|
Peter G. MORROS, Director Allen Biaggi, Administrator (775) 687-4670 TDD 687-4678
Administration |
STATE OF NEVADA KENNY C. GUINN Governor 
|
Waste Management Corrective Actions Federal Facilities Facsimile 687-6396
Air Quality |
|
Division of Environmental Protection 333 W. Nye Lane, Room 138 Carson City, Nevada 89706-0851 |
||
|
July 12, 1999 Mr. George Laskar
Dear Mr. Laskar: The Nevada Division of Environmental Protection, Bureau of Federal Facilities staff (NDEP) has reviewed the above referenced document and has the following comments. These comments are also being provided to the State Clearinghouse for incorporation into the State comments. The reference Environmental Assessment (EA) fails to provide an accurate description of land-use and institutional control issues for the Tonopah Test Range (TTR). Information presented in the EA leads the reader to believe that TTR is a separate unique facility with little connection to the Nellis Air Force Range (Range). The document also fails to clearly state the TTR occupies public lands held under a temporary land withdrawal granted by the U.S. Congress to the U. S. Air Force in October 1940. NDEP does acknowledge that the Sandia National Laboratory (SNL) has been the facility operator and site manager of TTR since it was established in 1957. Nevertheless, SNL's official connection to TTR is based solely on a Memorandum of Understanding between the DOE and the Air Force. The EA fails to incorporate certain information presented in Nevada Test Site-Wide Environmental Impact Statement (NTS Site-Wide EIS) as well as the Nellis Range Withdrawal Legislative EIS (LEIS). Because these EIS documents addressed baseline conditions, for both past and present defense research and testing activities conducted on the TTR and/or on adjacent lands, the referenced EA should identify how the proposed action is related to, or otherwise might impact, current activities discussed in these referenced EIS documents. In other words, the EA should be linked to, or tiered from, pertinent NEPA evaluations of TTR and the surrounding environs. Since the Department of Interior will remain the ultimate land management for all of the public lands encompassing the Range, they, as well as the Air Force should be consulted concerning the proposal to potentially disperse more than 1.5 tons of Depleted Uranium (DU) and up to 100 pounds of Beryllium on the public lands encompassing the Range. Another significant proposal associated with the LEIS and future Range usage concerns various contamination issues associated with the presently inactive DU bombing area on the Range. The State has historically raised concerns about cleanup of DU contaminated soils associated with defense testing on the Range. Accordingly, the proposed action assessed in the EA (dispersal of 1.5 tons of DU) should be discussed in light of previously identified concerns by State officials. The referenced EA provides an assessment of only one siting alternative to the facility at TTR. That alternative is a location near the Nevada Test Site (NTS) Spill Test Facility in Area 5. The EA falls short, however, in describing reasons why the NTS was not considered as an environmentally preferable site. It appears the key reasons for eliminating the NTS seem to be based on costs and institutional conflicts rather than environmental issues. For example, the document states that, "during operations of the [fire experiment] facility at NTS, the DOE Spill Facility Manager would have final control regarding whether a test would be conducted. . . [and] additional NTS contractor personnel would also be required". Two other alternatives were also mentioned but eliminated from further detail (i.e., a facility at China Lake, CA, and a burn test facility near Albuquerque, NM). In reference to China Lake, this site was dismissed because ". . . it would require additional security upgrades and permits for the tests to take place . . . [and the] estimates of cleanup costs following testing at China Lake are also substantially higher." The associated cleanup costs were not discussed for either the NTS or the TTR sites and yet these costs would apparently be significant at China Lake. After reviewing the analysis for siting the referenced fire experiment facility, it appears that DOE has failed to adequately describe appropriate alternatives to the recommended action. The EA should therefore be amended to include a more detailed description of the analysis used to support, or eliminate, a given alternative (e.g., application of siting criteria). The proposed fire experiment facility site on the TTR is adjacent to the Clean Slates 3 (CS-3) area. The predominant winds blow from the northwest, therefore, any airborne contamination could be blown onto the CS-3 site. Currently, the Air Force, DOE/NV, and NDEP are negotiating a soil remediation value for this and other radiologically contaminated soil sites on the Nellis Range. Many of the baseline radiological levels are also in question, which means that any further contamination of the CS-3 site, or other sites on the range, would greatly complicate State/Federal negotiations over soil remediation levels. The document states that cleanup standards would be developed and carried out at the end of the useful life of the facility. NDEP cannot concur with this proposed process and requires that cleanup requirements be established prior to conducting test activities which may result in environmental contamination. The proposed remediation activities and costs must be incorporated into the protocols for each series of tests. The EA states that "after decommissioning, soils found to be potentially contaminated from project activities would be managed under DOE environmental restoration procedures". Contamination and wastes from existing or proposed activities are not eligible to be addressed under environmental restoration. As stated above, all closure and decontamination activities must be an integral part of the project scope and funding. Reference has been made to the fact that only small amounts of "non-detectable" test material would be expected to be deposited on the soils. NDEP is requesting information describing the types of survey/sampling equipment and procedures that will be used. NDEP would also like the opportunity to review the radiological pre-test sampling data. This would allow concurrence in establishing baseline information needed to support agreed upon cleanup levels. The DOE Kirtland Area Office has sites that were historically closed in place on the TTR. NDEP has not provided closure concurrence on these sites as the Air Force has not recorded the land use restriction information demonstrating concurrence with the actions which is part of the requirements for closure of these sites. The Air Force is requiring an additional MOU between DOE/Kirtland and the Air Force as an integral part of the concurrence process. This issue must be resolved prior to NDEP providing any concurrence for any future activities not covered under the MOU between DOE/NV, DOE/Kirtland and the Air Force. DOE/ALOO is utilizing EPA CAP-88 and HOTSPOT models to estimate DU transport and ground contamination. Please provide the version being utilized and all input parameters/assumption being used. Additionally, NDEP has the following specific technical comments:
* Page 4-3, Section 4.1.1.2, 2d paragraph: The dose to the maximally exposed individual (MEI) is calculated at a distance of 10,000m south of the proposed NTS site. Personnel working at the Spill Test Facility would be much closer to the site, and it is these personnel who should be considered MEIs. This will also affect the dose calculation on Page 4-9, Section 4.7.2, 2d which is estimated to be approximately 0.47 mrem/yr at that range. * Page 4-5, Section 4.3.2.1, 2d paragraph: "from approximately 107 to 137 m..." The depth to ground water is listed in Section 3.4.2.1 as 90-450 ft. The document states that "there are no perennial water bodies or streams within the Frenchman Flat area of NTS..." and that "..there would be no significant cumulative effects to any water resource from the proposed activities...". There are other references to playa's in the document. Unless explicitly exempted, playas such as Frenchmans Flat, Antelope Lake, and NEDs Lake are considered to be waters of the U.S. and all applicable regulations must be addressed. The EA references that NDEP has determined that no stormwater permit would be required for this activity. Documentation that DOE has historically submitted did not contain information regarding this proposed project. Therefore, no determination has been made for these specific activities and DOE must submit additional details for evaluation to assess if there is a requirement for a storm water permit. If DOE is potentially generating a mixed waste as a product of a specific test at the proposed fire experiment facility, they need to evaluate if the waste requires treatment and must also identify a treatment facility(s) that can accept the waste since these wastes are not eligible for the LDR storage exemption under the Federal Facility Compliance Act (FFCAct). If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Karen K. Beckley at (775) 687-4670 extension 3033, Mike McKinnon at (702) 486-2874 or me at (775) 687-4670 extension 3039.
PJL/KKB/MM/js
cc: |
||
Federal Facilities Home Page