INL spent fuel shipment negotiations
Federal officials offered to remove twice the amount of high-level nuclear waste they proposed to send for research to an eastern Idaho nuclear facility in a deal with state officials that collapsed amid mounting concerns a nearly $600 million waste treatment facility might never operate.
Letters between the U.S. Department of Energy and Idaho Attorney General Lawrence Wasden made public by Wasden show that the federal agency balked at a counteroffer Wasden made seeking a way around the malfunctioning Integrated Waste Treatment Unit at the Idaho National Laboratory.
The Energy Department is trying to get a waiver to a 1995 agreement with Idaho because of a missed deadline converting 900,000 gallons of liquid waste into solid form.
Lacking the waiver, the federal agency on Friday canceled the first research shipment of 100 pounds of spent fuel worth an estimated $20 million annually to the state.
Below are four questions asked by the Associated Press and the responses from the Attorney General Office.
They were sent to us by the Attorney General’s Office.
Are there any other formal letters, documents to share that fill in the gap between the Feb. 27 letter and the Aug. 14 letter to DOE?
There were periodic updates on the progress of the IWTU and informal communications during this period.
2. The DOE appeared to offer up two options early in the negotiating phase, both of which we addressed in our Oct. 13th letter. Those offerings were removing twice the amount of heavy metal from the site and to make Sec. Moniz available for a press conference with Lawrence. The question is whether the heavy metal is something DOE is already obligated to remove or was this a new, good-faith proposal?
We’re going to cite the comments made by Lawrence in the Oct. 13th letter, which state: “While I appreciate DOE’s offer, it does not address the underlying problem – DOE is not in compliance with the 1995 Settlement Agreement.”
3. Would the AG have felt comfortable and confident in allowing the first shipment of spent fuel if DOE agreed to move forward on the liquid waste using some other technology/alternativethan the IWYU?
“We offered a proposed agreement, and if they would have signed an agreement with enforceable commitments to get into compliance, then yes, the spent fuel rods could have come in,” Wasden said. “We gave them a pathway forward, an opportunity to address the contractual breach and the questions surrounding whether the IWTU would ever become operational.”
4. What are your thoughts about the status of the second shipment?
“I remain hopeful that DOE is willing to sit down and engage in meaningful negotiations,” Wasden said. “I’ve proposed a pathway forward and they know the details of that proposal. They know how to reach me.”
