Critics of planned depleted-uranium shipments to Utah told regulators Thursday that it makes no sense to generate such waste when the country is advocating nuclear nonproliferation.

Depleted uranium is a by-product of uranium enrichment for nuclear fuels -- or for weapons -- and its accelerating commercial production in the United States has the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission in a three-year process to write rules for its disposal. In the meantime, Salt Lake City-based EnergySolutions is preparing to bury new shipments of it in the Tooele County desert.

"The president and many nations are calling for a reduction in nuclear arms," retired University of Utah biology professor Naomi Franklin said at an NRC roundtable discussion on the matter. It's the wrong time to increase uranium enrichment, she said.

Activist Jay Marx of the Washington-based Proposition 1 Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament likewise told officials he questioned the need to increase production of the waste. Nuclear energy is history and renewables are the future, he said, so there's no reason to expect the quantities that the NRC foresees.

Nonetheless, NRC officials said 700,000 metric tons currently exist in the country and up to 1.4 million metric tons could be generated by new enrichment programs -- both numbers far in excess of what the agency foresaw when in the 1980s it approved disposal of depleted uranium as a low-level waste. The material, generally in powder

Advertisement
form, becomes more dangerous over thousands of years as it releases radon gas, and regulators believe they need new standards for its safe isolation.

Gov. Gary Herbert, speaking at his monthly KUED news conference on Thursday, said he worries more about depleted uranium than other radioactive wastes coming to Utah, and would like to keep it out of the state because of its long period of radioactivity.

"It's forever," he said. "And the thing that causes most of us concern with depleted uranium is it gets hotter over time."

The governor said he is "more than happy to sit down with EnergySolutions and see if there's not something we can do to stop that from coming in or find a win-win, if that's possible."

Radioactive waste watchdog group HEAL Utah participated in the NRC meeting, and policy director Christopher Thomas said he was disappointed that state officials did not speak up. He said Texas, which sent a representative to the event, apparently takes the issue more seriously because it has its own rule requiring stricter disposal standards than the old NRC rule currently governing burial in Tooele County.

HEAL Utah and Idaho's Snake River Alliance told regulators that shallow burial, in Utah or elsewhere, is inappropriate.

That's contrary to the NRC's previous position that it is appropriate at arid places such as EnergySolutions' Clive site, said Thomas Magette, the company's vice president for regulatory strategy. He added that the West Desert is stable, and groundwater around Clive is saline and not potable.

"It has some natural advantages," he said of the site.

Magette said he had not seen the governor's comments and would not respond to them Thursday.

Eight people spoke during a public forum at the NRC meeting. Most opposed bringing depleted uranium to Utah, but one said alcohol, tobacco and everyday hazards should be higher priorities.

Uranium is present in nature, and is low on the list of dangers to humans, said Robert Bennion of West Jordan. "It's not a particularly big issue," he said.

Robert Gehrke contributed to this story.