The National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) reaffirmed Tuesday that, despite public comments and even a federal lawsuit that say otherwise, it does not need to perform another environmental review of the Uranium Processing Facility being built at the Y-12 National Security Complex in Oak Ridge, Tenn.
The semiautonomous Department of Energy agency “has determined, at this time, that there are no significant new circumstances or information relevant to environmental concerns that warrant preparation of a supplemental or new EIS [environmental impact statement],” the agency said in the now-final version of the supplemental analysis of its site-wide environmental impact statement for Y-12.
Members of the public, including a coalition of environmental groups that sued the NNSA in 2016, argued the agency must perform a new environmental review of the Uranium Processing Facility after changing the plant’s design to include three buildings, rather than one.
Though not required by U.S. environmental law, the NNSA this year performed a supplemental analysis of its environmental impact atatement for UPF, which will shape highly enriched uranium into forms usable by nuclear weapons and nuclear naval reactors. The Bechtel-built plant will replace the aging 9212 facility that dates to World War II. It is scheduled to be completed by 2025 at a cost of no more than $6.5 billion.
The current design for UPF “is not a new program, but is rather an ongoing plan for extending the life of existing facilities,” the NNSA said in the supplemental analysis.
The supplemental analysis is not likely to quiet the plaintiffs in a lawsuit set for trial Nov. 5, 2019, in U.S. District Court for Eastern Tennessee. The plaintiffs, the Oak Ridge Environmental Peace Alliance, Nuclear Watch New Mexico, and the Natural Resources Defense Council, said they will likely file an amended complaint in their 2-year-old lawsuit after reviewing the NNSA supplemental analysis. That is according to an Aug. 31 joint status report, which also said the parties would provide another scheduling update in the case by Sept. 21.
Among other things, critics of the three-building UPF design said the NNSA has not considered the potential seismic risks associated with the new facility.
In Tuesday’s supplement, NNSA countered that it is “continuing to analyze the effects of updated seismic information on operations in its enduring facilities at Y-12, and additional upgrades to enduring facilities at Y-12 may be proposed following completion of that analysis.” NNSA expects to finish its study of seismic risks to the facility in 2019, according to the document.
