ML20279A516
| ML20279A516 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Consolidated Interim Storage Facility |
| Issue date: | 10/08/2020 |
| From: | James Park NRC/NMSS/DREFS/ERMB |
| To: | |
| James Park | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20279A515 | List: |
| References | |
| Download: ML20279A516 (31) | |
Text
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 8, 2020 Webinar Webinar access:
https://usnrc.webex.com Event number: 199 619 8948 Event password: ISPDEIS Telephone access Phone number: 888-989-9268 Passcode: 5300047 AUDIO FOR THE MEETING IS THROUGH THE TELEPHONE LINE 1
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/
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: 199 619 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
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
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
Welcoming Remarks 5
- NRCs Review Process
- Safety Review
- Environmental Review Meeting
- Overview of Interim Storage Partners License Application Overview
- Public Scoping Comments and Concerns
- NRCs Environmental Review Results
- Information Resources and Ways to Comment
- Public Comment 6
To receive comments on the Draft Environmental Impact PURPOSE OF Statement (EIS) for ISPs THE MEETING Consolidated Interim Storage Facility (CISF) License Application 7
The NRCs Review Process for CISF License Applications 8
The NRCs CISF Review Process
- Evaluate the application and determine whether a license should be issued
- 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 9
NRCs Decision Process for CISF Reviews Applicant Submits License Application NEPA - National AEA - Atomic Energy Act NRC Accepts Environmental Policy Act
- Regulations must be met License Application
- Disclosure of for licensing environmental impacts
- 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)
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
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)
Transportation Geology and Soils 12
Summary of ISPs License Application for its Proposed CISF for Spent Nuclear Fuel 13
ISPs Proposed CISF Source: Modified from National Enrichment Facility Environmental Report, December 2003) 14
Phases and Stages
- 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 17
Public Scoping Comments 18
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 19
Scoping Comments
- Transportation
- Socioeconomics
- Safety/Accidents
- Greater impact on New Mexico due to
- Radiation dose to citizens near the rail sites border location line
- Geology
- Disproportionate on Hispanic
- Induced seismicity population
- Water Resources
- Out of Scope - Safety Issues
- Cask and canister design
- Located near surface beneath WCS site
- Monitoring
- Contamination of Ogallala Aquifer
- Handling
- Location and Land Use
- Co-located with other waste storage activities at WCS site 20
Results of NRCs Environmental Review 21
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.
22
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.
23
Impact Evaluation Ground Water analysis Geology analysis
- Shallowest confined ground water lies about
- 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
- Primarily associated with workers who might
- Analysis of the human health and move environmental impacts on low-income and
- Resources available to the community minority 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
- Access restrictions to WCS property and
- Within larger WCS-owned property
- Approximately 330 acres disturbed by
- 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
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 27
Results of NRCs Environmental Review 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 SMALL - Proposed Action Health SMALL - Additional Phases Waste Management SMALL - Proposed Action SMALL - Additional Phases 28
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 29
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.
30
Public Comments on the Draft EIS 31