Six East Idaho mayors say they are in favor of studying the environmental and economic impacts of siting an interim storage facility for commercial used nuclear fuel in this region, and they’re urging state leaders to look into the matter as they consider the future of nuclear activities at the Idaho National Laboratory and across the state.

    Mayors Jared Fuhriman of Idaho Falls, Brian Blad of Pocatello, Mike Virtue of Blackfoot, Richard Woodland of Rexburg, Steven W. Fuhriman of Ammon and Steven M. England of Chubbuck recently wrote a letter in favor of further study on the matter and sent it to the Leadership in Nuclear Energy (LINE) Commission.

    Gov. C.L. “Butch” Otter has asked the commission to look for ways to support and build on the INL’s mission and the state’s nuclear industry in general, and the mayors believe that siting an interim storage facility in this region could help do that.

    “As elected officials representing communities in Eastern Idaho, we have become aware of stakeholder interest in securing funding to study the environmental and economic impacts associated with siting an interim storage facility for commercial used nuclear fuel in our region,” they wrote in the letter. “We believe that such a facility could potentially provide significant economic benefits — not only to Eastern Idaho, but also to the entire state. We also believe that, at a minimum, we owe it to our constituents to investigate this possibility further.”

    Such considerations recently surfaced after the federal government decided to end its plans to build a nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain in Nevada to store spent nuclear fuel; the Blue Ribbon Commission, which was created to review current policies and come up with a new strategy, has since suggested the need for consolidated storage and disposal facilities for spent nuclear fuel and high-level waste.

    Although building an interim storage facility in East Idaho may require modifications to the state’s 1995 nuclear waste cleanup agreement with the federal government — which doesn’t allow shipments of commercial nuclear waste to Idaho — a report recently released by the LINE Commission suggests that changes may need to be made anyway if Idaho wants to safeguard the INL’s future as the nation’s lead nuclear energy laboratory.

    It also suggests the INL may be an ideal location for a pilot interim storage facility.

    “I’ve been supportive of the nuclear mission of the INL for as long as I’ve been mayor,” England said. “It’s a great benefit to us to have that mission stay in Idaho, and there is a great possibility of us losing the national nuclear mission of the lab if we don’t enter that discussion.”

    Although the mayors don’t want to do anything that could potentially harm this region, they suggest a science-based, independent study including environmental, socioeconomic and economic analysis would help state leaders determine if it is a good idea to locate a storage facility here.

    Doug Sayer, president and chairman of Premier Technology in Blackfoot, which manufactures products for the nuclear industry across the U.S. and world, said he applauds the mayors’ decision to speak out on the issue, and he supports their request for further study.

    He agrees that leaders shouldn’t do anything that could harm the state, but further study on the matter could help determine whether or not it would.

    Sayer said he would be in favor of modifying the 1995 agreement if it made environmental and economic sense; in fact, he thinks there could be some advantage in drafting a separate agreement regarding commercial nuclear fuel since it’s different than other types of nuclear waste.

    “Fuel has the potential to be recycled,” he said, adding that only a small percentage of the volume is actually used up.

    Still not everyone is in favor of making any modifications to the 1995 agreement meant to protect the Eastern Snake Plain Aquifer from possible contamination, including former governors Phil Batt, who  struck the deal with the federal government, and Cecil Andrus. They both wrote letters of their own recently.

    Batt cautioned the LINE Commission against “modification of my nuclear waste agreement,” while Andrus reiterated his opposition to accepting more nuclear waste.