14 July 1998
Source: http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/aces/aaces002.html

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

[Federal Register: July 14, 1998 (Volume 63, Number 134)]
[Notices]
[Page 37858-37859]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr14jy98-44]

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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Army


Proposed Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) for the M1
Abrams Main Battle Tank Heavy Armor System

AGENCY: U.S. Army Program Executive Office, Ground Combat & Support
Systems, Warren, MI.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) of 1969 and Army Regulation (AR) 200-2, the proposed FONSI for
the M1 Abrams Main Battle Tank Heavy Armor System is being published
for comment.
    The U.S. Army Program Executive Office, Ground Combat & Support
Systems (PEO-GCSS) has prepared a draft Environmental Assessment for
the M1 Abrams Main Battle Tank (MBT) Heavy Armor System. The current
use of the depleted uranium (DU) armor package on the Abrams MBT has
been re-evaluated to determine whether the environmental impacts of its
continued use remain insignificant, taking into consideration the
current use of the tank and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC's)
reduction in allowable radiation exposure from 500 mrem/year to 100
mrem/year for tank and maintenance crews (individual members of the
public).
    As in already-fielded weapon system, M1 MBTs have been in
production and in the field since the early 1980s. During that time,
many technical, environmental and health assessments have been
completed. These documents have addressed and minimized environmental
impacts. As part of the continuing analysis effort, this EA focuses
specifically on the assembly, use, repair and disposal of the heavy
armor package.
DATES: Comments must be received not later than August 28, 1998.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Questions concerning this proposed
action should be submitted within 45 days of the date of this
publication and directed to Mr. Dennis Sweers, Abrams Program
Management Office, Program Executive Office, Ground Combat and Support
Systems, ATTN: SFAE-GCSS-W-AB-SM, Warren, MI 48397-5000. Telephone
number: (810) 574-7895, E-mail address: sweersd@cc.tacom.army.mil

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

1. Purpose and Need for Proposed Action

    The Abrams Tank System Program (Abrams), administered by the
Project Manager, Abrams Tank System (PM Abrams) with support from the
U.S. Army Tank-automotive and Armaments Command (TACOM), has been using
Depleted Uranium (DU) armor on the Abrams Tank since 1988. In 1996, a
design change to the armor package was made by the Army and cut-in to
production by General Dynamics Land Systems (GDLS) via Change Request
XMPP-2083 in Oct 96 and effective with Job #1 M1A2 Phase II AUT. The
purpose of this revision to the Environmental Assessment (EA) is to
assess the environmental impact of the change from the original DU
armor design to this modified design. Additionally, although unrelated
to this armor design change, since the last EA, the NRC's maximum
radiation dose limits for individual members of the public has been
change from 500 mrem per year to 100 mrem per year. This revision
assesses the new design against these new dose limits.
    B. The findings of the draft EA of the M1 Abrams MBT Heavy Army
System support this FONSI. The assessment was conducted in keeping with
the Army's environmental stewardship policy, to ensure that any
potential environmental impacts are fully mitigated. The EA supports
all related M1 Abrams MBT programs reviewed by the Defense Acquisition
Board.

2. General Description of Action

    A. Under the proposed action, the use of the current depleted
uranium (DU) armor package on the Abrams tank would be evaluated to
determine whether the environmental impacts of its continued use remain
insignificant, taking into consideration the current use of the tank,
the armor package design change instituted in 1996 and changes in the
NRC's radiation dose limits for individual members of the public. If it
is determined that the environmental impacts of use of the DU armor
package remain insignificant, PM Abrams will continue to produce the
armor package through 2005.
    B. The draft Heavy Armor System EA evaluates the following: tank
assembly activities at Lima Army Tank Plant (LATP); field operations
including crew maintenance, field support maintenance and depot
maintenance; and demilitarization. All DU issues which are not the
direct responsibility of PM Abrams are not covered in the EA, but have
been covered in previous assessments.
    C. In summary, the DU is fabricated into armor packages by a
contractor to the Department of Energy. The contractor ships the
assembled armor packages to LATP for installation in the

[[Page 37859]]

tanks. At LATP, the armor packages remain in the transportation
containers until they are ready to be inserted into the tank. Following
installation of the armor package and other tank components, the
completed tanks are transported to military units as required for field
use. Field use consists primarily of training exercises and varying
levels of maintenance performed either by the tank operating crew or a
field maintenance crew. Some maintenance, including major repairs, is
conducted at maintenance depots by dedicated crews. At some point in
the future, the tanks will be removed from service, demilitarized, and
dispositioned.
    D. The impacts of the use of DU armor are central to the question
of whether the impacts of continued use of the M1 Abrams MBT remains
insignificant. The sue of DU armor is the primary feature that
distinguishes the Abrams tank from numerous other commonly accepted
equipment employed by the military and industry. Conventionally-armored
military vehicles and heavy equipment, similar to tanks, are commonly
operated by the Army and industry in a manner that is considered by the
public to be acceptable and with insignificant impact on the human
environment. Consequently, in conformance with the procedural
requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) this
Environmental Assessment (EA) has focused strictly on the use of DU
armor.

3. Anticipated Environmental Effects

    A. The MI Abrams MBT Heavy Armor System will be assembled,
transported, maintained, and disposed of in accordance with applicable
environmental protection regulations. The PM Abrams has performed an
in-depth study of exposure scenarios for affected personnel and has
found that, in all instances, the maximum potential exposure to
radiation from the Heavy Armor System will fall well under the 100
mrem/year NRC limit.
    B. The PM Abrams has determined that the potential for adverse
environmental impacts of the use and disposal of the Heavy Armor
package occur only if the outer armor integrity has been compromised or
if a large number of rounds are fired into the tank. In this instance,
however, decontamination measures can be limited to a 76-meter area
downwind of the impact site (for a worst-case scenario). The
concentration of the aerosol in the passing cloud does not exceed the
guidelines for the general population as set forth in 10 CFR Part 20.
    C. The PM Abrams will continue to assess alternative procedures and
materials for opportunities to replace the DU used for the Heavy Armor
System and to proactively implement environmental improvements to the
program in other areas.

4. Facts and Conclusions

    A. Operations at LATP are conducted in accordance with their
Radiation Protection Plan and personnel exposures are controlled within
the regulatory limits. Potential hazards have been identified and
evaluated and appropriate preventive measures have been taken. Efforts
have been made to reduce radiation exposures below the limits and to
minimize the number of personnel subjected to radiation exposure.
    B. Transportation of completed tanks from LATP to field
organizations for use is conducted in compliance with Department of
Transportation requirements for the transportation of articles
containing depleted uranium. Compliance with Department of
Transportation requirements assures appropriate protection of the
involved personnel and members of the general public from the potential
radiation and other hazards associated with transportation.
    C. Storage and Parking of tanks at field installations has been
evaluated and it has been determined that there is no reasonable
potential for exposure of personnel or the general public to radiation
exposures exceeding the limits allowed for members of the general
public.
    D. Fields use of the Abrams Tank with Heavy Armor has been
evaluated and it has been determined that appropriate controls exist in
the form of vehicle design, vehicle use, and vehicle maintenance to
assure that radiation exposure to involved personnel and the general
public is maintained within the required regulatory limits and that
efforts have been made to reduce radiation exposures below the limits.
    E. The environmental effects of accidents involving the release of
DU have been evaluated and appropriate actions have been identified to
assure mitigation and minimize the potential for environmental damage.
    F. Means have been identified and agreements have been made that
assure that the DU is properly managed and controlled during and
following demilitarization.
    G. Means have been identified and agreements have been made that
assure that all DU wastes generated by the Abrams Heavy Armor System
are properly managed and disposed.

5. Determination

    Based on the analyses of the draft EA, the use of DU armor from its
receipt by the Abrams program through disposition of the material
following future demilitarization of the Abrams tanks, including
reasonably foreseeable accidents, do not constitute a major Federal
action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment
within the meaning of the NEPA. Therefore, an Environmental Impact
Statement for the proposed action is not required.
Gregory D. Showalter,
Army Federal Register Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. 98-18674 Filed 7-13-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3710-08-M
