Jeremy L. Dillon
RW Monitor
4/17/2015
Utah’s Department of Environmental Quality agreed this week to suspend the public comment period for the EnergySolutions depleted uranium disposal Performance Assessment after the state identified potential issues. EnergySolutions requested the suspension after eight problem areas emerged in the state’s Safety Evaluation Report, released earlier this week. DEQ found that the PA meets requirements for protection of the public and inadvertent intruders, but the SER found EnergySolution’s PA deficient in eight areas, including areas related to the evapotranspiration cover, infiltration, erosion of cover, frost damage, effects of biological on radionuclide transport, clay liner, GoldSim quality assurance, and deep time analysis. The release of the report would have kicked off a seven week public comment period that would have included public hearings in Salt Lake City and Tooele, Utah, but those meetings have turned into informational public meetings due to the public comment suspension.
According to DEQ, the state wanted a “meaningful” public comment period, which would include the information needed from EnergySolutions to satisfy the SER. “It is imperative that the formal administrative public comment process be as meaningful as possible,” DEQ said in a release. “To accomplish this, DEQ will delay formal public comment and allow EnergySolutions additional time to address important components not addressed or resolved in the draft Safety Evaluation Report (SER) released on Monday. The administrative public comment period that will form the basis of the decision record, will be re-opened when the information necessary to fully analyze potential environmental and health impacts has been submitted by EnergySolutions.”
EnergySolutions ‘Will Not Proceed Until These Questions are Answered’
EnergySolutions did not want to move forward with the public comment period if deficiencies still existed in the report, company spokesman Mark Walker said this week. “Although we are confident we can address these unresolved questions, we believe the public comment period should only proceed once the questions are resolved,” Walker said in a statement. “The company’s position has been and continues to be that science should determine whether DU can be safely disposed of at Clive. The Company will not proceed until these questions are answered to the satisfaction of the appropriate regulatory bodies.”
EnergySolutions submitted Clive’s performance assessment for DU back in 2011 following the Utah Radiation Control Board’s 2010 decision to require a quantitative compliance period for DU out to 10,000 years, with a second qualitative review out to peak dose (approximately 2.5 million years). Subsequently, the state required additional information and a revised design for a DU disposal cell, which EnergySolutions resubmitted this past summer.
Governor Not Comfortable Until NRC Completes DU Review
Utah Gov. Gary Herbert (R), meanwhile, said this week that he is not comfortable with DU disposal until the Nuclear Regulatory Commission completes its review of classifying depleted uranium. “It’s not a matter of if can we do it. The questions is should we do it and is it permitted under the law,” Herbert said during a press conference this week. “The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has raised the question as whether depleted uranium is in fact Class A waste, and they have at least talked about reviewing and analyzing whether or not it is. I think that should happen.” He added, “Frankly, if it’s hotter than Class A waste, we don’t want to have it. If it’s Class A waste that fits under the parameters of the NRC, then that’s something else. They may have the right to permit it, but I want that reviewed because I have a hunch that it’s hotter than Class A waste. Until [a NRC review] happens, I’m not comfortable having depleted uranium out at Clive.”
In response, EnergySolutions issued the following statement: “The classification of Depleted Uranium as Class A waste has for years met the rigorous review standards of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and the technical and scientific communities,” Walker said. “We believe in the principle that good policy is based upon good science. We are confident that Depleted Uranium is classified correctly as Class A waste and that the Division of Radiation Control will be satisfied with the answers we will provide and confirm that our facility is suitable for the disposal of Depleted Uranium.”
SER Lists Conditions Needed for License Amendment
DEQ’s SER also included a list of seven conditions EnergySolutions must meet before it can grant a license amendment for DU disposal. Among the conditions, EnergySolutions would need to come to an agreement with the Department of Energy indicating that DOE will accept title to the Federal Cell after closure; assure DU be disposed below the original-grade level of the proposed Federal Cell; provide documentation that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission does not plan to reclassify DU; provide a revised modeling of the remainder of waste planned for disposal in the Federal Cell; submit a written Waste Acceptance Criteria plan to ensure that all DU disposal meets with all properties assumed in the PA; prohibit land disposal of any quantity of DU that was produced at DOE facilities from uranium-bearing materials containing recycled uranium; and develop and implement a program to provide more detailed site characterization and hydrogeological evaluation of aquifers in the area.
While each requirement could prove a challenge for EnergySolutions, some industry officials pointed to the prohibition of DU produced at DOE facilities from uranium-bearing materials containing recycled uranium as especially troublesome. EnergySolutions currently is storing some 5,000 barrels of DU from the Savannah River Site cleanup that it received in 2009 before the state and the company agreed upon a suspension on DU shipments. A 2010 analysis of the waste showed that the Savannah River DU waste was Class A, but that at least technetium-99, a recycled uranium by-product, was present. This stipulation could prevent the Savannah River waste from being disposed of at the Clive site.
Opposition Sees PA as “Narrow Science”
Heal Utah, an environmental activist group against the disposal of DU at Clive, saw the deficiencies of the PA outlined in the SER as further evidence of EnergySolutions “narrow science.” Heal Executive Director Matt Pacenza celebrated the SER findings as well as the list of conditions DEQ added to granting the license amendment. “It’s pretty clear when you read the review that EnergySolutions is stonewalling the state — and the public,” Pacenza said in a statement. “We’re confident it’ll be an easy decision for Gov. Herbert to reject waste that grows increasingly hazardous for hundreds of thousands of years, given all these uncertainties.” He added, “We’re not quite tossing our cowboy hats in the air yet, but we’re pretty hopeful. And we’re gratified that Utah officials are showing such strong skepticism about the company’s absurdly narrow science.”
DEQ: No Final Decision
DEQ has not made a final decision yet as to the suitability of the PA, and it will not until after the public comment period ends, DEQ said in a release this week. “Conclusions contained in the SER are subject to reconsideration based on public comments and the record as a whole,” DEQ said. “DEQ has not made a formal recommendation or determination at this time regarding EnergySolutions’ proposal. The director of the Division of Radiation Control will make the final decision on whether or not to issue a license amendment to EnergySolutions based on the SER/PA and comments received during the public comment period.”
