Navy’s Nuclear Waste Targeted For Idaho Site Federal Plan For Inel Ignores Opposition By State Officials

The Energy Department tentatively proposed Thursday that the U.S. Navy’s spent nuclear fuel be stored at the Idaho Engineering Laboratory site, although Idaho officials have opposed additional fuel shipments.

The proposal was in a final environmental impact statement released Thursday and shipments could begin immediately after June 1 when Energy Secretary Hazel O’Leary is expected to make a final decision, department officials said.

Fuel shipments from the Navy have been in limbo since a federal court barred further disposal of spent fuel rods in Idaho after state officials filed a lawsuit challenging the shipments. The court required the formal environmental impact review before shipments could be resumed.

A backlog of spent nuclear fuel has been accumulating at the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard at Bremerton, Wash., in special shielded railcars since the federal court order halted all shipments two years ago.

A map with the impact statement shows that Idaho would receive all spent fuel removed from ships and subs at the Puget Sound shipyard. Spent fuel from Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard also would be transported through Bremerton on its way to Idaho, the map shows.

About 65 metric tons of nuclear fuel are expected to be shipped to the Idaho site near Idaho Falls under the proposed plan. The storage would be temporary until a permanent repository for high-level nuclear wastes is selected and built.

Since the court barred shipments to Idaho, the Navy has been keeping its spent fuel from reactors that power nuclear submarines and other vessels in shipping containers at Navy shipyards.

The environmental review also concluded that about 2,700 metric tons of Energy Department nuclear fuel continue to be kept at the Savannah River site in South Carolina and the Hanford Nuclear Reservation.

“Potential for environmental impacts … would be small,” said the department after reviewing the final environmental impact analysis.

In Idaho, Gov. Phil Batt said he was disappointed at the department’s conclusions and said he would try to dissuade O’Leary from accepting the recommendation.

Batt said state officials have yet to study the environmental impact analysis in detail. He called the proposal “wrong not only for Idaho but for the nation” and said he was concerned that temporary storage would become permanent.

“Idaho will not be a permanent repository and will resist this effort in court, if necessary,” the governor said in a statement issued in Boise.