EIS Comment Summary Document

Ymp

Informations

• Publié par: Ninol
• Nombre de lectures: 23
• Langue: English

Extrait

Environmental Impact Statement For A Proposed Repository
At Yucca Mountain, Nevada
Summary of Public Scoping Comments
Related to the
Environmental Impact Statement
for a Geologic Repository for the Disposal
of Spent Nuclear Fuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste
at Yucca Mountain, Nye County, Nevada
May 1997
U.S. Department of Energy
Yucca Mountain Site Characterization OfficeTABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page
Acronyms...................................................................iv
1. INTRODUCTION .........................................................1
1.1 PURPOSE AND ORGANIZATION OF THE DOCUMENT ..................1
1.2 BACKGROUND ....................................................1
1.3 ALTERNATIVES TO BE EVALUATED IN THE REPOSITORY
E N V I RO N ME N T A L I MPA CT ST A T E ME N T.............................3
1.4 RE L A T E D N E PA RE V I E WS ..........................................4
2. T H E SCO PI N G PRO CE SS .................................................7
2.1 D E SCRI PT I O N O F T H E SCO PI N G PRO CE SS............................7
2.1.1 Pre-Scoping Briefings ..........................................7
2.1.2 Public Meetings ..............................................8
2.2 RE SU L T S O F T H E SCO PI N G PRO CE SS ................................8
2.2.1 Policy .....................................................11
2.2.2 NEPA Process ...............................................15
2.2.3 Proposed Action/Alternatives ...................................15
2.2.4 Schedule and Licensing of Repository ............................17
2.2.5 Land Use ...................................................17
2.2.6 Air Quality and Meteorology Issues ..............................18
2.2.7 Geology ....................................................18
2.2.8 Hydrology ..................................................19
2.2.9 Biology ....................................................20
2.2.10 Health and Safety ............................................21
2.2.11 Transportation ...............................................21
2.2.12 Cultural and Historic Resources .................................22
2.2.13 Environmental Justice .........................................23
2.2.14 Noise and Aesthetics ..........................................25
2.2.15 Performance Assessment ......................................25
2.2.16 Cumulative Impacts6
2.2.17 Mitigation ..................................................26
2.2.18 Program/Project Cost7
2.2.19 Socioeconomics .............................................27
2.2.20 Accidents ...................................................28
2.2.21 General ....................................................29
REFERENCES ..............................................................30
iList of Figures
F ig ur e 1- 1 Re positor y E I S T ime line ............................................2
List of Tables
T a ble 2- 1 Me e ting s L oc a tions a nd A tte nda nc e ...................................9
T a ble 2- 2 I ssue Ca te g or ie s I de ntif ie d D ur ing Sc oping f or the Re positor y E I S ..........10
Appendix A SUMMARY OF SCOPING COMMENTS BY CATEGORY
T a ble A .1- 1. Polic y ........................................................ A - 1
T a ble A .1- 2. D O E N E PA Polic y.............................................. A - 6
T a ble A .1- 3. O the r E I Ss .................................................... A - 9
T a ble A .1- 4. Pe r c e ption- ba se d I mpa c ts ....................................... A - 10
T a ble A .1- 5. L e g a l A - 11
T a ble A .2- 1. Sc oping Pr oc e ss ............................................... A - 13
T a ble A .2- 2. I mple me nta tion Pla n ........................................... A - 16
T a ble A .2- 3. Consulta tions ................................................. A - 17
T a ble A .2- 4. Re c or d of D e c ision ............................................ A - 18
T a ble A .2- 5. I mpa c t A na ly sis Pr oc e ss ........................................ A - 19
Table A.3. Alternatives .................................................. A-20
Table A.4. Schedule and Licensing ......................................... A-24
Table A.5. Land Use .................................................... A-25
Table A.6. Air Quality and Meteorology ..................................... A-27
Table A.7. Geology ..................................................... A-28
Table A.8. Hydrology ................................................... A-31
Table A.9. Biology ...................................................... A-33
Table A.10. Public Health and Safety ........................................ A-34
Table A.11-1. General Transportation ......................................... A-35
Table A.11-2. Transportation Routing A-36
Table A.11-3. Transportation Accidents A-38
Table A.11-4. Transportation Human Health .................................... A-39
Table A.11-5. Transportation Emergency Response ............................... A-40
Table A.11-6. Regional Rail and Heavy Haul A-41
Table A.11-7. Transportation Packaging ....................................... A-42
Table A.12-1. Cultural and Historic Resources, General ........................... A-45
Table A.12-2. Cultural and Historic Resource, Native American Issues ............... A-46
Table A.13. Environmental Justice .......................................... A-48
Table A.14. Noise and Aesthetics ........................................... A-49
Table A.15. Performance Assessment ........................................ A-50
Table A.16. Cumulative Impacts ............................................ A-55
Table A.17. Mitigation .................................................... A-56
Table A.18. Program Cost ................................................. A-58
iiTable A.19. Socioeconomics ............................................... A-59
Table A.20. Accidents .................................................... A-65
Table A.21. General ...................................................... A-66
iiiACRONYMS
CFR - Code of Federal Regulations
DOE - Department of Energy
EIS - Environmental Impact Statement
FR - Federal Register
HLW - high-level radioactive waste
MTHM - metric tons of heavy metal
NEPA - National Environmental Policy Act
NTS - Nevada Test Site
NWPA - Nuclear Waste Policy Act
SNF - spent nuclear fuel
iv1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 PURPOSE AND ORGANIZATION OF THE DOCUMENT
The U. S. Department of Energy (DOE) is evaluating in the Environmental Impact
Statement for a Geologic Repository for the Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel and High-Level
Radioactive Waste at Yucca Mountain, Nye County, Nevada [Repository Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS)] the proposal to construct, operate, and permanently close a geologic repository
[Federal Register (FR) 1995a]. This comment summary document summarizes comments and
issues identified during the public scoping process and indicates the general approach for
addressing issues in the Repository EIS.
Section 1 describes the history and scope of the Repository EIS, the alternatives being evaluated
in the EIS, and related National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) reviews. Section 2
summarizes the major issues identified during the public scoping process for the Repository EIS
and describes a general approach for what will be addressed in the EIS. Appendix A contains
comment summaries compiled by DOE based on the public comments received during the public
scoping process for the Repository EIS.
On July 9, 1996, DOE published a final rule in the Federal Register that, among other
things, eliminated the requirement to prepare an implementation plan [formerly in Section
1021.312 of DOE NEPA regulations at 10 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 1021]. This
change was made to simplify the DOE NEPA process, reduce cost, and save time. The
elimination of the implementation plan does not, however, relinquish the requirement to consider
public scoping comments and factor them into the preparation of an EIS. This document
summarizes and categorizes comments received during the public scoping process into issue
areas to discuss what issues will be addressed in the EIS. The intent is not to provide a direct
response to every question that was asked during period. Preparation of this
document fulfills DOE’s commitment, made during the EIS scoping process, to inform the public
of the outcome of that process.
1.2 BACKGROUND
The Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, as amended, (NWPA) directs the DOE to
evaluate the suitability of the Yucca Mountain site in southern Nevada as a potential site for
development of a geologic repository for the disposal of spent nuclear fuel (SNF) and high level
radioactive waste (HLW). If the Secretary of Energy determines that the Yucca Mountain site is
suitable, the Secretary may then recommend that the President approve the site for development
of a repository. Under the NWPA, such a recommendation must be accompanied by a Final EIS.
Therefore, DOE is preparing the Repository EIS to support a potential recommendation for
development of a repository at Yucca Mountain. The NWPA also directs the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission to adopt DOE’s Repository EIS, to the extent practicable, in connec