Jump to main content.

Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for the Long-Term Management and Storage of Elemental Mercury

Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.

PDF Version (3 pp, 55K, About PDF)

[Federal Register: July 2, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 126)]
[Notices]
[Page 31723-31725]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr02jy09-45]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for
the Long-Term Management and Storage of Elemental Mercury

AGENCY: Department of Energy.
ACTION: Notice of intent.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: As required by the Mercury Export Ban Act of 2008 (Pub. L.
110-414), hereafter referred to as the Act, the Department of Energy
(DOE or the Department) plans to designate a facility or facilities for
the long-term management and storage of elemental mercury generated
within the United States. To this end, the Department intends to
prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) in accordance with the
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 regulations of the
President's Council on Environmental Quality (40 CFR parts 1500-1508)
and DOE's implementing procedures (10 CFR part 1021). This EIS will
evaluate alternatives for such a facility or facilities in order to
have the requisite capability operational by January 1, 2013, as
stipulated in the Act. The United States Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is a cooperating agency for this EIS.

DATES: DOE invites public comment on the scope of this EIS during a 45-
day public scoping period commencing July 2, 2009 and ending on August
17, 2009. In defining the scope of the EIS, DOE will consider all
comments received or postmarked by the end of the scoping period.
Comments received or postmarked after the scoping period end date will
be considered to the extent practicable. For dates, times and locations
of public scoping meetings, see SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION below.

ADDRESSES: Written comments on the scope of the EIS may be submitted by
mail to: Mr. David Levenstein, EIS Document Manager, P.O. Box 2612,
Germantown, MD 20874, by toll free fax to 1-877-274-5462; or through
the EIS Web site at www.mercurystorageeis.com.
    To be placed on the EIS distribution list, any of the methods
listed under ADDRESSES above can be used. In requesting a copy of the
Draft EIS, please specify whether the request is for a copy of the
Summary only, the entire Draft EIS, or the entire Draft EIS (which
includes the Summary) on a compact disc. In addition, the Draft EIS
will be available on the DOE NEPA Web site at http://www.gc.energy.gov/
NEPA/ and at the EIS Web site referenced above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information about the EIS,
please contact David Levenstein, EIS Document Manager, Office of
Regulatory Compliance (EM-10), U.S. Department of Energy, 1000
Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585. For general information
concerning DOE's NEPA process, contact: Carol M. Borgstrom, Director,
Office of NEPA Policy and Compliance (GC-20), U.S. Department of
Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585, e-mail:
askNEPA@hq.doe.gov; telephone 202-586-4600, fax 202-586-7031, or leave
a message at 1-800-472-2756. This Notice will be available at 
http://www.gc.energy.gov/NEPA/ and at www.mercurystorageeis.com.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The Mercury Export Ban Act of 2008 (Pub. L. 110-414) prohibits, as
of January 1, 2013, the sale, distribution, or transfer of elemental
mercury by Federal agencies to any other Federal agency, any State or
local government agency, or any private individual or entity that is
under the control of a Federal agency (with certain limited
exceptions). It also prohibits the export of elemental mercury from the
United States effective January 1, 2013 (subject to certain essential
use exceptions). Section 5 of the Act, Long-Term Storage, directs DOE
to designate a facility or facilities for the long-term management and
storage of elemental mercury generated within the United States. DOE's
facility or facilities must be operational by January 1, 2013, and
ready to accept custody of elemental mercury delivered to such a
facility. The Act also requires DOE to assess fees based upon the pro
rata costs of long-term management and storage.
    Inventory: There are several sources of elemental mercury in the
United States, including mercury used in the chlorine and caustic soda
manufacturing process (i.e., chlor-alkali industry), reclaimed from
recycling and waste recovery activities, and generated as a byproduct
of the gold mining process. In addition, DOE stores approximately 1,200
metric tons of elemental mercury at the Y-12 National Security Complex
in Oak Ridge, Tennessee. The Department of Defense (DOD) stores approximately

[[Page 31724]]

4,400 metric tons of elemental mercury at various locations.
    An EPA report, ``Mercury Storage Cost Estimates'' (2007), estimates
the total amount of elemental mercury from non-governmental sources
that would be eligible for DOE storage is between 7,500 and 10,000
metric tons over a 40-year period. DOE plans to use such estimates and
other credible sources of information to develop an annual and long-
term inventory estimate for EIS evaluation. During the scoping period,
DOE invites commentors to provide inventory data on elemental mercury
for consideration in the EIS.

Purpose and Need for Action

    DOE needs to develop a capability for the safe and secure long-term
management and storage of elemental mercury as required by the Act.
Accordingly, the Department needs to identify an appropriate facility
or facilities to host this activity.

Proposed Action

    DOE proposes to select one or more existing (including modification
as needed) or new facilities for the long-term management and storage
of elemental mercury in accordance with the Act. Facilities to be
constructed as well as existing or modified facilities must comply with
applicable requirements of Section 5(d) of the Act, Management
Standards for a Facility, including the requirements of the Solid Waste
Disposal Act, as amended by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
(RCRA), and other permitting requirements. DOE intends to identify the
facility or facilities through the NEPA process. EPA is a cooperating
agency on the EIS.

Proposed Alternatives

    As required by the Council on Environmental Quality and DOE NEPA
implementing procedures at 40 CFR parts 1500-1508 and 10 CFR part 1021,
respectively, DOE will evaluate the range of reasonable alternatives
for a facility or facilities for the long-term management and storage
of elemental mercury. These alternatives will include the modification
of existing facilities as may be necessary. Recognizing that new
construction may be needed at some candidate locations, DOE proposes to
evaluate a generic, newly constructed facility that would meet RCRA
requirements, such that new construction could be considered at some
candidate locations along with modification of existing facilities as
appropriate. DOE has developed the following preliminary criteria to
use as a framework for identifying candidate host locations:
    • The facility or facilities will not create significant
conflicts with any existing DOE site mission and will not interfere
with future mission compatibility;
    • The candidate host location has an existing facility or
facilities suitable for mercury storage with the capability and
flexibility for operational expansion, if necessary;
    • The facility or facilities is, or potentially will be,
capable of complying with RCRA permitting requirements, including
siting requirements;
    • The facility or facilities has supporting infrastructure,
including a capability or potential capability for flooring that would
support mercury loadings;
    • Storage of elemental mercury at the facility or facilities
is compatible with local and regional land use plans;
    • The facility or facilities is accessible to major
transportation routes; and
    • The candidate host location has sufficient information on
hand in order to adequately characterize the site.
    In March 2009, DOE published a Request for Expressions of Interest
in the Federal Register (74 FR 11923, March 20, 2009) as well as in the
Federal Business Opportunities seeking interest from Federal agencies
and from the private sector regarding potential locations for a
facility or facilities where DOE can store and manage mercury pursuant
to the Act. Based on the responses received and on the criteria
identified above, DOE proposes to evaluate the following candidate host
sites as alternatives for the long-term management and storage of
elemental mercury:
    • Grand Junction Disposal Site, Grand Junction, CO;
    • Hanford Site, Richland, WA;
    • Hawthorne Army Depot, Hawthorne, NV;
    • Idaho National Laboratory, Idaho Falls, ID;
    • Kansas City Plant, Kansas City, MO;
    • Savannah River Site, Aiken, SC; and
    • Waste Control Specialists, Andrews, TX.
    As required by NEPA, the EIS will evaluate a No Action alternative
to serve as a basis for comparison with the action alternatives. Under
the No Action alternative, long-term management and storage of
privately-owned elemental mercury would remain the responsibility of
its owners, and government-owned elemental mercury would remain at
existing facilities.

Preliminary Identification of Environmental Issues

    DOE proposes to address the issues listed below when considering
the potential impacts of the proposed management and storage
alternatives in the EIS. This list is presented to facilitate public
comment during the scoping period and will be revisited as DOE
considers the scoping comments. It is not intended to be comprehensive,
nor to imply any predetermination of impacts.
    • Potential effects on the public health from exposure to
hazardous materials under routine operations and credible accident
scenarios including natural disasters (floods, hurricanes, tornadoes,
and seismic events);
    • Impacts on surface and groundwater, floodplains and
wetlands, and on water use and quality;
    • Impacts on air quality (including global climate change) and noise;
    • Impacts on plants and animals and their habitats,
including species that are Federal- or State-listed as threatened or
endangered, or of special concern;
    • Impacts on geology and soil;
    • Impacts on cultural resources such as historic,
archeological, and Native American culturally important sites;
    • Socioeconomic impacts on potentially affected communities;
    • Environmental Justice, particularly whether or not long-term
elemental mercury management and storage activities have a disproportionately
high and adverse effect on minority and low-income populations;
    • Potential impacts on land-use plans, policies and
controls, and visual resources;
    • Pollution prevention and waste management practices and activities;
    • Unavoidable adverse impacts, and irreversible and
irretrievable commitments of resources;
    • Potential cumulative environmental effects of past,
present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions;
    • Status of compliance with all applicable Federal, state
and local statutes and regulations, international agreements, and
required Federal and State environmental permits, consultations, and
notifications; and
    • Potential impacts of intentional destructive acts,
including sabotage and terrorism.

EIS Process and Invitation To Comment

    NEPA implementing regulations require an early and open process for
determining the scope of an EIS and for identifying the significant
issues related to the proposed action. Accordingly, DOE invites Federal
agencies, State,

[[Page 31725]]

local and Tribal governments, the general public and international
community to comment on the scope of the EIS, including identification
of reasonable alternatives and specific issues to be addressed.
    DOE will hold public scoping meetings from 5:30 p.m.-9:30 p.m. on
the following dates and locations:
    • July 21, 2009 Two Rivers Convention Center, 159 Main
Street, Grand Junction, CO 81501.
    • July 23, 2009 Embassy Suites Kansas City--Plaza, 220 West
43rd Street, Kansas City, MO 64111.
    • July 28, 2009 Clarion Hotel and Conference Center, 1515
George Washington Way, Richland, WA 99352.
    • July 30, 2009 North Augusta Municipal Center, 100 Georgia
Avenue, North Augusta, SC 29841.
    • August 4, 2009 El Capitan Resort, 540 F Street, Hawthorne, NV 89415.
    • August 6, 2009 James Roberts Civic Center, 855 E.
Broadway, Andrews, TX 79714.
    • August 11, 2009 Shilo Inn/O'Callahans Convention Center,
780 Lindsay Blvd., Idaho Falls, ID 83402.
    Additional details on the scoping meetings will be provided in
local media and at www.mercurystorageeis.com.
    At each scoping meeting, DOE plans to hold an open house one hour
prior to the formal portion of the meetings to allow participants to
register to provide oral comments, view informational materials, and
engage project staff. The registration table will have an oral comment
registration form as well as a sign up sheet for those who do not wish
to give oral comments but who would like to be included on the mailing
list to receive future information. The public may provide written and/
or oral comments at the scoping meetings.
    Analysis of all public comments provided during the scoping
meetings as well as those submitted as described in ADDRESSES above,
will be considered in helping DOE further develop the scope of the EIS
and potential issues to be addressed. DOE expects to issue a Draft EIS
in the fall of 2009.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on June 24, 2009.
Scott Blake Harris,
General Counsel.
[FR Doc. E9-15704 Filed 7-1-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P

 
 

Local Navigation

Jump to main content.