Jeremy L. Dillon
RW Monitor
4/11/2014
A group of nine House lawmakers from five states with permanently shut down reactors are calling for funding to be provided in Fiscal Year 2015 so the Department of Energy can move forward with its plans for developing a consent-based siting approach for nuclear waste storage facilities. In a letter to the leadership of the House Energy and Water Appropriations Subcommittee, the lawmakers noted the growing costs of litigation caused by the lack of progress towards a nuclear waste solution as well as the dwindling faith of the communities where the waste currently sits as reason for providing funding. “We ask that the FY 15 Energy and Water Appropriations bill include sufficient funds for the DOE to enter into discussions with potential host communities, tribes, and states that might have interest in participating in the nation’s storage and disposal program for these materials, to examine reforms for the funding mechanisms established to pay for the government’s effort in this regard, and that you direct the establishment of a pilot consolidated storage program with a priority to remove SNF [Spent Fuel Pool] and GTCC [Greater than Class C] waste from these permanently shutdown facilities,” the letter said.
The letter was signed by eight Democrats, Reps. Ami Bera (D-Calif.), Joe Courtney (D-Conn.), Jared Huffman (D-Calif.), Ron Kind (D-Wis.), Doris Matsui (D-Calif.), Michael Michaud (D-Maine), Richard Neal (D-Mass.), Chellie Pingree (D-Maine), and one Republican, Reid Ribble (R-Wis.).
DOE’s efforts to implement some of the major strategies outlined in its “Strategy for the Management and Disposal of Used Nuclear Fuel and High-Level Waste” are limited due to the Nuclear Waste Policy Act’s strict adherence to only allowing movement towards the now shuttered Yucca Mountain repository project. In an effort to circumvent these restrictions, DOE’s FY15 budget request included $30 million to “continue developing plans for a consent-based siting process; maintain and expand the unified and integrated UNF database and analysis system to characterize the input to the waste management system; prepare for large-scale transportation of UNF and high-level radioactive waste to a pilot interim storage facility with focus on UNF at shutdown reactor sites; evaluate integrated approaches to storage, transportation, and disposal in the waste management system with an emphasis on providing flexibility, including evaluation of standardization of dry cask storage and transportation systems; and evaluate expanded generic operational and conceptual design alternatives for the expanded interim storage facility including development of more detailed cost and schedule data,” according to detailed budget documents released last month.
Strategic Plan Lacks Details on Waste Management Strategy
Notably absent from DOE’s new Strategic Plan for 2014-204, released this week, were any details on the Department’s plan to manage the nation’s high-level waste. The Strategic Plan outlines DOE’s priorities moving forward, and this installment presented its activities to advance renewable energy, further the Cold War legacy cleanup, and promote non-proliferation, but little information on nuclear waste management. “DOE also will work to advance the Administration’s Strategy for the Management and Disposal of Used Nuclear Fuel and High Level Radioactive Waste within legislative authorities until the necessary full implementing legislation is enacted,” the Strategic Plan said. The document did not offer any specifics or timetables for actions it would like to complete. DOE did not return calls for comment this week.
The lack of information in the Strategic Plan, as well as the minimal budgetary information for nuclear waste management in the Department’s Fiscal Year 2015 budget request, has drawn the ire of some industry executives. “How can you not address it?” one industry executive told RW Monitor. “Something this high profile, this contentious, this important, how do you not address it in your budget or your Strategic Plan? It’s a dereliction of duty to turn a blind eye to it and imagine that it’s not there.” Another executive pointed to this as further evidence to a lack of leadership from DOE. “Once again, it’s just further evidence of further procrastination on the part of the Department, and a real lack of leadership and a real lack of commitment in moving forward and resolving this nuclear waste issue.”
