Jeremy L. Dillon
RW Monitor
10/2/2015
A panel of spent nuclear fuel transportation experts appearing before the House Energy and Commerce Environment and the Economy Subcommittee this week called on the Department of Energy to more effectively engage state and local stakeholders to better prepare the routing for the eventual movement of the radioactive materials to either an interim storage facility or final repository. The panel, including representatives from industry and regional transportation planning groups, voiced confidence in the government’s ability to move the material, as evident by the transuranic waste transportation campaign to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, but worried that DOE’s inaction on outreach could cause further delays in the shipment of commercial waste.
“Today’s hearing reaffirmed the fact that engaging with state and local stakeholders to share information, identify routes, and train emergency responders is of utmost importance when formulating a long-term plan to transport nuclear material,” subcommittee Chairman John Shimkus (R-Ill.) said after the hearing. “It’s important to note that even if Congress authorized interim storage as the preferred public policy to store spent nuclear fuel – it would still take substantial efforts and considerable time to plan for transport. I hope DOE revisits previous recommendations and lays the foundation for a national campaign and identifies a path forward for permanent disposal of spent nuclear fuel.”
Franklin Rusco, director of the natural resources and environment division within the Government Accountability Office, testified that DOE’s efforts on the outreach front have been lacking, or nonexistent in some circumstances. “We concluded that in the absence of a coordinated outreach strategy by DOE, specific stakeholders and the general public may not have complete or accurate information about the agency’s activities, making it more difficult for the federal government to move forward with any policy to manage spent nuclear fuel,” Rusco said. GAO, he added, has recommended that DOE “develop and implement a coordinate outreach strategy for providing information to specific stakeholders and the general public on federal activities related to managing spent nuclear fuel.”
States, meanwhile, also called on the Department to better engage at the state level so necessary inspection programs and emergency response teams can begin to take shape. Kelly Horn, co-chair of the Midwestern Radioactive Materials Transportation Committee, said state government agencies could better gain public acceptance for a transportation plan via a well-established working relationships with local community officials. “We feel very strongly that DOE must adopt regional measures to minimize public risk and maximize public confidence in the transportation program,” Horn said. “These measures include: state involvement in route identification; the development of a reciprocal rail inspection program; and financial support, not just for training, but for state transportation safety programs that are consistent with the WIPP model.”
Lack of Destination Causing Problems
Horn advocated that as part of DOE’s outreach program, it begin providing grants to local governments affected by the transportation plan, as required by the Nuclear Waste Policy Act. But, without a final destination selected yet for the waste, DOE has been unable to provide that funding, which would help states develop the necessary programs to oversee routing and oversight of shipments. “According to the Nuclear Waste Policy Act, once a site is determined and states have the opportunity to analyze routing through their states and determine how affected their state will be, then they can submit to the DOE a funding mechanism asking for money under section 180c,” Horn said. “So, to date, because we do not have a facility to ship to, states and regional groups are not getting any money under 180c.” This lack of funding has prevented states from implementing the necessary programs and training for shipments, Horn said.
The lack of destination has also prevented DOE from actually establishing a transport plan, according to a former acting director of DOE’s Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management. “The greatest challenge regarding transportation planning, in the current highly uncertain policy environment, is to discern what level of activities are appropriate, given the status of the development of the receiving facility,” Christopher Kouts said. “Two of the obvious critical needs for meaningful transportation planning are knowledge of the point of origin and the ultimate destination of the shipments. In this case, the points of origin are well known. However, no amount of transportation planning can overcome the lack of a definitive destination for these shipments, whether that destination is an interim storage facility or a geologic repository.”
Shimkus, meanwhile, questioned whether moving the fuel to an interim location without a final destination would make for the best financial decision. “While Congress potentially considers amending the Nuclear Waste Policy Act, we must evaluate whether marginal safety gains from temporarily consolidating used fuel justifies the financial costs to transport used fuel twice,” the lawmaker said in his opening statement. “As this Committee continues to engage in conversations with national stakeholders to identify a path forward for permanent disposal of spent nuclear fuel, I hope DOE revisits previous recommendations and lays the foundation for a national campaign.”
A consent-based pilot consolidated storage facility is the Department of Energy’s preferred strategy to satisfy the nation’s spent fuel disposal needs— approximately 75,000 metric tons of used nuclear fuel spread around the country. However, language in the Nuclear Waste Policy Act prevents the department from considering other sites beyond Yucca Mountain in Nevada without congressional approval.
Secretary of Energy Ernest Moniz, though, announced in March that DOE would begin to take “affirmative steps” to siting a consent-based pilot interim storage facility. DOE has been working on generic analyses of how to move forward with an interim storage facility, but now will take a much more proactive approach in talking with actual communities about hosting a site, Moniz said. Construction of a facility, though, cannot occur without congressional approval. A representative from DOE did not appear on the panel.
