ML20279A355: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(StriderTol Bot insert)
 
(StriderTol Bot change)
 
Line 16: Line 16:


=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Draft Environmental Impact Statement for a Consolidated Interim Storage Facility for Spent Nuclear Fuel in Andrews County, Texas Public Comment Meeting October 6, 2020 Webinar Webinar access:
{{#Wiki_filter:1 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Draft Environmental Impact Statement for a Consolidated Interim Storage Facility for Spent Nuclear Fuel in Andrews County, Texas Public Comment Meeting October 6, 2020 Webinar Webinar access:
https://usnrc.webex.com Event number: 199 740 4202 Event password: ISPDEIS Telephone access Phone number: 888-989-9268 Passcode: 5300047 AUDIO FOR THE MEETING IS THROUGH THE TELEPHONE LINE 1
https://usnrc.webex.com Event number: 199 740 4202 Event password: ISPDEIS Telephone access Phone number: 888-989-9268 Passcode: 5300047 AUDIO FOR THE MEETING IS THROUGH THE TELEPHONE LINE


U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Draft Environmental Impact Statement for a Consolidated Interim Storage Facility (CISF) for Spent Nuclear Fuel in Andrews County, Texas Public Comment Meetings Webinars - October 1, 6, 8, and 15, 2020 Thursday, October 1, 2020 - 4pm MT / 5pm CT / 6pm ET           Tuesday, October 6, 2020 - 12pm MT / 1pm CT / 2pm ET Webinar                                                        Webinar Event address: https://usnrc.webex.com/                         Event address: https://usnrc.webex.com/
2 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Draft Environmental Impact Statement for a Consolidated Interim Storage Facility (CISF) for Spent Nuclear Fuel in Andrews County, Texas Public Comment Meetings Webinars - October 1, 6, 8, and 15, 2020 Thursday, October 1, 2020 - 4pm MT / 5pm CT / 6pm ET Webinar Event address: https://usnrc.webex.com/
Event number: 199 125 5213                                      Event number: 199 740 4202 Event password: ISPDEIS                                         Event password: ISPDEIS Telephone access                                                Telephone access Phone number: 888-989-9268                                      Phone number: 888-989-9268 Passcode: 5300047                                              Passcode: 5300047 Thursday, October 8, 2020 - 4pm MT / 5pm CT / 6pm ET            Thursday, October 15, 2020 - 9am MT / 10am CT / 11am ET Webinar                                                        Webinar Event address: https://usnrc.webex.com/                        Event address: https://usnrc.webex.com/
Event number: 199 125 5213 Event password: ISPDEIS Telephone access Phone number: 888-989-9268 Passcode: 5300047 Thursday, October 8, 2020 - 4pm MT / 5pm CT / 6pm ET Webinar Event address: https://usnrc.webex.com/
Event number: 199 619 8948                                      Event number: 199 551 6533 Event password: ISPDEIS                                         Event password: ISPDEIS Telephone access                                                Telephone access Phone number: 888-989-9268                                      Phone number: 888-989-9268 Passcode: 5300047                                               Passcode: 5300047 2
Event number: 199 619 8948 Event password: ISPDEIS Telephone access Phone number: 888-989-9268 Passcode: 5300047 Tuesday, October 6, 2020 - 12pm MT / 1pm CT / 2pm ET Webinar Event address: https://usnrc.webex.com/
AUDIO FOR ALL MEETINGS WILL BE THROUGH THE TELEPHONE LINE
Event number: 199 740 4202 Event password: ISPDEIS Telephone access Phone number: 888-989-9268 Passcode: 5300047 Thursday, October 15, 2020 - 9am MT / 10am CT / 11am ET Webinar Event address: https://usnrc.webex.com/
Event number: 199 551 6533 Event password: ISPDEIS Telephone access Phone number: 888-989-9268 Passcode: 5300047 AUDIO FOR ALL MEETINGS WILL BE THROUGH THE TELEPHONE LINE


Members of the Media Please contact David McIntyre NRCs Public Affairs Officer David.McIntyre@nrc.gov 3
3 Members of the Media Please contact David McIntyre NRCs Public Affairs Officer David.McIntyre@nrc.gov


Spanish Language Staff and Slides Spanish language slides are available at https://www.nrc.gov/waste/spent-fuel-storage/cis/waste-control-specialist.html Native Spanish speaking staff available during todays meeting 4
4 Spanish Language Staff and Slides Spanish language slides are available at https://www.nrc.gov/waste/spent-fuel-storage/cis/waste-control-specialist.html Native Spanish speaking staff available during todays meeting


Welcoming Remarks 5
5 Welcoming Remarks
* NRCs Review Process
 
              - Safety Review
6 Meeting Overview
              - Environmental Review Meeting
* NRCs Review Process  
* Overview of Interim Storage Partners License Application Overview
- Safety Review
- Environmental Review
* Overview of Interim Storage Partners License Application
* Public Scoping Comments and Concerns
* Public Scoping Comments and Concerns
* NRCs Environmental Review Results
* NRCs Environmental Review Results
* Information Resources and Ways to Comment
* Information Resources and Ways to Comment
* Public Comment 6
* Public Comment  


To receive comments on the Draft Environmental Impact PURPOSE OF  Statement (EIS) for ISPs THE MEETING Consolidated Interim Storage Facility (CISF) License Application 7
7 PURPOSE OF THE MEETING To receive comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for ISPs Consolidated Interim Storage Facility (CISF) License Application


The NRCs Review Process for CISF License Applications 8
8 The NRCs Review Process for CISF License Applications


The NRCs CISF Review Process
9 The NRCs CISF Review Process
* Evaluate the application and determine whether a license should be issued
* Evaluate the application and determine whether a license should be issued
* Not to promote ISPs proposal or the Consolidated Interim Storage Facility (CISF) concept
* Not to promote ISPs proposal or the Consolidated Interim Storage Facility (CISF) concept
* Safety and Environmental Review of ISPs application
* Safety and Environmental Review of ISPs application
  - Safety Review: Determine whether ISP can safely construct and operate the CISF at the proposed site
- Safety Review: Determine whether ISP can safely construct and operate the CISF at the proposed site
  - Environmental Review: Evaluate the environmental impacts of building and operating the CISF at the proposed site 9
- Environmental Review: Evaluate the environmental impacts of building and operating the CISF at the proposed site


NRCs Decision Process for CISF Reviews Applicant Submits License Application NEPA - National AEA - Atomic Energy Act NRC Accepts                       Environmental Policy Act
10 NRCs Decision Process for CISF Reviews Applicant Submits License Application NRC Accepts License Application NRC Safety Review (Safety Evalution Report)
* Regulations must be met License Application
NRC Environmental Review (Environmental Impact Statement)
* Disclosure of for licensing environmental impacts
NRC Adjudicatory Hearings ASLB Issues Findings NRC Licensing Decision 10 NEPA - National Environmental Policy Act Disclosure of environmental impacts NRC impact levels AEA - Atomic Energy Act Regulations must be met for licensing 10 Code of Federal Regulations Part 72
* 10 Code of Federal
* NRC impact levels Regulations Part 72 NRC Safety                                 NRC Review                            Environmental NRC Adjudicatory          Review (Safety Evalution     Hearings Report)                           (Environmental Impact Statement)
ASLB Issues Findings NRC Licensing Decision 10 10


NRCs CISF Safety Review Financial          Hazards from Natural Operational controls,            Qualifications    Phenomena (Flood, limits, procedures;                                Wind, Fires,Tornados, training and qualifications                        High/Low temps)
11 NRCs CISF Safety Review Hazards from Natural Phenomena (Flood, Wind, Fires,Tornados, High/Low temps)
Physical Security; Emergency Response Hazards from nearby industrial facilities, pipelines, transportation             Geologic features, soil               Facility building design; characteristics, seismic              storage system design; hazards                                quality assurance 11
Physical Security; Emergency Response Hazards from nearby industrial facilities, pipelines, transportation Geologic features, soil characteristics, seismic hazards Financial Qualifications Facility building design; storage system design; quality assurance Operational controls, limits, procedures; training and qualifications


NRCs CISF Environmental Review Scenic and Visual Public and                                                   Noise Occupational Health                                                           Air Quality Waste Management Historic and Cultural Ecology Socioeconomics Water Resources Environmental Justice (Surface and Groundwater)
12 NRCs CISF Environmental Review Air Quality Scenic and Visual Public and Occupational Health Ecology Socioeconomics Environmental Justice Water Resources (Surface and Groundwater)
Transportation Geology and Soils 12
Geology and Soils Transportation Waste Management Noise Historic and Cultural


Summary of ISPs License Application for its Proposed CISF for Spent Nuclear Fuel 13
13 Summary of ISPs License Application for its Proposed CISF for Spent Nuclear Fuel  


ISPs Proposed CISF Source: Modified from National Enrichment Facility Environmental Report, December 2003) 14
14 ISPs Proposed CISF Source: Modified from National Enrichment Facility Environmental Report, December 2003)


ISPs Proposed CISF 15
15 ISPs Proposed CISF


ISPs Proposed CISF 16
16 ISPs Proposed CISF


Phases and Stages
17 Phases and Stages
* ISPs proposed action is Phase 1 or 5000 MTUs
* ISPs proposed action is Phase 1 or 5000 MTUs
* EIS evaluates potentially impacts of up to 8 PHASES
* EIS evaluates potentially impacts of up to 8 PHASES
  - Note that the safety review evaluates Phase 1 storage facility and any other facilities that are important to safety (i.e. transfer building components)
- Note that the safety review evaluates Phase 1 storage facility and any other facilities that are important to safety (i.e. transfer building components)
* EIS evaluates 3 STAGES of the project
* EIS evaluates 3 STAGES of the project  
  - Construction, Operation, and Decommissioning
- Construction, Operation, and Decommissioning
* Phase 1 includes construction of rail sidetrack and additional supporting facilities 17
* Phase 1 includes construction of rail sidetrack and additional supporting facilities


Public Scoping Comments 18
18 Public Scoping Comments


Scoping Process
19 Scoping Process
* Scoping Periods
* Scoping Periods  
  - November 16, 2016 - April 28, 2017 and September 4, 2018 -
- November 16, 2016 - April 28, 2017 and September 4, 2018 -
November 19, 2018
November 19, 2018
  - Webinars from Rockville, MD and in-person meetings held in Andrews, TX and Hobbs, NM
- Webinars from Rockville, MD and in-person meetings held in Andrews, TX and Hobbs, NM
* Comments -
* Comments -
  - 29,430 pieces of comment correspondence
- 29,430 pieces of comment correspondence
  - Approximately 3,200 unique scoping comments
- Approximately 3,200 unique scoping comments
* Scoping comment report
* Scoping comment report
  - https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML1916/ML19161A150.pdf 19
- https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML1916/ML19161A150.pdf


Scoping Comments
20 Scoping Comments
* Transportation
* Transportation
- Safety/Accidents
- Radiation dose to citizens near the rail line
* Geology
- Induced seismicity
* Water Resources
- Located near surface beneath WCS site
- Contamination of Ogallala Aquifer Location and Land Use
- Co-located with other waste storage activities at WCS site
* Socioeconomics
* Socioeconomics
  - Safety/Accidents
* Greater impact on New Mexico due to sites border location
* Greater impact on New Mexico due to
  - Radiation dose to citizens near the rail      sites border location line
* Environmental Justice
* Environmental Justice
* Geology
* Disproportionate on Hispanic population
* Disproportionate on Hispanic
  - Induced seismicity                            population
* Water Resources
* Out of Scope - Safety Issues
* Out of Scope - Safety Issues
* Cask and canister design
* Cask and canister design
  - Located near surface beneath WCS site
* Monitoring
* Monitoring
  - Contamination of Ogallala Aquifer
* Handling  
* Handling
* Location and Land Use
  - Co-located with other waste storage activities at WCS site 20


Results of NRCs Environmental Review 21
21 Results of NRCs Environmental Review


Impact Significance Levels
22 Impact Significance Levels
* SMALL - Environmental effects are not detectable or are so minor that they will neither destabilize nor noticeably alter any important attribute of the resource.
*SMALL - Environmental effects are not detectable or are so minor that they will neither destabilize nor noticeably alter any important attribute of the resource.
* MODERATE - Environmental effects are sufficient to alter noticeably, but not to destabilize, important attributes of the resource.
*MODERATE - Environmental effects are sufficient to alter noticeably, but not to destabilize, important attributes of the resource.
* LARGE - Environmental effects are clearly noticeable and are sufficient to destabilize important attributes of the resource.
*LARGE - Environmental effects are clearly noticeable and are sufficient to destabilize important attributes of the resource.
22


Impact Evaluation Transportation analysis
23 Impact Evaluation Transportation analysis Increase in traffic levels from workers and construction vehicles Evaluated spent fuel movement for Phase 1 (425 shipments) and for full buildout (3,400 shipments) using modeling Radiological dose rates to the public and workers along the rail route, from incident-free and accident conditions Transportation impacts Minor increase in traffic along local roads around proposed site Dose of 1.9 mrem from 3,400 shipments to a person 30 meters from rail line.
* Increase in traffic levels from workers and construction vehicles
No accidental release of canistered fuel under the most severe impacts studied.
* Evaluated spent fuel movement for Phase 1 (425 shipments) and for full buildout (3,400 shipments) using modeling
* Radiological dose rates to the public and workers along the rail route, from incident-free and accident conditions Transportation impacts
* Minor increase in traffic along local roads around proposed site
* Dose of 1.9 mrem from 3,400 shipments to a person 30 meters from rail line.
* No accidental release of canistered fuel under the most severe impacts studied.
23


Impact Evaluation Ground Water analysis                             Geology analysis
24 Impact Evaluation Ground Water analysis Shallowest confined ground water lies about 225 feet below the CISF site Isolated pockets of limited saturation found about 90-100 feet below the CISF site CISF site is about 1 mile, at closest approach, to SW of SW limits of Ogallala Aquifer Ground Water impacts Potable water supplied from City of Eunice, NMs water wells CISF construction would not affect ground water due to depth to ground water CISF operation would not affect ground water due to facility design and depth to ground water Geology analysis Evaporites about 1500 feet below the CISF site No sinkholes near the CISF site Largest recorded earthquake near CISF site is 1992 magnitude 5.0 earthquake about 18 mi away Geology impacts Surficial excavation of soils during construction CISF site in area of low seismic risk Subsidence and sinkholes not likely due to depth to evaporite deposits below the CISF site
* Shallowest confined ground water lies about
* Evaporites about 1500 feet below the CISF site 225 feet below the CISF site
* No sinkholes near the CISF site
* Isolated pockets of limited saturation found
* Largest recorded earthquake near CISF site is about 90-100 feet below the CISF site             1992 magnitude 5.0 earthquake about 18 mi
* CISF site is about 1 mile, at closest approach,   away to SW of SW limits of Ogallala Aquifer Geology impacts Ground Water impacts
* Surficial excavation of soils during construction
* Potable water supplied from City of Eunice,
* CISF site in area of low seismic risk NMs water wells
* Subsidence and sinkholes not likely due to
* CISF construction would not affect ground         depth to evaporite deposits below the CISF site water due to depth to ground water
* CISF operation would not affect ground water due to facility design and depth to ground water 24


Impact Evaluation Socioeconomics analysis                           Environmental Justice
25 Impact Evaluation Socioeconomics analysis Primarily associated with workers who might move Resources available to the community Economic growth and tax revenues generated Demand on public services, schools and housing Socioeconomics impacts Estimated maximum of 110 workers on site (50 construction workers, 60 regular workers)
* Primarily associated with workers who might
Impacts to a 3-county area (Andrews, Gaines, and Lea counties)
* Analysis of the human health and move                                              environmental impacts on low-income and
Noticeable increase in population growth and in local revenues Environmental Justice Analysis of the human health and environmental impacts on low-income and minority populations 109 block groups that fall completely or partially within the 50-mile radius of the proposed CISF project area.
* Resources available to the community              minority populations
Identify disproportionately high and adverse impacts on minority or low-income populations NRC analysis does not find means or pathways for disproportionate effects on minority or low-income populations No disproportionate impacts on minority or low-income populations
* Economic growth and tax revenues generated
* 109 block groups that fall completely or partially
* Demand on public services, schools and            within the 50-mile radius of the proposed CISF housing                                          project area.
* Identify disproportionately high and adverse Socioeconomics impacts                              impacts on minority or low-income populations
* Estimated maximum of 110 workers on site (50
* NRC analysis does not find means or pathways construction workers, 60 regular workers)        for disproportionate effects on minority or low-
* Impacts to a 3-county area (Andrews, Gaines,      income populations and Lea counties)
* No disproportionate impacts on minority or low-
* Noticeable increase in population growth and in  income populations local revenues 25


Impact Evaluation Facility Location/Land Use                    Facility Location/Land Use analysis                                     impacts
26 Impact Evaluation Facility Location/Land Use analysis Location proposed by ISP Within larger WCS-owned property Active oil & gas extraction in the region surrounding the WCS property Nearest permanent resident is about 4 miles west of the proposed CISF site Facility Location/Land Use impacts Access restrictions to WCS property and CISF site Approximately 330 acres disturbed by CISF construction Activities outside the CISF site would not be affected (e.g., grazing, oil & gas extraction)
* Access restrictions to WCS property and
After CISF decommissioning, CISF infrastructure may remain or be removed
* Location proposed by ISP CISF site
* Within larger WCS-owned property
* Approximately 330 acres disturbed by
* Active oil & gas extraction in the region     CISF construction surrounding the WCS property
* Activities outside the CISF site would not
* Nearest permanent resident is about 4 miles  be affected (e.g., grazing, oil & gas extraction) west of the proposed CISF site
* After CISF decommissioning, CISF infrastructure may remain or be removed 26


Results of NRCs Environmental Review RESOURCE         IMPACT EVALUATION (construction, operation and decommission/reclamation stages)
27 Results of NRCs Environmental Review RESOURCE IMPACT EVALUATION (construction, operation and decommission/reclamation stages)
Land Use         SMALL - Proposed Action SMALL - Additional Phases Transportation   SMALL - Proposed Action SMALL - Additional Phases Geology and Soils SMALL - Proposed Action SMALL - Additional Phases Surface Water     SMALL - Proposed Action SMALL - Additional Phases Groundwater       SMALL - Proposed Action SMALL - Additional Phases Ecology           SMALL to MODERATE - Proposed Action**
Land Use SMALL - Proposed Action SMALL - Additional Phases Transportation SMALL - Proposed Action SMALL - Additional Phases Geology and Soils SMALL - Proposed Action SMALL - Additional Phases Surface Water SMALL - Proposed Action SMALL - Additional Phases Groundwater SMALL - Proposed Action SMALL - Additional Phases Ecology SMALL to MODERATE - Proposed Action**
SMALL to MODERATE - Additional Phases**
SMALL to MODERATE - Additional Phases**
                    ** until vegetation has been reestablished Air Quality       SMALL - Proposed Action SMALL - Additional Phases                             27
** until vegetation has been reestablished Air Quality SMALL - Proposed Action SMALL - Additional Phases


Results of NRCs Environmental Review RESOURCE               IMPACT EVALUATION (construction, operation and decommission/reclamation stages)
28 RESOURCE IMPACT EVALUATION (construction, operation and decommission/reclamation stages)
Noise                   SMALL - Proposed Action SMALL - Additional Phases Historic and Cultural   SMALL - Proposed Action SMALL - Additional Phases Visual and Scenic       SMALL - Proposed Action SMALL - Additional Phases Socioeconomic           SMALL to MODERATE*
Noise SMALL - Proposed Action SMALL - Additional Phases Historic and Cultural SMALL - Proposed Action SMALL - Additional Phases Visual and Scenic SMALL - Proposed Action SMALL - Additional Phases Socioeconomic SMALL to MODERATE*
                          *on population growth and beneficial on local finances Environmental Justice   There would be no disproportionately high and adverse impacts to either minority or low-income populations Public and Occupational SMALL - Proposed Action Health                  SMALL - Additional Phases Waste Management       SMALL - Proposed Action SMALL - Additional Phases 28
*on population growth and beneficial on local finances Environmental Justice There would be no disproportionately high and adverse impacts to either minority or low-income populations Public and Occupational Health SMALL - Proposed Action SMALL - Additional Phases Waste Management SMALL - Proposed Action SMALL - Additional Phases Results of NRCs Environmental Review


Information Resources
29 Information Resources
* Draft Environmental Impact Statement
* Draft Environmental Impact Statement
    - https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML2012/ML20122A220.pdf
- https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML2012/ML20122A220.pdf
* Readers guide
* Readers guide
    - https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML2012/ML20121A016.pdf
- https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML2012/ML20121A016.pdf
    - https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML2013/ML20136A148.pdf (Spanish)
- https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML2013/ML20136A148.pdf (Spanish)
* Application material and NRC project website
* Application material and NRC project website
    - https://www.nrc.gov/waste/spent-fuel-storage/cis/waste-control-specialist.html 29
- https://www.nrc.gov/waste/spent-fuel-storage/cis/waste-control-specialist.html


How to Comment
30 How to Comment Oral Comments tonight Federal Rulemaking Web Site: Go to https://www.regulations.gov/ and search for Docket ID NRC-2016-0231. Address questions about NRC docket IDs to Jennifer Borges; telephone: 301-287-9127; e-mail: Jennifer.Borges@nrc.gov.
* Oral Comments tonight
Mail comments to: Office of Administration, Mail Stop: TWFN-7-A60M, ATTN: Program Management, Announcements and Editing Staff, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.
* Federal Rulemaking Web Site: Go to https://www.regulations.gov/ and search for Docket ID NRC-2016-0231. Address questions about NRC docket IDs to Jennifer Borges; telephone: 301-287-9127; e-mail: Jennifer.Borges@nrc.gov.
E-mail comments to: WCS_CISF_EIS@nrc.gov SUBMIT COMMENTS BY NOVEMBER 3, 2020 NOTE : The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact information that you do not want to be publicly disclosed in your comment submission. The NRC posts all comment submissions at https://www.regulations.gov and enters all comment submissions into ADAMS, the NRCs document filing system.
* Mail comments to: Office of Administration, Mail Stop: TWFN-7-A60M, ATTN: Program Management, Announcements and Editing Staff, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.
* E-mail comments to: WCS_CISF_EIS@nrc.gov SUBMIT COMMENTS BY NOVEMBER 3, 2020 NOTE : The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact information that you do not want to be publicly disclosed in your comment submission. The NRC posts all comment submissions at https://www.regulations.gov and enters all comment submissions into ADAMS, the NRCs document filing system.
30


Public Comments on the Draft EIS 31}}
31 Public Comments on the Draft EIS}}

Latest revision as of 17:56, 29 November 2024

ISP Deis Meeting Presentation October 6 Webinar
ML20279A355
Person / Time
Site: Consolidated Interim Storage Facility
Issue date: 10/02/2020
From: James Park
NRC/NMSS/DREFS/ERMB
To:
James Park
Shared Package
ML20279A354 List:
References
Download: ML20279A355 (31)
v • d • e


Text

1 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Draft Environmental Impact Statement for a Consolidated Interim Storage Facility for Spent Nuclear Fuel in Andrews County, Texas Public Comment Meeting October 6, 2020 Webinar Webinar access:

https://usnrc.webex.com Event number: 199 740 4202 Event password: ISPDEIS Telephone access Phone number: 888-989-9268 Passcode: 5300047 AUDIO FOR THE MEETING IS THROUGH THE TELEPHONE LINE

2 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Draft Environmental Impact Statement for a Consolidated Interim Storage Facility (CISF) for Spent Nuclear Fuel in Andrews County, Texas Public Comment Meetings Webinars - October 1, 6, 8, and 15, 2020 Thursday, October 1, 2020 - 4pm MT / 5pm CT / 6pm ET Webinar Event address: https://usnrc.webex.com/

Event number: 199 125 5213 Event password: ISPDEIS Telephone access Phone number: 888-989-9268 Passcode: 5300047 Thursday, October 8, 2020 - 4pm MT / 5pm CT / 6pm ET Webinar Event address: https://usnrc.webex.com/

Event number: 199 619 8948 Event password: ISPDEIS Telephone access Phone number: 888-989-9268 Passcode: 5300047 Tuesday, October 6, 2020 - 12pm MT / 1pm CT / 2pm ET Webinar Event address: https://usnrc.webex.com/

Event number: 199 740 4202 Event password: ISPDEIS Telephone access Phone number: 888-989-9268 Passcode: 5300047 Thursday, October 15, 2020 - 9am MT / 10am CT / 11am ET Webinar Event address: https://usnrc.webex.com/

Event number: 199 551 6533 Event password: ISPDEIS Telephone access Phone number: 888-989-9268 Passcode: 5300047 AUDIO FOR ALL MEETINGS WILL BE THROUGH THE TELEPHONE LINE

3 Members of the Media Please contact David McIntyre NRCs Public Affairs Officer David.McIntyre@nrc.gov

4 Spanish Language Staff and Slides Spanish language slides are available at https://www.nrc.gov/waste/spent-fuel-storage/cis/waste-control-specialist.html Native Spanish speaking staff available during todays meeting

5 Welcoming Remarks

6 Meeting Overview

  • NRCs Review Process

- Safety Review

- Environmental Review

  • Overview of Interim Storage Partners License Application
  • Public Scoping Comments and Concerns
  • NRCs Environmental Review Results
  • Information Resources and Ways to Comment
  • Public Comment

7 PURPOSE OF THE MEETING To receive comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for ISPs Consolidated Interim Storage Facility (CISF) License Application

8 The NRCs Review Process for CISF License Applications

9 The NRCs CISF Review Process

  • Evaluate the application and determine whether a license should be issued
  • Not to promote ISPs proposal or the Consolidated Interim Storage Facility (CISF) concept
  • Safety and Environmental Review of ISPs application

- Safety Review: Determine whether ISP can safely construct and operate the CISF at the proposed site

- Environmental Review: Evaluate the environmental impacts of building and operating the CISF at the proposed site

10 NRCs Decision Process for CISF Reviews Applicant Submits License Application NRC Accepts License Application NRC Safety Review (Safety Evalution Report)

NRC Environmental Review (Environmental Impact Statement)

NRC Adjudicatory Hearings ASLB Issues Findings NRC Licensing Decision 10 NEPA - National Environmental Policy Act Disclosure of environmental impacts NRC impact levels AEA - Atomic Energy Act Regulations must be met for licensing 10 Code of Federal Regulations Part 72

11 NRCs CISF Safety Review Hazards from Natural Phenomena (Flood, Wind, Fires,Tornados, High/Low temps)

Physical Security; Emergency Response Hazards from nearby industrial facilities, pipelines, transportation Geologic features, soil characteristics, seismic hazards Financial Qualifications Facility building design; storage system design; quality assurance Operational controls, limits, procedures; training and qualifications

12 NRCs CISF Environmental Review Air Quality Scenic and Visual Public and Occupational Health Ecology Socioeconomics Environmental Justice Water Resources (Surface and Groundwater)

Geology and Soils Transportation Waste Management Noise Historic and Cultural

13 Summary of ISPs License Application for its Proposed CISF for Spent Nuclear Fuel

14 ISPs Proposed CISF Source: Modified from National Enrichment Facility Environmental Report, December 2003)

15 ISPs Proposed CISF

16 ISPs Proposed CISF

17 Phases and Stages

  • ISPs proposed action is Phase 1 or 5000 MTUs
  • EIS evaluates potentially impacts of up to 8 PHASES

- Note that the safety review evaluates Phase 1 storage facility and any other facilities that are important to safety (i.e. transfer building components)

  • EIS evaluates 3 STAGES of the project

- Construction, Operation, and Decommissioning

  • Phase 1 includes construction of rail sidetrack and additional supporting facilities

18 Public Scoping Comments

19 Scoping Process

  • Scoping Periods

- November 16, 2016 - April 28, 2017 and September 4, 2018 -

November 19, 2018

- Webinars from Rockville, MD and in-person meetings held in Andrews, TX and Hobbs, NM

  • Comments -

- 29,430 pieces of comment correspondence

- Approximately 3,200 unique scoping comments

  • Scoping comment report

- https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML1916/ML19161A150.pdf

20 Scoping Comments

  • Transportation

- Safety/Accidents

- Radiation dose to citizens near the rail line

  • Geology

- Induced seismicity

  • Water Resources

- Located near surface beneath WCS site

- Contamination of Ogallala Aquifer Location and Land Use

- Co-located with other waste storage activities at WCS site

  • Socioeconomics
  • Greater impact on New Mexico due to sites border location
  • Disproportionate on Hispanic population
  • Out of Scope - Safety Issues
  • Cask and canister design
  • Monitoring
  • Handling

21 Results of NRCs Environmental Review

22 Impact Significance Levels

  • SMALL - Environmental effects are not detectable or are so minor that they will neither destabilize nor noticeably alter any important attribute of the resource.
  • MODERATE - Environmental effects are sufficient to alter noticeably, but not to destabilize, important attributes of the resource.
  • LARGE - Environmental effects are clearly noticeable and are sufficient to destabilize important attributes of the resource.

23 Impact Evaluation Transportation analysis Increase in traffic levels from workers and construction vehicles Evaluated spent fuel movement for Phase 1 (425 shipments) and for full buildout (3,400 shipments) using modeling Radiological dose rates to the public and workers along the rail route, from incident-free and accident conditions Transportation impacts Minor increase in traffic along local roads around proposed site Dose of 1.9 mrem from 3,400 shipments to a person 30 meters from rail line.

No accidental release of canistered fuel under the most severe impacts studied.

24 Impact Evaluation Ground Water analysis Shallowest confined ground water lies about 225 feet below the CISF site Isolated pockets of limited saturation found about 90-100 feet below the CISF site CISF site is about 1 mile, at closest approach, to SW of SW limits of Ogallala Aquifer Ground Water impacts Potable water supplied from City of Eunice, NMs water wells CISF construction would not affect ground water due to depth to ground water CISF operation would not affect ground water due to facility design and depth to ground water Geology analysis Evaporites about 1500 feet below the CISF site No sinkholes near the CISF site Largest recorded earthquake near CISF site is 1992 magnitude 5.0 earthquake about 18 mi away Geology impacts Surficial excavation of soils during construction CISF site in area of low seismic risk Subsidence and sinkholes not likely due to depth to evaporite deposits below the CISF site

25 Impact Evaluation Socioeconomics analysis Primarily associated with workers who might move Resources available to the community Economic growth and tax revenues generated Demand on public services, schools and housing Socioeconomics impacts Estimated maximum of 110 workers on site (50 construction workers, 60 regular workers)

Impacts to a 3-county area (Andrews, Gaines, and Lea counties)

Noticeable increase in population growth and in local revenues Environmental Justice Analysis of the human health and environmental impacts on low-income and minority populations 109 block groups that fall completely or partially within the 50-mile radius of the proposed CISF project area.

Identify disproportionately high and adverse impacts on minority or low-income populations NRC analysis does not find means or pathways for disproportionate effects on minority or low-income populations No disproportionate impacts on minority or low-income populations

26 Impact Evaluation Facility Location/Land Use analysis Location proposed by ISP Within larger WCS-owned property Active oil & gas extraction in the region surrounding the WCS property Nearest permanent resident is about 4 miles west of the proposed CISF site Facility Location/Land Use impacts Access restrictions to WCS property and CISF site Approximately 330 acres disturbed by CISF construction Activities outside the CISF site would not be affected (e.g., grazing, oil & gas extraction)

After CISF decommissioning, CISF infrastructure may remain or be removed

27 Results of NRCs Environmental Review RESOURCE IMPACT EVALUATION (construction, operation and decommission/reclamation stages)

Land Use SMALL - Proposed Action SMALL - Additional Phases Transportation SMALL - Proposed Action SMALL - Additional Phases Geology and Soils SMALL - Proposed Action SMALL - Additional Phases Surface Water SMALL - Proposed Action SMALL - Additional Phases Groundwater SMALL - Proposed Action SMALL - Additional Phases Ecology SMALL to MODERATE - Proposed Action**

SMALL to MODERATE - Additional Phases**

    • until vegetation has been reestablished Air Quality SMALL - Proposed Action SMALL - Additional Phases

28 RESOURCE IMPACT EVALUATION (construction, operation and decommission/reclamation stages)

Noise SMALL - Proposed Action SMALL - Additional Phases Historic and Cultural SMALL - Proposed Action SMALL - Additional Phases Visual and Scenic SMALL - Proposed Action SMALL - Additional Phases Socioeconomic SMALL to MODERATE*

  • on population growth and beneficial on local finances Environmental Justice There would be no disproportionately high and adverse impacts to either minority or low-income populations Public and Occupational Health SMALL - Proposed Action SMALL - Additional Phases Waste Management SMALL - Proposed Action SMALL - Additional Phases Results of NRCs Environmental Review

29 Information Resources

  • Draft Environmental Impact Statement

- https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML2012/ML20122A220.pdf

  • Readers guide

- https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML2012/ML20121A016.pdf

- https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML2013/ML20136A148.pdf (Spanish)

  • Application material and NRC project website

- https://www.nrc.gov/waste/spent-fuel-storage/cis/waste-control-specialist.html

30 How to Comment Oral Comments tonight Federal Rulemaking Web Site: Go to https://www.regulations.gov/ and search for Docket ID NRC-2016-0231. Address questions about NRC docket IDs to Jennifer Borges; telephone: 301-287-9127; e-mail: Jennifer.Borges@nrc.gov.

Mail comments to: Office of Administration, Mail Stop: TWFN-7-A60M, ATTN: Program Management, Announcements and Editing Staff, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.

E-mail comments to: WCS_CISF_EIS@nrc.gov SUBMIT COMMENTS BY NOVEMBER 3, 2020 NOTE : The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact information that you do not want to be publicly disclosed in your comment submission. The NRC posts all comment submissions at https://www.regulations.gov and enters all comment submissions into ADAMS, the NRCs document filing system.

31 Public Comments on the Draft EIS

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20279A355&oldid=3848113"