INEEL NEWS
Environmental Defense Institute
June 2002 |
Volume 13 Number 2 |
Against DOE on High-Level
Waste
The
Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) filed a lawsuit in February in U.S
Federal Court for the District of Idaho challenging the Department of Energy
(DOE) violation of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act by arbitrarily reclassifying
high-level radioactive waste and calling it “incidental waste.” According to the NRDC complaint, “This
renaming process would allow DOE to permanently leave high-level radioactive
waste – which will gradually disperse into the environment – in shallow burial
in more than 200 nuclear waste storage tanks located at three DOE nuclear
weapons sites: the Hanford Reservation in Washington near the Columbia River,
the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL) above the
Snake River Aquifer, and the Savannah River Site in South Carolina where
several tanks literally sit in the water table.”
In a desperate attempt to cut
treatment and disposal costs of what the NRDC accurately calls the “most
dangerous substances known to humankind,” DOE chose to change the rules that
otherwise require appropriate treatment and safe permanent disposal in a secure
(10,000-year) geologic repository. At
this point, the only obstacle in DOE’s path in implementing this tragic policy,
is the NRDC suit. One might
legitimately ask, “where are the federal and state regulators” whose taxpayer
funded mandate it is to take action when public safety and the environment are
at risk? Geoffrey Fettus, lead NRDC
attorney in the lawsuit, says some encouraging exchanges have occurred between
the states of South Carolina, Washington, and Oregon, but alas not a peep from
Idaho or EPA. Fettus is hoping that the
states will at least file Amicus Curiae (friend of the court) briefs as currently
indicated in support of the NRDC suit.
NRDC claims that, “Over the
last few decades, hundreds of thousands of gallons of this waste have leaked
into the environment and continues to do so.”
Internal INEEL documents revealed by a whistle blower show that the
high-level waste tanks located at INTEC (formerly called Idaho Chemical
Processing Plant) are leaking into the concrete vaults surrounding the tanks
and have in turn leaked from the vaults to the ground and eventually to the
aquifer. Many service pipeline leaks from the INTEC “Tank Farm” have also
occurred over the years causing extensive contamination of the soil and
underlying ground water. A 1994 Idaho State Oversight Program report notes that
over a 23-month period, about 123,500 gallons leaked into the concrete tank
vaults that surround the high-level tanks.
In March of 1993, for instance, about 26,000 gallons leaked into the
tank vaults. Additionally, other pipe
leaks generated some 146,000 cubic yards of contaminated soil with radiation
readings of 102 million picocuries/gram for cesium-137 with a radiation of 400
rem/hr are reported by the regulatory agencies. These contaminates are lethal by any standards. These contaminates are migrating into the
underlying Snake River Plain Aquifer and pose a significant hazard.
NRDC states that, “Instead of
following federal law and disposing of high-level radioactive waste in a
geologic repository, DOE intends to leave literally thousands of gallons of the
highly radioactive sediments and sledges in the bottom of the underground
tanks, cover the waste in place with concrete, and hope for the best. The waste
remaining in the tanks will also have comparable – and potentially much higher
– concentrations of radioactive elements than the high-level [liquid portion]
waste removed from the tanks for disposal in a geologic repository. DOE has already implemented this process
with three tanks at Savannah River and has grouted them in place for ‘permanent
disposal’. Fundamentally, DOE’s action
creates three national sacrifice zones for high-level waste. DOE [action]
arbitrarily and unilaterally reclassifies high-level waste as ‘incidental
waste,’ thereby exempting it from the [Nuclear Waste Policy Act] NWPA and
allows this dangerous waste to be subject to an entirely different, and
substantially less stringent set of disposal criteria. Disposal of tens of thousands of gallons of
high-level waste in the INEEL, Hanford, and Savannah River waste tanks will (1)
result in a potentially catastrophic dispersal of radioactivity into the
environment and (2) at a minimum, will require significant land-use
restrictions, maintenance and monitoring in perpetuity.”
All
this begs the question of why the attorney generals of South Carolina,
Washington, and Oregon are apparently preparing to file Amicus Curiae Briefs in
support of the NRDC lawsuit if there were not major outstanding regulatory
issues related to DOE’s plan to de-list significant quantities of high-level
waste and leave this highly toxic waste in place to compromise future
generations.
Our collective hats are off
and waving to NRDC for having the courage and commitment to challenge DOE on
this crucial and potentially precedent setting legal action, and
demanding, “ a permanent injunction
preventing DOE from taking any actions with respect to waste in the tanks that
would be inconsistent with the requirements for high-level radioactive waste
disposal under the [Nuclear Waste Policy Act] NWPA.” Who in their right mind would call compliance with existing
environmental law “radical” except for the current Bush Administration?
Laird Lucus, otherwise
associated with the Land and Water Fund of the Rockies as senior attorney is
the local Idaho lead attorney on the NRDC lawsuit. Ä
|
EDI Challenges Idaho Approval of High-Level
Tank Closure Plan |
The
Idaho Department of Environmental Quality (IDEQ) recently approved a draft
Closure Plan for two INTEC high-level waste tanks. If the final Plan is approved, it will allow about 79,000 gallons
of tank sediments to remain in place with a concrete (grout) cap. The Environmental Defense Institute (EDI)
and David McCoy submitted an official Petition to reopen the public comment
period into this misguided Plan. EDI’s
request provided internal INEEL documentation that showed the “grouting”
planned does not meet regulatory requirements for disposal of high-level waste
or, for that matter, any other category of mixed hazardous radioactive
waste.
IDEQ’s Director, C. Stephen
Allred responded to EDI in a 5/10/02 letter stating, “[I]t appears that DOE and
its contractor went to great lengths to prospectively identify both regulatory
and operational pit falls. Based on our
[IDEQ] review of your [EDI] submittal, the DEQ remains confident that the plan
for moving forward with closure of the first two of eleven Tank Farm Facility
tanks is compliant with [Hazardous Waste Management Act] HWMA regulations, and
it represents full disclosure on the part of DOE to address the operational
realities associated with closure of the mixed waste tanks.”
The Tank Closure Plan violates
federal regulations (40 CFR 191) for disposing mixed high-level radioactive
waste in near surface internment that cannot meet the 10,000-year minimum
requirement.
The
Tank Closure Plan also violates federal regulations (40 CFR 265.112(b)(4)) that
states in pertinent part, “A detailed description of the steps needed to remove
or decontaminate all hazardous waste residues and
The
INEEL Tank Closure Plan additionally violates federal regulations (40 CFR Sec.
265.197(a)) closure and post-closure care that states “ At closure of a tank system, the owner or operator must remove
or decontaminate all waste residues, contaminated containment system
components (liners, etc.), contaminated soils, and structures and equipment
contaminated with waste, and manage them as hazardous waste.”
The
State of Idaho and EPA regulators are thrusting a “Risk-Based” closure plan
that has a multitude of questionable assumptions without supporting sampling
data, and specific limits on tank heels left in place, all of which are not
fully disclosed. Specifically, how much tank heel will be left in the tanks and
grouted over in order to meet the “Risk Based” no harm criteria?
Even
more egregious is that the DOE technology development that currently exists
that can remove nearly all the tank sediments, yet for cost cutting measures
has not been implemented.
Fundamentally,
EDI alleges that easily exhumable mixed hazardous high-level waste from the
INTEC tanks will be sent to other un-RCRA permitted treatment, storage,
disposal (TSD) at INTEC (i.e., High-level Liquid Waste Evaporator (HLLWE),
Process Equipment Waste Evaporator (PEWE), and the Liquid Effluent Treatment
and Disposal (LET&D). This is
illegal!
EDI
is requesting reopening or extension of the period for public comment because
new information raises substantial new questions related to DOE’s unwillingness
to properly close High Level Waste Tanks.
IDEQ’S Allred’s determination that everything is copasetic fails to
address the various crucial legal issues EDI presented earlier in our “Request
for Investigation” some of which include:
EPA Risks Compromising INEEL Investigation by
Moving it to Seattle Region 10
|
In
September of last year, the Environmental Defense Institute, Keep Yellowstone
Nuclear Free, and David McCoy filed a formal Petition with the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA). The Petition
asked EPA to remove the State of Idaho’s enforcement authority based on an
abominable history of non-enforcement of hazardous waste laws at INEEL. EPA’s Office of Inspector General Western
Division in Sacramento, CA was assigned the task of conducting the
investigation, and subsequently ordered the EPA Region 10 Administrator to
respond to all the charges listed in the Petition. EPA Region 10 jurisdiction
includes Idaho and the INEEL operations. Region 10’s response predictably
justified the continued operation of INEEL mixed hazardous and radioactive
waste incinerators (that operated for decades) under a bogus and illegal
“interim status” provision in the statute that was never intended to last more
than five years. These “interim status” exemptions expired before 1992.
In
April, Kwai Chan, EPA’s Assistant Inspector General in Washington, DC abruptly
announced that the investigation lead would be changed from Western Division
Sacramento office to the Seattle Region 10 office. EPA Region 10 in Seattle is mandated by law to oversee the State
of Idaho’s enforcement actions to ensure compliance with federal hazardous
waste laws.
The
Environmental Defense Institute (EDI) Petition documents how EPA Region 10 is
just as culpable as the State of Idaho for non-enforcement of environmental
laws. Moreover, EPA Region 10 is
identified as a defendant in three Notices of Intent to Sue filed by EDI and
other Petitioners for allowing the DOE to operate mixed hazardous and
radioactive incinerators for decades without the required permits and without
meeting federal standards for operating requirements.
The Environmental Defense
Institute challenged this major change of venue on the grounds that it was a
conflict of interest for Region 10 to investigate itself. Kwai Chan’s response was that, “[B]ased on
the background, training, experience, work load, as well as the individual
interest of the team members, we have assembled the best team to address the
issues raised in the Petition.” It is
reasonable for the public to view this EPA action as similar to the Arthur
Anderson conflict of interest as an Enron auditing firm while at the same time
serving as a highly paid consultant. It is naive to think the EPA Region 10
would have sufficient independence to investigate itself just as it is naive to
think any Executive Branch agency can credibly investigate another Executive
Branch agency (i.e., EPA investigating DOE) given that they both report to the
President. Historically, the only thing
DOE responds to is a court order. We will just have to wait to see what EPA’s
Inspector General investigation findings are before any public judgment can be
launched.
State of Idaho Reopens Lawsuit
with DOE
|
On
April 18th Idaho Attorney General Alan Lance filed a motion in U.S.
Federal Court to reopen an old lawsuit originally filed by then Governor Cecil
Andrus in 1991 against DOE for violation of environmental laws. The litigation was “settled” by then
Governor Phil Batt in 1995, however Idaho now alleges that DOE failed to comply
with the settlement agreement that was approved by the federal court as a
Consent Order.
The
crux of the current dispute is over the interpretation of the 1995 Settlement
Agreement. Idaho justifiably claims
that DOE agreed to remove all high-level and transuranic waste
(including buried waste in the INEEL burial grounds) from the state by the year
2035. DOE claims that it only agreed to
remove a limited amount (65,000 cubic feet) of this waste currently in above
ground storage.
In
1995, when Governor Batt’s draft settlement agreement was made public, the
Environmental Defense Institute (EDI) attempted to file an Amicus Curiae
(friend of the court) brief to alert the federal court and the State of Idaho
on major deficiencies in the settlement agreement that did not include adequate
specificity of the huge quantities of high-level and transuranic waste in the
INEEL burial grounds. EDI, in its
Amicus Brief, documented that over 90 metric tons of irradiated reactor fuel
has been dumped in the INEEL burial grounds.
Both Idaho and DOE blocked EDI’s motion to file an Amicus Brief as well
as blocking a parallel federal court motion by the Shoshone Bannock Tribes to
submit an Amicus Brief.
These
are clear examples of Idaho’s political agenda to block public and Tribal involvement. Had Idaho listened in 1995, the State would
not be back in federal court today. The
fact that Idaho is now back in court is either a mixed blessing or simply
Governor Kempthorne’s reading of the Idaho political winds that is emphatically
saying that Idahoans no longer consider INEEL a good neighbor.
Now
once again, in yet a new fit of arrogance, Idaho is blocking any attempt by EDI
to ensure that the INEEL high-level waste tank sediments (see previous article)
are included in the litigation against DOE.
Idaho has already approved a draft plan to leave over 79,000 gallons of
high-level waste in the underground tanks.
This waste is some forty feet below the 100-year Big Lost River
flood plan and will eventually end up in the Snake River Aquifer.
EDI
supports Idaho’s current litigation against DOE, despite crucial deficiencies,
because the buried waste in the INEEL dump poses one of many enormous threats
to public health and safety due to the on-going migration of these pollutants
into the Snake River Aquifer.
Specifically,
EDI has documented DOE’s attempt to enterprise on Idaho’s deficient (if not politically motivated) negotiating
skills and blatant disregard of public/Tribal input and that is reprehensible.
DOE simply does not want to spend the money to exhume the waste in order to
properly and legally dispose of it in a geologically safe repository. President Bush does not consider this cost
as part of “home-land security,” when in fact it has everything to do with
“home-land security” for not only the state of Idaho but also Oregon and
Washington residents that are downstream of INEEL pollution.
What is at stake here is the viability of a principal sole source aquifer for future generations. This is a major threat to our very future that simply must not be shrugged off by Boise or Washington politicians.
The
issue of stored waste verses buried waste is crucial. Comparatively, the 65,000 cm of stored waste in
buildings at the INEEL Transuranic Storage Area is more recently generated and
is less radioactive than the buried high-level/TRU waste in
the burial grounds. In the earlier years (1950-75), DOE and its predecessors
dumped all categories (including high-level) of waste together in shallow
burial ground pits, trenches, and "soil vaults." After 1975,
high-level and TRU waste were segregated from low-level waste. Consequently,
the buried waste constitutes a greater hazard than the stored
TRU waste because of co-mingling in the early years of all types of waste.
The stored
TRU waste evaluated in DOE’s recent environmental study contains 647,000 curies
of radioactivity, including 473,600 curies of plutonium. Although, DOE is not
publicly acknowledging the fact, other internal DOE reports show the buried
waste contains 11,000,000 curies of radioactivity including 1,455 kilograms of
plutonium from Rocky Flats alone. The total buried plutonium
contains 700,400 curies of radioactivity. The total stored and
buried plutonium amounts to 1,174,000 curies (473,600 + 700,400). The buried
waste alone represents potentially 17 times more radioactivity to be processed
than apparently is considered in the DOE environmental study or the
applications for state and federal permits.
DOE's Rocky Flats Plant
recently conducted a mass balance inventory of plutonium and determined that
1,191.8 kg of plutonium was "unaccounted" for. Part of this shortfall was attributed to an
estimated 300 kg in the ductwork and glove-boxes, and the remaining 891 kg
shortfall was shipped to INEEL for disposal and was not included in the
shipping manifests. Criticality control
limits of 267 grams of plutonium-239 that could be disposed in the same
container were regularly exceeded. The numerous fires at Rocky Flats and the
resulting cleanup operations that shipped the decontamination waste to INEEL
added to the accounting errors. Therefore, the total Rocky Flats plutonium
dumped in the INEEL Subsurface Disposal Area could be as much as 2,346 kg
(1,455 + 891). Given the radioactive
toxic half-life of plutonium at 24,000 years, and the fact that it is migrating
into the aquifer, this represents an unacceptable risk to public health and
safety.
The
DOE internal reports that estimate 11 million curies in the burial ground is
considered by Environmental Defense Institute (EDI) as grossly understated. EDI
researchers used the Navy waste shipments to the burial ground as a test case
to evaluate the reliability of DOE's inventory estimates. DOE's 1994 inventory
attributes only 4.2 million curies shipped from the Naval Reactor Facility. EDI,
using the DOE's Radioactive Waste Management Information System data base
printouts for each shipment (obtained through a Freedom of Information
request), added up the Navy shipments between 1960, and 1993, and determined
that the curie content amounted to 8.14 million curies. This is twice the amount at radioactivity DOE is claiming in the
1994 inventory for the Navy alone, which means the rest of the DOE inventory is
equally understated.
This
buried waste is clearly the most problematic in terms of environmental impact
because contaminates are migrating into the Snake River Aquifer. In the
"good old days," everything that was not usable went into the burial
grounds, including some 90 metric tons of irradiated reactor fuel. The curie content of the buried waste is
more than 11 million curies as previously cited. The only spent reactor fuel
that went into storage at the INTEC (previously called Idaho Chemical
Processing Plant) was fuel that DOE could easily reprocess to extract materials
for the nuclear weapons programs. In other words, only aluminum, stainless
steel, or zirconium clad fuels could be reprocessed, with the exception that
some experimental, and unsuccessful, fuel reprocessing of other reactor clad
fuels did occur. There was no reprocessing of fuels such as ceramic clad fuels
used in the Aircraft Nuclear Propulsion reactors, the Navy fuel test specimens,
the Army reactors, the reactor fuel left after meltdowns where the cladding was
compromised and thus difficult to store. This fuel that was not to be
reprocessed went to the burial grounds and was mixed in with the other
radioactive waste.
This cavalier dumping practice resulted in
significant contaminate migration into the underlying soils and the Snake River
Aquifer. The consequence of this pollution migration means that huge volumes of
contaminated soils must be exhumed in addition to the waste to prevent further
contaminate migration into the environment. Estimates of contaminated soils are
690,000 cm of which 170,000 cm is plutonium contaminated TRU waste. This contaminated soil would be candidate
waste for the processing plants because it contains significant quantities of
hazardous chemicals that were mixed in with the other radioactive waste.
Additionally,
the buried waste contains a witch's brew of toxic chemicals and heavy metals,
which DOE is not including in its environmental analysis. A 1994 DOE internal
document inventory of this buried waste shows more than 2,868.42 metric tons of
these toxic chemicals in the shallow pits and trenches.
For
more information on this issue, see EDI’s website at http://personalpages.tds.net/~edinst
Fallen Colleague |
Joe
Goldfield died on May 22. His passing left a huge void in the nuclear activist
community. Joe was a wonderful engineer who had the technical expertise to
credibly challenge DOE’s radioactive waste incinerators. Joe effectively lead the charge that
resulted in closure of the Rocky Flats incinerator, and also the INEEL Plutonium
incinerator now called the Advanced Mixed Waste Treatment Plant (incinerator
portion). His technical contribution made the difference between winning an
illegal incinerator project closure and loosing it. In both cases (Rocky Flats and INEEL) we won, thanks to Joe
Goldfield! Ä