8. INDEX

Subjects are indexed by section, figure, table, and appendix designations only.
1992/1993 Planning Basis alternative
    consequences, 5.1.4
    description, 3.1.3
    SNF distribution, location, and inventory,
      Fig. 3-3
    summary, Table 3-3
1992/1993 Planning Basis alternative, by site
    Hanford Site, 3.1.3.1
    Idaho National Engineering Laboratory, 3.1.3.2
    Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program, 3.1.3.6
    Nevada Test Site, 3.1.3.5
    Oak Ridge Reservation, 3.1.3.4
    Other generator/storage sites, 3.1.3.7
    Savannah River Site, 3.1.3.3
             -A-
abbreviations, App. G
accidents
    comparisons, 3.3.2.2; Fig. 3-9, -10; Table 3-8
    mitigation measures, 5.7.12
    see also site appendices
acronyms, App. G
adverse environmental effects, 5.4
aesthetic and scenic resources
    characterization. see site appendices
    impacts, 3.2.3
affected environment, Chapter 4, App. A through F
    DOE test and experimental reactors, 4.7.1
    Hanford Site, 4.1, App. A
    Idaho National Engineering Laboratory, 4.2,
      App. B
    Naval Sites, 4.6, App. D
    Nevada Test Site, 4.4, App. F
    Oak Ridge Reservation, 4.3, App. F
    Other generator/storage sites, 4.7, App. E
    Savannah River Site, 4.3, App. C
agency, consultation, 7.1
air quality/resources
    characterization, see site appendices
    impacts, 5.2.5, 3.3.2.3
    mitigation measures, 3.7.3
alternative
    comparisons, 3.3
         accidents, 3.3.2.2
         employment impacts, 3.3.3; Fig. 3-11, -12
         implementation cost, 3.3.6, Table 3.9
         incident-free transportation fatalities,
           3.3.2, Fig. 3-8
         mission (DOE and Navy) impacts, 3.3.5
         facility accident risks, Fig. 3.9
         normal operation, Table 3-8
         public health effects, 3,3.2, Fig. 3-8
         radioactive waste generation, 3.3.4
         shipment numbers, 3.3.1, Fig. 3-7
         transportation accident risks, Fig. 3-10
         U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission licensing
           standards, 3.3.7
    consequences, 3.3, Chapter 5
         by key discriminator disciplines
             1992/1993 planning basis, 5.1.4
             Centralization, 5.1.6
             Decentralization, 3.1.3
             No Action, 3.1.2
             Regionalization, 5.1.3
             see also specific discipline
         see also specific discipline and environmental
           consequences
    descriptions, 3.1
         1992/1993 planning basis, 3.1.3, Fig. 3-3,
           Table 3-3
         Decentralization, 3.1.2. Fig. 3-2, Table 3-2
         Centralization, 3.1.5, Fig. 36, Table 3-5
         eliminated, 3.2
         No Action, 3.1.1, Fig. 3-1, Table 3-1
         overview, 3.1, Fig. 3-1 through 36, Table 3-1
         Regionalization, 3.1.4; Fig. 3-4, -5; Table
           3-4
         regulatory requirements, Chapter 7
         summary, Tables 3-1 through 3-5
         see also specific alternative
    preferred, Chapter 3 introduction
    sites, App. F
alternatives eliminated, 3.2.1, 3.2.2, 3.2.3, 3.2.4, 3.2.5
American Indian Religious Freedom Act, 7.1.1
Archaeological Resource Protection Act, 7.1.1
Argonne National Laboratory-East, 4.7.1.4, App. B
Atomic Energy Act of 1954, 7.1.1
             -B-
Babcock and Wilcox Nuclear Fuels Research Facility
    characterization, 4.7.3,3, App. B
    SNF management and inventories, 1.1.2.5,
      Table 1-3
Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, 7.1.1
biotic resources, see ecological resources
Brookhaven National Laboratory, 4.7.1.1, App. B
             -C-
cancer fatalities
    from normal operations, Fig. 3-8
    from radiation exposure, Fig. 3-9, Table 5-1
    transportation analyses, App. I
         incident-free, Table 3-7
Centralization alternative
    consequences, 3.1.6
    description, 3.1.5
         SNF distribution, location, inventory, Fig. 3-6
         summary, Table 3-5
Centralization alternative, by site, 3.1.5
    Hanford Site, 3.1.5.1
    Idaho National Engineering Laboratory, 3.1.5.2
    Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program, 3.1.5.6
    Nevada Test Site, 3.1.5.5
    Oak Ridge Reservation, 3.1.5.4
    Other generator/storage sites, 3.1.5.7
    Savannah River Site, 3.1.5.3
characterization, environmental, Chapter 4
    see also affected environment and site appendices
Clean Air Act, 7.1.1
Clean Water Act, 7.1.1
comparison of alternatives, see alternative comparisons
Comprehensive Environmental Response,
  Compensation, and Liability Act, 7.1.1
consultations, 7.2
cost of implementation, comparison, 3.3.6
cultural resources
    characterization, see site appendices
    impacts, 5.2.2
    mitigation measures, 5.7.3
cumulative impacts, 5.3
    programmatic, 5.3.1
    site-specific, 5.3.2
         air quality, 5.3.2.3
         biotic resources, 3.3.2.5
         energy/utilities, 5.3.2.5
         land use, 5.3.2.1
         occupational and public health, 5.3.2.6
         socioeconomics, 5.3.2.2
         transportation, 5.3.2.7
         waste generation, 5.3.2.9
         water, 5,3.2.4
          -D-
Decentralization alternative
    consequences, 5.1.3
    description, 3.1.2
    SNF distribution, location, and inventory, Fig. 3-2
    summary, Table 3-2
Decentralization alternative, by site, 3.1.2
    Hanford Site, 3.1.2.1
    Idaho National Engineering Laboratory, 3.1.2.2
    Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program, 3.1.2.6
    Nevada Test Site, 3.1.2.5
    Oak Ridge Reservation, 3.1.2.4
    Other generator/storage sites, 3.1.2.7
    Savannah River Site, 3.1.2.3
definition of spent nuclear fuel, 1.1.1
disposition technologies (SNF), 1.1.3.4
distribution, FEIS, App. M
DOE orders and regulations, 7.1.3, Table 7-1
DOE test and experimental reactors, 4.7.1, App. E
    Argonne National Laboratory-East, 4.7.1.4
    Brookhaven National Laboratory, 4.7.1.1
    Los Alamos National Laboratory, 4.7.1.2
    Sandia National Laboratories, 4.7.1.3
domestic research and test reactors, 4.7.2.
  Table 1-2, App. E
    Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 4.7.2.2
    National Institute of Standards and Technology, 
      4.7.2.1
    SNF management and inventories, 1.1.2.5,
      Table 1-2
    University of Missouri, 4.7.2.3
            -E-
ecological resources
    characterization, see site appendices
    impacts, 5.2.7, 5.3.2.5
    mitigation measures, 5.7.7
electricity, as key discriminator, 5.1.1.2
    1992/1993 Planning Basis, 5.1.4.2
    Centralization, 5.1.6.2
    Decentralization, 5.1.3.2
    No Action, 5,1.2.2
    Regionalization, 5.1.5.2
eliminated alternatives, 3.2.1, 3.2.2, 3.2.3, 3.2.4, 3.2.5
Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know
  Act, 7.1.1
employment, alternative comparison, 3.3.3;
  Fig. 3-11, -12
Endangered Species Act, 7.1.1
environment, affected, see affected environment
environmental consequences, Chapter 5
    1992/1993 Planning Basis alternative, 5.1.4
    background, 5.1.1
    Centralization alternative, 5.1.6
    cumulative, 5.3, see also cumulative impacts
    data, App. K
    Decentralization alternative, 5.1.3
    key discriminator disciplines, 5.1
         materials and waste management, 5.1.1.3
         occupational and public health and
           safety, 5.1.1.4
         socioeconomics, 5.1.1.1
         transportation, 5.1.1.5
         utilities, 5.1.1.2
    No Action alternative, 5.1.2
    Regionalization alternative, 5.1.5
    supporting analyses, see site appendices
    unavoidable adverse, 5.4
environmental impact statements, SNF-related, 1.2
environmental justice, 5.8, App. L
environmental regulations, Chapter 7
Executive Orders, 7.1.2
             -F-
Federal environmental regulations, 7.1.1
Federal Facility Compliance Act, 7.1.1
Final EIS distribution, App. M
foreign research reactors, 1.2.4, 1.1.2.4
    characterization, 4.7.3.2, App. E
    SNF management and inventories, 1.1.2.5,
      Table 1-3
             -G-
generation sites (SNF), 1.1.2, Fig. 1-2
geologic resources
    characterization, see site appendices
    impacts, 5.2.4
glossary, App. H
             -H-
Hanford Site
    alternatives, 3.1
         1992/1993 Planning Basis, 3.1.3.1
         Centralization. 3.1.5.1
         Decentralization, 3.1.2.1
         No Action, 3.1.1.1
         Regionalization, 3.1.4.1
    characterization, 4.1, App. A
    location, Fig. 4.1, App. A
    SNF management and inventory 1.1.2.2, Fig. 1-2,
      Table 1-1
    supporting analyses, App. A, K
hazardous and radioactive material transportation
  regulations, 7.1.4
health effects, 3.3.2
    see also occupational and public health and safety
             -I-
Idaho National Engineering Laboratory
    alternatives, 3.1
         1992/1993 Planning Basis, 3.1.3.2
         Centralization, 3.1.5.2
         Decentralization, 3.1.2.2
         No Action, 3.1.1.2
         Regionalization, 3.1.4.2
    characterization, 4.2, App. B
    location, Fig. 42
    SNF management and inventory, 1.1.2.2,
      Table 1-1, Fig. 1-2
    supporting analyses, App. B, K
impacts, environmental
    see environmental consequences
implementation of alternative costs, 3.3.6
incident-free transportation comparison, Table 3-7
inventories (SNF), Table 1-1
    see also specific alternatives
irreversible and irretrievable resource commitment, 5.6
             -J-
no entries
             -K-
Kesselring Site
    characterization, 4.6.5
    location, Fig. 4-11
    supporting analyses, Appendix D
             -L-
land use
    characterization, see site appendices
    impacts, 5.2.1, 5.3.2.1
laws and requirements, 7.1
licensing standards, 3.3.7
Los Alamos National Laboratory
    characterization, 4.7.1.2, App. E
maps
    Hanford Site, Fig. 4-1
    Idaho National Engineering Laboratory, Fig. 4-2
    Kesselring Site, Fig. 4-11
    Nevada Test Site, Fig. 4-4
    Newport News Shipyard, Fig. 4-8
    Norfolk Naval Shipyard, Fig. 4-7
    Oak Ridge Reservation, Fig. 4-5
    Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard, Fig. 4-10
    Portsmouth Naval Shipyard, Fig. 4-9
    Puget Sound Naval Shipyard, Fig. 4-6
    Savannah River Site, Fig. 4-3
Massachusetts Institute of Technology reactor
    characterization, 4.7.2.2, App. H
    SNF management and inventories, 1.1.2.5,
      Table 1-2
materials and waste management
    characterization, see site appendices
    impacts, as key discriminator, 5.1.1.3
         1992/1993 Planning Basis. 5.1.4.3
         Centralization, 5.1.6.3
         Decentralization, 5.1.3.3
         No Action, 5.1.2.3
         Regionalization, 5.1.5.3
Migratory Bird Treaty Act, 7.1.1
mitigation measures, 5.7
    accidents, 5.7.12
    air resources, 5.7.5
    cultural resources, 5.7.3
    ecological resources, 5.7.7
    noise, 5.7.8
    occupational and public health and safety, 5.7.10
    pollution prevention, 5.7.1
    site services, 5.7.11
    socioeconomics, 5.7.2
    soils, 5.7.4
    traffic and transportation, 5.7.9
    water resources, 5.7.6
             -N-
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), 7.1.1
    relationship of EIS to, 1.2
    reviews related to this volume, Table 1-4
National Historic Preservation Act, 7.1.1
National Institute of Standards and Technology
  reactor, 4.7.2.1, App. H
Native American Grave Protection and Repatriation
  Act, 7.1.1
Naval fuel examination, alternative summaries
         1992/1993 Planning Basis, Table 3-3
         Centralization, Table 3-5
         Decentralization, Table 3-2
         No Action, Table 3-1
         Regionalization, Table 3-4
Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program
    alternatives, 3.1
         1992/1993 Planning Basis, 3.1.3.6
         Centralization, 3,1.5.6
         Decentralization, 3.1.2.6
         No Action, 3.1.1.6
         Regionalization, 3.1.4.6
    characterization, 4.6. App. D
    EIS scope, 1.3.2
    sites, 4.6
         Kesselring, 4.6.5, Fig. 4-11
         Newport News Naval Shipyard, Fig. 4-8
         Norfolk Naval Shipyard, 4.6.2, Fig. 4-7
         Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard, 4.6.4, Fig. 4-10
         Portsmouth Naval Shipyard, 4.6,3, Fig. 4-9
         Puget Sound Naval Shipyard, 4.6.1, Fig. 4-6
    spent nuclear fuel management, 1.1.2.3
    supporting analyses, App. D, K
    See also specific alternatives and specific sites
Nevada Test Site,
    alternatives, 3.1
         1992/1993 Planning Basis, 3.1.3.5
         Centralization, 3.1.5.5
         Decentralization, 3.1.2.5
         No Action, 3.1.1.5
         Regionalization, 3.1.4.5
    characterization, 4.4, App. F
    location, Fig, 4-4
    supporting analyses, App. F, K
Newport News Naval Shipyard, Fig. 48
No Action alternative
    consequences, 5.1.2
    description, 3.1.1
    SNF distribution, location, and inventory, Fig. 3-1
    summary, Table 3-1
No Action alternative, by site
    Hanford Site, 3.1.1.1
    Idaho National Engineering Laboratory, 3.1.1.2
    Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program, 3.1.1.6
    Nevada Test Site, 3.1.1.5
    Oak Ridge Reservation, 3.1.1.4
    Other generator/storage sites, 3.1.1.7
    Savannah River Site, 3.1.1.3
noise
    characterization, see site appendices
    impacts, 5.2.8
    mitigation measures, 5.7.8
Noise Control Act, 7.1.1
nonprogrammatic EISs (DOE), 1.2.4, 1.2.5, 1.2.6
nonradiological impacts
    1992/1993 Planning Basis, 5.1.4.5
    Centralization, 5.1.6.5
    Decentralization, 5.1.3.5
    No Action, 5.1.2.5
    Regionalization, 5.1.5.5
Norfolk Naval Shipyard
    characterization, 4.6.2
    location, Fig. 47
    supporting analyses, App. D
normal operations, cancer fatalities, 3.3.2.1,
  Fig. 3-8, Table 3-7
Nuclear Regulatory Commission licensing
  standard, 3.3.7
Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, 7.1.1
           -O-
Oak Ridge Reservation
    alternatives, 3.1
         1992/1993 Planning Basis, 3.1.3.4
         Centralization, 3.1.5.4
         Decentralization, 3.1.2.4
         No Action, 3.1.1.4
         Regionalization, 3.1.4.4
    characterization, 4.5, App. F
    location, Fig. 4-5
    SNF inventory management, 1.1.2.2, Fig. 1-2.
      Table 1-1
    supporting analyses, App. F
occupational and public health and safety
    characterization, see site appendices
    impacts
         comparison of impacts, 3.3.2, Fig. 3-8
         cumulative impacts, 5.3.2.6
         as key discriminator, 5.1.1.4
             1992/1993 Planning Basis, 5.1.4.3
             Centralization, 5.1.6.3
             Decentralization, 5.1.3.3
             No Action, 5.1.2.3
             Regionalization, 5.1.5.3
         mitigation, 5.7.10
    see also transportation
Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, 7.1.1
other generator and storage sites
    affected environment, 4.7
    alternatives, 3.1
         1992/1993 Planning Basis, 3.1.3.7
         Centralization, 3.1.5.7
         Decentralization, 3.1.2.7
         No Action, 3.1.1.7
         Regionalization, 3.1.4.7
overview of EIS
    alternatives, 3.1, Tables 3-1 through 3-5
    spent nuclear fuel management, 1.1, Tables 1-1
      through 1-3
             -P-
Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard
    characterization, 4.6.4
    location, Fig. 4-10
    supporting analyses, App. D
planning basis alternative
  see 1992/1993 Planning Basis at beginning of index
pollution prevention mitigation, 5.7.1
Portsmouth Naval Shipyard
    characterization, 4.6.3
    location, Fig. 4-9
    supporting analyses, App. D
preferred alternative, Chapter 3 introduction
preparers list, Chapter 6
programmatic EISs (DOE), 1.2.1, 1.2.2, 1.2.3
public comment response, 1.4
    changes to EIS, 1.4.2
    National Environmental Protection Act process,
      1.4.1
public health effects, see occupational and public health
  and safety
Puget Sound Naval Shipyard
    characterization, 4.6.1
    location, Fig. 4-6
    supporting analyses. App, D
purpose and need, Chapter 2
               -Q-
no entries
               -R-
radioactive materials
    transportation regulations, 7.1.4
radiological impacts
    from alternatives
         1992/1993 Planning Basis, 5.1.4.4
         Centralization, 5.1.6.4
         Decentralization, 5.1.3.4
         No Action, 5.1.2.4
         Regionalization, 5.1.5.4
    transportation, 5.3.2.6, App. I
radiation
    health effects, App. K
    from spent nuclear fuel, 1.1.1
radioactive waste generation comparison, 3.3.4
references, Chapter 9
Regionalization alternative
    consequences, 5.1.5
    description, 3.1.4
    SNF distribution, location, and
       Inventory, Fig. 3-4, -5
    summary, Table 3-4
Regionalization alternatives, by site, 3.1.4
    Hanford Site, 3.1.4.1
    Idaho National Engineering Laboratory, 3.1.4.2
    Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program, 3.1.4.6
    Nevada Test Site, 3.1.4.5
    Oak Ridge Reservation, 3.1.4.4
    Other generator/storage sites. 3.1.4.7
    Savannah River Site, 3.1.4.3
regulatory requirements, 7.1
    DOE regulations and orders, 7.1.3, Table 7-1
    Executive Orders, 7.1.2
    Federal, 7.1.1
    transportation regulations, 7.1.4
research and development alternative summaries
    1992/1993 Planning Basis, Table 3-3
    Centralization, Table 3-5
    Decentralization, Table 3-2
    No Action, Table 3-1
    Regionalization, Table 3-4
research reactors (non-DOE). Table 1-2, App. H
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, 7.1.1
resources commitment, 5.6
             -S-
Safe Drinking Water Act, 7.1.1
Sandia National Laboratories
    characterization, 4.7.1.3, App. B
Savannah River Site
    alternatives, 3.1
         1992/1993 Planning Basis, 3.1.3.3
         Centralization, 3.1.5.3
         Decentralization, 3.1.2.3
         No Action, 3.1.1.3
         Regionalization, 3.1,4.3
    characterization, 4.3, App. C
    location, Fig. 4-3
    SNF management and inventory, 1.1.2.2,
      Fig. 1-2, Table 1-1
    supporting analyses, App. C, App. K
scope, EIS Volume 1, 1.3.2
scoping process, 1.3.1
shipments of SNF
    by alternative, see alternative summaries
    comparisons, 3.3.1, Fig. 3-7, Table 3-6
    historical, Fig. 3-7
Short-term use and long-term productivity, 5.5
site services
    characterization, see site appendices
    impacts on, 5.2.9
    mitigation measures. 5.7.11
sites, alternative, App. F
    Nevada Test Site, 4.4
    Oak Ridge Reservation. 4.5
socioeconomics
    characterization. see site appendices
    impacts
         cumulative, 5.3.2.2
         as key discriminator, 5.1.1.1
             1992/1993 Planning Basis, 5.1.4.1
             Centralization, 5.1.6.1
             Decentralization. 5.1.3.1
             No Action, 5.1.2.1
             Regionalization. 5.1.5.1
         mitigation, 5.7.2
soils, mitigation measures, 5.7.4
special-case nuclear fuel power plants, 4.7.3, App. E
    Babcock and Wilcox, 4.7.3.3
    Fort St. Vrain, 4.7.3.2
    SNF management and inventories at, 1.1.2.5,
      Table 1-3
    West Valley Demonstration Project, 4.7.3.1
spent nuclear fuel
    alternatives
         consequences, Chapter 5
         description, Chapter 3
         see also alternatives
    definition, 1.1.1
    disposition technologies, 1.1.3.4
    foreign research reactors, 1.1.2.4
    generation, 1.1.2, Fig. 1-2
    inventories, 1.1.2.1, Table 1-1, Fig. 3-1 through
      3-6
    location and inventory by alternatives, Fig. 1-2
    management
         current DOE, 1.1.2.3
         current Naval, 1.1.2.3
         foreign research reactors, 1.1.2.4
         inventories, 1.1.2.1
         non-DOE domestic reactors. 1.1.2.5
         overview, 1.1
         technologies, 1.1.3
         vulnerabilities, 1.1.1.3
    overview, 1.1
    radioactivity, 1.1.1
    regulatory requirements, Chapter 7
    regulatory status, 7.1.5
    shipments
         by alternative, see alternative summaries
         historical, Fig. 3-7
    special-case, 1.1.2.5. 1.3.2.5, Table 1-3
stabilization (technologies), 1.1.3.2
         see also stabilization of SNF
    storage
         historical, 1.1.2, Fig. 1-2
         technologies, 1.1.3.1
         see also storage of SNF
    transportation (technologies), 1.1.3.3
    vulnerability assessment, 1.1.1.3
stabilization of SNF
    alternative summaries
         1992/1993 Planning Basis, Table 3-3
         Centralization, Table 3-5
         Decentralization, Table 3-2
         No Action, Table 3-1
         Regionalization, Table 34
    EIS scope, 1.3.2.2
    technologies, 1.1.3.2
Stockpile Stewardship and Management Programmatic
  EIS, 1.2.2
storage of SNF
    alternative summaries
         1992/1993 Planning Basis, Table 3-3
         Centralization, Table 3-5
         Decentralization, Table 3-2
         No Action, Table 3-1
         Regionalization, Table 3-4
    EIS scope, 1.3.2.3
    other sites, 4.7
    sites, historical, 1.1.2
    technologies, 1.1.3.1
           -T-
technologies for SNF management, 1.1.3
    disposition, 1.1.3.4
    stabilization, 1.1.3.2
    storage, 1.1.3.1
    transportation, 1.1.3.3
test and experimental reactors, 1.1.2.5, 4.7.1
Toxic Substances Control Act, 7.1.1
traffic, see transportation
transportation, Appendix I
    accidents comparison, 3.3.5, Table 3-9
    alternative summaries
         1992/1993 Planning Basis, Table 3-3
         Centralization, Table 3-5
         Decentralization, Table 3-2
         No Action, Table 3-1
         Regionalization, Table 3-4
    as key discriminator, 5.1.1.1
         1992/1993 Planning Basis, 5.1.4.6
         Centralization, 5.1.6.6
         Decentralization, 5.1.3.6
         No Action, 5.1.2.6
         Regionalization, 5.1.5.6
    impacts
         comparison, 3.3.5
         cumulative impacts, 5.3.2.7, Table 5-4
         mitigation, 5.7.9
         traffic accidents, 5.3.2.6
    regulations, 7.1.4
    shipments, 3.3.1. Table 3-6
    technologies, 1.1.3.3
Tritium Supply and Recycling Programmatic EIS, 1.2.2
             -U-
University of Missouri reactor
    characterization, 4.7.2.3, App. H
    SNF management and inventories, 1.1.2.5,
      Table 1-2
utilities and energy
    characterization, see site appendices
    impacts, 5.1.1.2, 5.2.9
         cumulative, 5.3.2.8
         mitigation, 5.7.11
    see also electricity
             -V-, -W-
waste generation (radioactive)
    comparison, 3.3.4
    impacts, 5.3.2.9
Waste Management Programmatic EIS, 1.2.1
water resources, 5.2.6, 5.7.6
    characterization, see site appendices
    impacts, 5.2.6, 5.3.2.4
    mitigation, 5.7.6
West Valley Demonstration Project
    characterization, 4.7.3.1, App. E
    SNF management and inventories, 1.1.2.5,
      Table 1-3
Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, 7.1.1
             -X-,-Y-,-Z-
no entries