Jeremy L. Dillon
RW Monitor
5/22/2105
Congress should prioritize the disposal of defense waste before commercial waste, the Energy Community Alliance said in a letter late last week to House Energy and Commerce Committee leaders. The letter comes in response to Secretary of Energy Ernest Moniz’s announcement earlier this year that the Department of Energy would seek a separate track for disposing of defense waste, compared to comingling it with commercial waste in the same repository. Following the announcement, House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Fred Upton (R-Mich.) voiced his opposition to the de-comingling of the waste for fear of splitting DOE time and resources.
The ECA argued that the defense waste, due to its age and finite supply, presents an easier option for disposal. “Our local communities want to see progress from the federal government on moving the high-level nuclear waste to a safe repository, and our communities that potentially want to host a nuclear waste interim facility want funding to analyze the potential of using their site for this mission,” ECA Chairman Chuck Smith said in the letter. “Moving forward with the process will lead to lessons learned for subsequent repositories, including how to do consent-based siting and transportation planning. It will allow EPA and NRC to begin to evaluate new regulatory requirements. Most importantly, it can help rebuild trust and public acceptability. Finally, it will not impact the viability of Yucca Mountain.”
Sec. Moniz: Defense Repository Would Run on Parallel Track
At the time of the announcement, Moniz indicated a similar thought process for the “de-comingling” the waste. “However, what I have emphasized is that the [defense] high-level waste repository has significantly lower challenges—again finite, small amount, much of it rather cool, and heterogeneity providing the opportunity for some selected alternative pathways,” Moniz said during the announcement. “We think that this can go as fast as any nuclear facility can go. That remains to be demonstrated what that timeline is.” Moniz also assured stakeholders that the defense repository would run on a parallel track with a commercial repository, while featuring a more flexible design and implementation process, which could keep costs down.
The Department of Energy produced a report late last year that endorsed the safety and political case for dividing the two waste streams. The report said that such a move would build confidence in a repository disposal process, meet local state cleanup agreements, and eliminate the political stalemate surrounding the disposal of commercial waste.
Lawmakers De-comingling Would ‘Cast Aside the Yucca Site’
House Energy leaders, though, expressed doubt about splitting the two waste streams. “I have real concerns with pursuing a secondary site for military waste,” Upton said in a statement at the time of the announcement. “Doing so is likely to cast aside the Yucca site with years of work and billions of dollars spent. We passed bipartisan legislation some 30 years ago, and starting from step one looking for another site seems likely to delay a solution for years to come. Yucca Mountain remains the most viable solution for our nation’s nuclear waste policy and it comes with the scientific community’s seal of approval. We remain committed to finding a path forward that works best for the country.” Calls for comment to the House Energy and Commerce Committee were not returned this week.
