WorldWideScience

Sample records for impact statement final

  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. 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

  5. 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

  6. 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...

  7. 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

  8. 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.

  9. 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

  10. 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

  11. 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.

  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. 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

  14. 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.

  15. 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

  16. 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...

  17. 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...

  18. 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...

  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. 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...

  2. 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

  3. 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.

  4. 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

  5. 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

  6. 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

  7. 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...

  8. 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...

  9. 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...

  10. 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

  11. 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)

  12. 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

  13. 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...

  14. 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...

  15. 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...

  16. 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...

  17. 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

  18. 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

  19. 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

  20. 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...

  1. 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

  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. 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.

  4. 17 CFR 200.553 - Draft, final and supplemental impact statements.

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-04-01

    ... COMMISSION ORGANIZATION; CONDUCT AND ETHICS; AND INFORMATION AND REQUESTS Regulations Pertaining to the Protection of the Environment § 200.553 Draft, final and supplemental impact statements. If the Commission...

  5. 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...

  6. 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

  7. 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...

  8. 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

  9. 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.

  10. 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

  11. 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.

  12. 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.

  13. 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

  14. 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.

  15. 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...

  16. 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...

  17. 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

  18. 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.

  19. 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

  20. 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...

  1. 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...

  2. 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

  3. 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...

  4. 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...

  5. 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...

  6. 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...

  7. 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...

  8. 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...

  9. 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

  10. 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

  11. 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

  12. Shock Testing the SEAWOLF Submarine, Final Environmental Impact Statement

    Science.gov (United States)

    1998-05-01

    relevant experience. Phil Barfield. Operational requirements. B.S. Mechanical Engineering. 14 years relevant experience. James Craig . Appendix D. B.S...Atlantic Biodiversity Center Nassau, Delaware Russell DeConti Center for Coastal Studies Provincetown, Massachusetts Robert Deegan Sierra Club...either area. C-9 APPENDIX D PHYSICAL IMPACTS OF EXPLOSIONS ON MARINE MAMMALS AND TURTLES James C. Craig Christian W. Hearn Naval Surface Warfare

  13. Final programmatic environmental impact statement for tritium supply and recycling

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1995-10-01

    Tritium, a radioactive gas used in all of the Nation's nuclear weapons, has a short half-life and must be replaced periodically in order for the weapon to operate as designed. Currently, there is no capability to produce the required amounts of tritium within the Nuclear Weapons Complex. The PEIS for Tritium Supply and Recycling evaluates the alternatives for the siting, construction, and operation of tritium supply and recycling facilities at each of five candidate sites: the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory, the Nevada Test Site, the Oak Ridge Reservation, the Pantex Plant, and the Savannah River Site. Alternatives for new tritium supply and recycling facilities consist of four different tritium supply technologies: Heavy Water Reactor, Modular High Temperature Gas-Cooled Reactor, Advanced Light Water Reactor, and Accelerator Production of Tritium. The PEIS also evaluates the impacts of the DOE purchase of an existing operating or partially completed commercial light water reactor or the DOE purchase of irradiation services contracted from commercial power reactors. Additionally, the PEIS includes an analysis of multipurpose reactors that would produce tritium, dispose of plutonium, and produce electricity. Evaluation of impacts on land resources, site infrastructure, air quality and acoustics, water resources, geology and soils, biotic resources, cultural and paleontological resources, socioeconomics, radiological and hazardous chemical impacts during normal operation and accidents to workers and the public, waste management, and intersite transport are included in the assessment

  14. 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

  15. 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

  16. 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

  17. 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...

  18. 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...

  19. 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...

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

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1995-11-01

    The Columbia River and its tributaries are the primary water system in the Pacific Northwest, draining some 219,000 square miles in seven states and another 39,500 square miles in British Columbia. Beginning in the 1930's, the Columbia River has been significantly modified by construction of 30 major dams on the river and its tributaries, along with dozens of non-Federal projects. Construction and subsequent operation of these water development projects have contributed to eight primary uses of the river system, including navigation, flood control, irrigation, electric power generation, fish migration, fish and wildlife habitat, recreation, and water supply and quality considerations. Increasing stress on the water development of the Columbia River and its tributaries has led primary Federal agencies to undertake intensive analysis and evaluation of the operation of these projects. These agencies are the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Bureau of Reclamation, who operate the large Federal dams on the river, and the Bonneville Power Administration who sells the power generated at the dams. This review, termed the System Operation Review (SOR), has as its ultimate goal to define a strategy for future operation of the major Columbia River projects which effectively considers the needs of all river uses. This volume, Appendix D: Cultural resources appendix, Technical imput includes the following: Development of geomorphology based framework for cultural resources management, Dworshak Reservoir, Idaho; Impact profiles for SOR reservoirs; comments from the following Native American tribes: Burns Paiute Tribe; Coville Confederated Tribes; Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Indian Reservation; Confederated Tribes and bands of the Yakama Indian Nation (comments); Nez Perce Tribe; Coeur D'Alene Tribe; Spokane Tribe of Indians; The confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation

  1. 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

  2. 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).

  3. 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.

  4. 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

  5. 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...

  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. 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.

  8. 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

  9. 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

  10. 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

  11. 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

  12. 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

  13. 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

  14. 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.

  15. 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

  16. 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

  17. 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

  18. 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.

  19. 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.

  20. 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.

  1. 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

  2. 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

  3. 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...

  4. 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...

  5. 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...

  6. 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...

  7. 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...

  8. 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...

  9. 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

  10. 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

  11. 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.

  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. 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

  14. 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

  15. 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

  16. 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

  17. 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.

  18. 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.

  19. 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)

  20. 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

  1. 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.

  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. 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

  4. 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

  5. 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

  6. 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).

  7. 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...

  8. 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

  9. 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

  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. 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.

  13. 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

  14. 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

  15. 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.

  16. 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

  17. 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.

  18. 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

  19. 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

  20. 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

  1. 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

  2. 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...

  3. 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

  4. 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

  5. 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.

  6. 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...

  7. 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

  8. 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

  9. 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

  10. 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...

  11. 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.

  12. 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

  13. 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.

  14. 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)

  15. 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

  16. 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

  17. 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

  18. 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

  19. 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...

  20. 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...

  1. 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...

  2. 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.

  3. 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...

  4. 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

  5. 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.

  6. 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.

  7. 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

  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. 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

  10. Final Environmental Impact Statement for Proposed White Elk Military Operations Area, Hill Air Force Base, Utah

    Science.gov (United States)

    2011-04-01

    concerns can include effects to wildlife, domestic animals, natural soundscapes , and outdoor recreation. Each of these effects can be difficult to assess...assessment of impacts. See Section 4.6 for a discussion of noise impacts to wildlife. For assessing noise impacts to natural soundscapes and

  11. 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.

  12. 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

  13. 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.

  14. 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

  15. 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...

  16. 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...

  17. 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...

  18. 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

  19. 76 FR 21403 - Notice of Availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Genesis Project...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2011-04-15

    ...: (1) The cumulative impacts of mining and related actions on affected resources, for example water... DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Land Management [LLNV010000.L19900000.EX0000 241A; 11-08807... the Genesis Project, Eureka County, NV AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior. ACTION: Notice of...

  20. 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...

  1. 76 FR 65531 - Notice of Availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the North Steens...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2011-10-21

    ... . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The applicant, Echanis, LLC, has filed applications for rights-of-way (ROWs) with the... Cooperative's existing transmission system near Diamond Junction, Oregon. A Draft EIS analyzing impacts of the... near Diamond Junction, Oregon. Included in the analysis of this alternative are two additional minor...

  2. 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...

  3. 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.

  4. 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

  5. Klondike III/Biglow Canyon Wind Integration Project; Final Environmental Impact Statement, September 2006.

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    United States. Bonneville Power Administration

    2006-09-01

    BPA has been asked by PPM Energy, Inc. to interconnect 300 megawatts (MW) of electricity generated from the proposed Klondike III Wind Project to the Federal Columbia River Transmission System. Orion Energy LLC has also asked BPA to interconnect 400 MW of electricity from its proposed Biglow Canyon Wind Farm, located north and east of the proposed Klondike III Wind Project. (Portland General Electric recently bought the rights to develop the proposed Biglow Canyon Wind Farm from Orion Energy, LLC.) Both wind projects received Site Certificates from the Oregon Energy Facility Siting Council on June 30, 2006. To interconnect these projects, BPA would need to build and operate a 230-kV double-circuit transmission line about 12 miles long, expand one substation and build one new substation. The wind projects would require wind turbines, substation(s), access roads, and other facilities. Two routes for the transmission line are being considered. Both begin at PPM's Klondike Schoolhouse Substation then travel north (Proposed Action) or north and westerly (Middle Alternative) to a new BPA 230-kV substation next to BPA's existing John Day 500-kV Substation. BPA is also considering a No Action Alternative in which BPA would not build the transmission line and would not interconnect the wind projects. The proposed BPA and wind projects would be located on private land, mainly used for agriculture. If BPA decides to interconnect the wind projects, construction of the BPA transmission line and substation(s) could commence as early as the winter of 2006-07. Both wind projects would operate for much of each year for at least 20 years. The proposed projects would generally create no or low impacts. Wildlife resources and local visual resources are the only resources to receive an impact rating other than ''none'' or ''low''. The low to moderate impacts to wildlife are from the expected bird and bat mortality and the cumulative

  6. Final programmatic environmental impact statement for tritium supply and recycling. Volume III

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1995-10-01

    Tritium, a radioactive gas used in all of the Nation's nuclear weapons, has a short half-life and must be replaced periodically in order for the weapon to operate as designed. Currently, there is no capability to produce the required amounts of tritium within the Nuclear Weapons Complex. The PEIS for Tritium Supply and Recycling evaluates the alternatives for the siting, construction, and operation of tritium supply and recycling facilities at each of five candidate sites: the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory, the Nevada Test Site, the Oak Ridge Reservation, the Pantex Plant, and the Savannah River Site. Alternatives for new tritium supply and recycling facilities consist of four different tritium supply technologies: Heavy Water Reactor, Modular High Temperature Gas-Cooled Reactor, Advanced Light Water Reactor, and Accelerator Production of Tritium. The PEIS also evaluates the impacts of the DOE purchase of an existing operating or partially completed commercial light water reactor or the DOE purchase of irradiation services contracted from commercial power reactors. Additionally, the PEIS includes an analysis of multipurpose reactors that would produce tritium, dispose of plutonium, and produce electricity. Evaluation of impacts on land resources, site infrastructure, air quality and acoustics, water resources, geology and soils, biotic resources, cultural and paleontological resources, socioeconomics, radiological and hazardous chemical impacts during normal operation and accidents to workers and the public, waste management, and intersite transport are included in the assessment

  7. Final programmatic environmental impact statement for tritium supply and recycling. Volume 1

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1995-10-01

    Tritium, a radioactive gas used in all of the Nation's nuclear weapons, has a short half-life and must be replaced periodically in order for the weapon to operate as designed. Currently, there is no capability to produce the required amounts of tritium within the Nuclear Weapons Complex. The PEIS for Tritium Supply and Recycling evaluates the alternatives for the siting, construction, and operation of tritium supply and recycling facilities at each of five candidate sites: the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory, the Nevada Test Site, the Oak Ridge Reservation, the Pantex Plant, and the Savannah River Site. Alternatives for new tritium supply and recycling facilities consist of four different tritium supply technologies: Heavy Water Reactor, Modular High Temperature Gas-Cooled Reactor, Advanced Light Water Reactor, and Accelerator Production of Tritium. The PEIS also evaluates the impacts of the DOE purchase of an existing operating or partially completed commercial light water reactor or the DOE purchase of irradiation services contracted from commercial power reactors. Additionally, the PEIS includes an analysis of multipurpose reactors that would produce tritium, dispose of plutonium, and produce electricity. Evaluation of impacts on land resources, site infrastructure, air quality and acoustics, water resources, geology and soils, biotic resources, cultural and paleontological resources, socioeconomics, radiological and hazardous chemical impacts during normal operation and accidents to workers and the public, waste management, and intersite transport are included in the assessment. 550 refs

  8. 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

  9. 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.

  10. 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...

  11. 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

  12. 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...

  13. 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

  14. 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)

  15. 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.

  16. 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

  17. 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.

  18. 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

  19. 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

  20. 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

  1. 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

  2. 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

  3. Columbia River System Operation Review : Final Environmental Impact Statement, Appendix D: Exhibits.

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    Columbia River System Operation Review (U.S.)

    1995-11-01

    The Columbia River and its tributaries are the primary water system in the Pacific Northwest, draining some 219,000 square miles in seven states and another 39,500 square miles in British Columbia. Beginning in the 1930`s, the Columbia River has been significantly modified by construction of 30 major dams on the river and its tributaries, along with dozens of non-Federal projects. Construction and subsequent operation of these water development projects have contributed to eight primary uses of the river system, including navigation, flood control, irrigation, electric power generation, fish migration, fish and wildlife habitat, recreation, and water supply and quality considerations. Increasing stress on the water development of the Columbia River and its tributaries has led primary Federal agencies to undertake intensive analysis and evaluation of the operation of these projects. These agencies are the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Bureau of Reclamation, who operate the large Federal dams on the river, and the Bonneville Power Administration who sells the power generated at the dams. This review, termed the System Operation Review (SOR), has as its ultimate goal to define a strategy for future operation of the major Columbia River projects which effectively considers the needs of all river uses. This volume, Appendix D: Cultural resources appendix, Technical imput includes the following: Development of geomorphology based framework for cultural resources management, Dworshak Reservoir, Idaho; Impact profiles for SOR reservoirs; comments from the following Native American tribes: Burns Paiute Tribe; Coville Confederated Tribes; Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Indian Reservation; Confederated Tribes and bands of the Yakama Indian Nation (comments); Nez Perce Tribe; Coeur D`Alene Tribe; Spokane Tribe of Indians; The confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation.

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

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    N/A

    2000-06-30

    , traffic, noise, and ecological resources, that could result from construction and operation of the proposed project. Key findings include that maximum modeled increases in ground-level concentrations of SO{sub 2} nitrogen dioxide (NO{sub 2}), and particulate matter (for the proposed project alone or in conjunction with the related action) would always be less than 10% of their corresponding standards for increases in pollutants. For potential cumulative air quality impacts, results of modeling regional sources and the proposed project indicate that the maximum 24-hour average SO{sub 2} concentration would closely approach (i.e., 97%) but not exceed the corresponding Florida standard. After the Unit 1 repowering, results indicate that the maximum 24-hour average SO{sub 2} concentration would be 91% of the Florida standard. Concentrations for other averaging periods and pollutants would be lower percentages of their standards. Regarding toxic air pollutants from the proposed project, the maximum annual cancer risk to a member of the public would be approximately 1 in 1 million; given the conservative assumptions in the estimate, the risk would probably be less. With regard to threatened and endangered species, impacts to manatees, gopher tortoises, and other species would be negligible or non-existent. Construction-induced traffic would result in noticeable congestion. In the unlikely event that all coal were transported by rail, up to 3 additional trains per week would exacerbate impacts associated with noise, vibration, and blocked roads at on-grade rail crossings. Additional train traffic could be minimized by relying more heavily on barges and ships for coal transport, which is likely to be a more economic fuel delivery mode. During construction of the proposed project, noise levels would increase from the current operational levels. Except possibly during steam blowouts and possibly during operation of equipment used to construct a nearby segment of a conveyor

  5. 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)

  6. 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

  7. 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...

  8. 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

  9. 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

  10. 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

  11. 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

  12. 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

  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, 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

  15. 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

  16. 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.

  17. 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

  18. 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

  19. 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...

  20. 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

  1. 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...

  2. 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

  3. 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

  4. 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...

  5. 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

  6. 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.

  7. 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

  8. 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

  9. 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.

  10. 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

  11. 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

  12. 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

  13. 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

  14. 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

  15. 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

  16. Final Technical Report & Financial Statement

    International Development Research Centre (IDRC) Digital Library (Canada)

    Moktadul

    activities was to improve the impact of research findings and empirical .... life of the project focusing on maximizing the synergy through their effective integration. .... In general, the poverty research of the project has contributed much in.

  17. 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...

  18. 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.

  19. 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.

  20. 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

  1. 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).

  2. 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

  3. 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

  4. Saugus River and Tributaries Flood Damage Reduction Study; Lynn, Malden, Revere and Saugus, Massachusetts. Section 2. Final Environmental Impact Statement and Final Environmental Impact Report

    Science.gov (United States)

    1989-12-01

    sensitive marine aquatic life although the less stringent acute criteria were usually met. Mercury appears to exceed the chronic criteria frequently while...other metals showing occasional exceedances include copper, zinc, lead, chromium and nickel. Acute criteria is also occasionally exceeded by copper. b...Main Report A- ppendices Sea Level Rise Chapter 8 P. 14 A-C,G,H Secondary & Cumulative Para. 7.206 Impacts Section 404(b)(1) After EIS/EIR Evaluation

  5. 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

  6. 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

  7. 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

  8. 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

  9. 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

  10. 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.

  11. 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...

  12. 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.

  13. 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

  14. 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

  15. 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...

  16. 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...

  17. 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...

  18. 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...

  19. 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...

  20. 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...

  1. 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

  2. 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

  3. 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

  4. Assessing indoor air quality options: Final environmental impact statement on new energy-efficient home programs: Volume 2

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1988-03-01

    This report discusses the impact of energy conservation measures on indoor air quality in various size residential buildings. This volume includes appendices on ventilation rates, indoor pollutant levels, health effects, human risk assessment, radon, fiberglass hazards, tobacco smoke, mitigation

  5. 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...

  6. 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...

  7. 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...

  8. 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

  9. 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

  10. 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

  11. 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.

  12. 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

  13. 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.

  14. 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

  15. 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

  16. 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.

  17. 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

  18. 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

  19. 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

  20. 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

  1. 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

  2. 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

  3. 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

  4. 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...

  5. 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...

  6. 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

  7. 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...

  8. 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...

  9. 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.

  10. 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

  11. 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

  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. 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

  14. 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

  15. 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...

  16. 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)

  17. 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

  18. 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

  19. 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...

  20. 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...

  1. 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

  2. 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...

  3. 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

  4. 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

  5. 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

  6. 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

  7. 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...

  8. 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...

  9. 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.

  10. 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

  11. 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

  12. 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...

  13. 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.

  14. 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...

  15. 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

  16. 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

  17. 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

  18. 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

  19. 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...

  20. 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

  1. 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

  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. 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...

  4. 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

  5. Generic impact statement for commercial radioactive waste management

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    Unruh, C.M.

    1976-01-01

    ERDA is preparing a generic environmental impact statement on the treatment and disposal of waste resulting from commercial reactors and post fission operations in the light water reactor (LWR) fuel cycle. Expert contributions will be provided by many of the ERDA national laboratories and contractors. The waste management aspects of the statement will be based on available technology as presented in the recently issued ''Alternatives for Managing Waste from Reactors and Post Fission Operations in the LWR Fuel Cycle,'' ERDA-76-43 Document. This 1500 page, five volume Technical Alternative Document (TAD) describes the status of technology (to September, 1975) for handling post fission radioactive waste generated by the production of electricity by nuclear power light water reactor-generator systems. The statement will be generic in nature discussing typical or hypothetical facilities in typical or hypothetical environments. It is not intended to replace environmental statements required in support of specific projects nor for Nuclear Regulatory Commission licensing procedures. A major purpose of the generic statement is to inform the public and to solicit comments on the ERDA program for: (1) the final disposition of commercial radioactive waste, (2) waste treatment, (3) waste interim storage, and (4) transportation of waste. The statement will discuss the ERDA contingency program to provide retrievable storage of such waste if they should be transferred to Federal custody prior to the availability of the geologic isolation facilities for terminal disposal. The generic statement will not address radioactive waste resulting from U.S. Defense Programs, the mining or milling of uranium, the management of waste from the breeder reactor program, waste from other nations, nor will it include an evaluation of the impact of waste resulting from power sources other than light water reactors

  6. 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...

  7. 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...

  8. 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...

  9. 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...

  10. 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...

  11. 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...

  12. 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...

  13. 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).

  14. 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...

  15. 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

  16. Final environmental impact statement for the Nevada test site and off-site locations in the State of Nevada. Human health risks and safety impacts study, Volume 1, Appendix H

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1996-08-01

    Proposed changes in the Nevada Test Site (NTS) operations, as well as the US Department of Energy (DOE) policy of reviewing sitewide National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documents, have resulted in the need for the US Department of Energy, Nevada Operations Office (DOE/NV) Operations Office to prepare a new Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the NTS. This report has been prepared to assess the human health and safety impacts from operations expected to be carried out under each of the four alternatives defined in the NTS EIS. These alternatives are: Alternative 1, Continue Current Operations (No Action); Alternative 2, Discontinue Operations; Alternative 3, Expanded Use; and Alternative 4, Alternate Use of Withdrawn Lands

  17. 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

  18. 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...

  19. 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...

  20. 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...

  1. 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

  2. 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

  3. 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.

  4. 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.

  5. 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

  6. 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

  7. Final programmatic environmental impact statement for alternative strategies for the long-term management and use of depleted uranium hexafluoride. Summary

    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

  8. Final programmatic environmental impact statement for alternative strategies for the long-term management and use of depleted uranium hexafluoride. Volume 1: Main text

    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

  9. Final programmatic environmental impact statement for alternative strategies for the long-term management and use of depleted uranium hexafluoride. Volume 2: Appendices

    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 contains Appendices A--O

  10. 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.

  11. 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

  12. Final guidelines for an Environmental Impact Statement on the proposed construction and operation of a replacement nuclear research reactor at the Lucas Heights Science and Technology Centre

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1998-01-01

    These guidelines are based on the requirements of paragraphs 4.1 and 4.3 of the Administrative Procedures under the Commonwealth Environment Protection (Impact of Proposals) Act 1974 (EPIP Act).The Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation (ANSTO) has been designated as proponent under the EPIP Act in relation to the proposed replacement nuclear research reactor at the Lucas Heights Science and Technology Centre (LHSTC). The term 'environment' refers to all aspects of the surroundings of human beings, whether affecting human beings as individuals or in social groupings. It includes the natural environment, the built environment, and social aspects of our surroundings. The definition covers such factors as air, water, soils, flora,fauna, buildings, roads, employment, hazards and risks, and safety. As set out in the guidelines, the scope of this assessment shall encompass those issues and alternatives directly related to the construction and operation of a replacement nuclear research reactor at the LHSTC. The EIS will need to make clear the site selection criteria used, and the basis, in assessing Lucas Heights as being suitable for a new reactor. While the EIS will address all aspects of the construction and operation of a replacement nuclear research reactor, it will not address issues associated with the treatment of spent nuclear fuel rods from the existing High Flux Australian Reactor (HIFAR facility). The EIS will also address issues associated with the eventual decommissioning of the proposed replacement reactor, and eventual decommissioning of the existing HIFAR facility

  13. Columbia River System Operation Review final environmental impact statement. Appendix S: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Coordination Act Report

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1995-11-01

    This document constitutes the report of the US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) relating to the proposed Columbia River System Operation Review (SOR). The SOR proposed alternative consists of a number of specific water management manipulations and new management targets for operating the network of existing Federal Columbia River Power System dams and facilities. This report, therefore, presents a broader, ecosystem planning and management approach for evaluating and resolving those operational and biological uncertainties. Potential mitigation, enhancement and restoration actions associated with the preferred alternative will require an adaptive implementation approach. At the present time and as further changes anticipated in SOR operations occur, the complete, ecosystemwide, synergistic effects of the operation of the current Federal Columbia River Power System cannot be adequately ascertained. However, the initial elements of ecosystem-based remedies are presented in Sections 4 and 5 of this report. These remedies are intended to stimulate action to help conserve distressed fish and wildlife populations, while furthering understanding of the impacts of the SOR preferred alternative on the ecosystem. This Coordination Act Report is the first attempt to integrate fish and wildlife mitigation, enhancement, recovery and restoration needs with the proposed action and the existing Federal Columbia River Power System

  14. 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

  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. 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...

  17. 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...

  18. 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...

  19. 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...

  20. 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...

  1. 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...

  2. 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

  3. 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

  4. 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

  5. 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

  6. 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

  7. 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...

  8. 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....

  9. 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...

  10. 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....

  11. 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....

  12. 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...

  13. 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....

  14. 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...

  15. 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...

  16. 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...

  17. 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...

  18. 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...

  19. 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...

  20. 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...

  1. 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...

  2. 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...

  3. 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...

  4. 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...

  5. 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...

  6. 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...

  7. 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...

  8. 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...

  9. 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...

  10. 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...

  11. 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...

  12. 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...

  13. 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...

  14. 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...

  15. 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...

  16. 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...

  17. 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...

  18. 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...

  19. 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...

  20. 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...

  1. 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...

  2. 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...

  3. 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...

  4. 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...

  5. 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...

  6. 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...

  7. 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...

  8. 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...

  9. 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...

  10. 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...

  11. 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...

  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. 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

  14. 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...

  15. 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

  16. Annual Financial Statements � the Final Products of Accounting

    Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

    Genu Alexandru Caruntu

    2016-07-01

    Full Text Available Being a tool and a first class social stake in decision making, accounting language should be understood by all users in the national area, but also across national borders, which requires an internationalization of accounting language through standardization and harmonization. The expansion and multiplication of international economic relations in which commodity and capital markets are expanding at a rapid pace, ignoring national borders, due to globalization process, require that the accounting systems should ensure through the financial statements (balance sheet, profit and loss account, statement of changes in equity, cash flow statement, accounting policies and explanatory notes accounting information comparable between countries.

  17. 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

  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. 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

  20. 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...

  1. 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

  2. Supplemental environmental impact statement - defense waste processing facility

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1994-11-01

    This document supplements the Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) DOE Issued in 1982 (DOE/EIS-0082) to construct and operate the Defense Waste Processing Facility (DWPF) at the Savannah River Site (SRS), a major DOE installation in southwestern South Carolina. That EIS supported the decision to construct and operate the DWPF to immobilize high-level waste generated as a result of nuclear materials processing at SRS. The DWPF would use a vitrification process to incorporate the radioactive waste into borosilicate glass and seal it in stainless steel canisters for eventual disposal at a permanent geologic repository. The DWPF is now mostly constructed and nearly ready for full operation. However, DOE has made design changes to the DWPF since the 1982 EIS to improve efficiency and safety of the facility. Each of these modifications was subjected to appropriate NEPA review. The purpose of this Supplemental EIS is to assist DOE in deciding whether and how to proceed with operation of the DWPF as modified since 1982 while ensuring appropriate consideration of potential environmental effects. In this document, DOE assesses the potential environmental impacts of completing and operating the DWPF in light of these design changes, examines the impact of alternatives, and identifies potential actions to be taken to reduce adverse impacts. Evaluations of impacts on water quality, air quality, ecological systems, land use, geologic resources, cultural resources, socioeconomics, and health and safety of onsite workers and the public are included in the assessment

  3. 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...

  4. 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...

  5. 10 CFR 51.81 - Distribution of draft environmental impact statement.

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-01-01

    ... 10 Energy 2 2010-01-01 2010-01-01 false Distribution of draft environmental impact statement. 51...-Regulations Implementing Section 102(2) Draft Environmental Impact Statements-Materials Licenses § 51.81 Distribution of draft environmental impact statement. Copies of the draft environmental impact statement and...

  6. 10 CFR 51.86 - Distribution of draft environmental impact statement.

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-01-01

    ... 10 Energy 2 2010-01-01 2010-01-01 false Distribution of draft environmental impact statement. 51...-Regulations Implementing Section 102(2) Draft Environmental Impact Statements-Rulemaking § 51.86 Distribution of draft environmental impact statement. Copies of the draft environmental impact statement and any...

  7. 43 CFR 46.415 - Environmental impact statement content, alternatives, circulation and filing requirements.

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-10-01

    ... 43 Public Lands: Interior 1 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false Environmental impact statement content... Impact Statements § 46.415 Environmental impact statement content, alternatives, circulation and filing requirements. The Responsible Official may use any environmental impact statement format and design as long as...

  8. 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...

  9. 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

  10. 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

  11. 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.

  12. 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). Final supplement dealing with occupational radiation dose. Supplement No. 1

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1984-10-01

    In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act, 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 has been supplemented. The supplement was required because current information indicates that cleanup may entail substantially more occupational radiation dose to the cleanup work force than originally anticipated. Cleanup was originally estimated to result in from 2000 to 8000 person-rem of occupational radiation dose. Although nearly 2000 person-rem have resulted from cleanup operations performed up to now, current estimates now indicate that between 13,000 and 46,000 person-rem are expected to be required. Alternative cleanup methods considered in the supplement either did not result in appreciable dose savings or were not known to be technically feasible

  13. 10 CFR 51.74 - Distribution of draft environmental impact statement and supplement to draft environmental impact...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-01-01

    ... 10 Energy 2 2010-01-01 2010-01-01 false Distribution of draft environmental impact statement and supplement to draft environmental impact statement; news releases. 51.74 Section 51.74 Energy NUCLEAR... Impact Statements § 51.74 Distribution of draft environmental impact statement and supplement to draft...

  14. Surplus plutonium disposition draft environmental impact statement. Summary

    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

  15. Advanced mixed waste treatment project draft environmental impact statement

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1998-07-01

    The AMWTP DEIS assesses the potential environmental impacts associated with four alternatives related to the construction and operation of a proposed waste treatment facility at the INEEL. Four alternatives were analyzed: The No Action Alternative, the Proposed Action, the Non-Thermal Treatment Alternative, and the Treatment and Storage Alternative. The proposed AMWTP facility would treat low-level mixed waste, alpha-contaminated low-level mixed waste, and transuranic waste in preparation for disposal. Transuranic waste would be disposed of at the Waste isolation Pilot Plant in New Mexico. Low-level mixed waste would be disposed of at an approval disposal facility depending on decisions to be based on DOE's Final Waste Management Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement. Evaluation of impacts on land use, socio-economics, cultural resources, aesthetic and scenic resources, geology, air resources, water resources, ecological resources, noise, traffic and transportation, occupational and public health and safety, INEEL services, and environmental justice were included in the assessment. The AMWTP DEIS identifies as the Preferred Alternative the Proposed Action, which is the construction and operation of the AMWTP facility

  16. 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

  17. Supplement to the Surplus Plutonium Disposition Draft Environmental Impact Statement

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1999-01-01

    On May 22, 1997, DOE published a Notice of Intent 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)''. ''The Surplus Plutonium Disposition Draft Environmental Impact Statement'' (SPD Draft EIS) (DOWEIS-0283-D) was prepared in accordance with NEPA and issued in July 1998. It identified the potential environmental impacts of reasonable alternatives for the proposed siting, construction, and operation of three facilities for plutonium disposition. These three facilities would accomplish pit disassembly and conversion, immobilization, and MOX fuel fabrication. For the alternatives that included MOX fuel fabrication, the draft also described the potential environmental impacts of using from three to eight commercial nuclear reactors to irradiate MOX fuel. The potential impacts were based on a generic reactor analysis that used actual reactor data and a range of potential site conditions. In May 1998, DCE initiated a procurement process to obtain MOX fuel fabrication and reactor irradiation services. The request for proposals defined limited activities that may be performed prior to issuance of the SPD EIS Record of Decision (ROD) including non-site-specific work associated with the development of the initial design for the MOX fuel fabrication facility, and plans (paper studies) for outreach, long lead-time procurements, regulatory management, facility quality assurance, safeguards, security, fuel qualification, and deactivation. No construction on the proposed MOX facility would begin before an SPD EIS ROD is issued. In March 1999, DOE awarded a contract to Duke Engineering and Services; COGEMA, Inc.; and Stone and Webster (known as DCS) to provide the requested services. The procurement process

  18. Supplement to the Surplus Plutonium Disposition Draft Environmental Impact Statement

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    N/A

    1999-05-14

    On May 22, 1997, DOE published a Notice of Intent 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)''. ''The Surplus Plutonium Disposition Draft Environmental Impact Statement'' (SPD Draft EIS) (DOWEIS-0283-D) was prepared in accordance with NEPA and issued in July 1998. It identified the potential environmental impacts of reasonable alternatives for the proposed siting, construction, and operation of three facilities for plutonium disposition. These three facilities would accomplish pit disassembly and conversion, immobilization, and MOX fuel fabrication. For the alternatives that included MOX fuel fabrication, the draft also described the potential environmental impacts of using from three to eight commercial nuclear reactors to irradiate MOX fuel. The potential impacts were based on a generic reactor analysis that used actual reactor data and a range of potential site conditions. In May 1998, DCE initiated a procurement process to obtain MOX fuel fabrication and reactor irradiation services. The request for proposals defined limited activities that may be performed prior to issuance of the SPD EIS Record of Decision (ROD) including non-site-specific work associated with the development of the initial design for the MOX fuel fabrication facility, and plans (paper studies) for outreach, long lead-time procurements, regulatory management, facility quality assurance, safeguards, security, fuel qualification, and deactivation. No construction on the proposed MOX facility would begin before an SPD EIS ROD is issued. In March 1999, DOE awarded a contract to Duke Engineering & Services; COGEMA, Inc.; and Stone & Webster (known as DCS) to provide the requested

  19. 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

  20. 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

  1. 75 FR 22723 - Stream Protection Rule; Environmental Impact Statement

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-04-30

    ..., 784, 816, and 817 RIN 1029-AC63 Stream Protection Rule; Environmental Impact Statement AGENCY: Office... streams from the adverse impacts of surface coal mining operations. We are requesting comments for the... mining activities may be conducted in or near perennial or intermittent streams. That rule, which this...

  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. Waste Isolation Pilot Plant: Draft Supplement Environmental Impact Statement

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1989-04-01

    The US Department of Energy (DOE) has prepared this supplement to the 1980 Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) in order to assess the environmental impacts that may occur from the continued development of the WIPP as a minced geologic repository for transuranic (TRU) waste. Since the publication of the FEIS in October 1980, new data collected at the WIPP have led to changes in the understanding of the hydrogeologic characteristics of the area and their potential implications for the long-term performance of the WIPP. In addition, there have been changes in the FEIS Proposed Action and new regulatory requirements. This supplement to the FEIS (SEIS) evaluates the environmental consequences of the Proposed Action as modified since 1980 in light of new data and assumptions. The new information pertains mainly to the geologic and hydrologic systems at the WIPP site and their effect on the long-term performance of the WIPP. The SEIS includes new data indicating that: the permeability of the Salado Formation, the geologic formation in which the WIPP underground facilities are located, is lower than previously believed; the moisture content of the Salado Formation and the consequent brine inflow is higher than previously believed; a higher transmissivity zone is present in the Rustler Formation in the southeastern portion of the WIPP site; and ''salt creep'' (convergence) in the repository occurs faster than previously believed. Volume 2 contains 11 appendices

  4. Quality of environmental impact statements in Portugal and Spain

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    Canelas, Leonel; Almansa, P.; Merchan, M.; Cifuentes, Pedro

    2005-01-01

    One of the key steps of the Environmental Impact Assessment Process, defined by Directive 337/85 'on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects' is the preparation of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) of a Project. The quality of the EIS is of great importance to properly inform the public and the decision makers about the significant environmental effects of the project. Using the 'Guidance on EIA-EIS Review' 2001 report, produced with the support of the European Commission, this paper analyses the overall quality of 46 recently elaborated EIS from Portugal and Spain (1998-2003). It also analyses the quality of the various chapters of the EIS and the Non-Technical Summary. A comparison is made between the quality of the EIS from Portugal and from Spain. The results for Portugal are also compared with those of other European countries (Ireland and United Kingdom) in similar periods. Finally it presents overall conclusions and suggestions for improvement

  5. Generic environmental impact statement for license renewal of nuclear plants

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1996-05-01

    Volume 2 of the Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants contains the appendices. These include: (A) General characterisitics and environmental settings of domestic nuclear plants, (B) Definition of impact initiators, (C) Socioeconomics and case studies, (D) Aquatic organisms and human health, (E) Radiation protection considerations, (F) Methodology for assessing impacts to aquatic ecology and water resources, (G) Postulated accidents, and (H) Environmental statutes and regulations affecting license renewal

  6. Planning for quality stewardship: The sitewide environmental impact statement

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    Webb, D.

    1995-01-01

    The U.S Department of Energy is responsible for managing many large tracts of Federal land throughout this country. These sites host the nation's nuclear weapons complex, national laboratories, environmental restoration facilities, and serve other uses. The Department faces unique problems in administering this land. Many have multiple activities taking place at the same time; for example, a site may simultaneously be used for energy research, technology development, waste disposal and wildlife habitat. The sites often use radioactive and other hazardous materials and many are contaminated as a result of past management practices. In 1992 the Department institutes a policy, as stated in its National Environmental Policy Act regulations [10 CFR 1021], to prepare sitewide environmental impact statements for its large, multipurpose sites. For the first time, through the sitewide environmental impact statement process, the Department has an effective tool to plan for quality stewardship of the lands and resources entrusted to its care. The sitewide environmental impact statement is a specialized type of programmatic environmental impact statement which allows the Department to look at the geographically connected actions taking place at a given site. The sitewide statement allows a comprehensive look at the operational baseline for the entire site to determine the total cumulative impact of ongoing operations at the site. The Department can identify areas where a change in management practices would mitigate undesirable impacts; areas not at issue could continue under existing practices. As a result, an environmentally-sound operating envelope can be established. This, in turn, can serve in the future as a threshold to decide if new proposals would result in significant impacts to the site as a whole, to simplify future National Environmental Policy Act reviews

  7. 76 FR 57720 - Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement/Overseas Environmental Impact...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2011-09-16

    ...The Department of the Navy published a document in the Federal Register (76 FR 174) on September 8, 2011, concerning public scoping meetings to support the development of an Environmental Impact Statement/Overseas Environmental Impact Statement for the Mariana Islands Training and Testing Study Area. The document contained an incorrect scoping date.

  8. Facilitating relative comparisons of health impacts from postulated accidents in environmental impact statements

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    Mueller, C.J.

    1996-01-01

    Current US Department of Energy (DOE) guidance on the performance of accident analyses supported an environmental impact statement (EIS) stresses a graded approach that emphasizes the most important risks, calls for the evaluation of frequencies as well as consequences for severe accident scenarios, and discourages the use of bounding analyses that confound risk comparisons among EIS alternatives. This paper discusses methods in probabilistic risk analysis that were developed and applied in defining accidents and generating radiological source terms for the DOE Draft Waste Management Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (WM PEIS); publication of the Final WM PEIS is due in late summer 1996. The strengths and shortcomings of the cited probabilistic risk analysis methods used to evaluate facility accidents are addressed, both as they relate to the WM PEIS and as they relate to more general EIS applications. Key guidance is discussed that was developed by DOE and used in shaping the techniques cited herein for application in an EIS. Related perceptions on accidents observed from the public comment process for the WM PEIS are cited. Finally, recommendations are made on the basis of needs as well as lessons learned in implementing the accident analysis for the WM PEIS

  9. Transmission System Vegetation Management Program. Draft Environmental Impact Statement - Appendices

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1999-01-01

    The appendices covered in this Draft Environmental Impact Statement are: Appendix A--Public involvement; Appendix B--Biological weed control agents; Appendix C--BPA herbicide licensing plan; Appendix D--Sample educational information; Appendix E--Clearance criteria; Appendix F--USFS mitigation measures and background; Appendix G--BLM mitigation measures and background and Appendix H--Pesticide fact sheets

  10. 77 FR 17051 - Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability

    Science.gov (United States)

    2012-03-23

    ... ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-9002-2] Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of..., ME, I-395/Route 9 Transportation System, To Improve Transportation System Linkage, Safety, and... Safety Modification Project, To Remediate Seismic, Seepage, and Hydrologic Deficiencies in the Main Dam...

  11. Business plan: Supplemental draft environmental impact statement. Volume 2. Appendices

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1995-02-01

    This document contains the appendices for the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) Business Plan: Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement. Included are: BPA products and services; Rate design; Methodology and assumptions for numerical analysis; Retail utility operations; Comments and responses to the draft business plan EIS

  12. 78 FR 63959 - Environmental Impact Statement; Animal Carcass Management

    Science.gov (United States)

    2013-10-25

    ...] Environmental Impact Statement; Animal Carcass Management AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service... pests or diseases. Large numbers of animals and carcasses may need to be disposed of or otherwise... management of large numbers of carcasses during an animal health emergency must be timely, safe, biosecure...

  13. Business Plan : Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement, Volume 2, Appendices.

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    United States. Bonneville Power Administration.

    1995-02-01

    This document contains the appendices for the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) Business Plan: Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement. Included are: BPA products and services; Rate design; Methodology and assumptions for numerical analysis; Retail utility operations; Comments and responses to the draft business plan EIS.

  14. 75 FR 34666 - Stream Protection Rule; Environmental Impact Statement

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-06-18

    ... rule means that we will need to prepare a new environmental impact statement rather than the supplement.... Establishing corrective action thresholds. Land Forming and Fill Optimization. Revising the backfilling and... Original Contour Exceptions. Limiting variances and exceptions from approximate original contour...

  15. 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

  16. 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

  17. 43 CFR 46.425 - Identification of the preferred alternative in an environmental impact statement.

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-10-01

    ... alternative in an environmental impact statement. 46.425 Section 46.425 Public Lands: Interior Office of the... Impact Statements § 46.425 Identification of the preferred alternative in an environmental impact statement. (a) Unless another law prohibits the expression of a preference, the draft environmental impact...

  18. 10 CFR 51.73 - Request for comments on draft environmental impact statement.

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-01-01

    ... 10 Energy 2 2010-01-01 2010-01-01 false Request for comments on draft environmental impact...-Regulations Implementing Section 102(2) Environmental Impact Statements § 51.73 Request for comments on draft environmental impact statement. Each draft environmental impact statement and each supplement to a draft...

  19. 10 CFR 51.70 - Draft environmental impact statement-general.

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-01-01

    ... 10 Energy 2 2010-01-01 2010-01-01 false Draft environmental impact statement-general. 51.70... Implementing Section 102(2) Environmental Impact Statements § 51.70 Draft environmental impact statement—general. (a) The NRC staff will prepare a draft environmental impact statement as soon as practicable...

  20. 10 CFR 51.85 - Draft environmental impact statement-rulemaking.

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-01-01

    ... 10 Energy 2 2010-01-01 2010-01-01 false Draft environmental impact statement-rulemaking. 51.85... Implementing Section 102(2) Draft Environmental Impact Statements-Rulemaking § 51.85 Draft environmental impact... Commission has determined to prepare an environmental impact statement. ...

  1. 10 CFR 51.71 - Draft environmental impact statement-contents.

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-01-01

    ... 10 Energy 2 2010-01-01 2010-01-01 false Draft environmental impact statement-contents. 51.71... Implementing Section 102(2) Environmental Impact Statements § 51.71 Draft environmental impact statement—contents. (a) Scope. The draft environmental impact statement will be prepared in accordance with the scope...

  2. 10 CFR 51.117 - Draft environmental impact statement-notice of availability.

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-01-01

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

  3. Environmental impact statement on management of commercially generated radioactive wastes

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    Shupe, M.W.; Kreiter, M.R.

    1979-01-01

    This report describes the generic environmental impact statement on the management of generated high-level and transuranic radioactive wastes. The contents of the statement are summarized. The alternatives considered include: geologic disposal; chemical resynthesis; very deep hole disposal; rock melting concept; island disposal; subseabed disposal; icesheet disposal; reverse well disposal; transmutation treatment; and space disposal concepts. The types and quantities of wastes considered are from 3 different fuel cycles for the LWR reactor: once through; uranium-only recycle; and uranium and platinum recycle

  4. Lepreau 2 environmental impact statement. Summary

    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 proposed facility are described in this report

  5. 78 FR 73559 - Moose-Wilson Corridor Comprehensive Management Plan, Environmental Impact Statement, Grand Teton...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2013-12-06

    ...-Wilson Corridor Comprehensive Management Plan, Environmental Impact Statement, Grand Teton National Park... is preparing a Comprehensive Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Moose...; (2) distinguish the corridor's fundamental and other important resources and values; (3) clearly...

  6. 75 FR 78980 - Notice of Availability of the Draft Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for Solar Energy...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-12-17

    ...] Notice of Availability of the Draft Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for Solar Energy... Draft Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for Solar Energy Development in Six Southwestern... preferred method of commenting. Mail: Addressed to: Solar Energy Draft Programmatic EIS, Argonne National...

  7. 78 FR 56869 - Nuclear Infrastructure Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement Supplement Analysis...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2013-09-16

    ... DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Nuclear Infrastructure Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement Supplement... of Energy (DOE) has completed the Supplement Analysis (SA) of the Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for Accomplishing Expanded Civilian Nuclear Energy Research and Development and Isotope Production...

  8. 75 FR 53979 - Bison Brucellosis Remote Vaccination, Draft Environmental Impact Statement, Yellowstone National...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-09-02

    ... DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service Bison Brucellosis Remote Vaccination, Draft Environmental Impact Statement, Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming ACTION: Reopening of public comment period... Brucellosis Remote Vaccination Draft Environmental Impact Statement. The original comment period was from 28...

  9. 2004 Power marketing program draft environmental impact statement

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1996-04-01

    This is volume 3 of a draft environmental impact statement from the Western Power Administration's Sierra Nevada Region. Information is included on the following topics: statutory and legal framework; Sierra Nevada region customer groups and economic regions; renewable technology cost information matrix; hydrological assumptions; recreation resources along river reaches and the delta; archaeological and historical aspects; power resources in PROSYM; air quality regulatory structure; energy generation for PROSYM cases; overall power costs for utility, agriculture, and other customers; socioeconomic impacts in specific economic regions; projected air resource impacts; and land use, water quality, and solid waste impact factors

  10. 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

  11. 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)

  12. 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)

  13. 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

  14. 78 FR 44137 - Availability of Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Proposed Construction of a Highway...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2013-07-23

    ... Environmental Impact Statement for the Proposed Construction of a Highway Bridge Across the Manatee River at... for the Manatee River Draft Environmental Impact Statement published in the Federal Register on July 5... published a notice titled, ``Availability of Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Proposed...

  15. 75 FR 4842 - Winter Use Plan, Environmental Impact Statement, Yellowstone National Park

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-01-29

    ... DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service Winter Use Plan, Environmental Impact Statement... to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for a Winter Use Plan, Yellowstone National Park... Park Service (NPS) is preparing an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for a Winter Use Plan for...

  16. 18 CFR 380.7 - Format of an environmental impact statement.

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-04-01

    ... environmental impact statement. 380.7 Section 380.7 Conservation of Power and Water Resources FEDERAL ENERGY... ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT § 380.7 Format of an environmental impact statement. In addition to the requirements for an environmental impact statement prescribed in 40 CFR 1502.10 of the regulations of the Council...

  17. 16 CFR 1.84 - Draft environmental impact statements: Availability and comment.

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-01-01

    ... 16 Commercial Practices 1 2010-01-01 2010-01-01 false Draft environmental impact statements... Environmental Policy Act of 1969 § 1.84 Draft environmental impact statements: Availability and comment. Except for proposals for legislation, environmental impact statements shall be prepared in two stages: Draft...

  18. 10 CFR 60.24 - Updating of application and environmental impact statement.

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-01-01

    ... 10 Energy 2 2010-01-01 2010-01-01 false Updating of application and environmental impact statement... environmental impact statement. (a) The application shall be as complete as possible in the light of information... was issued. (c) The DOE shall supplement its environmental impact statement in a timely manner so as...

  19. 18 CFR 380.6 - Actions that require an environmental impact statement.

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-04-01

    ... environmental impact statement. 380.6 Section 380.6 Conservation of Power and Water Resources FEDERAL ENERGY... ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT § 380.6 Actions that require an environmental impact statement. (a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, an environmental impact statement will normally be prepared first...

  20. 10 CFR 51.77 - Distribution of draft environmental impact statement.

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-01-01

    ... 10 Energy 2 2010-01-01 2010-01-01 false Distribution of draft environmental impact statement. 51...-Regulations Implementing Section 102(2) Draft Environmental Impact Statements-Production and Utilization Facilities § 51.77 Distribution of draft environmental impact statement. (a) In addition to the distribution...

  1. 43 CFR 46.445 - Preparing a legislative environmental impact statement.

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-10-01

    ... IMPLEMENTATION OF THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT OF 1969 Environmental Impact Statements § 46.445 Preparing a legislative environmental impact statement. When required under 40 CFR 1506.8, the Department must ensure that a legislative environmental impact statement is included as a part of the formal...

  2. 40 CFR 1501.4 - Whether to prepare an environmental impact statement.

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-07-01

    ... impact statement. 1501.4 Section 1501.4 Protection of Environment COUNCIL ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY NEPA AND AGENCY PLANNING § 1501.4 Whether to prepare an environmental impact statement. In determining whether to prepare an environmental impact statement the Federal agency shall: (a) Determine under its...

  3. 78 FR 17653 - Upper Great Plains Wind Energy Draft Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (DOE/EIS-0408)

    Science.gov (United States)

    2013-03-22

    ... Wildlife Service Upper Great Plains Wind Energy Draft Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (DOE/EIS... Plains Wind Energy Draft Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (Draft [[Page 17654

  4. 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

  5. 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

  6. Department of Energy Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) scoping session

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1992-01-01

    The purpose of this programmatic environmental impact statement (PEIS) scoping meeting was: to present the ground water program so as to build some familiarity and understanding about the issue involved; and to get the Durango community's input. This report contains the presentations made by the project manager for the uranium mill tailings program, site manager for the Durango UMTRA site, manager of ground water hydrology, and includes comments made by local residents

  7. Wildlife mitigation program. Draft environmental impact statement

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1996-08-01

    Bonneville Power Administration (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 enhancement, 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. Five standardizing 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

  8. Griffith energy project draft environmental impact statement

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1998-10-01

    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. The existing environmental resource conditions in the Project area and the potential impacts on the resources by the proposed action and alternatives are described. 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

  9. North Central Transmission Line: Guidelines for the environmental impact statement

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1992-01-01

    Guidelines that Manitoba Hydro must follow in the preparation of the environmental impact statement on the proposed North Central Transmission Line (TCTL) project are presented. The project consists of a 138 kV transmission line, two 25 kV distribution lines, and related ancillary structures and facilities. The review process must be sensitive to cultural and community needs and must involve those most directly affected, and should be grounded in the impacted northern communities. The review should include a project background, the proposal, a description of the existing natural and socio-economic environment, and must address employment, education and training, impacts on renewable resource harvesting, environmental impacts, social impacts and economic impacts, legal/jurisdictional issues, infrastructure, mitigation and compensation, and environmental monitoring and follow-up. 1 fig., 20 tabs

  10. 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

  11. 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

  12. 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

  13. Replacement Nuclear Research Reactor. Supplement to Draft Environmental Impact Statement. Volume 3

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    NONE

    1999-01-01

    The Draft Environmental Impact Statement for a replacement research reactor at Lucas Heights, was available for public examination and comment for some three months during 1998. A Supplement to the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (Draft EIS) has been completed and was lodged with Environment Australia on 18 January 1999. The Supplement is an important step in the overall environmental assessment process. It reviews submissions received and provides the proponent`s response to issues raised in the public review period. General issues extracted from submissions and addressed in the Supplement include concern over liability issues, Chernobyl type accidents, the ozone layer and health issues. Further studies, relating to issues raised in the public submission process, were undertaken for the Supplementary EIS. These studies confirm, in ANSTO`s view, the findings of the Draft EIS and hence the findings of the Final EIS are unchanged from the Draft EIS

  14. Replacement Nuclear Research Reactor. Supplement to Draft Environmental Impact Statement. Volume 3

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    1999-01-01

    The Draft Environmental Impact Statement for a replacement research reactor at Lucas Heights, was available for public examination and comment for some three months during 1998. A Supplement to the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (Draft EIS) has been completed and was lodged with Environment Australia on 18 January 1999. The Supplement is an important step in the overall environmental assessment process. It reviews submissions received and provides the proponent's response to issues raised in the public review period. General issues extracted from submissions and addressed in the Supplement include concern over liability issues, Chernobyl type accidents, the ozone layer and health issues. Further studies, relating to issues raised in the public submission process, were undertaken for the Supplementary EIS. These studies confirm, in ANSTO's view, the findings of the Draft EIS and hence the findings of the Final EIS are unchanged from the Draft EIS

  15. 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

  16. Interdisciplinary environmental impact statement examinations with parallel licensing procedures

    International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

    Gassner, E.

    1990-01-01

    The article investigates the question how the interdisciplinary, collective, integrative environmental impact statement can predominate the decisions in individual licensing procedures. It illustrates the requirements of the Act on Environmental Impact Statements. According to this Act, measures are to be found which deal with the overall complex, i.e. the entire system. In the article, the monitoring project organization's primary responsibility is emphasized: Analysis and prognosis of a project's environmental impacts are transferred to this organization for decision-preparation. Subsequent corrections or supplementations during the official approval procedure, or incorporation of the public through the authorities, do not change the matter. An all-comprehensive assessment must be based on all-comprehensive standards. From the point of view of immissions this is minimization of adverse effects on the nature cycle and landscape matters; from the point of view of emissions it is the duty of environment-compatible waste management within the sense of waste management legislation having to serve public welfare. (orig.) [de

  17. 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)

  18. 76 FR 55703 - Draft Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report and Notice of Public Meetings...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2011-09-08

    ..., and physical and cyber security systems. The new JOC also must meet State essential service criteria... DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Reclamation Draft Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report and Notice of Public Meetings for the Joint Operations Center Relocation Project...

  19. 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...

  20. 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