facilities, and a shutdown and decommissioning alternative of UC discontinuing its management of LLNL after the current contract expires on September 30, 1992. This document assesses the environmental impacts of the Laboratories' operations on air and water quality, geological and ecological systems, occupational and public health risks, prehistoric and historic resources, endangered species, floodplains and wetlands, socioeconomic resources, hazardous waste management, site contamination, and other environmental issues. The EIS/EIR is divided into five volumes and two companion reports. This volume contains copies of the written comments and transcripts of individual statements at the public hearing and the responses to them

  18. Final generic environmental statement on the routine use of plutonium-powered cardiac pacemakers. Update of information on power sources for pacemakers

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1979-05-01

    The Final Environmental Statement on Routine Use of Plutonium-Powered Cardiac Pacemakers (FES) was issued in July 1976. Supplement 1, prepared in 1978, updates the FES with respect to power sources for pacemakers. Particular attention is given to the non-nuclear lithium batteries as alternatives to 238-Pu power sources in pacemakers. Supplement 1 also considers the current extent of pacemaker use and makeup of the patient population and concludes that the FES' conclusion is still valid that distribution of 238-Pu powered pacemakers for routine use should be authorized subject to specific conditions

  19. Preliminary final programmatic environmental impact statement for the Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action Ground Water Project. Volume 1

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1996-01-01

    The first step in the UMTRA Ground Water Project is the preparation of this programmatic environmental impact statement (PEIS). This document analyzes the potential impacts of four alternative systems for conducting the ground water program. One of these systems is the proposed action. These alternatives do not address site-specific ground water compliance strategies, because the PEIS is a planning document only. It assesses the potential programmatic impacts of conducting the Ground Water Project, provides a method for determining the site-specific ground water compliance strategies, and provides data and information that can be used to prepare site-specific environmental impacts analyses more efficiently. This PEIS presents multiple ground water compliance strategies, each with its own set of potential impacts, that could be used to implement all the alternatives presented in the PEIS except the no action alternative. The no action alternative must be considered by law. It consists of taking no action to meet EPA standards. Implementing all PEIS alternatives (except no action) means applying a ground water compliance strategy or a combination of strategies that would result in site-specific impacts

  20. Operation of Grand Gulf Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2, Dockets Nos. 50-416 and 50-417: Mississippi Power and Light Company, Middle South Energy, Inc., South Mississippi Electric Power Association. Final environmental statement

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1981-09-01

    The information in this Final Environmental Statement is the second assessment of the environmental impacts associated with the construction and operation of the Grand Gulf Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2, located on the Mississippi River in Claiborne County, Mississippi. The Draft Environmental Statement was issued in May 1981. The first assessment was the Final Environmental Statement related to construction, which was issued in August 1973 prior to issuance of the Grand Gulf Nuclear Station construction permits. In September 1981 Grand Gulf Unit 1 was 92% complete and Unit 2 was 22% complete. Fuel loading for Unit 1 is scheduled for December 1981. The present assessment is the result of the NRC staff review of the activities associated with the proposed operation of the Station, and includes the staff responses to comments on the Draft Environmental Statement

  1. Environmental impact statement law and environmental impact statement administration regulation

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    Feldmann, F.J.

    1991-01-01

    The contribution does not deal with the question - as might be suggested by the heading - that the execution of the environmental impact statement law might be uncertain if there are no further accompanying legal transformatory acts. Putting the environmental impact statements into action is concerned in partiuclar with procedural provisions regarding the Federal Act on Protection against Nuisances and the Atomic Energy Act. The author deals with aspects of the environmental impact statement law and the state-of-the-art achieved so far. He also deals with legislative intent, with further points of putting the law into practice, i.e. the information requirements in the administrative provisions and the integrating aspect, the amalgamating aspect, the requirements made on the state of the environment, and the significance of administrative provisions. Also treated are legal procedures in the Federal Laender and on an international level. (RST) [de

  2. Supplement to Final Environmental Statement related to construction and operation of Clinch River Breeder Reactor Plant, Docket No. 50-537

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1982-10-01

    In February 1977, the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation issued a Final Environmental Statement (FES) (NUREG-0139) related to the construction and operation of the proposed Clinch River Breeder Reactor Plant (CRBRP). Since the FES was issued, additional data relative to the site and its environs have been collected, several modifications have been made to the CRBRP design, and its fuel cycle, and the timing of the plant construction and operation has been affected in accordance with deferments under the DOE Liquid Metal Fast Breeder Reactor (LMFBR) program. These changes are summarized and their environmental significance is assessed in this document. The reader should note that this document generally does not repeat the substantial amount of information in the FES which is still current; hence, the FES should be consulted for a comprehensive understanding of the staff's environmental review of the CRBRP project

  3. Environmental Impact Statement: Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP): Executive summary

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1980-10-01

    The purpose of this document is to provide a summary of the environmental impact statement for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) project. The Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the WIPP was published by the US Department of Energy (DOE) in April 1979. This document was reviewed and commented on by members of the general public, private organizations, and governmental agencies. The Final Environmental Impact Statement was subsequently published in October, 1980. This summary is designed to assist decision-maker and interested individuals in reviewing the material presented in the environmental impact statement for the WIPP project. To make this material widely available, this summary is published in both Spanish and English. Additional, more detailed information concerning the environmental and safety consequences of the WIPP project is available in the Final Environmental Impact Statement. Written comments and public hearing comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement are available for review. 27 refs., 4 figs., 7 tabs

  4. Final environmental statement related to operation of Indian Point Nuclear Generating Plant, Unit No. 3: (Docket No. 50-286): Volume 1

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1975-02-01

    The proposed action is the issuance of a license to consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc., for the operation of the Indian Point Nuclear Generating Plant, Unit No. 3, located in the State of New York, Westchester County, Village of Buchanan, 24 miles north of the New York City boundary line. Although the present action is the issuance of an operating license for Unit No. 3, this Statement considers the environmental impacts from simultaneous operation of all three Units. A Final Environmental Statement has been issued for Unit No. 2. Furthermore, in view of the proximity to the Indian Point site of existing and presently proposed power plants on the Hudson River, the cumulative environmental benefits and impacts of the plants within a 30-mile reach of the river have been assessed. The proposed action is interreleated to other actions taken by other Federal agencies such as the Environmental Protection Agency, in regard to granting or denying application for discharge permits under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) instituted through the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972, and the Federal Power Commission, in licensing of other facilities on the Hudson River. 128 figs., 210 tabs

  5. Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station, Units 1, 2, and 3 (Docket Nos. STN 50-528, STN 50-529, and STN 50-530): Final environmental statement

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1982-02-01

    The proposed action is the issuance of operating licenses to the Arizona Public Service Company (APS, applicant) for the startup and operation of PVNGS, Units 1, 2, and 3, located in Maricopa County, about 24 km (15 mi) west of Buckeye, Arizona. The information in this statement represents the second assessment of the environmental impact associated with PVNGS Units 1, 2, and 3 pursuant to the guidelines of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) and Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Part 51 of the Commissions's Regulations. After receiving an application in July 1974 to construct this station, the staff carried out a review of impacts that would occur during its construction and operation. That evaluation was issued as a Final Environmental Statement/emdash/Construction Phase (FES-CP). After this environmental review, a safety review, an evaluation by the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards, and public hearings in Phoenix, Arizona, the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission issued Construction Permits Nos. CPPR-141, CPPR-142, and CPPR-143 for the construction of PVNGS Units 1, 2, and 3. As of September 1981, the construction of Unit 1 was about 92 percent complete, Unit 2 was 68 percent complete, and Unit 3 was 26 percent complete. 11 figs., 21 tabs

  6. Final environmental statement for selection of the preferred closed cycle cooling system at Indian Point Unit No. 3, Docket No. 50-286

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1979-12-01

    The environmental statement includes information concerning the alternative closed cycle cooling systems; schedule and permits; environmental impacts of feasible alternative closed cycle cooling systems; socio-economic impact of closed cycle cooling systems; and evaluation of proposed action

  7. Final programmatic environmental impact statement for the uranium mill tailings remedial action ground water project. Volume II

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    None

    1996-10-01

    Volume II of the programmatic environmental impact statement (PElS) is a comment and response document; it is the collection of the comments received on the draft PElS. The U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) response to each comment is provided after each comment. If the comment resulted in a change to the PElS, the affected section number of the PElS is provided in the response. Comments 1 through 259 were received at public hearings. The name of the hearing at which the comment was received is listed after each comment. Comments were recorded on flip charts and by notetakers. DOE representatives were present to hear the comments and respond to them. The DOE's written response is provided after each comment. Comments 260 through 576 were received in writing at the hearings, and from various federal, tribal, and state agencies and from individuals during the public comment period. Copies of the written comments follow the comments and responses.

  8. Final programmatic environmental impact statement for the uranium mill tailings remedial action ground water project. Volume II

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1996-01-01

    Volume II of the programmatic environmental impact statement (PElS) is a comment and response document; it is the collection of the comments received on the draft PElS. The U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) response to each comment is provided after each comment. If the comment resulted in a change to the PElS, the affected section number of the PElS is provided in the response. Comments 1 through 259 were received at public hearings. The name of the hearing at which the comment was received is listed after each comment. Comments were recorded on flip charts and by notetakers. DOE representatives were present to hear the comments and respond to them. The DOE's written response is provided after each comment. Comments 260 through 576 were received in writing at the hearings, and from various federal, tribal, and state agencies and from individuals during the public comment period. Copies of the written comments follow the comments and responses

  9. 76 FR 14968 - Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability

    Science.gov (United States)

    2011-03-18

    ... ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-8995-9] Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of....epa.gov/compliance/nepa/ . Weekly Receipt of Environmental Impact Statements Filed 03/07/2011 Through.... McKoy 1-800-432-8330 Ext 4426. EIS No. 20110083, Final EIS, USFS, MT, Beaver Creek Landscape Management...

  10. Final Environmental Statement related to the decommissioning of the Edgemont uranium mill. Docket No. 40-1341 Tennessee Valley Authority

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1982-06-01

    After an assessment of concerns and alternatives and the addition of conditions related to the proposed decommissioning project operations, the proposed action permits the decommissioning of the existing uranium milling facilities at Edgemont, South Dakota, including removal or cleanup of mill buildings, removal of tailings sands and slimes from the mill site, and removal of contaminated soil from the mill site and local environs. It is estimated by TVA that approximately 2.1 x 10 6 MT (2.3 x 10 6 tons) of tailings and an undetermined amount of contaminated soil will be removed from the mill site. It is also proposed that all radioactive materials, removed in the course of carrying out the proposed action, be transported by truck and/or slurry pipeline to an impoundment, located about 3.21 km southeast of the mill site, constructed especially to ensure containment of such material for the foreseeable future. The project area that will undergo major land disturbance consists of 207 ha (including 104 ha at the disposal site, 12 ha for the haul road to be constructed between the mill and disposal site, and the 86-ha mill site), plus the potential removal of at least 17 ha of ponderosa pine and surficial soil east of the mill site and an unestablished, but small, area of surficial soil in the Cottonwood community. The latter two areas have been contaminated by windblown tailings. All disturbed areas will be reclaimed and revegetated. The title to the tailings disposal site will be transferred to state or federal entities so that any future use can be controlled to ensure the health and safety of the public. Chapters are devoted to alternatives including the proposed action; the affected environment; and environmental consequences, monitoring to detect impacts, and mitigation of impacts. Qualifications of the task group are given and agencies receiving the draft environmental statement are listed

  11. Salt Lake City Utah Integrated Projects electric power marketing. Final environmental impact statement, Volume 5: Appendix E

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1996-01-01

    The Colorado River Storage Project Customer Service Office of the Western Area Power Administration (Western) markets electricity produced at hydroelectric facilities operated by the Bureau of Reclamation. The facilities are known collectively as the Salt Lake City Area Integrated Projects (SLCA/IP) and include dams equipped for power generation on the Colorado, Green, Gunnison, and Rio Grande rivers and on Plateau Creek in Arizona, Colorado, Utah, Wyoming, and New Mexico. Of these facilities, only the Glen Canyon Unit, the Flaming Gorge Unit, and the Aspinall Unit (which includes Blue Mesa, Morrow Point, and Crystal dams) are influenced by Western power scheduling and transmission decisions. The environmental impact statement (EIS) alternatives, called commitment-level alternatives, reflect combinations of capacity and energy that would feasibly and reasonably fulfill Western's firm power marketing responsibilities, needs, and statutory obligations. The viability of these alternatives relates directly to the combination of generation capability of the SLCA/IP with energy purchases and interchange. The economic and natural resource assessments in this EIS include an analysis of commitment-level alternatives. Impacts of the no-action alternative are also assessed. Supply options, which include combinations of electrical power purchases and hydropower operational scenarios reflecting different operations of the dams, are also assessed. The EIS evaluates the impacts of these scenarios relative to socioeconomics, air resources, water resources, ecological resources, cultural resources, land use, recreation, and visual resources. Western has identified commitment-level alternative 1, the Post-1989 commitment level, as its preferred alternative. The impact evaluations indicate that this commitment level is also the environmentally preferred alternative

  12. Salt Lake City Area Integrated Projects electric power marketing -- Final environmental impact statement. Volume 2: Sections 1--16

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1996-01-01

    The Colorado River Storage Project Customer Service Office of the Western Area Power Administration (Western) markets electricity produced at hydroelectric facilities operated by the Bureau of Reclamation. The facilities are known collectively as the Salt Lake City Area Integrated Projects (SLCA/IP) and include dams equipped for power generation on the Colorado, Green, Gunnison, and Rio Grande rivers and on Plateau Creek in Arizona, Colorado, Utah, Wyoming, and New Mexico. Of these facilities, only the Glen Canyon Unit, the Flaming Gorge Unit, and the Aspinall Unit (which includes Blue Mesa, Morrow Point, and Crystal dams) are influenced by Western power scheduling and transmission decisions. The environmental impact statement (EIS) alternatives, called commitment-level alternatives, reflect combinations of capacity and energy that would feasibly and reasonably fulfill Western's firm power marketing responsibilities, needs, and statutory obligations. The viability of these alternatives relates directly to the combination of generation capability of the SLCA/IP with energy purchases and interchange. The economic and natural resource assessments in this EIS include an analysis of commitment-level alternatives. Impacts of the no-action alternative are also assessed. Supply options, which include combinations of electrical power purchases and hydropower operational scenarios reflecting different operations of the dams, are also assessed. The EIS evaluates the impacts of these scenarios relative to socioeconomics, air resources, water resources, ecological resources, cultural resources, land use, recreation, and visual resources. Western has identified commitment-level alternative 1, the Post-1989 commitment level, as its preferred alternative. The impact evaluations indicate that this commitment level is also the environmentally preferred alternative

  13. Salt Lake City Area Integrated Projects electric power marketing final environmental impact statement. Volume 4: Appendixes B-D

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1996-01-01

    The Colorado River Storage Project Customer Office of the Western Area Power Administration (Western) markets electricity produced at hydroelectric facilities operated by the Bureau of Reclamation. The facilities are known collectively as the Salt Lake City Area Integrated Projects (SLCA/IP) and include dams equipped for power generation on the Colorado, Green, Gunnison, and Rio Grande rivers and on Plateau Creek in Arizona, Colorado, Utah, Wyoming, and New Mexico. Of these facilities, only the Glen Canyon Unit, the Flaming Gorge Unit, and the Aspinall Unit (which includes Blue Mesa, Morrow Point, and Crystal dams) are influenced by Western power scheduling and transmission decisions. The environmental impact statement (EIS) alternatives, called commitment-level alternatives, reflect combinations of capacity and energy that would feasibly and reasonably fulfill Western's firm power marketing responsibilities, needs, and statutory obligations. The viability of these alternatives relates directly to the combination of generation capability of the SLCA/IP with energy purchases and interchange. The economic and natural resource assessments in this EIS include an analysis of commitment-level alternatives. Impacts of the no-action alternative are also assessed. Supply options, which include combinations of electrical power purchases and hydropower operational scenarios reflecting different operations of the dams, are also assessed. The EIS evaluates the impacts of these scenarios relative to socioeconomics, air resources, water resources, ecological resources, cultural resources, land use, recreation, and visual resources. Western has identified commitment-level alternative 1, the Post-1989 commitment level, as its preferred alternative. The impact evaluations indicate that this commitment level is also the environmentally preferred alter native

  14. Environmental Impact Analysis Process. Final Environmental Impact Statement for Expansion of the Melrose Air Force Range, Curry and Roosevelt Counties, New Mexico

    Science.gov (United States)

    1985-04-18

    County’s status of meeting the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). EPA indicates that ambient concentrations of particulates and sulfur...EPA ruled on the attainment status of the national ambient air quality standards. 19 rN 0 UN Nr Nr a, -4 CL CA N o4 A r- No co 0 N Ar w -4- .- t- ai...Environmental Impacto --- N C Statement (EIS), or file a Finding Of Nto Slni Icant Impact (FONSI). In either case, docu-nenrration of the environmental analysis

  15. 75 FR 57286 - Notice of Availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the NextLight Renewable...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-09-20

    ... solar field and infrastructure would consist of fixed panels, an underground and overhead electrical... Statement for the NextLight Renewable Power, LLC, Silver State Solar Project, Clark County, NV AGENCY... Statement (EIS) for the Silver State Solar Project, Clark County, Nevada, and by this notice is announcing...

  16. Draft supplement to final environmental statement related to construction and operation of Clinch River Breeder Reactor Plant. Docket No. 50-537

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1982-07-01

    Information is presented concerning the site and environs; facility description; environmental impacts due to construction; environmental impacts of plant operation; environmental measurement and monitoring programs; environmental impacts of postulated accidents; need for the proposed facility; alternatives; evaluation of the proposed action; and discussion of comments received on the draft environmental statement

  17. Final environmental impact statement for the construction and operation of an independent spent fuel storage installation to store the Three Mile Island Unit 2 spent fuel at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory. Docket Number 72-20

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1998-03-01

    This Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) contains an assessment of the potential environmental impacts of the construction and operation of an Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI) for the Three Mile Island Unit 2 (TMI-2) fuel debris at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental laboratory (INEEL). US Department of Energy-Idaho Operations Office (DOE-ID) is proposing to design, construct, and operate at the Idaho Chemical Processing Plant (ICPP). The TMI-2 fuel debris would be removed from wet storage, transported to the ISFSI, and placed in storage modules on a concrete basemat. As part of its overall spent nuclear fuel (SNF) management program, the US DOE has prepared a final programmatic environmental impact statement (EIS) that provides an overview of the spent fuel management proposed for INEEL, including the construction and operation of the TMI-2 ISFSI. In addition, DOE-ID has prepared an environmental assessment (EA) to describe the environmental impacts associated with the stabilization of the storage pool and the construction/operation of the ISFSI at the ICPP. As provided in NRC's NEPA procedures, a FEIS of another Federal agency may be adopted in whole or in part in accordance with the procedures outlined in 40 CFR 1506.3 of the regulations of the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ). Under 40 CFR 1506.3(b), if the actions covered by the original EIS and the proposed action are substantially the same, the agency adopting another agency's statement is not required to recirculate it except as a final statement. The NRC has determined that its proposed action is substantially the same as actions considered in DOE's environmental documents referenced above and, therefore, has elected to adopt the DOE documents as the NRC FEIS

  18. Final environmental impact statement for the Nevada Test Site and off-site locations in the state of Nevada: Mitigation action plan

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1997-02-01

    The DOE Notice of Availability for this environmental impact statement was published in the Federal Register on Friday, October 18, 1996 (61 FR 54437). The final environmental impact statement identifies potential adverse effects resulting from the four use alternatives evaluated and discusses measures that DOE considered for the mitigation of these potential adverse effects. The Secretary of Energy signed the Record of Decision on the management and operation of the Nevada Test Site and other DOE sites in the state of Nevada on December 9, 1996. These decisions will result in the continuation of the multipurpose, multi-program use of the Nevada Test Site, under which DOE will pursue a further diversification of interagency, private industry, and public-education uses while meeting its Defense Program, Waste Management, and Environmental Restoration mission requirements at the Nevada Test Site and other Nevada sites, including the Tonopah Test Range, the Project Shoal Site, the Central Nevada Test Area, and on the Nellis Air Force Range Complex. The Record of Decision also identifies specific mitigation actions beyond the routine day-to-day physical and administrative controls needed for implementation of the decisions. These specific mitigation actions are focused on the transportation of waste and on groundwater availability. This Mitigation Action Plan elaborates on these mitigation commitments

  19. Petroleum production at Maximum Efficient Rate Naval Petroleum Reserve No. 1 (Elk Hills), Kern County, California. Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    1993-07-01

    This document provides an analysis of the potential impacts associated with the proposed action, which is continued operation of Naval Petroleum Reserve No. I (NPR-1) at the Maximum Efficient Rate (MER) as authorized by Public law 94-258, the Naval Petroleum Reserves Production Act of 1976 (Act). The document also provides a similar analysis of alternatives to the proposed action, which also involve continued operations, but under lower development scenarios and lower rates of production. NPR-1 is a large oil and gas field jointly owned and operated by the federal government and Chevron U.SA Inc. (CUSA) pursuant to a Unit Plan Contract that became effective in 1944; the government`s interest is approximately 78% and CUSA`s interest is approximately 22%. The government`s interest is under the jurisdiction of the United States Department of Energy (DOE). The facility is approximately 17,409 acres (74 square miles), and it is located in Kern County, California, about 25 miles southwest of Bakersfield and 100 miles north of Los Angeles in the south central portion of the state. The environmental analysis presented herein is a supplement to the NPR-1 Final Environmental Impact Statement of that was issued by DOE in 1979 (1979 EIS). As such, this document is a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS).

  20. Final waste management programmatic environmental impact statement for managing treatment, storage, and disposal of radioactive and hazardous waste. Volume IV of V

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1997-01-01

    The Final Waste Management Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (WM PEIS) examines the potential environmental and cost impacts of strategic management alternatives for managing five types of radioactive and hazardous wastes that have resulted and will continue to result from nuclear defense and research activities at a variety of sites around the United States. The five waste types are low-level mixed waste, low-level waste, transuranic waste, high-level waste, and hazardous waste. The WM PEIS provides information on the impacts of various siting alternatives which the Department of Energy (DOE) will use to decide at which sites to locate additional treatment, storage, and disposal capacity for each waste type.Transportation is an integral component of the alternatives being considered for each type of radioactive waste in the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Waste Management Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (WM PEIS). The types of radioactive waste considered in Part I are high-level waste (HLW), low-level waste (LLW), transuranic waste (TRUW), and low-level mixed waste (LLMW). For some alternatives, radioactive waste would be shipped among the DOE sites at various stages of the treatment, storage, and disposal (TSD) process. The magnitude of the transportation-related activities varies with each alternative, ranging from minimal transportation for decentralized approaches to significant transportation for some centralized approaches. The human health risks associated with transporting various waste materials were assessed to ensure a complete appraisal of the impacts of each PEIS alternative being considered

  1. Final Environmental Impact Statement and Environmental Impact Report for continued operation of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and Sandia National Laboratories, Livermore

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1992-08-01

    The US Department of Energy (DOE) and the Regents of the University of California (UC) propose the continued operation, including near-term proposed projects, of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL). In addition, DOE proposes the continued operation, including near-term proposed projects, of Sandia National Laboratories, Livermore (SNL, Livermore). Continued operation plus proposed projects at the two Laboratories is needed so that the research and development missions established by Congress and the President can continue to be supported. As provided and encouraged by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), DOE and UC have prepared this document as a joint Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and Environmental Impact Report (EIR) to analyze the impacts of the proposed action. In addition, this document discusses a no action alternative for continuing operations at FY 1992 funding levels without further growth, a modification of operations alternative focused on specific adverse environmental impacts of operations or facilities, and a shutdown and decommissioning alternative. This document also examines the alternative of UC discontinuing its management of LLNL after the current contract expires on September 30, 1992. The environmental documentation process provides information to the public, government agencies, and decision makers about the environmental impacts of implementing the proposed and alternative actions. In addition, this environmental documentation identifies alternatives and possible ways to reduce or prevent environmental impacts. A list of the issues raised through the EIS/EIR scoping process is presented

  2. Final Environmental Statement related to license renewal and power increase for the National Bureau of Standards Reactor: Docket No. 50-184

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1982-08-01

    This Final Environmental Statement contains an assessment of the environmental impact associated with renewal of Operating License No. TR-5 for the National Bureau of Standards (NBS) reactor for a period of 20 years at a power level of 20 MW. This reactor is located on the 576-acre NBS site near Gaithersburg in Montgomery County, Maryland, about 20 mi northwest of the center of Washington, DC. The reactor is a high-flux heavy-water-moderated, cooled and reflected test reactor, which first went critical on December 7, 1967. Though the reactor was originally designed for 20-MW operation, it has been operating for 14 years at a maximum authorized power level to 10 MW. Program demand is now great enough to warrant operation at a power level of 20 MW. No additional major changes to the physical plant are required to operate at 20 MW

  3. Final environmental statement related to construction of Midland Plant, Units 1 and 2 (Docket Nos. 50-329 and 50-330)

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1977-01-01

    This is a Final Detailed Statement on Environmental Considerations associated with construction and operation of Midland Plant Units 1 and 2 at Midland, Michigan, pursuant to a construction permit and operating license which has been applied for by the Consumers Power Company. The application is under review by the US Atomic Energy Commission's Regulatory Staff. The environmental impact, including adverse and beneficial effects, of the Midland Plant includes reassignment of use of about 1100 acres of agricultural and residential land for the cooling pond (the plant buildings are located on industrial zoned land); this resulted in the dislocation of approximately 25 residences and relocation of the Midland County Farm to a newly built structure; the destruction of a maximum of 4400 tons of phytoplankton per year at the intake of makeup water from the Tittabawassee River; and a predicted small increase in fogging effects in the near vicinity of the cooling pond. 34 refs., 19 figs., 26 tabs

  4. Final Long-Term Management and Storage of Elemental Mercury Environmental Impact Statement Summary and Guide for Stakeholders

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    2011-01-01

    Pursuant to the Mercury Export Ban Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-414), DOE was directed to designate a facility or facilities for the long-term management and storage of elemental mercury generated within the United States. Therefore, DOE has analyzed the storage of up to 10,000 metric tons (11,000 tons) of elemental mercury in a facility(ies) constructed and operated in accordance with the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (74 FR 31723). DOE prepared this Final Mercury Storage EIS in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) implementing regulations (40 CFR 1500–1508), and DOE’s NEPA implementing procedures (10 CFR 1021) to evaluate reasonable alternatives for a facility(ies) for the long-term management and storage of elemental mercury. This Final Mercury Storage EIS analyzes the potential environmental, human health, and socioeconomic impacts of elemental mercury storage at seven candidate locations: Grand Junction Disposal Site near Grand Junction, Colorado; Hanford Site near Richland, Washington; Hawthorne Army Depot near Hawthorne, Nevada; Idaho National Laboratory near Idaho Falls, Idaho; Kansas City Plant in Kansas City, Missouri; Savannah River Site near Aiken, South Carolina; and Waste Control Specialists, LLC, site near Andrews, Texas. As required by CEQ NEPA regulations, the No Action Alternative was also analyzed as a basis for comparison. DOE intends to decide (1) where to locate the elemental mercury storage facility(ies) and (2) whether to use existing buildings, new buildings, or a combination of existing and new buildings. DOE’s Preferred Alternative for the long-term management and storage of mercury is the Waste Control Specialists, LLC, site near Andrews, Texas.

  5. 40 CFR 1502.19 - Circulation of the environmental impact statement.

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-07-01

    ... impact statement. 1502.19 Section 1502.19 Protection of Environment COUNCIL ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT § 1502.19 Circulation of the environmental impact statement. Agencies shall circulate the entire draft and final environmental impact statements except for certain appendices as...

  6. Generic environmental impact statement in support of rulemaking on radiological criteria for license termination of NRC-licensed nuclear facilities. Final report, appendices A and B

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1997-07-01

    The action being considered in this Final Generic Environmental Impact Statement (GEIS) is an amendment to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission''s (NRC) regulations in 10 CFR Part 20 to include radiological criteria for decommissioning of lands and structures at nuclear facilities. Under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), all Federal agencies must consider the effect of their actions on the environment. To fulfill NRC''s responsibilities under NEPA, the Commission is preparing this GEIS which analyzes alternative courses of action and the costs and impacts associated with those alternatives. In preparing the final GEIS, the following approach was taken: (1) a listing was developed of regulatory alternatives for establishing radiological criteria for decommissioning; (2) for each alternative, a detailed analysis and comparison of incremental impacts, both radiological and nonradiological, to workers, members of the public, and the environment, and costs were performed; and (3) based on the analysis of impacts and costs, conclusions on radiological criteria for decommissioning were provided. Contained in the GEIS are results and conclusions related to achieving, as an objective of decommissioning ALARA, reduction to preexisting background, the radiological criterion for unrestricted use, decommissioning ALARA analysis for soils and structures containing contamination, restricted use and alternative analysis for special site-specific situations and groundwater cleanup. In its analyses, the final GEIS includes consideration of comments made on the draft GEIS during the public comment period

  7. Generic environmental impact statement in support of rulemaking on radiological criteria for license termination of NRC-licensed nuclear facilities. Final report, main report

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1997-07-01

    The action being considered in this Final Generic Environmental Impact Statement (GEIS) is an amendment to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC) regulations in 10 CFR Part 20 to include radiological criteria for decommissioning of lands and structures at nuclear facilities. Under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), all Federal agencies must consider the effect of their actions on the environment. To fulfill NRC's responsibilities under NEPA, the Commission is preparing this GEIS which analyzes alternative courses of action and the costs and impacts associated with those alternatives. In preparing the final GEIS, the following approach was taken: (1) a listing was developed of regulatory alternatives for establishing radiological criteria for decommissioning; (2) for each alternative, a detailed analysis and comparison of incremental impacts, both radiological and nonradiological, to workers, members of the public, and the environment, and costs, were performed; and (3) based on the analysis of impacts and costs, conclusions on radiological criteria for decommissioning were provided. Contained in the GEIS are results and conclusions related to achieving, as an objective of decommissioning ALARA, reduction to preexisting background, the radiological criterion for unrestricted use, decommissioning ALARA analysis for soils and structures containing contamination, restricted use and alternative analysis for special site specific situations, and groundwater cleanup. In its analyses, the final GEIS includes consideration of comments made on the draft GEIS during the public comment period

  8. Final environmental statement concerning proposed rule making action: acceptance criteria for emergency core cooling systems for light-water-cooled nuclear power reactors

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1973-01-01

    Information on the ECCS requirements for PWR and BWR reactors are presented concerning environmental impact, alternatives, adverse environmental effects, relationship between short-term uses of the environment and long-term productivity, irreversible and irretrievable commitment of resources, cost-benefit analysis, and discussion of significant comments received on the draft environmental statement. (U.S.)

  9. Remedial actions at the former Climax Uranium Company, Uranium Mill site, Grand Junction, Mesa County, Colorado. Volume 1, Text: Final environmental impact statement

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    None

    1986-12-01

    This statement evaluates and compares the environmental impacts associated with the remedial actions of the residual radioactive materials remaining at the inactive uranium processing site and associated vicinity properties at Grand Junction, Mesa County, Colorado. This statement is also intended to aid the BLM in amending their management framework plans and final resource management plan, as well as assisting in compliance with the withdrawal application as appropriate. The site is a 114-acre tract of private and state owned land which contains approximately 3.1 million cubic yards of tailings and associated contaminated soils. The vicinity properties are homes, businesses, public buildings, and vacant lots which may have been contaminated during construction by the use of tailings as building material. An estimated 3465 vicinity properties would be cleaned up during remedial action of the tailings pile. The tailings were produced by the former Climax Uranium Company which processed uranium ore, which it sold to the US Atomic Energy Commission from 1951 to 1966 and to private sources from 1966 to 1970. This statement evaluates six alternatives for stabilization and disposal of the tailings and other contaminated materials: (1) No action. (2) Stabilization at the Grand Junction site. (3) Disposal at the Cheney Reservoir site with truck transport. (4) Disposal at the Cheney Reservoir site with train and truck transport. (5) Disposal at the Two Road site with truck transport. (6) Disposal at the Two Road site with train and truck transport. All of the alternatives except no action include remedial action at an estimated 3465 vicinity properties. Alternative 3 is DOE`s preferred alternative.

  10. Management of intermediate level radioactive waste, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee. Final environmental impact statement

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1977-09-01

    Chapters are devoted to the following topics: background and description; environmental impact of the proposed action; unavoidable adverse environmental effects; alternatives; relationship between short-term uses and long term productivity; state, local, or regional conflicts; irreversible and irretrievable commitments of resources; and cost benefit analysis. Four Appendices are provided: Glossary of terms; Characterization of existing environment; Calculations; Environmental monitoring of existing environment

  11. Final environmental impact statement for the Nevada Test Site and off-site locations in the State of Nevada. Framework for the resource management plan, Volume 2

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1996-08-01

    The purpose of this document is to publicize how the U.S. Department of Energy Nevada Operations Office (DOE/NV) proposes to develop and use a Resource Management Plan for the Nevada Test Site (NTS) so the public could comment on and assist in the following activities: (1) Developing the methods for creating and using the plan; (2) Identifying the values people place on manmade and natural resources found on the NTS; (3) Developing the goals the DOE/NV will use to guide the conservation and use of those resources; (4) Identifying the management actions needed to meet constraints and resource management goals; and (5) Incorporating the principles of ecosystem management into land and resource management on the NTS. This framework for the Resource Management Plan was developed in conjunction with the Environmental Impact Statement for the Nevada Test Site and off-site locations in the state of Nevada (NTS EIS) to take advantage of the extensive data collection and public participation activities associated with the National Environmental Policy Act. After public input was received during the comment period for the Draft NTS EIS, DOE/NV revised this description of the Resource Management Plan and published it with the NTS Final EIS. This revision includes the goals DOE/NV has developed for managing resources and land-use constraints. It also includes the final plans for developing the Resource Management Plan. These plans will guide DOE/NV as it develops a Resource Management Plan in the coming years

  12. 75 FR 4803 - Notice of Availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for Decommissioning and/or...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-01-29

    ...). The Proposed Action includes the decontamination and decommissioning of the waste storage tanks and... site facilities identified in the Final EIS would be removed; contaminated soil, sediment, and...

  13. 77 FR 44221 - Notice of Availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Proposed Point Thomson...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2012-07-27

    ... by Exxon Mobil Corporation and PTE Pipeline, is now available for public review. The Final EIS... camps (lodging); offices, warehouses, and shops; electric power generation and distribution facilities...

  14. Final Environmental Impact Statement for the construction and operation of Claiborne Enrichment Center, Homer, Louisiana (Docket No. 70-3-70). Volume 2, Public comments and NRC response

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    Zeitoun, A.

    1994-08-01

    The Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) (Volume 1), was prepared by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in accordance with regulation 10 CFR Part 51, which implements the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), to assess the potential environmental impacts for licensing the construction and operation of a proposed gaseous centrifuge enrichment facility to be built in Claiborne Parish, Louisiana by Louisiana Energy Services, L.P. (LES). The proposed facility would have a production capacity of about 866 metric tons annually of up to 5 weight percent enriched UF 6 , using a proven centrifuge technology. Included in the assessment are co on, both normal operations and potential accidents (internal and external events), and the eventual decontamination and decommissioning of the site. In order to help assure that releases from the operation of the facility and potential impacts on the public are as low as reasonably achievable, an environmental monitoring program was developed by LES to detect significant changes in the background levels of uranium around the site. Other issues addressed include the purpose and need for the facility, the alternatives to the proposed action, potential disposition of the tails, the site selection process, and environmental justice. The NRC staff concludes that the facility can be constructed and operated with small and acceptable impacts on the public and the environment, and proposes to issue a license to the applicant, Louisiana Energy Services, to authorize construction and operation of the proposed facility. The letters in this Appendix have been divided into three sections. Section One contains letters to which the NRC responded by addressing specific comments. Section Two contains the letters that concerned the communities of Forest Grove and Center Springs. Section Three is composed of letters that required no response. These letters were generally in support of the facility

  15. Final Environmental Impact Statement for the construction and operation of Claiborne Enrichment Center, Homer, Louisiana (Docket No. 70-3-70). Volume 2, Public comments and NRC response

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    Zeitoun, A. [Science Applications International Corp., Germantown, MD (United States)

    1994-08-01

    The Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) (Volume 1), was prepared by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in accordance with regulation 10 CFR Part 51, which implements the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), to assess the potential environmental impacts for licensing the construction and operation of a proposed gaseous centrifuge enrichment facility to be built in Claiborne Parish, Louisiana by Louisiana Energy Services, L.P. (LES). The proposed facility would have a production capacity of about 866 metric tons annually of up to 5 weight percent enriched UF{sub 6}, using a proven centrifuge technology. Included in the assessment are co on, both normal operations and potential accidents (internal and external events), and the eventual decontamination and decommissioning of the site. In order to help assure that releases from the operation of the facility and potential impacts on the public are as low as reasonably achievable, an environmental monitoring program was developed by LES to detect significant changes in the background levels of uranium around the site. Other issues addressed include the purpose and need for the facility, the alternatives to the proposed action, potential disposition of the tails, the site selection process, and environmental justice. The NRC staff concludes that the facility can be constructed and operated with small and acceptable impacts on the public and the environment, and proposes to issue a license to the applicant, Louisiana Energy Services, to authorize construction and operation of the proposed facility. The letters in this Appendix have been divided into three sections. Section One contains letters to which the NRC responded by addressing specific comments. Section Two contains the letters that concerned the communities of Forest Grove and Center Springs. Section Three is composed of letters that required no response. These letters were generally in support of the facility.

  16. 76 FR 37160 - Notice of Availability of Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for the Lost Creek In...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2011-06-24

    ... assessed the environmental impacts from the construction, operation, aquifer restoration, and..., operate, conduct aquifer restoration, and decommission an ISR facility at Lost Creek. Alternatives that were considered, but were eliminated from detailed analysis, included conventional mining and milling...

  17. 75 FR 49483 - Notice of Availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) for Training Range and...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-08-13

    ... Aerial System (UAS) facility and a 10th Engineering Battalion Complex) to be constructed over a 4-year... cantonment area to reduce unit transit time, and have fewer overall environmental impacts. Alternative C...

  18. Pine Flat Dam Fish and Wildlife Habitat Restoration, Fresno, California. Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environment Impact Report (SCH #96042044)

    National Research Council Canada - National Science Library

    2001-01-01

    ...; and reestablishing the historic flood plain and native historic plant and wildlife communities. This final EIS/EIR describes the environment near Pine Flat Dam and Reservoir and along the Lower Kings River in the Pine Flat Dam area...

  19. Supplement to the final environmental statement related to the decommissioning of the rare earths facility, West Chicago, Illinois: Volume 1: Main test and appendices A-G

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1989-04-01

    This Supplement to the Final Environmental Statement (SFES) assesses the impacts of permanent disposal of wastes located at the Kerr-McGee Rare Earths Facility in West Chicago, Illinois. In this SFES, additional alternative sites are analyzed, the analysis is more detailed, and the NRC expressly considers the suitability of these sites for permanent waste disposal. The analysis describes the Proposed Action, which is permanent disposal of the wastes in an above-grade disposal cell at the West Chicago site, and four alternatives for permanent disposal at other sites in Illinois. The four alternatives are: Alternative A, disposal at an active surface coal mine in a deep-trench disposal cell; Alternative B, disposal in a reclaimed surface coal mine in a deep-trench disposal cell; Alternative C, disposal in an underground coal mine in a worked-out panel; and Alternative D, disposal on a farmland site in a partially above-grade disposal cell. The environmental issues considered in the impact assessment are topography, air quality, socioeconomics, land resources, archaeology, mineral resources, water resources, ecology, and radiation exposure. A cost-benefit analysis of the Proposed Action and its alternatives is also presented. Based on the information and analysis given within this SFES, the NRC concluded that the Proposed Action is the preferred course of action. 220 refs., 7 figs., 125 Tabs

  20. Final environmental impact statement for the Nevada Test Site and off-site locations in the State of Nevada. Summary

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1996-08-01

    This sitewide EIS evaluates the potential environmental impacts of four possible land-use alternatives being considered for the Nevada Test Site (NTS), the Tonopah Test Range, and the formerly operated DOE sites in the state of Nevada: the Project Shoal Area, the Central Nevada Test Area, and portions of the Nellis Air Force Range Complex. Three additional sites in Nevada-Eldorado Valley, Dry Lake Valley, and Coyote Spring Valley-are evaluated for collocation of solar energy production facilities. The four alternatives include Continue Current Operations (No Action, continue to operate at the level maintained for the past 3 to 5 years); Discontinue Operations 1 (discontinue operations and interagency programs); Expanded Use (increased use of NTS and its resources to support defense and nondefense programs); and Alternate Use of Withdrawn Lands (discontinue all defense-related activities at NTS; continue waste management operations in support of NTS environmental restoration efforts; expand nondefense research). Environmental impacts were assessed for each alternative by analyzing, to the extent possible, the discrete and cumulative environmental impacts associated with Defense Waste Management, Environmental Restoration, Nondefense Research and Development, and Work for Others Programs. A framework for a Resource Management Plan is included as Volume 2 of this EIS and represents the development of an ecosystem based planning process closely integrated with the National Environmental Policy Act process. This EIS, among other things, analyzed the impacts of transportation of low level waste, and site characterization activities related to the Yucca Mountain Project but did not analyze the suitability of the site as a repository. This EIS does not analyze the suitability of the Yucca Mountain site as a repository as this is an action beyond the scope of the EIS. Volume 3 of this EIS contains the public comments and the responses to the comments

  1. Final generic environmental statement on the use of recycle plutonium in mixed oxide fuel in light water cooled reactors. Volume 2

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1976-08-01

    This environmental statement assesses the impacts of the implementation of plutonium recycle in the LWR industry. It is based on assumptions that are intended to reflect conservatively an acceptable level of the application of current technology. It is not intended to be a representation of the ''as low as reasonably achievable'' (ALARA) philosophy. This generic environmental statement discusses the anticipated effects of recycling plutonium in light water nuclear power reactors. It is based on about 30 years of experience with the element in the context of a projected light water nuclear power industry that is already substantial. A background perspective on plutonium, its safety, and its recycling as a reactor fuel is presented

  2. 78 FR 29151 - Notice of Availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Proposed Mohave County...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2013-05-17

    ... facilities include pad-mounted transformers, an underground 34.5-kilovolt (kV) electrical collection system... available at the locations listed below for 30 days from the date the Environmental Protection Agency... agencies include the Western Area Power Administration (Western); Bureau of Reclamation--Lower Colorado...

  3. 77 FR 41878 - Notice of Record of Decision on the Final Environmental Impact Statement that Evaluated the...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2012-07-16

    ... time. The ROD grants only conditional ALP approval of the Long-Term AIP. This conditional ALP approval... Long-Term AIP at this time. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Allan Nagy, Environmental Program... Preservation Officer (SHPO)) and the Keeper of the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). The FAA also...

  4. 78 FR 65698 - Notice of Availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Gas Hills In Situ...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2013-11-01

    ... production areas, or mine units, with subsurface ore bodies within the Wind River Formation for ISR extraction. Construction, operation, groundwater restoration, and surface reclamation of five mine units... Department of Environmental Quality Land Quality Division's (WDEQ-LQD) Mine Permit Application 687. In...

  5. 77 FR 44259 - Notice of Availability of a Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement and Draft Record of...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2012-07-27

    ... does not define effects for a specific or planned action. Instead, it analyzes the overall... northern border. For the purposes of the PEIS, CBP defined the northern border as the area between the... addresses concerns about environmental quality and the government's role in protecting it. The essence of...

  6. 78 FR 71639 - Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians' Proposed 534-Acre...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2013-11-29

    ... Action also includes the development of a 300-room hotel, casino, restaurants, retail establishments, a... addressed within the FEIS included land resources, water resources, air quality, biological resources..., Chief of the Division of Environmental, Cultural Resources Management and Safety, at the address listed...

  7. Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Seaway Navigation Season Extension. Volume 1. Main Report and Final Environmental Impact Statement

    Science.gov (United States)

    1979-08-01

    of navigation season extension. The Federal Clean Air Act sets forth National Ambient Air Quality Standards, defining maximum allowable ambient ...programmatic EIS reduces excessive paper work’by covee-ing a specific p rogram within a broad geological area, su- ..i~gthe environmental impactO within

  8. 75 FR 44278 - Notice of Availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Imperial Valley Solar...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-07-28

    ... National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended (NEPA), and the Federal Land Policy and Management... approximately 1.5 miles west of Dunaway Road and the western boundary is the westerly section line in Section 22... States. The Corps and the applicant are working with the BLM and CEC to identify the project proposal...

  9. Callaway Plant Units 1 and 2: Final environmental statement (Docket Nos. STN 50-483 and STN 50-486)

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1975-03-01

    The proposed action is the issuance of a construction permit to the Union Electric company for the construction of the Callaway Plant Units 1 and 2. The Callaway Plant, located 5 m north of the Missouri River in Callaway County, Missouri, will employ a pressurized water reactor to produce up to 3425 megawatts thermal (MWt) from each unit. A steam turbine-generator will use the heat to provide 1120 MWe (net) of electrical power capacity. A stretch power level of 3579 MWt (1160 MWe) is anticipated at a future date and is considered in the assessments contained in this statement. The exhaust steam will be cooled in a closed cycle mode, with water from the Missouri River. Constructing the plant and adjacent facilities will disturb an area of about 600 acres, of which less than 300 acres will be occupied by the operating plant and road and rail access to it. The land presently consists of cropland, pasture and forest. About 1140 acres will be required for the transmission line routes. The land presently consists of forest, pasture and cropland. No unique land usage is involved. Siltation and erosion during construction generally will have minor adverse effects, based upon the extent of protection measures the applicant plans to impose. The effect on Logan Creek is expected to be minor, but further assessment is needed, including possible additional precautions. About 14% of the benthic invertebrate population will be lost in the rectangular area defined by the river width and the length of the area to be dredged for shoreline structures. 28 figs., 53 tabs

  10. Montague Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2: Final environmental statement (Docket Nos. 50-496 and 50-497)

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1977-02-01

    The proposed action is the issuance of construction permits to the Northeast Nuclear Energy Company for the construction of the Montague Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2, located on the Connecticut River in the Town of Montague, Massachusetts. The plant will employ two identical boiling-water reactors to produce up to 3579 megawatts thermal (MWt) each. Two steam turbine-generators will use this heat to provide 1150 MWe (net) of electrical power capacity from each turbine-generator. A design power level of 3759 MWt (1220 Mwe net) for each unit is anticipated at a future date and is considered in the assessments contained in this statement. The waste heat will be rejected through natural-draft cooling towers using makeup water obtained from and discharged to the Connecticut River. The 1900-acre site is about 90% forest, with the remaining acreage in transmission-line corridor and old-field vegetation. The total loss of mixed-age forest will be 1273 acres. Nodesignated scenic areas will be crossed. Sixty acres of public lands, State forests, and parks will be lost to transmission facilities as well as losses associated with crossings of 2.0 miles of water bodies and 11.9 miles of wetlands. The maximum estimated potential loss of salable wood products will be $849,600. A maximum of 85.8 cfs of cooling water will be withdrawn from the Connecticut River. A maximum of 17.2 cfs will be returned to the river with the dissolved solids concentration increased by a factor of about 5. A maximum of 68.6 cfs will be evaporated to the atmosphere by the cooling towers. 143 refs., 58 figs., 69 tabs

  11. 78 FR 70067 - Notice of Availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Proposed Pan Mine...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2013-11-22

    ...: Midway Gold US, Inc. (Midway) proposes to construct and operate an open-pit gold mining operation in the northern part of the Pancake Mountain Range, approximately 50 miles west of Ely in White Pine County... Midway Gold Pan Project Exploration Amendment EA (July 2011). The Final EIS describes and analyzes the...

  12. 75 FR 18572 - Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for Sequoyah Nuclear Plant Units 1 and 2 License...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-04-12

    ... TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for Sequoyah Nuclear Plant... National Environmental Policy Act. TVA will prepare a supplemental environmental impact statement (SEIS) to update information in the 1974 Final Environmental Statement for Sequoyah Nuclear Plant Units 1 and 2...

  13. 75 FR 31834 - Adoption of Environmental Impact Statement; Availability of an Environmental Reevaluation

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-06-04

    ... DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Railroad Administration Adoption of Environmental Impact...), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Adoption and Recirculation of Final Environmental Impact... Impact Statement (EIS) issued by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) in 2004 for the construction of...

  14. Final environmental impact statement, interim management of nuclear materials, Savannah River Site, Aiken, South Carolina (DOE/EIS-0220)

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    Grainger, A R

    1995-10-01

    This document evaluates the potential environmental impacts of alternatives for the stabilization of nuclear materials currently stored at various locations on the Savannah River Site (SRS). These materials remain from past defense-related production, testing, and other activities at the SRS and from chemical separations and related activities that DOE suspended in 1992. The EIS analyzes the following alternatives: Continuing Storage (No Action), Processing to Metal, Processing to Oxide, Blending Down to Low Enriched Uranium, Processing and Storage for Vitrification in the Defense Waste Processing Facility, Vitrification (F-Canyon), and Improving Storage. The preferred alternatives cover a combination of these in relation to the different types of material.

  15. Final Environmental Impact Statement to construct and operate a facility to receive, store, and dispose of 11e.(2) byproduct material near Clive, Utah (Docket No. 40-8989)

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1993-08-01

    A Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) related to the licensing of Envirocare of Utah, Inc.'s proposed disposal facility in Tooele county, Utah (Docket No. 40-8989) for byproduct material as defined in Section 11e.(2) of the Atomic Energy Act, as amended, has been prepared by the Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards. This statement describes and evaluates the purpose of and need for the proposed action, the alternatives considered, and the environmental consequences of the proposed action. The NRC has concluded that the proposed action evaluated under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) and 10 CFR Part 51, is to permit the applicant to proceed with the project as described in this Statement

  16. Final waste management programmatic environmental impact statement for managing treatment, storage, and disposal of radioactive and hazardous waste. Volume V of V

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1997-01-01

    The Final Waste Management Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (WM PEIS) examines the potential environmental and cost impacts of strategic management alternatives for managing five types of radioactive and hazardous wastes that have resulted and will continue to result from nuclear energy research and the development, production, and testing of nuclear weapons at a variety of sites around the United States. The five waste types are low-level mixed waste, low-level waste, transuranic waste, high-level waste, and hazardous waste. The WM PEIS provides information on the impacts of various siting alternatives, which the Department of Energy (DOE) will use to decide at which sites to locate additional treatment, storage, and disposal capacity for each waste type. This information includes the cumulative impacts of combining future siting configurations for the five waste types and the collective impacts of other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future activities. The selected waste management facilities being considered for these different waste types are treatment and disposal facilities for low-level mixed waste; treatment and disposal facilities for low-level waste; treatment and storage facilities for transuranic waste in the event that treatment is required before disposal; storage facilities for created (vitrified) high-level waste canisters; and treatment of nonwastewater hazardous waste by DOE and commercial vendors. In addition to the No Action Alternative, which includes only existing of approved waste management facilities, the alternatives for each of the waste-type configurations include Decentralized, Regionalized, and Centralized Alternatives for using existing and operating new waste management facilities. However, the siting, construction, and operations of any new facility at a selected site will not be decided until completion of a sitewide or project-specific environmental impact review

  17. Final waste management programmatic environmental impact statement for managing treatment, storage, and disposal of radioactive and hazardous waste. Volume I of V

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1997-05-01

    The Final Waste Management Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (WM PEIS) examines the potential environmental and cost impacts of strategic management alternatives for managing five types of radioactive and hazardous wastes that have resulted and will continue to result from nuclear defense and research activities at a variety of sites around the United States. The five waste types are low-level mixed waste, low-level waste, transuranic waste, high-level waste, and hazardous waste. The WM PEIS provides information on the impacts of various siting alternatives which the Department of Energy (DOE) will use to decide at which sites to locate additional treatment, storage, and disposal capacity for each waste type. This information includes the cumulative impacts of combining future siting configurations for the five waste types and the collective impacts of other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future activities. The selected waste management facilities being considered for these different waste types are treatment and disposal facilities for low-level mixed waste; treatment and disposal facilities for low-level waste; treatment and storage facilities for transuranic waste in the event that treatment is required before disposal; storage facilities for treated (vitrified) high-level waste canisters; and treatment of nonwastewater hazardous waste by DOE and commercial vendors. In addition to the no action alternative, which includes only existing or approved waste management facilities, the alternatives for each of the waste type configurations include decentralized, regionalized, and centralized alternatives for using existing and operating new waste management facilities. However, the siting, construction and operations of any new facility at a selected site will not be decided until completion of a sitewide or project-specific environmental impact review

  18. 76 FR 21345 - Environmental Impacts Statements;

    Science.gov (United States)

    2011-04-15

    ... ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-8996-4] Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General Information (202) 564-1399 or http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/ Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements Filed 04/04/2011 Through 04...

  19. 78 FR 48672 - Environmental Impacts Statements;

    Science.gov (United States)

    2013-08-09

    ... ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-9010-5] Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General Information (202) 564-7146 or http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/ . Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements Filed 07/29/2013 Through...

  20. Final Environmental Impact Statement Relating to the Operation and Maintenance of the Fox River, Wisconsin Navigation Project.

    Science.gov (United States)

    1977-05-01

    30 te1e i), ’Y , W.i sonsin 54305 X1 Tom Peters Dr. G. Fred Lee c/o CH2M Center for Environmental Studies 200 S.W. Market University of Texas at Dallas...0 A. 31 v. 0 4𔃻C . ~ 0. > -’ C 1 - UCg J- . 0 u m a) 0 mC-. 40vc C AC- J. CL -0 0WuIL m0C a- 1 .19 41’c 0 0 ’C’ , 0 C’ .11t t% * 0 0’N 41I.Z FN- It 0...later industrial products moved to markets in the east. Appleton, Kim- berly, Little Chute, Combined Locks, and Kaukauna developed and grew around sites

  1. Final environmental statement related to the Atlas Minerals Division, Atlas Corporation, Atlas Uranium Mill (Grand County, Utah)

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1979-01-01

    The proposed action is the continuation of Source Material License SUA-917 issued to Atlas Corporation for the operation of the Atlas Uranium Mill in Grand County, Utah, near Moab (Docket No. 40-3453). The present mill was designed for an 1100 MT (1200 ton) per day processing rate with 0.25% uranium ore feed. The actual ore processing rate may vary up to 1450 MT (1600 ton) per day if lower grade ores are processed, but the annual production rate of 836 MT (921 tons) U 3 O 8 will not be exceeded. Possible environmental impacts and adverse effects are identified. Conditions for the protection of the environment are set forth before the license can be renewed

  2. Final generic environmental statement on the use of recycle plutonium in mixed oxide fuel in light water cooled reactors. Volume 5. Public comments and Nuclear Regulatory Commission responses

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1976-08-01

    Copies of 69 letters are presented commenting on the Draft Generic Environmental Statement (GESMO) WASH-1327 and the NRC's responses to the comments received from Federal, State and local agencies; environmental and public interest groups, members of the academic and industrial communities, and individual citizens. An index to these letters indicating the number assigned to each letter, the author, and organization represented, is provided in the Table of Contents

  3. Final generic environmental statement on the use of recycle plutonium in mixed oxide fuel in light water cooled reactors. Volume 5. Public comments and Nuclear Regulatory Commission responses

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    1976-08-01

    Copies of 69 letters are presented commenting on the Draft Generic Environmental Statement (GESMO) WASH-1327 and the NRC's responses to the comments received from Federal, State and local agencies; environmental and public interest groups, members of the academic and industrial communities, and individual citizens. An index to these letters indicating the number assigned to each letter, the author, and organization represented, is provided in the Table of Contents.

  4. DOE/EIS-0355 Remediation of the Moab Uranium Mill Tailings, Grand and San Juan Counties, Utah, Final Environmental Impact Statement (July 2005)

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    2005-01-01

    The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE or the Department) is proposing to clean up surface contamination and implement a ground water compliance strategy to address contamination that resulted from historical uranium-ore processing at the Moab Uranium Mill Tailings Site (Moab site), Grand County, Utah. Pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), 42 United States Code (U.S.C.) (section) 4321 et seq., DOE prepared this environmental impact statement (EIS) to assess the potential environmental impacts of remediating the Moab site and vicinity properties (properties where uranium mill tailings were used as construction or fill material before the potential hazards associated with the tailings were known). DOE analyzed the potential environmental impacts of both on-site and off-site remediation and disposal alternatives involving both surface and ground water contamination. DOE also analyzed the No Action alternative as required by NEPA implementing regulations promulgated by the Council on Environmental Quality. DOE has determined that its preferred alternatives are the off-site disposal of the Moab uranium mill tailings pile, combined with active ground water remediation at the Moab site. The preferred off-site disposal location is the Crescent Junction site, and the preferred method of transportation is rail. The basis for this determination is discussed later in this Summary. DOE has entered into agreements with 12 federal, tribal, state, and local agencies to be cooperating agencies in the development and preparation of this EIS. Several of the cooperating agencies have jurisdiction by law and intend to use the EIS to support their own decisionmaking. The others have expertise relevant to potential environmental, social, or economic impacts within their geographic regions. During the preparation of the EIS, DOE met with the cooperating agencies, provided them with opportunities to review preliminary versions of the document, and addressed their comments

  5. Final environmental statement related to the operation of the Barnwell Fuel Receiving and Storage Station (Docket No. 70-1729)

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1976-01-01

    The proposed action is to issue a materials license, pursuant to 10 CFR Parts 30, 40 and 70 of the Commission's regulations, authorizing Allied-General Nuclear Services to receive and handle fuel casks containing spent reactor fuel elements and to store spent reactor fuel at the Barnwell Nuclear Fuel Plant (BNFP), in the Barnwell Fuel Receiving and Storage Station (BFRSS). The BFRSS is a part of, and contiguous to, the BNFP-Separations Facility which is being constructed on a small portion of a 1700 acre site about six miles west of the city of Barnwell in Barnwell County, South Carolina. Construction of the BFRSS facility has been completed and the BNFP Separations Facility is more than 90% complete. A uranium Hexafluoride Facility is being constructed on the same site, and a Plutonium Product Facility is proposed to be constructed adjacent to the Separations Facility. The license that is the subject of this action will, if issued, allow lthe use of the BFRSS separate4 from the operation of the Separations Facility. Impacts resulting from the construction of the BFRSS have already occurred and mitigating measures have been and are being implemented to offset any adverse impacts. Operation of the BFRSS will not interfere with water sources, and should cause no noticeable damage to the terrestrial or aquatic environments. Operating experience at other fuel receiving and storage facilities has shown that radioactive concentrations discharged to the environs (the more significant process effluents) have been well below applicabhle state and federal limits. The small quantities to be released during operation of the BFRSS will result in negligible environmental impact. 20 figs

  6. Remedial actions at the former Vitro Rare Metals plant site, Canonsburg, Washington County, Pennsylvania. Final Environmental Impact Statement. Volume I

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    1983-07-01

    The environmental impacts associated with remedial actions in connection with residual radioactive materials remaining at the inactive uranium processing site located in Canonsburg, Washington County, Pennsylvania are evaluated. The Canonsburg site is an 18.5-acre property that was formerly owned by the Vitro Rare Metals Company. The expanded Canonsburg site would be 30-acre property that would include the Canonsburg site (the former Vitro Rare Metals plant), seven adjacent private houses, and the former Georges Pottery property. During the period 1942 through 1957 the Vitro Manufacturing Company and its successor, the Vitro Corporation of America, processed onsite residues and ores, and government-owned ores, concentrates, and scraps to extract uranium and other rare metals. The Canonsburg site is now the Canon Industrial Park. In addition to storing the residual radioactive materials of this process at the Canonsburg site, about 12,000 tons of radioactively contaminated materials were transferred to a railroad landfill in Burrell Township, Indiana County, Pennsylvania. This Canonsburg FEIS evaluates five alternatives for removing the potential public health hazard associated with the radioactively contaminated materials. In addition to no action, these alternatives involve various combinations of stabilization of the radioactively contaminated materials in place or decontamination of the Canonsburg and Burrell sites by removing the radioactively contaminated materials to another location. In addition to the two sites mentioned, a third site located in Hanover Township, Washington County, Pennsylvania has been considered as a disposal site to which the radioactively contaminated materials presently located at either of the other two sites might be moved.

  7. Remedial actions at the former Vitro Rare Metals plant site, Canonsburg, Washington County, Pennsylvania. Final Environmental Impact Statement. Volume I

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1983-07-01

    The environmental impacts associated with remedial actions in connection with residual radioactive materials remaining at the inactive uranium processing site located in Canonsburg, Washington County, Pennsylvania are evaluated. The Canonsburg site is an 18.5-acre property that was formerly owned by the Vitro Rare Metals Company. The expanded Canonsburg site would be 30-acre property that would include the Canonsburg site (the former Vitro Rare Metals plant), seven adjacent private houses, and the former Georges Pottery property. During the period 1942 through 1957 the Vitro Manufacturing Company and its successor, the Vitro Corporation of America, processed onsite residues and ores, and government-owned ores, concentrates, and scraps to extract uranium and other rare metals. The Canonsburg site is now the Canon Industrial Park. In addition to storing the residual radioactive materials of this process at the Canonsburg site, about 12,000 tons of radioactively contaminated materials were transferred to a railroad landfill in Burrell Township, Indiana County, Pennsylvania. This Canonsburg FEIS evaluates five alternatives for removing the potential public health hazard associated with the radioactively contaminated materials. In addition to no action, these alternatives involve various combinations of stabilization of the radioactively contaminated materials in place or decontamination of the Canonsburg and Burrell sites by removing the radioactively contaminated materials to another location. In addition to the two sites mentioned, a third site located in Hanover Township, Washington County, Pennsylvania has been considered as a disposal site to which the radioactively contaminated materials presently located at either of the other two sites might be moved

  8. Final Generic Environmental Impact Statement. Handling and storage of spent light water power reactor fuel. Volume 1. Executive summary and text

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1979-08-01

    The Generic Environmental Impact Statement on spent fuel storage was prepared by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff in response to a directive from the Commissioners published in the Federal Register, September 16, 1975 (40 FR 42801). The Commission directed the staff to analyze alternatives for the handling and storage of spent light water power reactor fuel with particular emphasis on developing long range policy. Accordingly, the scope of this statement examines alternative methods of spent fuel storage as well as the possible restriction or termination of the generation of spent fuel through nuclear power plant shutdown. Volume 1 includes the executive summary and the text

  9. Final environmental statement related to the operation of Catawba Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2. Docket Nos. 50-413 and 50-414, Duke Power Company, et al

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1983-01-01

    This Final Environmental Statement contains the second assessment of the environmental impact associated with the operation of the Catawba Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2, pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) and 10 CFR 51, as amended, of the NRC regulations. This statement examines: the affected environment, environmental consequences and mitigating actions, and environmental and economic benefits and costs. Land use and terrestrial and aquatic-ecological impacts will be small. Operational impacts to historic and archeological sites will be negligible. The effects of routine operations, energy transmission, and periodic maintenance of rights-of-way and transmission facilities should not jeopardize any populations of endangered or threatened species. No significant impacts are anticipated from normal operational releases of radioactivity. The risk associated with accidental radiation exposure is very low. The net socioeconomic effects of the project will be beneficial

  10. Final environmental statement related to the operation of Byron Station, Units 1 and 2 (Docket Nos. STN 50-454 and STN 50-455)

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1982-04-01

    The proposed action is the issuance of an operating license to Commonwealth Edison Company (CECo) of Chicago, Illinois, for startup and operation of the Byron Station, Units 1 and 2 on a 710-ha (1754-acre) site in Ogle County 6 km (4 miles) south-southwest of Byron, Illinois, and 3 km (2 miles) east of the Rock River. Each of the two generating units consists of a pressurized-water reactor, four steam generators, one steam turbine generator, a heat-dissipation system, and associated auxiliary and engineered safeguards. Information is presented under the following topics: purpose and need for the action; alternatives to the proposed action; project description and affected environment; environmental consequences and mitigating actions; evaluation of the proposed action; list of contributors; list of agencies and organizations requested to comment on the draft environmental statement; and responses to comments on the Draft Environmental Statement

  11. Gulf of Mexico Sales 139 and 141: Central and western planning areas. Final environmental impact statement. Volume 2: Sections 4.D. through 9. Final report

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1991-10-01

    The report is Volume II of two volumes. The EIS is a description of the environmental aspects and impacts of oil and gas activities resulting from these lease sales or the States bordering the Gulf of Mexico. The volume continues with Environmental Consequences; Consultation and Coordination; Bibliography and Special References; Preparers; Glossary; and the Appendices

  12. Final Environmental Statement related to the operation of Perry Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2 Docket Nos. 50-440 and 50-441, Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1982-08-01

    The information in this Final Environmental Statement is the second assessment of the environmental impact associated with the construction and operation of the Perry Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2, located on Lake Erie in Lake County, about 11 km (7 mi) northeast of Painesville, Ohio. The first assessment was the Final Environmental Statement related to the construction of the plant issued in April 1974, prior to issuance of the construction permits (CPRR-148 and CPPR-149). Plant construction for Unit 1 is currently about 83% complete, and Unit 2 about 43% complete. Fuel loading for Units 1 and 2 currently estimated by the licensee (Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company) for November 1983, with Unit 2 fuel load scheduled for May 1987. The present assessment is the result of the NRC staff review of the activities associated with the proposed operation of the plant

  13. Beverley project: draft environmental impact statement

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1982-07-01

    The Beverley deposit is located on the northern Lake Frome Plains, South Australia, 520km north of Adelaide. It is proposed to mine the deposit by in-situ leaching and to process the solution on the surface to produce an estimated 11,600t of yellowcake from about 6 million tonnes of 0.27% ore over approximately 23 years. The draft environmental impact statement is intended to cover all stages of the development from the pilot plant to final rehabilitation. Sections include the existing environment (geology, climate and meteorology, soils, hydrology, ecology, radionuclide base levels, land use, population and sites of Aboriginal and archaeological significance), the proposed development (solution mining, waste management, water management and mining and processing options), rehabilitation, environmental impact and environmental management and monitoring

  14. Gulf of Mexico Sales 139 and 141: Central and western planning areas. Final environmental impact statement. Volume 1: Sections 1 through 4.C. Final report

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1991-10-01

    The report is Volume I of two volumes. The EIS is a description of the environmental aspects and impacts of oil and gas activities resulting from these lease sales or the States bordering the Gulf of Mexico. It provides a description of the areas, the affected environment, and the environmental consequences; it describes the proposed actions, issues and areas of concern, and the major differences of holding these lease sales

  15. 78 FR 13082 - Draft Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Statement...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2013-02-26

    ...The Bureau of Reclamation has made available for public review and comment the draft Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Statement (EIR/EIS/EIS) for the Upper Truckee River Restoration and Marsh Restoration Project (Project). The California Tahoe Conservancy and the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency, the other lead agencies for the Project, made the EIR/EIS/EIS available to the public on February 8, 2013.

  16. Gulf of Mexico sales 157 and 161: Central and Western Planning areas. Final environmental impact statement: Volume 2, Sections IV.D through IX

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1995-01-01

    This volume of the environmental impact statement for sales in the Gulf of Mexico presents information dealing with impacts on the costal regions due to planned operations of the petroleum industry. Topics discussed include: impacts on sensitive coastal environments; coastal barrier beaches and associated dunes; wetlands; offshore resources; water quality; air quality; impacts to aquatic environments; impacts on marine birds; impacts on archaeological resources; impacts on socioeconomic conditions; topography; and analysis of a large oil spill

  17. Final environmental impact statement for the continued operation of the Pantex Plant and associated storage of nuclear weapon components. Volume 3 -- Comment response

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1996-11-01

    The Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the continued operation of Pantex Plant was published in March 1996. The document assessed the alternatives of no action, relocation of the storage of plutonium components resulting from nuclear weapon disassemble activities at Pantex Plant to another site, and the proposed action (preferred alternative) of continuing operations and increasing the quantity of pits in interim storage at Pantex Plant. This report contains the comments and responses received on the Draft EIS

  18. 7 CFR 1955.136 - Environmental Assessment (EA) and Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-01-01

    ... 7 Agriculture 14 2010-01-01 2009-01-01 true Environmental Assessment (EA) and Environmental Impact... Disposal of Inventory Property General § 1955.136 Environmental Assessment (EA) and Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). (a) Prior to a final decision on some disposal actions, an environmental assessment must be...

  19. Decontamination and disposal of radioactive wastes resulting from the March 28, 1979 accident, Three-Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 2, Pennsylvania-Docket No. 50-320 (final supplement 2 to the final environmental impact statement of March 1981)

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1987-06-01

    Implementation of actions necessary for decontamination of the facility, defueling of the reactor, and disposition of the radioactive wastes that resulted from the accident on March 28, 1979 at Unit 2 of the Three-Mile Island Nuclear Station in Dauphin County, Pennsylvania are discussed. This second final supplement to the final environmental impact statement, filed in March 1981 on facility decontamination, reevaluates the environmental impacts of accident-generated water disposal alternatives, using more complete and current information. This supplement also includes a specific evaluation of the recently submitted proposal for water disposition. The project would alleviate a radiological hazard that threatens the well-being of the surrounding population and downstream communities. Risks to the general public have been estimated to be very small fractions of the estimated normal incidence of cancer fatalities and genetic disorders. The most significant potential impact is the risk of physical injury associated with transportation accidents. Social impacts during the operation could result in reduced property values, competition between the work force and tourists for temporary housing, and congestion of local traffic arteries. Some psychological stress would experienced by area residents. Economic effects could include increased electricity rates, reduced tourism, and possible resistance to consumption of area goods that consumers might mistakenly think are contaminated

  20. Midland Plant, Units 1 and 2 (Docket Nos. 50-329 and 50-330): Draft supplement to the Final environmental statement

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1977-01-01

    The Midland Plant, Units 1 and 2 is to be owned and operated by the Consumers Power Company of Michigan. The approximately 1190-acre plant is on the south of the Tittabawassee River immediately across from the Dow Chemical Company's main industrial complex which is within the Midland city limits. The site itself was, and the area south of the site is, partially wooded flat land with farming the only economically significant human activity. To the east and north within one mile of the site, the land is industrial, both developed and undeveloped. To the west, the land is used for suburban residences and light farming. The plant will utilize two pressurized-water nuclear reactor systems. The Consumers Power Company filed with AEC (now NRC) an application for construction permits and operating licenses for the Midland Plant on January 13, 1969. The Final Environmental Statement was issued in March 1972 and on December 15, 1972 construction permits were issued for the Midland Plant. On July 21, 1976, the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit handed down decisions in the generic fuel cycle rulemaking and Midland appeals ruling that nuclear waste disposal and fuel reprocessing issues had been insufficiently considered by the AEC. In addition to consideration of the fuel cycle issues, the Court of Appeals remanded Consumer Power's construction permits for Midland to the NRC for further proceedings to consider energy conservation as an alternative to plant construction, and to consider any changed circumstances concerning the need of Dow for the process steam from the Midland Plant. 10 refs., 13 tabs

  1. 78 FR 59414 - Environmental Impact Statement; King County, Washington

    Science.gov (United States)

    2013-09-26

    ... DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Highway Administration Environmental Impact Statement; King... prepare an environmental impact statement. SUMMARY: The Federal Highway Administration is issuing this notice to advise the public that an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) will be prepared for a proposed...

  2. 77 FR 25782 - Environmental Impact Statement: Madison County, IL

    Science.gov (United States)

    2012-05-01

    ... DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Highway Administration Environmental Impact Statement...: The FHWA is issuing this notice of intent to advise the public that an Environmental Impact Statement... the Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT) will prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS...

  3. Citizens' actions and environmental impact statements

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    Waelde, T.

    1975-01-01

    Above all, two kinds of citizens' participation in environmental decisions are to be considered: on the one hand the suit for damages and compensation for the purpose of internalization of external effects, and on the other hand the actions with the aim to influence character and content of public final decision cases. This is where cooperation and contributions towards state activities with more concern for the environment come into it. This sphere is investigated. Combined are the possibility of judicially arranged citizens' participation and a modern instrument of public decision: environmental impact statements. At the moment these appear to become exclusively an instrument for internal administration management. However, it is possible - this can be confirmed in comparative law - to couple this for the purpose of administration created instrument of technology assessment with citizens' actions. Therefore, the article aims to point to a solution how modern administration management through judicial mediation can orientate itself according to citizens' interests. (orig./LN) [de

  4. Final programmatic environmental impact statement related to decontamination and disposal of radioactive wastes resulting from March 28, 1979 accident, Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 2, Docket No. 50-320

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1981-03-01

    The appendices included in this report include the following: Comments on the Draft Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (A-1); Commission's Statement of Policy and Notice of Intent to Prepare a Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (B-1); 'Final Environmental Assessment for Decontamination of the Three Mile Island Unit 2 Reactor Building Atmosphere, Final NRC Staff Report,' US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, NUREG-0662, May 1980 (C-1); 'Environmental Assessment for Use of EPICOR-Il at Three Mile Island Unit 2,' US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, NUREG-0591, October 3, 1979 (D-1); Fish and Fisheries of York Haven Pond and Conowingo Pond of the Susquehanna River and Upper Chesapeake Bay (E1); Reuse of Accident Water (F-1); Engineering Considerations for Treatment of TMI-2 Accident-Generated Liquid Waste G-1); Engineering Considerations Related to Immobilization of Radioactive Wastes (H-1); Justification for Radiation Fields Used in Section 6 I-1); Economic Cost Basis (K-1); Average Individual Quarterly Dose Limits Used in Determinations of Work Force Estimates (L-1); 'Long-Term Environmental Radiation Surveillance Plan for Three Mile Island,' US Environmental Protection Agency, 1981 (M-1); Occupational Radiation Exposure during Onsite Waste Handling (N-1); Decontamination Status of Auxiliary and Fuel Handling Buildings (0-1); Chemical Systems for Decontamination of Primary System Components (P-1); Onsite Storage Facility (Q-1); Proposed Additions to Technical Specifications for TMI-2 Cleanup Program (R-1); Calculations of Discharge of Processed Accident Water to the Atmosphere (S-1); The Behavior of Sorbable Radionuclides in the Susquehanna River and Chesapeake Bay (T-1); Decommissioning of TMI-2 (U-1); Assessment of Groundwater Liquid Pathway from Leakage of Containment Water at Three Mile Island, Unit 2 (V-1); Calculation Models and Parameters Used in Estimating Doses, and Interpretation of Model Results (W-1); Contributors to the PEIS X-1); Scheduled

  5. 10 CFR 51.29 - Scoping-environmental impact statement and supplement to environmental impact statement.

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-01-01

    ... 10 Energy 2 2010-01-01 2010-01-01 false Scoping-environmental impact statement and supplement to environmental impact statement. 51.29 Section 51.29 Energy NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION (CONTINUED... Environmental Policy Act-Regulations Implementing Section 102(2) Scoping § 51.29 Scoping-environmental impact...

  6. Lucky Mc Uranium Mill. Draft environmental statement

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1977-06-01

    The Environmental Impact Statement addressed the following: the existing environment; operations; environmental impacts; environmental effects of accidents; monitoring programs and other mitigating measures; unavoidable adverse environmental impacts; relationship between short-term uses of the environment and long-term productivity; irreversible and irretrievable commitments of resources; alternatives; and NRC benefit-cost summary for the Lucky Mc Mill

  7. Final supplement to the final environmental statement related to operation of Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 2: (Docket No. 50-320)

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1976-12-01

    The proposed action is the continuation of construction permit CPPR-66 and the issuance of operating license to Metropolitan Edison Company, Jersey Central Power and Light Company, and the Pennsylvania Electric Company (the Applicants) for the operation of the Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 2, Docket No. 50-320, near Harrisburg in Dauphin County, Pennsylvania. The Three Mile Island Nuclear Station Unit Number 2 has a designed thermal rating of 2772 megawatts with a maximum electrical output of 959 megawatts. Two natural draft cooling towers are utilized for dissipating the waste heat from the closed cycle cooling system. Extension of TMINS-Bechtelsville 500 kV transmission line an additional 7.36 miles from Bechtelsville to Hosensack required acquisition of additional 175 foot wide right-of-way along an existing 150 foot wide 230 kV corridor. Construction of this line segment resulted in clearing of 21 acres of woodland, spanning over 134.5 acres of agricultural land and diverting of 0.4 acres from agriculture to use under tower bases. About 550 curies of radionuclides in liquid effluents (0.24 Ci/yr excluding tritium and 550 Ci/yr of tritium) will be released to the environment annually. Gaseous releases will be approximately 6700 Ci/yr of noble gases, 0.01 Ci/yr of iodine-131, 560 Ci/yr of tritium, 25 Ci/yr of argon-41, and 0.06 Ci/yr of particulates. No significant environmental impacts are anticipated from normal operational releases of radioactive materials. The calculated dose to the estimated year 1990 US population is less than 540 manrem/yr. This value is less than the natural fluctuation in the approximately 28,000,000 manrem/yr dose this population would receive from background radiation

  8. 32 CFR 651.23 - Environmental impact statement.

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-07-01

    ... 32 National Defense 4 2010-07-01 2010-07-01 true Environmental impact statement. 651.23 Section...) ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS OF ARMY ACTIONS (AR 200-2) Records and Documents § 651.23 Environmental impact statement. An Environmental Impact statement (EIS) is a detailed written statement required...

  9. 46 CFR 504.7 - Environmental impact statements.

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-10-01

    ... 46 Shipping 9 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false Environmental impact statements. 504.7 Section 504.7... POLICY ANALYSIS § 504.7 Environmental impact statements. (a) General. (1) An environmental impact... environmental impact statements. (1) A draft environmental impact statement (DEIS) will initially be prepared in...

  10. Final supplemental environmental impact statement/program environmental impact report for the sale of NPR-1. Sale of Naval Petroleum Reserve Number 1 (Elk Hills) Kern County, California

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1997-10-01

    The Proposed Action is the sale of all right, title and interest of the US in Naval Petroleum Reserve Number 1 (NPR-1) in accordance with the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996 (Public Law 104-106). The Proposed Action is also DOE's Preferred Alternative. DOE has determined that the sale of NPR-1 as required by Public Law 104-106 constitutes a major Federal action which may have a significant impact upon the environment within the meaning of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) and Kern County has determined that the sale could have a significant effect on the environment under the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (CEQA). Significant impacts may occur because private-sector operation of the NPR-1 oil field could result in accelerated levels of development and different types of activities than under continued government ownership. This SEIS/PEIR assesses the potential environmental impacts from the Proposed Action, a No Action Alternative under which NPR-1 would continue to be operated by DOE, and an Alternative to the Proposed Action under which some form of government control would be maintained. This document assesses the environmental impacts on: geology and soils; hazardous materials and waste management; air; water; biology; cultural and historical resources; land use; noise socioeconomics; risk assessment; energy conservation; and environmental justice

  11. Final environmental statement concerning rule making. Exemption from licensing requirements for spark-gap irradiators that contain cobalt-60. Docket No. PRM 30-54

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1977-12-01

    The potential environmental impacts and adverse environmental effects from distribution, use only in commercial-sized oil burners, and disposal of 6000 spark-gap irradiators per year that contain 60 Co are summarized. On the basis of the analysis and evaluation set forth in this statement and after weighing the environmental, economic, technical, and other benefits against environmental costs and after considering available alternatives, it is concluded that the action called for under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) and 10 CFR Part 51 is the issuance of an exemption from licensing requirements for spark-gap irradiators that contain 60 Co, subject to the following conditions for the protection of the environment: persons who apply 60 Co to, or persons who incorporate 60 Co into, spark-gap irradiators or persons who import for sale or distribution spark-gap irradiators containing 60 Co are not exempt from the requirements for a license; each spark-gap irradiator shall contain no more than 1 μCi of 60 Co; and the 60 Co shall be applied to the spark-gap irradiators for use in electrically ignited fuel-oil burners having a firing rate of at least 3 gal/h

  12. Resource Contingency Program : Draft Environmental Impact Statement.

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    United States. Bonneville Power Administration.

    1995-02-01

    In 1990, the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) embarked upon the Resource Contingency Program (RCP) to fulfill its statutory responsibilities to supply electrical power to its utility, industrial and other customers in the Pacific Northwest. Instead of buying or building generating plants now, BPA has purchased options to acquire power later if needed. Three option development agreements were signed in September 1993 with three proposed natural gas-fired, combined cycle combustion turbine CT projects near Chehalis and Satsop Washington and near Hermiston, Oregon. This environmental impact statement addresses the environmental consequences of purchasing power from these options. This environmental impact statement addresses the environmental consequences of purchasing power from these options.

  13. 22 CFR 216.7 - Environmental impact statements.

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-04-01

    ... 22 Foreign Relations 1 2010-04-01 2010-04-01 false Environmental impact statements. 216.7 Section... Environmental impact statements. (a) Applicability. An Environmental Impact Statement shall be prepared when... Environmental Impact Statement relating to paragraph (a)(2) of this section shall comply with the CEQ...

  14. Environmental impact statement - an effective tool for successful mine design

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    Sinha, A.K.

    1996-01-01

    Mining is a hazardous operation which must be designed to succeed under very unpredictable environmental, geological and marketing conditions over a committed life of thirty years or longer. It is well-established by now that mining has tremendous social, economic and environmental impacts on society in general and on local communities in particular. Mining's image has begun to improve with effective hazard controls and property reclamation through improved mine design and restoration plans. Much of the credit for this achievement should go to Environmental Impact Statement and related permitting requirements for mining projects. An Environmental Impact Statement with respect to almost every type of mining project is now frequently required by major banks, and other funding agencies, governmental agencies and/or citizen groups involved in the permitting process. This impact statement ensures that the proposed project has the potential to succeed under all foreseeable environmental, geological and marketing problems throughout its projected life and to guarantee the return of the initial capital with interest. In short, the impact statement offers assurance that the final project will culminate with positive environmental and social impacts. The relevance and contributions of Environmental Impact Statements in mine design, as well as their applications and development procedures are presented. 3 refs., 8 figs

  15. Remedial actions at the former Vitro Chemical Company site, South Salt Lake, Salt Lake County, Utah. Volume I. Text. Final Environmental Impact Statement

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1984-07-01

    This statement evaluates the environmental impacts associated with the cleanup of those residues remaining at the abandoned uranium-mill-tailings site located in South Salt Lake, Utah, and hereinafter called the Vitro site. The site is a 128-acre property owned by the Central Valley Water Reclamation Facility (CVWRP) Board which also operates a sewage treatment plant adjacent to the northern boundaries of the Vitro site. The site contains approximately 2.5 million cubic yards of contaminated residues and soil; the residues were produced by the Vitro Chemical Company of America which processed uranium ore for sale to the US Atomic Energy Commission on the site from 1951 to 1964. This statement evaluates three alternatives for minimizing the public health hazards associated with the Vitro site contaminated materials: (1) no action; (2) stabilization of the contaminated material on the Vitro site; and (3) decontamination of the Vitro site and disposal of the contaminated material at a site located about one mile south of Clive, Utah. Alternative 3 is DOE's preferred alternative. An assessment of the impacts of these three alternatives was made in terms of effects on radiation levels, air quality, soils and mineral resources, surface- and ground-water resources, ecosystems, land use, sound levels, historical and cultural resources, populations and employment, economic structures, and transportation networks

  16. Final environmental impact statement for the Nevada Test Site and off-site locations in the State of Nevada. Transportation study, Volume 1, Appendix I

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1996-08-01

    This report has been prepared to address local transportation issues concerning current and potential operations at the Nevada Test Site (NTS), to document the results of the NTS transportation risk analysis, and to provide information and supporting documentation for the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the NTS and Off-Site Locations in the State of Nevada. Four alternatives are evaluated in the NTS EIS: Alternative 1, Continue Current Operations, (No Action); Alternative 2, Discontinue Operations; Alternative 3, Expanded Use; and Alternative 4, Alternate Use of Withdrawn Lands. The transportation risk analysis estimated the health risk from highway transportation of DOE-generated low-level waste, mixed waste, and defense-related nuclear materials for each of the four alternatives

  17. Final programmatic environmental impact statement related to decontamination and disposal of radioactive wastes resulting from March 28, 1979 accident, Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 2, Docket No. 50-320

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    NONE

    1981-03-01

    A Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) related to the decontamination and disposal of radioactive wastes resulting from the March 28, 1979, accident at Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 2 (Docket No. 50-320) has been prepared by the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in response to a directive issued by the Commission on November 21, 1979. This statement is an overall study of the activities necessary for decontamination of the facility, defueling, and disposition of the radioactive wastes. The available alternatives considered ranged from implementation of full cleanup to no action other than continuing to maintain the reactor in a safe shutdown condition. Also included are comments of governmental agencies, other organizations, and the general public on the Draft PEIS on this project, and staff responses to these comments. (author)

  18. 10 CFR 51.104 - NRC proceeding using public hearings; consideration of environmental impact statement.

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-01-01

    ... environmental impact statement. 51.104 Section 51.104 Energy NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION (CONTINUED....104 NRC proceeding using public hearings; consideration of environmental impact statement. (a)(1) In... scope of NEPA and this subpart are in issue, the NRC staff may not offer the final environmental impact...

  19. Final environmental statement related to the operation of Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2: Docket Numbers 50-390 and 50-391, Tennessee Valley Authority. Supplement Number 1

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1995-04-01

    The Final Environmental Statement-Operating License (FES-OL) issued in 1978 represents the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC's) previous environmental review related to the operation of Watts Bar Nuclear (WBN) Plant. The NRC staff has determined that it is appropriate to re-examine the issues associated with the environmental review before issuance of an operating license. The purpose of this NRC review is to discuss the effects of observed changes in the environment and to evaluate the changes in environmental impacts that have occurred as a result of changes in the WBN Plant design and proposed methods of operations since the last environmental review. A full scope of environmental topics has been evaluated, including regional demography, land and water use, meteorology, terrestrial and aquatic ecology, radiological and non-radiological impacts on humans and the environment, socioeconomic impacts, and environmental justice. The staff concluded that there are no significant changes in the environmental impacts since the NRC 1978 FES-OL from changes in plant design, proposed methods of operations, or changes in the environment. The Tennessee Valley Authority's (TVA's) preoperational and operational monitoring programs were reviewed and found to be appropriate for establishing baseline conditions and ongoing assessments of environmental impacts. The staff also conducted an analysis of plant operation with severe accident mitigation design alternatives (SAMDAs) and concluded that none of the SAMDAs, beyond the three procedural changes that the TVA committed to implement, would be cost-beneficial for further mitigating environmental impacts

  20. Nuclear power plant Isar. Actualized environmental statement 2012 on the consolidated environmental statement 2010

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    2012-01-01

    The actualized environmental statement 2012 for the NPP Isar covers the following issues: Direct environmental aspects: heat dissipation to the environment, water management, radioactive matter release onto the environment, environmental monitoring, waste management, operational materials supply, radioactive materials transport, safety of the nuclear facilities, remote monitoring and information system, environmental protection, communication; indirect environmental aspects; core indicators according EMAS III, development of the environmental targets and programs, reference to the valid environmental regulations, declaration of the environmental consultant.

  1. Long-term management of liquid high-level radioactive wastes stored at the Western New York Nuclear Service Center, West Valley. Final environmental impact statement

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1982-06-01

    The statement assesses and compares environmental implications of possible alternatives for long-term management of the liquid high-level radioactive wastes stored in underground tanks at the Western New York Nuclear Service Center in West Valley, New York. Four basic alternatives, as well as options within these alternatives, have been considered in the EIS: (1) onsite processing to a terminal waste form for shipment and disposal in a federal repository (the preferred alternative); (2) onsite conversion to a solid interim form for shipment to a federal waste facility for later processing to a terminal form and shipment and subsequent disposal in a federal repository; (3) mixing the liquid wastes with cement and other additives, pouring it back into the existing tanks, and leaving onsite; and (4) no action (continued storage of the wastes in liquid form in the underground tanks at West Valley). Mitigative measures for environmental impacts have been considered for all alternatives. No significant stresses on supplies or irreversible and irretrievable resources are anticipated, and no scarce resource would be required

  2. 75 FR 25309 - Environmental Impact Statement: Cook County, IL

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-05-07

    ... DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Highway Administration Environmental Impact Statement: Cook... FHWA is issuing this Notice to advise the public that an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) will be... project comprises several elements of the overall Chicago Region Environmental and Transportation...

  3. 77 FR 25781 - Environmental Impact Statement; Washington, DC

    Science.gov (United States)

    2012-05-01

    ... DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Highway Administration Environmental Impact Statement... Columbia, Department of Transportation. ACTION: Notice of Intent to Prepare a Draft Environmental Impact... agencies and the public that a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) will be prepared to assess the...

  4. Environmental impact statement 1987. Umweltgutachten 1987

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    1988-01-01

    In its third statement after 1974 and 1978 the Council of Environmental Experts describes the state of the environment and points out misdevelopments and ways of avoiding them. The subject's complexity defies the environmental impact statement's completeness. Other than the two preceding ones the 1987 statement focuses but on selected fields and aspects. In view of the fact that the environmental policy of the late eighties and of the nineties to come requires a general, transsectoral and balanced concept the statement puts much care into a comprehensive discussion of the basic traits of a general environmental policy. The characteristics worked out are applicable to any environmental sector and include man's consciousness of the environment and his behaviour towards it, active pollution abatement, economic aspects, and the structure of pollution sources in the Federal Republic of Germany. While the sectors of pollution control include ground and air pollution abatement the selected fields comprise environment and health, energy, transportation, regional planning, and recreation and tourism. (orig./HSCH).

  5. 76 FR 50212 - Site-Wide Environmental Impact Statement for Sandia National Laboratories, New Mexico (SNL/NM)

    Science.gov (United States)

    2011-08-12

    ... Environmental Impact Statement for Sandia National Laboratories, New Mexico (DOE/EIS-0281-SA-04), DOE/NNSA... Environmental Impact Statement for Sandia National Laboratories, New Mexico for the Installation of a Petawatt..., New Mexico Final Supplement Analysis for the Site-Wide Environmental Impact Statement (2006 SNL/NM...

  6. Final environmental impact statement for the Nevada Test Site and off-site locations in the State of Nevada. American Indian Assessments. Volume 1, Appendix G

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1996-08-01

    The Native American Resource Document is a summary of opinions expressed by the Consolidated Group of Tribes and Organizations (CGTO) regarding the Environmental Impact Statement for the Nevada Test Site and Other Off-Site Locations within the State of Nevada (NTS EIS). The document contains (a) general concerns regarding long-term impacts of the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) operations on the NTS and (b) a synopsis of specific comments made by the American Indian Writers Subgroup (AIWS) for various chapters of the NTS EIS. The Native American Resource Document was produced in response to consultation required for the NTS EIS, in accordance with DOE Order 1230.2, American Indian Tribal Government Policy. The consultation focused specifically on four alternative management decisions concerning the future mission of the NTS and related off-site locations in Nevada. However, the present CGTO's response to this consultation is not limited to EIS alternatives, but also integrates relevant recommendations made by Indian people for previous DOE projects in which American Indians participated

  7. Gulf of Mexico OCS oil and gas lease sales 171, 174, 177, and 180 - Western Planning Area. Final environmental impact statement

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1998-05-01

    The Minerals Management Service proposes to hold annual oil and gas lease sales in the Western Planning Area (WPA) of the Gulf of Mexico Outer Continental Shelf (OCS). The proposed actions are the Western Gulf sales scheduled in the Outer Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Leasing Program: 1997-2002 (Sale 171 in 1998, Sale 174 in 1999, Sale 177 in 2000, and Sale 180 in 2001). This environmental impact statement (EIS) serves as a decision document for proposed Sale 171. This document includes the purpose and background of the proposed actions, identification of the alternatives, description of the affected environment, and an analysis of the potential environmental impacts of the proposed actions, alternatives, and associated activities, including proposed mitigating measures and their potential effects. Potential contributions to cumulative impacts resulting from activities associated with the proposed actions are also analyzed. Each of the proposed actions will offer for lease all unleased blocks in the Western Planning Area of the Gulf of Mexico OCS, with the exclusion of the East and West Flower Garden Banks (Blocks A-375 and A-398 in the High Island Area, East Addition, South Extension) and three blocks used for Naval mine warfare testing and training (Blocks 793, 799, and 816 in the Mustang Island Area). Additionally, discussions between the United States and Mexico regarding tracts beyond the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone are ongoing and may result in the deferral of those tracts for Sale 171 (approximately 277 tracts) in the open-quotes Northern Portion of the Western Gapclose quotes (Figure 1-1). Additional copies of this EIS and the referenced visuals may be obtained from the MMS, Gulf of Mexico OCS Region, Public Information Office (MS 5034), 1201 Elmwood Park Boulevard, New Orleans, Louisiana 70123-2394, or by telephone at I-800-200-GULF

  8. 40 CFR 6.207 - Environmental impact statements.

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-07-01

    ... 40 Protection of Environment 1 2010-07-01 2010-07-01 false Environmental impact statements. 6.207... ACTIONS EPA's NEPA Environmental Review Procedures § 6.207 Environmental impact statements. (a) The Responsible Official will prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) (see 40 CFR 1508.11) for major...

  9. 40 CFR 1508.11 - Environmental impact statement.

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-07-01

    ... 40 Protection of Environment 32 2010-07-01 2010-07-01 false Environmental impact statement. 1508.11 Section 1508.11 Protection of Environment COUNCIL ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY TERMINOLOGY AND INDEX § 1508.11 Environmental impact statement. Environmental impact statement means a detailed written...

  10. 7 CFR 1794.61 - Environmental impact statement.

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-01-01

    ... 7 Agriculture 12 2010-01-01 2010-01-01 false Environmental impact statement. 1794.61 Section 1794..., DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE (CONTINUED) ENVIRONMENTAL POLICIES AND PROCEDURES Procedure for Environmental Impact Statements § 1794.61 Environmental impact statement. An EIS shall be prepared in accordance with...

  11. Environmental impact statement analysis: dose methodology

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    Mueller, M.A.; Strenge, D.L.; Napier, B.A.

    1981-01-01

    Standardized sections and methodologies are being developed for use in environmental impact statements (EIS) for activities to be conducted on the Hanford Reservation. Five areas for standardization have been identified: routine operations dose methodologies, accident dose methodology, Hanford Site description, health effects methodology, and socioeconomic environment for Hanford waste management activities

  12. Environmental Statement. Oswego Steam Station. Unit 5.

    Science.gov (United States)

    1971-12-27

    of the draft environmental statement was conducted and found to be in accord with the requirements set forth in the Environmental Policy Act of 1969...furnishcd by the Government or through GovernraenT- cncd facilities for the use of the liconse, inclumire the liccnzee’s proportionate share of the cost of...Commerce, Bureau of the Census I4 Osweqo, N.Y.. Greater Oswego Chamber of Commerce, Inc. IJ 15 Land Use and Transportation Plan - Policies for- Action

  13. Draft supplement to the final environmental statement related to the decommissioning of the Rare Earths Facility, West Chicago, Illinois (Docket No. 40-2061): Kerr-McGee Chemical Corporation

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1987-06-01

    This Draft Supplemental Environmental Statement (DSES) assesses the impacts of permanent disposal of wastes located at the Kerr-McGee Rare Earths Facility in West Chicago, Illinois. The assessments presented in the DSES augment and update those described in the Final Environmental Statement (FES) that was issued by the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in May 1983. In this DSES, additional alternative sites are analyzed, the analysis is more detailed, and the NRC expressly considers the suitability of these sites for permanent waste disposal. The analysis describes the Proposed Action, which is permanent disposal of the wastes in an above-grade disposal cell at the West Chicago site, and four alternatives for permanent disposal at other sites in Illinois. The four alternatives are: Alternative A, disposal at an active surface coal mine in a deep-trench disposal cell; Alternative B, disposal in a reclaimed surface coal mine in a deep-trench disposal cell; Alternative C, disposal in an underground coal mine in a worked-out panel; and Alternative D, disposal on a farmland site in a partially above-grade disposal cell. The environmental issues considered in the impact assessment are topography, air quality, socioeconomics, land resources, archaeology, mineral resources, water resources, ecology, and radiation exposure. A cost-benefit analysis of the Proposed Action and its alternatives is also presented. Based on the information and analysis given within this DSES, the NRC concluded that the Proposed Action is the preferred course of action

  14. Remedial actions at the former Vitro Rare Metals plant site, Canonsburg, Washington County, Pennsylvania. Final Environmental Impact Statement. Volume II. Appendices

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    1983-07-01

    This report provides a summary of the conceptual design and other information necessary to understand the proposed remedial action at the expanded Canonsburg, Pennsylvania site. This design constitutes the current approach to stabilizing the radioactively contaminated materials in place in a manner that would fully protect the public health and environment. This summary is intended to provide sufficient detail for the reader to understand the proposed remedial action and the anticipated environmental impacts. The site conceptual design has been developed using available data. In some cases, elements of the design have not been developed fully and will be made final during the detailed design process.

  15. Remedial actions at the former Vitro Rare Metals plant site, Canonsburg, Washington County, Pennsylvania. Final Environmental Impact Statement. Volume II. Appendices

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1983-07-01

    This report provides a summary of the conceptual design and other information necessary to understand the proposed remedial action at the expanded Canonsburg, Pennsylvania site. This design constitutes the current approach to stabilizing the radioactively contaminated materials in place in a manner that would fully protect the public health and environment. This summary is intended to provide sufficient detail for the reader to understand the proposed remedial action and the anticipated environmental impacts. The site conceptual design has been developed using available data. In some cases, elements of the design have not been developed fully and will be made final during the detailed design process

  16. 78 FR 46677 - Environmental Impact Statement; Calcasieu Parish, LA

    Science.gov (United States)

    2013-08-01

    ... DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Highway Administration Environmental Impact Statement...: The Federal Highway Administration is issuing this notice to advise the public that an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) will be prepared for a proposed transportation project in Calcasieu Parish...

  17. The Bonneville Power Administration new energy-efficient homes programs: Final environmental impact statement: Volume 1, Assessing indoor air quality options

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1988-03-01

    BPA has underway marketing and incentive programs to encourage the construction of new energy-efficient homes that comply with Model Conservation Standards (MCS) developed by the Northwest Power Planning Council. These homes are designed to have lower infiltration rates than current building practices provide, which is likely to contribute to increased levels of indoor air pollutants, and may adversely affect the health of occupants. BPA's current and past new homes programs maintained ventilation rates comparable to those found in current practice homes by requiring balanced mechanical ventilation. BPA now proposes to give builders and consumers more flexibility by increasing the options for protecting indoor air quality in its new homes programs. This proposal is the impetus for this Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), which was prepared for BPA by Pacific Northwest Laboratory. BPS is preparing this EIS to assess whether other techniques maintain indoor air quality comparable to that found in homes built using current practices. Although many pollutants are potentially of great concern, our analysis concentrates on radon and formaldehyde. It is based on measured concentrations of these pollutants and measured ventilation rates in current practice. Ventilation was measured using fan pressurization tests, which measure only air leakage, and perfluorocarbon tracer gas (PFT) tests, which account for ventilation from mechanical devices and occupant behavior in addition to air leakage. These tests yielded two different estimates. We used these data to estimate pollutant concentrations and lifetime cancer rates under three alternative actions. Under all of the alternatives, radon had a much greater effect than formaldehyde. 102 refs

  18. 78 FR 12353 - Winter Use Plan, Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, Yellowstone National Park

    Science.gov (United States)

    2013-02-22

    ...] Winter Use Plan, Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, Yellowstone National Park AGENCY: National... Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) for a Winter Use Plan for Yellowstone National... link to the 2012 Supplemental Winter Use Plan EIS), and at Yellowstone National Park headquarters...

  19. Lepreau 2 environmental impact statement

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1984-05-01

    Maritime Nuclear, a joint undertaking of Atomic Energy of Canada Limited and the New Brunswick Electric Power Commission, proposes to construct a second CANDU 600 MW nuclear-powered generating unit at the site of the existing Point Lepreau Generating Station, in New Brunswick. A feasibility study is now underway and guidelines issued by the Lepreau 2 Environmental Assessment Panel identified six priority issues and concerns. These are: impacts on the biological environment, impacts of radiation on humans, impacts on the socio-economic environment, monitoring, emergency planning, and decommissioning. These factors as well as a description of the site and proposed facility are described in this report

  20. 76 FR 53531 - Environmental Impact Statement: Hancock County, MS

    Science.gov (United States)

    2011-08-26

    ...)] Environmental Impact Statement: Hancock County, MS AGENCY: Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), Department Of... that an environmental impact statement will be prepared for a proposed highway project in Hancock... an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the proposed widening and/or realignment of State Route...

  1. 39 CFR 775.11 - Environmental impact statements.

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-07-01

    ... 39 Postal Service 1 2010-07-01 2010-07-01 false Environmental impact statements. 775.11 Section... POLICY ACT PROCEDURES § 775.11 Environmental impact statements. (a) Determining scope. Before an environmental impact statement is prepared, the following procedures must be followed to determine what issues...

  2. 76 FR 13017 - Environmental Impact Statement: Los Angeles County, CA

    Science.gov (United States)

    2011-03-09

    ... DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Highway Administration Environmental Impact Statement: Los... to advise the public that a Draft Environmental Impact Statement will be prepared for a proposed... prepare a Draft Environmental Impact Statement on a proposal for the State Route 710 Gap North Closure...

  3. 77 FR 20690 - Environmental Impact Statement: Albuquerque, New Mexico

    Science.gov (United States)

    2012-04-05

    ... DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Highway Administration Environmental Impact Statement.... SUMMARY: The FHWA is rescinding the notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement for the... rescinding the Notice of Intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the proposed...

  4. Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for F-35 Beddown at Eglin Air Force Base, Florida

    Science.gov (United States)

    2014-06-26

    IFR instrument flight rules IJTS Initial Joint Training Site ILLUM Illuminating ILS Instrument Landing System IMPLAN an economic impact modeling...Final Supplemental ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT FOR F-35 BEDDOWN AT EGLIN AIR FORCE BASE, FLORIDA JANUARY 2014 Report Documentation Page Form...Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 3. DATES COVERED 00-00-2011 to 00-00-2014 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE Final Supplemental Environmental Impact

  5. Lepreau 2 environmental impact statement. Supplemental information

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1984-09-01

    This report contains supplemental information to the Environmental Impact Statement that was issued on the proposed second nuclear generating station Point Lepreau-2 in New Brunswick, Canada. Some issues dealt with here are the terrestrial and aquatic impacts of radioactive and thermal releases to the environment, radiation safety for the human population, socio-economic impacts on the region in regards to housing, social services and employment, and monitoring programs for all aspects of the development, construction and operation of the plant

  6. 21 CFR 25.42 - Environmental impact statements.

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-04-01

    ... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2010-04-01 2010-04-01 false Environmental impact statements. 25.42 Section 25... ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT CONSIDERATIONS Preparation of Environmental Documents § 25.42 Environmental impact... be a clear, concise, and detailed written statement describing: (1) The environmental impacts of a...

  7. Remedial actions at the former Vanadium Corporation of America uranium mill site, Durango, La Plata County, Colorado. Volume II. Appendices. Final Environmental Impact Statement

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1985-10-01

    Volume 2 contains the following: addendums to Appendices A - Conceptual Designs and Engineering Evaluations for Remedial Action Alternative 3b, D - Meteorological and Air-Quality Information, F - Water Resources Information, H - Radiological Information, I - Information on Populations, Socioeconomics, and Land Use; Appendix K - List of Agencies, Organizations, and Persons Receiving Copies of this Statement; Appendix L - Wildlife Mitigation Plan; Appendix M - Seismic Evaluation; Appendix N - Tourism Evaluation; and Appendix O - Permits, Licenses, and Approvals

  8. Environmental impact statement requirements for CNEA

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    Ciurciolo, Melisa N.; Mender, J. A.

    2009-01-01

    The purpose of this paper is to describe the legal framework on Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) regarding the activities of the National Atomic Energy Commission (Comision Nacional de Energia Atomica, CNEA), and particularly, the Procedure for Internal Management of Environmental Impact Statements of CNEA (PN-PR-027). According to the distribution of powers stated in article 41 of the National Constitution, the environmental legal framework is constituted by National minimum standards for environmental protection and complementary provincial and municipal regulations. As a result, the EIA legal framework is not uniform across the Nation, and therefore, it differs according to the jurisdiction in which the activity subject to EIA is developed. Notwithstanding, the General Statute of the Environment (25.675) requires EIA for any project or activity developed in the National territory, which may cause a significant degradation to the environment, any of its components, or affect the populations' quality of life in a significant way. Since CNEA develops activities along the National territory, it is not possible to determine a uniform legal EIA framework for the entire Institution. Consequently, the binding requirements for Environmental Impact Statements (EISs) of CNEA activities differ among the activities developed in the different locations and atomic centers. In order to achieve a uniform environmental performance in CNEA, it has been considered necessary to uniform, in the internal sphere, the binding requirements for EIS, by means of a procedure written within the framework of the Environmental Management System of the Institution. The purpose of the Procedure for Internal Management of Environmental Impact Statements is to determine the requirements to be complied by the atomic centers, locations and enterprises associated with CNEA, regarding EIS Management. This Procedure shall apply to those projects and activities subjected to EIA, according to a

  9. 76 FR 53453 - Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability

    Science.gov (United States)

    2011-08-26

    ... ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-8998-7] Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of....epa.gov/compliance/nepa/ . Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements. Filed 08/15/2011 through... Lease Sale 193, Revised Information, Analyzing the Environmental Impact of Natural Gas Development and...

  10. 32 CFR 989.16 - Environmental impact statement.

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-07-01

    ... 32 National Defense 6 2010-07-01 2010-07-01 false Environmental impact statement. 989.16 Section... PROTECTION ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS PROCESS (EIAP) § 989.16 Environmental impact statement. (a) Certain classes of environmental impacts normally require preparation of an EIS (40 CFR 1501.4). These include...

  11. 78 FR 75919 - Environmental Impact Statements; Notice of Availability

    Science.gov (United States)

    2013-12-13

    ... ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-9012-5] Environmental Impact Statements; Notice of....epa.gov/compliance/nepa/ . Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements filed 12/02/2013 through... Railroad Relocation Planning and Environmental Study, Review Period Ends: 01/13/2014, Contact: John Winkle...

  12. 24 CFR 58.37 - Environmental impact statement determinations.

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-04-01

    ... 24 Housing and Urban Development 1 2010-04-01 2010-04-01 false Environmental impact statement... Classification § 58.37 Environmental impact statement determinations. (a) An EIS is required when the project is... and Urban Development ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR ENTITIES ASSUMING HUD ENVIRONMENTAL...

  13. 77 FR 49792 - Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability

    Science.gov (United States)

    2012-08-17

    ... ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-9004-5] Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of....epa.gov/compliance/nepa/ . Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements Filed 08/06/2012 Through..., USFS, CA, On Top Hazardous Fuels Reduction Project, To Disclose the Environmental Effects of a Federal...

  14. 21 CFR 25.52 - Environmental impact statements.

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-04-01

    ... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2010-04-01 2010-04-01 false Environmental impact statements. 25.52 Section 25... ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT CONSIDERATIONS Public Participation and Notification of Environmental Documents § 25.52 Environmental impact statements. (a) If FDA determines that an EIS is necessary for an action involving...

  15. 77 FR 40144 - Adoption of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and Participation in the Section 106...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2012-07-06

    ...) obligations related to MTA's request for financing for the East Side Access project through the FRA Railroad... Statement (EIS) and Participation in the Section 106 Programmatic Agreement for the East Side Access Project... adoption and recirculation of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the East Side Access Project and...

  16. Final environmental impact statement for standards for the control of byproduct materials from uranium ore processing (40 CFR 192). Volume 1

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1983-09-01

    The Environmental Protection Agency is establishing public health and environmental standards (40 CFR 192) for uranium and thorium mill tailings at licensed mill sites under the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978 (PL. 95-604). Mills are currently located in Colorado, New Mexico, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, Washington and Wyoming. These standards are issued to reduce and control the hazards associated with uranium and thorium mill Tailings. Controls are required both during the operational period of mills and for disposal of the tailings piles, to assure environmentally sound, long-term protection of public health and stabilization of the tailings

  17. Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) Activities on White Sands Missile Range, New Mexico. Volume 1

    National Research Council Canada - National Science Library

    2007-01-01

    ...) activities at White Sands Missile Range (WSMR), New Mexico. It addresses future DTRA testing activities and expands on the current testing parameters addressed in existing National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documents...

  18. Benchmarking performance: Environmental impact statements in Egypt

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    Badr, El-Sayed A.; Zahran, Ashraf A.; Cashmore, Matthew

    2011-01-01

    Environmental impact assessment (EIA) was formally introduced in Egypt in 1994. This short paper evaluates 'how well' the EIA process is working in practice in Egypt, by reviewing the quality of 45 environmental impact statements (EISs) produced between 2000 and 2007 for a variety of project types. The Lee and Colley review package was used to assess the quality of the selected EISs. About 69% of the EISs sampled were found to be of a satisfactory quality. An assessment of the performance of different elements of the EIA process indicates that descriptive tasks tend to be performed better than scientific tasks. The quality of core elements of EIA (e.g., impact prediction, significance evaluation, scoping and consideration of alternatives) appears to be particularly problematic. Variables that influence the quality of EISs are identified and a number of broad recommendations are made for improving the effectiveness of the EIA system.

  19. Manual: environmental impact statement and intervention regulation

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    Neumann, K.

    1992-01-01

    In order to be able to fulfil also legally the important tasks of environmental protection and natural preservation in the last ten years numerous legal provisions have been issued. Many of these laws require that the environmental impact of projects and constructional measures is taken into account to a higher degree. Two important instruments in this connection are the impact statement and the intervention regulation of natural preservation. Their importance and consequences for the planning and realization of projects are until now not sufficiently know. This manual is to fill this gap. This booklet shall help builder-owners and investors to realize their building projects in a way which is compatible with the environment. For architects and planners information is given in this manual about the requirements to be fulfilled in the individual planning and licensing procedures. The booklet is structured in a way that builder-owners, consultants and authorities find quickly the information needed. (orig./KW) [de

  20. Final generic environmental statement on the use of recycle plutonium in mixed oxide fuel in light water cooled reactors. Volume 4

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1976-08-01

    Information concerning the use of plutonium recycle in water cooled reactors is presented under the following chapter headings: probable adverse environmental effects that cannot be avoided; means for mitigating adverse environmental effects; alternative dispositions of plutonium; relationship between local short term uses of man's environment and the maintenance and enhancement of long term productivity; irreversible and irretrievable commitments of resources; and economic analysis and cost-benefit balancing

  1. 78 FR 70041 - Environmental Impact Statements; Notice of Availability

    Science.gov (United States)

    2013-11-22

    ... ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-9012-2] Environmental Impact Statements; Notice of Availability Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General Information (202) 564-7146 or http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/ . Weekly Receipt of Environmental Impact Statements Filed 11/11/2013 through 11/15/2013. Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9....

  2. 78 FR 73524 - Environmental Impact Statements; Notice of Availability

    Science.gov (United States)

    2013-12-06

    ... ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-9012-4] Environmental Impact Statements; Notice of Availability RESPONSIBLE AGENCY: Office of Federal Activities, General Information (202) 564-7146 or http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/ Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements Filed 11/25/2013 Through 11/29/2013 Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9. Notice...

  3. 78 FR 67140 - Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability

    Science.gov (United States)

    2013-11-08

    ... ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-9011-8] Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General Information (202) 564-7146 or http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/ . Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements Filed 10/28/2013 Through 11/01/2013, Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9....

  4. 78 FR 63977 - Environmental Impact Statements; Notice of Availability

    Science.gov (United States)

    2013-10-25

    ... ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-9011-6] Environmental Impact Statements; Notice of Availability Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General Information (202) 564-7146 or http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/ . Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements Filed 09/30/2013 Through 10/18/2013 Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9....

  5. 78 FR 52524 - Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability

    Science.gov (United States)

    2013-08-23

    ... ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-9010-7] Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General Information (202) 564-7146 or http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/ Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements Filed 08/12/2013 Through 08/16/2013 Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9. Notic...

  6. 78 FR 69665 - Environmental Impact Statements; Notice of Availability

    Science.gov (United States)

    2013-11-20

    ... ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-9011-9] Environmental Impact Statements; Notice of Availability Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General Information (202) 564-7146 or http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/ . Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements. Filed 11/04/2013 through 11/08/2013. Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9....

  7. 78 FR 16500 - Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability

    Science.gov (United States)

    2013-03-15

    ... ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-9008-2] Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General Information (202) 564-7146 or http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/ . Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements Filed 03/04/2013 Through...

  8. 78 FR 26027 - Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability

    Science.gov (United States)

    2013-05-03

    ... ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-9008-9] Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General Information (202) 564-7146 or http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/ . Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements Filed 04/22/2013 Through...

  9. 78 FR 21938 - Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability

    Science.gov (United States)

    2013-04-12

    ... ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-9008-6] Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General Information (202) 564-7146 or http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/ . Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements Filed 04/01/2013 Through...

  10. 78 FR 2397 - Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability

    Science.gov (United States)

    2013-01-11

    ... ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-9007-1] Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General Information (202) 564-7146 or http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/ . Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements Filed 12/31/2012 Through...

  11. 75 FR 63469 - Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-10-15

    ... ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-8993-2] Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of....epa.gov/compliance/nepa/ . Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements Filed 10/4/2010 through.../2010, Contact: David Arrasmith, 530-478- 6220. EIS No. 20100405, Draft EIS, USFS, MT, Beaver Creek...

  12. 77 FR 9652 - Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability

    Science.gov (United States)

    2012-02-17

    ... ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-9001-6] Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of....epa.gov/compliance/nepa/ Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements Filed 02/06/2012 Through 02..., Development, and Production of Mineral and Energy Resources and Reclamation of Activities, Beaver, Garfield...

  13. 76 FR 65509 - Environmental Impact Statements; Notice of Availability

    Science.gov (United States)

    2011-10-21

    ... ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-8999-6] Environmental Impact Statements; Notice of....epa.gov/compliance/nepa/ . Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements. Filed 10/10/2011 Through... Mineral and Energy Resources and Reclamation of Activities, Beaver, Garfield, Iron, Juab, Millard, Piute...

  14. 77 FR 60986 - Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability

    Science.gov (United States)

    2012-10-05

    ... ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-9005-4] Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of....epa.gov/compliance/nepa/ . Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements Filed 09/24/2012 through... and Special-Use-Permit by AFS, Sevier, Millard, Iron, Beaver, and Washington Counties, UT, Review...

  15. 77 FR 25165 - Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability

    Science.gov (United States)

    2012-04-27

    ... ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-9002-7] Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of....epa.gov/compliance/nepa/ . Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements filed 04/16/2012 through...-Specific Impacts Associated with the Plan of Operations, Sweetwater County, WY, Comment Period Ends: 06/11...

  16. 78 FR 43200 - Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability

    Science.gov (United States)

    2013-07-19

    ... ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-9010-2] Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General Information (202) 564-7146 or http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/ . Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements Filed 07/08/2013 Through...

  17. 23 CFR 771.123 - Draft environmental impact statements.

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-04-01

    ... 23 Highways 1 2010-04-01 2010-04-01 false Draft environmental impact statements. 771.123 Section... ENVIRONMENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AND RELATED PROCEDURES § 771.123 Draft environmental impact statements. (a) A... significant impacts on the environment. When the applicant, after consultation with any project sponsor that...

  18. 76 FR 45554 - Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability

    Science.gov (United States)

    2011-07-29

    ... ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-8998-2] Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General Information (202) 564-1399 or http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/ . Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements Filed 07/18/2011 Through...

  19. 76 FR 62405 - Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability

    Science.gov (United States)

    2011-10-07

    ... ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-8999-4] Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability AGENCY: Office of Federal Activities, EPA. General Information (202) 564-1399 or http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/ . Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements Filed 09/26/2011 Through 09...

  20. 76 FR 65775 - Environmental Impact Statement: Harris County, Texas

    Science.gov (United States)

    2011-10-24

    ... DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Highway Administration Environmental Impact Statement: Harris... (TxDOT) are issuing this notice to advise the public that an environmental impact statement (EIS) will..., Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) and the National Environmental Policy...

  1. 77 FR 44234 - Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability

    Science.gov (United States)

    2012-07-27

    ... ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-9004-2] Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of....epa.gov/compliance/nepa/ . Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements Filed 07/16/2012 through... Analyze the Site-Specific Impacts Associated with the Plan of Operations, Sweetwater County, WY, Review...

  2. 78 FR 78955 - Environmental Impact Statements; Notice of Availability

    Science.gov (United States)

    2013-12-27

    ... ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-9012-7] Environmental Impact Statements; Notice of Availability Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General Information (202) 564-7146 or http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/ Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements filed 12/16/2013 through 12...

  3. 76 FR 63922 - Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability

    Science.gov (United States)

    2011-10-14

    ... ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-8999-5] Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General Information (202) 564-1399 or http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/ . Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements Filed 10/03/2011 Through...

  4. 77 FR 2060 - Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability

    Science.gov (United States)

    2012-01-13

    ... ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-9001-1] Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability RESPONSIBLE AGENCY: Office of Federal Activities, General Information (202) 564-7146 or http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/ . Weekly Receipt of Environmental Impact Statements Filed 01/03/2012 Through...

  5. 78 FR 32645 - Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability

    Science.gov (United States)

    2013-05-31

    ... ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-9009-4] Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability RESPONSIBLE AGENCY: Office of Federal Activities, General Information (202) 564-7146 or http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/ . Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements Filed 05/20/2013 Through...

  6. 75 FR 69434 - Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-11-12

    ... ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-8993-6] Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General Information (202) 564-1399 or http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/ . Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements Filed 11/01/2010 Through...

  7. 77 FR 793 - Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability

    Science.gov (United States)

    2012-01-06

    ... ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-9000-9] Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General Information (202) 564-1399 or http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/ . Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements Filed 12/27/2011 through...

  8. 77 FR 74479 - Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability

    Science.gov (United States)

    2012-12-14

    ... ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-9006-5] Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of....epa.gov/compliance/nepa/ . Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements Filed 12/03/2012 Through... Transit Project, Construction-Related Potential Impacts on Business Revenue, St. Paul and Twin Cities...

  9. 77 FR 46433 - Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability

    Science.gov (United States)

    2012-08-03

    ... ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-9004-3] Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General Information (202) 564-7146 or http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/ . Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements Filed 07/23/2012 Through...

  10. 75 FR 65320 - Environmental Impact Statements; Notice of Availability

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-10-22

    ... ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-8993-3] Environmental Impact Statements; Notice of Availability Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General Information (202) 564-1399 or http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/ . Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements Filed 10/11/2010 Through...

  11. 77 FR 62235 - Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability

    Science.gov (United States)

    2012-10-12

    ... ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-9005-5] Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General Information (202) 564-7146 or http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/ . Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements Filed 10/01/2012 Through...

  12. 76 FR 76972 - Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability

    Science.gov (United States)

    2011-12-09

    ... ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-9000-4] Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General Information (202) 564-1399 or http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/ . Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements Filed 11/28/2011 through...

  13. 77 FR 56840 - Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability

    Science.gov (United States)

    2012-09-14

    ... ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-9005-1] Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General Information (202) 564-7146 or http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/ . Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements. Filed 09/03/2012 Through...

  14. 78 FR 5439 - Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability

    Science.gov (United States)

    2013-01-25

    ... ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-9007-3] Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General Information (202) 564-7146 or http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/ . Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements Filed 01/14/2013 Through...

  15. 10 CFR 1021.310 - Environmental impact statements.

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-01-01

    ... 10 Energy 4 2010-01-01 2010-01-01 false Environmental impact statements. 1021.310 Section 1021.310 Energy DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY (GENERAL PROVISIONS) NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT IMPLEMENTING PROCEDURES Implementing Procedures § 1021.310 Environmental impact statements. DOE shall prepare and...

  16. 77 FR 55213 - Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability

    Science.gov (United States)

    2012-09-07

    ... ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-9004-9] Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of....epa.gov/compliance/nepa/ . Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements Filed 08/27/2012 through... Conditions by Reducing Road-Related Impacts to Wildlife, Fish, Soil, and Water Resources and Restoration of...

  17. 78 FR 20632 - Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability

    Science.gov (United States)

    2013-04-05

    ... ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-9008-5] Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General Information (202) 564-7146 or http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/ . Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements Filed 03/25/2013 Through...

  18. 78 FR 37539 - Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability

    Science.gov (United States)

    2013-06-21

    ... ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-9009-7] Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General Information (202) 564-7146 or http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/ . Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements Filed 06/10/2013 Through...

  19. 78 FR 20714 - Environmental Impact Statement: Cook County, Illinois

    Science.gov (United States)

    2013-04-05

    ... DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Highway Administration Environmental Impact Statement: Cook... Department of Transportation, is preparing an environmental impact statement (EIS) on a proposal to improve.... SUMMARY: The FHWA is issuing this revised notice of intent to advise the public that an environmental...

  20. 76 FR 80367 - Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability

    Science.gov (United States)

    2011-12-23

    ... ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-9000-6] Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General Information (202) 564-1399 or http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/ . Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements Filed 12/12/2011 Through...

  1. 78 FR 35928 - Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability

    Science.gov (United States)

    2013-06-14

    ... ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-9009-6] Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General Information (202) 564-7146 or http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/ . Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements Filed 06/03/2013 through...

  2. 75 FR 38517 - Environmental Impact Statements; Notice of Availability

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-07-02

    ... ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-8991-2] Environmental Impact Statements; Notice of Availability Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General Information (202) 564-1399 or http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/ . Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements. Filed 06/21/2010 through...

  3. 78 FR 4586 - Environmental Impact Statement: Kake Access, AK

    Science.gov (United States)

    2013-01-22

    ... DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Highway Administration Environmental Impact Statement: Kake... Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for a proposed transportation project to improve access to and from the... written comments on environmental concerns that should be addressed in the EIS. The public scoping...

  4. 76 FR 54767 - Environmental Impact Statements; Notice of Availability

    Science.gov (United States)

    2011-09-02

    ... ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-8998-8] Environmental Impact Statements; Notice of....epa.gov/compliance/nepa/ . Weekly Receipt of Environmental Impact Statements Filed 08/22/2011 Through... the Chemistry and Metallurgy Research Replacement Project, To Address New Geologic Information...

  5. 76 FR 24021 - Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability

    Science.gov (United States)

    2011-04-29

    ... ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-8996-6] Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of....epa.gov/compliance/nepa/ . Weekly receipt of Environmental. Impact Statements Filed 04/18/2011 Through..., Draft Supplement, NNSA, NM, Nuclear Facility of the Chemistry and Metallurgy Research Replacement...

  6. 78 FR 79658 - Environmental Impact Statement; Animal Carcass Management

    Science.gov (United States)

    2013-12-31

    ...] Environmental Impact Statement; Animal Carcass Management AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service... prepare an environmental impact statement to examine the potential environmental effects of animal carcass... of animal carcass management options used throughout the United States. The EIS will analyze and...

  7. Environmental impact statements: new legal technique for environmental protection

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    Baldwin, M F

    1975-02-01

    The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) has required Federal agencies to re-examine all their programs affecting the environment, to consider alternative policies, to coordinate their actions with other agencies, and to disclose their environmental analyses to the public. In short, it has attempted to change decision processes markedly, in order to respond to wide-spread public concern about a deteriorating natural and human environment. The mandates of the policy are listed, but knowing that these were not sufficient to change existing agency practices, Congress established what has been called an ''action-forcing mechanism.'' Each federal agency must ''include in every recommendation or report on proposals for legislation and other major federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment, a detailed statement by the responsible official.'' This statement must cover the following five points as specified in Section 102(2)(c): the environmental impact of the proposed action; any adverse environmental effects which cannot be avoided should the proposal be implemented; alternatives to the proposed action; the relationship between local and short-term uses of man's environment and the maintenance and enhancement of long-term productivity, and any irreversible and irretrievable commitments of resources which would be involved in the proposed action should it be implemented. Section 102 has been considered the heart of the National Environmental Policy Act. The specific five-point environmental report--known as an environmental impact statement--is the visible evidence of an agency's compliance with the environmental policy articulated by Congress. (MCW)

  8. Final environmental statement related to construction of Skagit Nuclear Power Project Units 1 and 2: (Docket Nos. 50-522 and 50-523)

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1975-05-01

    The proposed action is the issuance of construction permits to the Pudget Sound Power and Light Company, Pacific Power and Light Company, Washington Water Power Company and the Washington Public Power Supply System, for the construction of Skagit Nuclear Power Projects Units 1 and 2 (Docket Nos. 50-522 and 50-523) in Skagit County, Washington (about 64 miles north of Seattle and 6 miles ENE of Sedro Woolley). These units are scheduled for commercial service in 1982 and 1985, respectively. Each unit will employ a boiling-water nuclear reactor with a maximum expected thermal power level of 4100 MWt, which is considered in the assessments contained in this statement. At the 3800 MWt power level initially to be licensed, the net electrical capacity of each unit will be 1288 MWe. The exhaust steam from the turbine-generators will be cooled in condensers which will utilize one hyperbolic-type natural-draft cooling tower per unit to dissipate heat to the atmosphere. Water (106 cfs max.) for the cooling tower makeup (82.4 cfs) and other plant uses will be withdrawn from the Skagit River through Ranney Collectors embedded in the north bank of the river and pumped to the plant through a pipeline about 35,000 ft. long. Cooling tower blowdown (7 cfs max.) from the project and dilution water (20 cfs max.) will flow through a pipeline back to the river where it will be discharged through a diffuser

  9. Final environmental impact statement for the Nevada test site and off-site locations in the State of Nevada. Public comment and response document, Volume 3, Part A comments

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1996-08-01

    On February 2, 1996, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) issued the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Nevada Test Site and Off-Site Locations in the State of Nevada (NTS EIS) for review by the state of Nevada, Indian tribes, local governments, other federal agencies, groups and organizations, and the general public. The formal comment period lasted 90 days, ending May 3, 1996. As part of the comment process, the DOE held public hearings in St. George, Utah, and in Pahrump, Reno, and Las Vegas, Nevada. Community Workshops were held in Caliente, Tonopah, Boulder City, and North Las Vegas, Nevada, in conjunction with the University of Nevada Las Vegas to discuss the Draft NTS EIS. Volume 3 of the Final NTS EIS contains 3 chapters. Chapter 1 summarizes the major issues raised by the public. Chapter 2 contains the full text of the public comments on the Draft NTS EIS received by the DOE; it includes public hearing transcripts, written comments, and comments received via a toll-free comment open-quotes hot line.close quotes Chapter 3 contains the DOE's responses to the public comments and describes how the comments were considered in the Final NTS EIS

  10. Final environmental impact statement for the Nevada Test Site and off-site locations in the State of Nevada. Volume 1, Appendices A-F

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1996-08-01

    This sitewide EIS evaluates the potential environmental impacts of four possible land-use alternatives being considered for the Nevada Test Site (NTS), the Tonopah Test Range, and the formerly operated DOE sites in the state of Nevada: the Project Shoal Area, the Central Nevada Test Area, and portions of the Nellis Air Force Range Complex. Three additional sites in Nevada-Eldorado Valley, Dry Lake Valley, and Coyote Spring Valley-are evaluated for collocation of solar energy production facilities. The four alternatives include Continue Current Operations (No Action, continue to operate at the level maintained for the past 3 to 5 years); Discontinue Operations 1 (discontinue operations and interagency programs); Expanded Use (increased use of NTS and its resources to support defense and nondefense programs); and Alternate Use of Withdrawn Lands (discontinue all defense-related activities at NTS; continue waste management operations in support of NTS environmental restoration efforts; expand nondefense research). Environmental impacts were assessed for each alternative by analyzing, to the extent possible, the discrete and cumulative environmental impacts associated with Defense Waste Management, Environmental Restoration, Nondefense Research and Development, and Work for Others Programs. A framework for a Resource Management Plan is included as Volume 2 of this EIS and represents the development of an ecosystem based planning process closely integrated with the National Environmental Policy Act process. This EIS, among other things, analyzed the impacts of transportation of low level waste, and site characterization activities related to the Yucca Mountain Project but did not analyze the suitability of the site as a repository. This EIS does not analyze the suitability of the Yucca Mountain site as a repository as this is an action beyond the scope of the EIS. Volume 3 of this EIS contains the public comments and the responses to the comments

  11. Final environmental impact statement for the Nevada Test Site and off-site locations in the State of Nevada. Volume 1, Chapters 1-9

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1996-08-01

    This sitewide EIS evaluates the potential environmental impacts of four possible land-use alternatives being considered for the Nevada Test Site (NTS), the Tonopah Test Range, and the formerly operated DOE sites in the state of Nevada: the Project Shoal Area, the Central Nevada Test Area, and portions of the Nellis Air Force Range Complex. Three additional sites in Nevada-Eldorado Valley, Dry Lake Valley, and Coyote Spring Valley-are evaluated for collocation of solar energy production facilities. The four alternatives include Continue Current Operations (No Action, continue to operate at the level maintained for the past 3 to 5 years); Discontinue Operations 1 (discontinue operations and interagency programs); Expanded Use (increased use of NTS and its resources to support defense and nondefense programs); and Alternate Use of Withdrawn Lands (discontinue all defense-related activities at NTS; continue waste management operations in support of NTS environmental restoration efforts; expand nondefense research). Environmental impacts were assessed for each alternative by analyzing, to the extent possible, the discrete and cumulative environmental impacts associated with Defense Waste Management, Environmental Restoration, Nondefense Research and Development, and Work for Others Programs. A framework for a Resource Management Plan is included as Volume 2 of this EIS and represents the development of an ecosystem based planning process closely integrated with the National Environmental Policy Act process. This EIS, among other things, analyzed the impacts of transportation of low level waste, and site characterization activities related to the Yucca Mountain Project but did not analyze the suitability of the site as a repository. This EIS does not analyze the suitability of the Yucca Mountain site as a repository as this is an action beyond the scope of the EIS. Volume 3 of this EIS contains the public comments and the responses to the comments

  12. A comparative review of accident studies from recent environmental impact statements

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    Mueller, C.; Folga, S.; Nabelssi, B.

    1996-01-01

    The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has recently prepared or is in the process of preparing a number of programmatic and site-specific environmental impact statements (EISs). This study was conducted for the purpose of reviewing the self-consistency of programmatic alternatives, associated relative impacts, and supporting data, methods, and assumptions in EISs prepared for related activities. The following EISs, which deal with waste management issues, are reviewed in this paper (the parenthetical acronyms are referred to in Table 1): (1) Final Environmental Impact Statement, Savannah River Site Waste Management, DOE/EIS-0217, Vol. II, July 1995. (SRS WM-EIS), (2) Draft Waste Management Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for Managing Treatment, Storage, and Disposal of Radioactive and Hazardous Waste, DOE/EIS-0200-D, Vol. IV, Aug. 1995. (WM PEIS), (3) Final Environmental Impact Statement, Interim Management of Nuclear Materials at the Savannah River Site. DOE/EIS-0220, Oct. 1995. (IMNM EIS), (4) Department of Energy Programmatic Spent Nuclear Fuel Management and Idaho National Engineering Laboratory Environmental Restoration and Waste Management Programs Environmental Impact Statement, DOE/EIS-0203-F, April 1995. (INEL Site-Wide-EIS), (5) Draft Environmental Impact Statement, Disposition of Surplus Highly Enriched Uranium, DOE/EIS-0240-D, Oct. 1995. (HEU Disposition EIS), (6) Final Environmental Impact Statement, Safe Interim Storage of Hanford Tank Wastes, Hanford Site, Richland, Washington, DOE/EIS-0212, Oct. 1995. (SIS EIS). This study compares the facility accident analysis approaches used in these EISs vis-a-vis the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) guidance developed by DOE (Recommendations for the Preparation of Environmental Assessments and Environmental Impact Statements, Office of NEPA Oversight). The purpose of the comparative review of these approaches with NEPA guidance is to identify potential preferred paths for future EISs

  13. Final environmental statement related to the operation of H.B. Robinson Nuclear Steam-Electric Plant, Unit 2: (Docket No. 50-261)

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1975-04-01

    The proposed action is the continuation of Facility Operating License DPR-23 to Carolina Power and Light Company for H.B. Robinson Unit 2. Unit 2, located adjacent to Lake Robinson in Darlington County, near Hartsville, South Carolina, employs a pressurized water reactor to produce up to 2200 megawatts thermal (MWt). A steam turbine-generator uses this heat to provide 700 megawatts electric (MWe) of net electrical power capacity. A design power level of 2300 MWt (730 MWe) has been requested and is considered in the assessments contained in this statement. The exhaust steam is cooled by a flow of water obtained from the discharged to a 2250-acre cooling lake, Lake Robinson. Land areas disturbed during construction of the plant, but not used, have been seeded to native grasses, trees, and shrubs. Construction of a cooling water discharge canal extension resulted in alteration of about 100 acres of wildlife habitat. Subsequently, the canal banks were seeded with pines and legumes. Some erosion has taken place in the pine-seeded areas. Some small fish are killed by impingement on the water intake screens. Organisms passing through the screens very likely do not survive their passage through the circulating water system. Operation of the plant will cause an increase in the temperature of Black Creek below Lake Robinson. A small impact exists due to production and, after processing, disposal or release of sanitary and chemical wastes. Unit 2 may discharge up to 500 pounds/day of chemicals (primarily sulfates). Under conditions of low flow into and out of the lake, this increases the sulfate concentration in the lake by less than 1 ppM over the normal 7.7 ppM

  14. 78 FR 37325 - License Renewal of Nuclear Power Plants; Generic Environmental Impact Statement and Standard...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2013-06-20

    ... Nuclear Power Plants; Generic Environmental Impact Statement and Standard Review Plans for Environmental... for Nuclear Power Plants, Supplement 1: Operating License Renewal'' (ESRP). The ESRP serves as a guide... published a final rule, ``Revisions to Environmental Review for Renewal of Nuclear Power Plant Operating...

  15. Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement related to decontamination and disposal of radioactive wastes resulting from March 28, 1979 accident at Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 2 (Docket No. 50-320): Final report

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1987-06-01

    In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act, the Commission's implementing regulations, and the Commission's April 27, 1981 Statement of Policy, the Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement related to decontamination and disposal of radioactive wastes resulting from March 28, 1979, accident Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 2 NUREG-0683 (PEIS) is being supplemented. This supplement updates the environmental evaluation of accident-generated water disposal alternatives published in the PEIS, utilizing more complete and current information. Also, the supplement includes a specific environmental evaluation of the licensee's proposal for water disposition. Although no clearly preferable water disposal alternative was identified, the supplement concluded that a number of alternatives could be implemented without significant environmental impact. The NRC staff has concluded that the licensee's proposed disposal of the accident-generated water by evaporation will not significantly affect the quality of the human environment. Further, any impacts from the disposal program are outweighed by its benefits

  16. Hanford Remedial Action Environmental Impact Statement, Richland, Washington. Implementation Plan

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1995-06-01

    This implementation plan was prepared in compliance in compliance with 10 CFR 1021. It includes the following sections: introduction; purpose and need for departmental action; scope, content, and alternatives for the HRA EIS; public participation process; schedule for preparation of the HRA EIS; anticipated environmental reviews and consultations; and contractor disclosure statement. The following appendices are also included: notice of intent, federal register notice for extension of public scoping period, proposed annotated outline for the draft HRA EIS, summary of final report for the Hanford Future Site Uses Working Group, and summary of comments and responses from the public scoping process

  17. Final environmental impact statement for the continued operation of the Pantex Plant and associated storage of nuclear weapon components. Volume 1 -- Main report

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1996-11-01

    This document assesses the potential environmental impacts over approximately 10 years of continued operation of Pantex Plant, including foreseeable projects and activities. For Pantex Plant, this document assesses the alternatives of No Action, Relocation of the storage of plutonium components (pits) resulting from nuclear weapon disassembly activities at Pantex Plant to another site, and the Proposed Action (Preferred Alternative) of continuing operations and increasing the quantity of pits in interim storage at Pantex Plant. For the Pit Storage Relocation Alternative, this document also assesses the potential environmental impacts to three DOE candidate sites and one Department of Defense candidate site that could be selected for the relocation of the nuclear component storage activities from Pantex Plant. Evaluations of site infrastructure, land resources, geology and soils, water resources, air quality, acoustics, biotic resources, cultural resources, socio-economic resources, intrasite transportation, waste management, human health, aircraft accidents, and environmental justice for Pantex Plant and the candidate sites are included in the assessment. The intersite transportation of nuclear and hazardous materials is also assessed

  18. Final environmental statement related to the operation of North Anna Power Station, Units 1 and 2: (Docket Nos. 50-338 and 50-339)

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1980-08-01

    The proposed action is the issuance of Operating Licenses to the Virginia Electric and Power Company for the startup and operation of the North Anna Power Station, Units No. 1 and 2, located on Lake Anna in Louisa County, 40 miles east of Charlottesville, Virginia. The information in this second addendum responds to the Commission's directive that the staff address in narrative form the environmental dose commitments and health effects from fuel cycle releases, fuel cycle socioeconomic impacts, and possible cumulative impacts pending further treatment by rulemaking

  19. Depleted UF6 programmatic environmental impact statement

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1997-01-01

    The US Department of Energy has developed a program for long-term management and use of depleted uranium hexafluoride, a product of the uranium enrichment process. As part of this effort, DOE is preparing a Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) for the depleted UF 6 management program. This report duplicates the information available at the web site (http://www.ead.anl.gov/web/newduf6) set up as a repository for the PEIS. Options for the web site include: reviewing recent additions or changes to the web site; learning more about depleted UF 6 and the PEIS; browsing the PEIS and related documents, or submitting official comments on the PEIS; downloading all or part of the PEIS documents; and adding or deleting one's name from the depleted UF 6 mailing list

  20. Allocation of petroleum feedstock: Baltimore Gas and Electric Company, Sollers Point SNG Plant, Sollers Point, Baltimore County, Maryland. Final environmental impact statement

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    Liverman, James L.

    1978-04-01

    An allocation of naphtha feedstock up to 2,186,000 barrels per year to Baltimore Gas and Electric Company (BG and E) to operate its synthetic natural gas (SNG) facility is being considered. The allocation would enable BG and E to produce 10,800,000 mcf of SNG during a 180 day period. Operation of the plant at design capacity is expected to result in annual pollution emissions as follows: 626.4 tons of sulfur oxides, 168.5 tons of nitrogen oxides and 21.6 tons of particulate matter. Incremental emissions due to plant operations relative to existing emissions in Baltimore County are less than 1%. All Federal and State air quality standards should be met. Treated effluent is to be discharged into the Patapasco River where the environmental impacts are not expected to be significant. The SNG facility has been designed to be in compliance with all applicable Federal, State and local effluent standards. Water consumption requirements of 335,000 gallons per day are not expected to significantly tax the area's water resources. Sound generated by the SNG facility will be inaudible or imperceptible. All other operational impacts on land use, population, visual quality, roadways, community facilities and services and ecological systems were judged to be minimal. Environmental impacts resulting from various alternatives ranging from full allocation through denial of an allocation are discussed.

  1. Final generic environmental statement on the use of recycle plutonium in mixed oxide fuel in light water cooled reactors. Volume 3

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1976-08-01

    An assessment is presented of the health, safety and environmental effects of the entire light water reactor fuel cycle, considering the comparative effects of three major alternatives: no recycle, recycle of uranium only, and recycle of both uranium and plutonium. The assessment covers the period from 1975 through the year 2000 and includes the cumulative effects for the entire period as well as projections for specific years. Topics discussed include: the light water reactor with plutonium recycle; mixed oxide fuel fabrication; reprocessing plant operations; supporting uranium fuel cycle; transportation of radioactive materials; radioactive waste management; storage of plutonium; radiological health assessment; extended spent fuel storage; and blending of plutonium and uranium at reprocessing plants

  2. Final Environmental Impact Statement for Treating Transuranic (TRU)/Alpha Low-level Waste at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory Oak Ridge, Tennessee

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    N/A

    2000-06-30

    The DOE proposes to construct, operate, and decontaminate/decommission a TRU Waste Treatment Facility in Oak Ridge, Tennessee. The four waste types that would be treated at the proposed facility would be remote-handled TRU mixed waste sludge, liquid low-level waste associated with the sludge, contact-handled TRU/alpha low-level waste solids, and remote-handled TRU/alpha low-level waste solids. The mixed waste sludge and some of the solid waste contain metals regulated under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act and may be classified as mixed waste. This document analyzes the potential environmental impacts associated with five alternatives--No Action, the Low-Temperature Drying Alternative (Preferred Alternative), the Vitrification Alternative, the Cementation Alternative, and the Treatment and Waste Storage at Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) Alternative.

  3. 33 CFR 230.13 - Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-07-01

    ... 33 Navigation and Navigable Waters 3 2010-07-01 2010-07-01 false Environmental Impact Statement..., DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE PROCEDURES FOR IMPLEMENTING NEPA § 230.13 Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). An EIS... issues and impacts. The transmittal letter to EPA as well as the cover sheet should clearly identify the...

  4. 78 FR 4143 - Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability

    Science.gov (United States)

    2013-01-18

    ... ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-9007-2] Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General Information (202) 564-7146 or http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/ . [[Page 4144

  5. 75 FR 43160 - Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-07-23

    ... ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-8991-6] Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General Information (202) 564-1399 or http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/ . [[Page 43161

  6. 76 FR 21790 - Environmental Impact Statement: Interstate 66 Corridor, Virginia

    Science.gov (United States)

    2011-04-18

    ... prepare a Tier 1 Environmental Impact Statement, in cooperation with the Virginia Department of... and Environmental Team Leader, Federal Highway Administration, Post Office Box 10249, Richmond...: The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), in cooperation with the Virginia Department of...

  7. Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Chemistry and Metallurgy Research Building Replacement Project at Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    2003-01-01

    NNSA, an agency within DOE, proposes to replace the Chemistry and Metallurgy Research (CMR) Building at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL). The CMRR EIS examines the potential environmental impacts associated with the Proposed Action of consolidating and relocating the mission-critical CMR capabilities from a degraded building to a new modern building(s). The existing CMR Building, constructed in the early 1950s, houses most of LANL's analytical chemistry and materials characterization AC and MC capabilities. Other capabilities at the CMR Building include actinide processing, waste characterization, and nondestructive analysis that support a variety of NNSA and DOE nuclear materials management programs. In 1992, DOE initiated planning and implementation of CMR Building upgrades to address specific safety, reliability, consolidation, and security and safeguards issues. Later, in 1997 and 1998, a series of operational, safety, and seismic issues surfaced regarding the long-term viability of the CMR Building. Because of these issues, DOE determined that the extensive upgrades originally planned would be much more expensive and time consuming and of only marginal effectiveness. As a result, DOE decided to perform only the upgrades necessary to ensure the safe and reliable operation of the CMR Building through 2010 and to seek an alternative path for long-term reliability. The CMRR EIS evaluates the potential direct, indirect, and cumulative environmental impacts associated with the Proposed Action. The Proposed Action is to replace the CMR Building. The Preferred Alternative is to construct a new CMRR Facility at Technical Area (TA) 55, consisting of two or three buildings. One of the new buildings would provide space for administrative offices and support functions. The other building(s) would provide secure laboratory spaces for research and analytical support activities. The buildings would be expected to operate for a minimum of 50 years. Tunnels could be

  8. 76 FR 75556 - Notice of Availability of the Proposed Resource Management Plan and Final Environmental Impact...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2011-12-02

    ...] Notice of Availability of the Proposed Resource Management Plan and Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Taos Field Office, New Mexico AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior. ACTION: Notice of...) has prepared the Proposed Resource Management Plan/Final Environmental Impact Statement (Proposed RMP...

  9. Final programmatic environmental impact statement for alternative strategies for the long-term management and use of depleted uranium hexafluoride. Volume 3: Responses to public comments

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1999-04-01

    This PEIS assesses the potential impacts of alternative management strategies for depleted uranium hexafluoride (UF 6 ) currently stored at three DOE sites: Paducah site near Paducah, Kentucky, Portsmouth site near Portsmouth, Ohio; and K-25 site on the Oak Ridge Reservation, Oak Ridge, Tennessee. The alternatives analyzed in the PEIS include no action, long-term storage as UF 6 , long-term storage as uranium oxide, use as uranium oxide, use as uranium metal, and disposal. DOE's preferred alternative is to begin conversion of the depleted UF 6 inventory as soon as possible, either to uranium oxide, uranium metal, or a combination of both, while allowing for use of as much of this inventory as possible. This volume of the Final PEIS contains the comments and DOE's responses to comments received during the comment period. Chapter 2 contains photocopies of written submissions received by DOE on the Draft PEIS; DOE's responses to those comments are listed in Chapter 3. Chapter 4 provides the oral comments received at the public hearings and DOE's responses. Chapter 5 provides indices to comments and responses arranged by commentor name and by comment number

  10. Total System Performance Assessment - Analyses for Disposal of Commercial and DOE Waste Inventories at Yucca Mountain - Input to Final Environmental Impact Statement and Site Suitability Evaluation, Rev. 00

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    NA

    2001-01-01

    This Letter Report presents the results of calculations to assess long-term performance of commercial spent nuclear fuel (CSNF), U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) spent nuclear fuel (DSNF), high-level radioactive waste (HLW), and Greater Than Class C (GTCC) radioactive waste and DOE Special Performance Assessment Required (SPAR) radioactive waste at the potential Yucca Mountain repository in Nye County Nevada with respect to the 10,000-year performance period specified in 40 CFR Part 197.30 (66 FR 32074 [DIRS 155216], p. 32134) with regard to radiation-protection standards. The EPA Final Rule 40 CFR Part 197 has three separate standards, individual-protection, human-intrusion, and groundwater-protection standards, all with a compliance timeframe of 10,000 years. These calculations evaluate the dose to receptors for each of these standards. Further, this Letter Report includes the results of simulations to the 1,000,000-year performance period described in 40 CFR Part 197.35 (66 FR 32074 [DIRS 155216], p. 32135) which calls for the calculation of the peak dose to the Reasonably Maximally Exposed Individual (RMEI) that would occur after 10,000 years and within the period of geological stability. In accordance with TSPA-SR the ''period of geologic stability'' is from zero to 1,000,000 years after repository closure. The calculations also present the 5th and 95th percentiles, and the mean and median of the set of probabilistic simulations used to evaluate various disposal scenarios

  11. Incorporating environmental justice measures during environmental impact statement scoping

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    Imam, J.; Poles, J.S.

    1995-01-01

    Executive Order 12898, open-quote Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income populations,close-quote directs Federal agencies to make environmental justice part of their mission by involving minorities and low-income populations and by identifying and addressing as appropriate disproportionately high and adverse human health and environmental effects of their programs, policies, and activities on minority and low-income populations. In the Presidential Memorandum transmitting the Executive Order it was stated that environmental justice should be taken into consideration under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA). NEPA, with its systematic approach and requirements for alternatives analysis and comprehensive public participation, has served as one of the main mechanisms for involving the public in environmental decision-making. This paper addresses challenges faced by the Department of Energy in involving minority and low-income populations in the public involvement activities associated with a national-level environmental impact statement (EIS) and suggests ways to improve agencies' incorporation of environmental justice considerations in NEPA scoping

  12. Surplus plutonium disposition draft environmental impact statement. Volume 2

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1998-07-01

    On May 22, 1997, DOE published a Notice of Intent (NOI) in the Federal Register (62 Federal Register 28009) announcing its decision to prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) that would tier from the analysis and decisions reached in connection with the Storage and Disposition of Weapons-Usable Fissile Materials Final Programmatic EIS (Storage and Disposition PEIS). DOE's disposition strategy allows for both the immobilization of surplus plutonium and its use as mixed oxide (MOX) fuel in existing domestic, commercial reactors. The disposition of surplus plutonium would also involve disposal of the immobilized plutonium and MOX fuel (as spent nuclear fuel) in a geologic repository. The Surplus Plutonium Disposition Environmental Impact Statement analyzes alternatives that would use the immobilization approach (for some of the surplus plutonium) and the MOX fuel approach (for some of the surplus plutonium); alternatives that would immobilize all of the surplus plutonium; and the No Action Alternative. The alternatives include three disposition facilities that would be designed so that they could collectively accomplish disposition of up to 50 metric tons (55 tons) of surplus plutonium over their operating lives: (1) the pit disassembly and conversion facility would disassemble pits (a weapons component) and convert the recovered plutonium, as well as plutonium metal from other sources, into plutonium dioxide suitable for disposition; (2) the immobilization facility would include a collocated capability for converting nonpit plutonium materials into plutonium dioxide suitable for immobilization and would be located at either Hanford or SRS. DOE has identified SRS as the preferred site for an immobilization facility; (3) the MOX fuel fabrication facility would fabricate plutonium dioxide into MOX fuel. Volume 2 contains the appendices to the report and describe the following: Federal Register notices; contractor nondisclosure statement; adjunct melter

  13. 78 FR 77153 - Environmental Action Statement Screening Form and Proposed Amendment to the Candidate...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2013-12-20

    ... the information necessary to determine impacts in the environmental action statement screening form... authorized for 25 years in Alfalfa, Beaver, Beckham, Cimarron, Custer, Dewey, Ellis, Harper, Major, Roger... discussion of the impacts, both positive and negative, can be found in the Final Environmental Assessment and...

  14. Yakima Fisheries Project. Final environmental impact statement

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1996-01-01

    BPA proposes to fund several fishery-related activities in the Yakima River Basin. These activities, known as the Yakima Fisheries Project (YFP), would be jointly managed by the State of Washington and the Yakima Indian Nation. The YFP is included in the Northwest Power Planning Council's (Council's) fish and wildlife program. The Council selected the Yakima River system for attention because fisheries resources are severely reduced from historical levels and because there is a significant potential for enhancement of these resources. BPA's proposed action is to fund (1) information gathering on the implementation of supplementation techniques and on feasibility of reintroducing coho salmon in an environment where native populations have become extinct; (2) research activities based on continuous assessment, feedback and improvement of research design and activities (open-quotes adaptive managementclose quotes); and (3) die construction, operation, and maintenance of facilities for supplementing populations of upper Yakima spring chinook salmon. Examined in addition to No Action are two alternatives for action: (1) supplementation of depressed natural populations of upper Yakima spring chinook and (2) that same supplementation plus a study to determine the feasibility of reestablishing naturally spawning population and a significant fall fishery for coho in the Yakima Basin. Alternative 2 is the preferred action. A central hatchery would be built for either alternative, as well as three sites with six raceways each for acclimation and release of spring chinook smolts. Major issues examined in the Revised Draft EIS include potential impacts of the project on genetic and ecological resources of existing fish populations, on water quality and quantity, on threatened and endangered species listed under the Endangered Species Act, and on the recreational fishery

  15. Yakima Fisheries Project : Final Environmental Impact Statement.

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    United States. Bonneville Power Administration; Washington (State). Dept. of Fish and Wildlife; Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation, Washington.

    1996-01-01

    BPA proposes to fund several fishery-related activities in the Yakima River Basin. These activities, known as the Yakima Fisheries Project (YFP), would be jointly managed by the State of Washington and the Yakima Indian Nation. The YFP is included in the Northwest Power Planning Council`s (Council`s) fish and wildlife program. The Council selected the Yakima River system for attention because fisheries resources are severely reduced from historical levels and because there is a significant potential for enhancement of these resources. BPA`s proposed action is to fund (1) information gathering on the implementation of supplementation techniques and on feasibility of reintroducing coho salmon in an environment where native populations have become extinct; (2) research activities based on continuous assessment, feedback and improvement of research design and activities ({open_quotes}adaptive management{close_quotes}); and (3) die construction, operation, and maintenance of facilities for supplementing populations of upper Yakima spring chinook salmon. Examined in addition to No Action are two alternatives for action: (1) supplementation of depressed natural populations of upper Yakima spring chinook and (2) that same supplementation plus a study to determine the feasibility of reestablishing naturally spawning population and a significant fall fishery for coho in the Yakima Basin. Alternative 2 is the preferred action. A central hatchery would be built for either alternative, as well as three sites with six raceways each for acclimation and release of spring chinook smolts. Major issues examined in the Revised Draft EIS include potential impacts of the project on genetic and ecological resources of existing fish populations, on water quality and quantity, on threatened and endangered species listed under the Endangered Species Act, and on the recreational fishery.

  16. 78 FR 37846 - Resource Management Plan/General Plan and Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2013-06-24

    ...The Bureau of Reclamation and the California Department of Parks and Recreation (CDPR) have prepared a Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (EIS/EIR) for the San Luis Reservoir State Recreation Area Resource Management Plan/General Plan (RMP/GP). The Final EIS/EIR describes and presents the environmental effects of the No Action/No Project Alternative and three Action Alternatives for implementing the RMP/GP. A Notice of Availability of the Draft EIS/EIR was published in the Federal Register on August 3, 2012 (77 FR 46518). The comment period on the Draft EIS/EIR ended on October 2, 2012. The Final EIS/EIR contains responses to all comments received and reflects comments and any additional information received during the review period.

  17. 28 CFR 91.63 - Preparing an Environmental Impact Statement

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-07-01

    ... 28 Judicial Administration 2 2010-07-01 2010-07-01 false Preparing an Environmental Impact... CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES Environmental Impact Review Procedures for VOI/TIS Grant Program Environmental Review Procedures § 91.63 Preparing an Environmental Impact Statement (a) Initial determination. OJP will determine...

  18. K Basins environmental impact statement technical input document

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    Bergsman, K.H.; Bergmann, D.W.; Costley, G.E.; Jansky, M.T.; McCormack, R.L.; Monthey, M.J.; Praga, A.N.; Ullah, J.K.; Willis, W.L.

    1995-10-01

    This document describes the technical input necessary to develop and evaluate the alternatives within the Environmental Impact Statement for the Management of Spent Nuclear Fuel From the K Basins at the Hanford Site

  19. DWPF upgrade, immobilization Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement input. Revision 1

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    Sullivan, I.K.; Bignell, D.

    1994-01-01

    This Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) addresses the immobilization of plutonium by vitrification. Existing engineering documents, analyses, EIS, and technical publications were used and incorporated wherever possible to provide a timely response to this support effort. Although the vitrification technology is proven for the immobilization of high-level radioactive waste, more study and technical detail will be necessary to provide a comprehensive EIS that fully addresses all aspects of introduction of plutonium to the vitrification process. This document describes the concept(s) of plutonium processing as it relates to the upgrade of the DWPF and is therefore conceptual in nature. These concepts are based on technical data and experience at the Savannah River Site and will be detailed and finalized to support execution of this immobilization option

  20. 10 CFR 51.72 - Supplement to draft environmental impact statement.

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-01-01

    ... 10 Energy 2 2010-01-01 2010-01-01 false Supplement to draft environmental impact statement. 51.72... Implementing Section 102(2) Environmental Impact Statements § 51.72 Supplement to draft environmental impact statement. (a) The NRC staff will prepare a supplement to a draft environmental impact statement for which a...