It would be a waste of taxpayer dollars to brief a group representing nuclear-site host communities about the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board’s (DNFSB) latest safety recommendation to the Department of Energy, according to the board chairman.
“[U]sing staff resources, even though marginal in this instance, to educate a public interest group on complex technical Recommendations made to the Secretary is outside the Board’s mission and is thus an inappropriate use of public resources,” DNFSB Chairman Bruce Hamilton wrote in an April 30 comment posted to the agency’s website recently. “Likewise, providing educational services to a public interest group sets a precedent that the Board would be well-served to avoid.”
Fortunately for the ECA, Hamilton was outvoted on whether the DNFSB should the briefing. The other two DNFSB members, Joyce Connery and Jessie Hill Roberson, thought the group should have a chance to ask questions about the recommendation. In April, Hamilton therefore wrote a letter to Energy Communities Alliance Chairman Ron Wooody saying the board “welcomes the opportunity to provide an overview briefing and answer questions to better clarify the basis and content of the Recommendation.” The session is expected to be held in conjunction with a public hearing on a separate DNFSB recommendation for the Savannah River Site in South Carolina, which has been postponed and not yet rescheduled.
The ECA is an interest group representing the host communities of Energy Department defense-nuclear sites, including
The conversation began on April 23, when Woody, county executive for Roane County, Tenn., asked the DNFSB for “ additional information about Recommendation 2020-01,” in which the board urged DOE not to make certain changes to federal regulations about nuclear safety management and procedures at defense-nuclear sites.
Woody wanted a summary “that can be more easily understood by a wider audience,” and said that the group “ welcomes the opportunity to discuss our concerns and ways in which can help improve communication and engagement between DNFSB and local communities.”
The DNFSB issued Recommendation 2020-1, its third of the Donald Trump administration, February. In it, the board said DOE’s drive to revise the primary nuclear safety management regulation, Title 10, Part 830 of the Code of Federal Regulations, “would actually erode the regulatory framework.”
Among other things, DOE has proposed to eliminate hazard categorization of nuclear facilities from federal regulations, retaining categorization internally but effectively removing the weight of federal law from the categories that differentiate the nuclear dangers of a given site.
The Energy Department also has proposed eliminating its annual approval of changes to a site’s documented safety analysis: the comprehensive list of known hazards created by a facility and its safe operation, and the means of eventually closing down an operation despite those hazards.
