The federal government's continued difficulties in establishing a permanent disposal site for nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain, Nev., has Energy officials looking for a temporary disposal site, including the Savannah River Site. The state's congressional delegation should fight any suggestion that SRS be used for that purpose, recognizing that the designation "temporary" could very well mean "long-term" or "permanent."

An Energy Department report has recommended the temporary storage of tons of commercial waste that the federal government eventually plans to bury inside Yucca Mountain. It cites SRS and Hanford in Washington state as potential sites, as well as former military bases. Yucca Mountain has been stalled by opponents, who argue it doesn't meet the requisite safety standards.

Establishing a temporary waste storage site would ease some of the pressure on the federal government's efforts to open Yucca Mountain. It could also result in long-term disposal at a site that wasn't designed for storage. Yucca Mountain, by contrast, is in a remote, desert location.

South Carolina is fully aware of the difficulties of dealing with the federal government's radioactive waste, with millions of gallons of high-level waste still remaining in tanks at SRS, some dating from the 1950s. SRS was designed as a production facility, not as a radioactive waste dump.

The Energy appropriations bill recently approved by the House includes more than $660 million for the continued development of Yucca Mountain, but endorses the idea of temporary storage of nuclear waste at a federal site.

Reps. John Spratt, D-S.C., and Gresham Barrett, R-S.C., questioned whether the report language would override an existing law that prohibits the establishment of a temporary storage site until the permit for Yucca Mountain is issued. They were assured by Rep. David Hobson, chairman of the House subcommittee on energy appropriations, that the existing law wouldn't be pre-empted.

"It's an important concession, which says that the law must be changed before interim storage facilities can be sited at Savannah River," Rep. Spratt said. "By confirming that a change in the law is needed before interim waste storage can go forward, we ensure hearings and debate in Congress. We have served notice that we are ready to do battle if someone wants to set up interim storage in South Carolina."

Nevertheless, the growing level of commercial waste, the penalties faced by the federal government and pressures to build new reactors to cut the dependence on increasingly expensive foreign oil could encourage a change in the law on temporary storage.

The federal government was to have begun accepting commercial nuclear waste for storage in 1998 and is responsible for subsequent storage costs. Rep. Hobson, R-Ohio, estimates the government's liability at $500 million for each year it fails to meet its waste disposal commitment, according to The Associated Press. Some 50,000 tons of nuclear waste are now stored on site at reactors in 31 states, the AP reports.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., says a reprocessing center for spent fuel is worth discussing if there is a pathway out for the waste. He adds, however, that he is unwilling for SRS to be used as a de facto permanent site for nuclear waste disposal: "We're not set up to be a nuclear repository. We're not going to accept any spent fuel at SRS" for storage.

Continued vigilance will be required at the state and congressional level to deter the Energy Department's stated interest in using SRS as a disposal site. Yucca Mountain is a far safer place for disposal, and continued determination to complete that repository offers the best hope that SRS won't be on Energy's short list to solve federal radioactive waste problems.