Gordon’s Tough Questions Lead to Clarification on Nuclear Waste Import License

October 26, 2009, WASHINGTON, D.C. – As a result of Congressman Bart Gordon’s recent questions to Utah-based EnergySolutions, the company has now submitted a formal “clarification” to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission affirming that they did not have signed contracts to dispose of Italian radioactive waste in the United States, as they had previously indicated.

EnergySolutions has a license application pending with NRC to import 20,000 tons of Italian low-level radioactive waste for disposal in the U.S., which would be the largest importation ever of foreign-generated radioactive waste.  If the license is granted, the nuclear waste shipments would be transported to Tennessee for processing and later disposed of in Utah.  Gordon has been leading the fight against this proposal and is the author of bipartisan legislation to ban the importation of foreign-generated waste for disposal in the U.S. 

“We’re the only country in the world that disposes of radioactive waste generated by other countries,” added Gordon.  “It’s time to put an end to this practice and preserve our limited disposal space for the American medical facilities, research labs and utility companies that produce this kind of waste.”

At an October 16 legislative hearing on Gordon’s bill, titled the Radioactive Import Deterrence Act, EnergySolutions President Val Christensen’s answers to questions posed by Gordon revealed that the company had not portrayed its business situation with Italy accurately.  In a June 2009 letter to the NRC, EnergySolutions claimed that if a license was not granted to import the Italian waste, it “would cause EnergySolutions substantial economic harm because it is unable to perform work under its contracts for this waste.” 

Gordon said that the timeline did not make sense.

“Last year, in sworn testimony at a congressional hearing, EnergySolutions stated that it didn’t have a formal contract with Italy,” said Gordon.  “It wouldn’t make sense for them to then turn around and sign a legally binding contract, as EnergySolutions alleged in its June 2009 filing, while a court case and federal legislation were pending that questioned EnergySolutions’ ability to move forward with the Italian deal.”
 
At the October hearing, Christensen acknowledged that his company did not have any such contracts and the filing should have said “memorandum of understanding,” which is not a legally binding contract.  EnergySolutions has since clarified its business situation to the NRC.