After agreeing last month to delay shipments of highly enriched uranium (HEU) from Canada to the Savannah River Site at least until Feb. 17, 2017, the Department of Energy is now asking a federal judge for summary judgment in a lawsuit in which antinuclear organizations are requesting more information on the transfers.
The DOE facility, located near Aiken, S.C., was supposed to begin receiving the weapon-grade uranium in September from the Chalk River Laboratories in Ontario. The U.S.-origin material was sent to Canada under the Atoms for Peace program, and used to produce the isotope molybdenum-99 for medical purposes. Under the program, the United States pledged to take back the HEU and fission products.
But on Aug. 12, several groups sued DOE and other parties in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia because they believe the department failed to take necessary steps before authorizing up to 150 shipments that total 6,000 gallons of HEU.
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.” They are asking that shipments not start until DOE completes an environmental impact statement (EIS) that details the potential risks of moving the material.
The plaintiffs in the lawsuit are Beyond Nuclear, the Nuclear Information and Resource Service, Savannah River Site Watch, Citizens for Alternatives to Chemical Contamination, the 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.
In the Nov. 4 request for a court ruling on the case, the Energy Department argued that an environmental impact statement is not required because the agency fully complied with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) by conducting a supplemental analysis in 2013 and another one in 2015.
Both concluded 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 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission. Testing included free-drop testing from 9 meters onto an unyielding surface and thermal analysis to assure they remain leak-tight.
“The only issue Plaintiffs may raise at this late juncture is the narrow issue of NEPA supplementation, and DOE is entitled to deference in its determination that a supplemental EIS was not required,” DOE said in its summary judgment request.
The nuclear groups have until Nov. 22 to respond.
On Sept. 20, the two sides signed a joint motion to postpone 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.”
