A longstanding plan to send highly enriched uranium (HEU) from Canada to the Savannah River Site in South Carolina has been delayed at least until Feb. 17, 2017 – an agreed-upon date that is expected to give the federal government enough time to prove it is meeting contractual and legal obligations for the shipments. The U.S.-origin nuclear weapon-grade material was sent to Canada under the Atoms for Peace program, and used to produce molybdenum-99 for medical purposes. Under the program, the United States pledged to take back the HEU and fission products.
SRS, located near Aiken, S.C., was supposed to begin receiving shipments in September. But multiple anti-nuclear groups sued the Department of Energy and other parties in August in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, arguing that necessary steps were not taken before the department authorized up to 150 shipments from the Chalk River Laboratories in Ontario that total 6,000 gallons of HEU. The groups are asking that shipments not start until the Department of Energy completes an environmental impact statement (EIS) that details the potential risks of moving the material. The plaintiffs say the transport poses a wide spectrum of dangers, “whether from leakage of the liquid contents due to sabotage, accident, or malfunction or from the emanation of penetrating gamma and neutron radiation from the cargo during transportation due to accidental criticality or inadequacies in shielding.”
The plaintiffs in the lawsuit are Beyond Nuclear, the Nuclear Information and Resource Service, Savannah River Site Watch, Citizens for Alternatives to Chemical Contamination, Lone Tree Council, Sierra Club, and Environmentalists Inc. They are suing the Energy Department; Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz; Monica Regalbuto, assistant energy secretary for environmental management; David Huizenga, principal assistant deputy administrator for defense nuclear nonproliferation at the National Nuclear Security Administration; and SRS Manager Jack Craig.
A Sept. 20 joint motion in the case states that the two sides have agreed to a delay in the HEU shipments so the court has sufficient time to “issue a decision prior to the date Defendants have determined the Canadian shipments must commence.” To expedite the process, the two parties have outlined a scheduling order between now and the February deadline that both are expected to meet. For example, the plaintiffs have until Nov. 14 to file their motion for summary judgment in the lawsuit and the defendants have until Dec. 5 to respond to that motion.
A Nuclear Regulatory Commission document filed on Sept. 27 indicates the shipments were set to begin on Dec. 1 of this year and continue to Jan. 31, 2018, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) said in a Sept. 30 press release. Gillibrand and Rep. Brian Higgins (D-N.Y.) last week sent a letter to Moniz requesting a new environmental impact statement before beginning the HEU shipments, which would pass through their state. They said the prior plan only addressed solid material. “The transportation of a liquid substance versus a solid substance is an entirely different form of matter, which causes a significant change in the risks that come with transporting such a substance and could have environmental and safety impacts that were not previously evaluated,” the lawmakers stated in their letter.
Last year, DOE prepared a supplemental analysis and concluded that an EIS was not necessary. The analysis determined that the transport constitutes low risk because the HEU will be shipped in containers specifically designed and fabricated for holding liquid material. The containers meet standards established by the International Atomic Energy Agency and were certified by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission. Testing of the containers included free-drop testing from 9 meters onto an unyielding surface and thermal testing to assure they remain leak-tight.
The National Nuclear Security Administration noted the joint filing, but would not comment further on the issue. SRS Watch Director Tom Clements wrote in a press release that the delay is a victory for the plaintiffs’ effort because it also gives time for considering viable options for treating the HEU in Canada. “For over three years since our initial request, DOE has staunchly refused to allow formal public input into a full EIS on the unnecessary import of highly radioactive waste liquid waste from Canada,” he wrote. “We are optimistic that our initial victory in halting the shipments will yield the EIS we are seeking.”
At SRS, the HEU is to be processed at H Canyon along with spent nuclear fuel that is being processed from L Basin. The recovered uranium would be purified and then blended with natural uranium to produce low-enriched uranium (LEU). That material would then be transferred to the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) where it will be converted into fuel for use in TVA reactors.
