Senate Bill Funds Interim Storage, But Not Yucca
Jeremy L. Dillon
RW Monitor
5/22/2015
While the Senate’s version of the Fiscal Year 2016 Energy and Water Appropriations bill this week included language that would enable interim storage at both a pilot plant and private facility, Sen. Tom Udall’s (D-N.M.) public opposition to interim storage may signify an uphill battle to siting a facility in southeastern New Mexico. Udall introduced an amendment during the full committee markup that ultimately failed, but would have stricken language from the bill that would allow DOE to take title of the waste so that it could be transported to an interim storage facility. Udall previously voiced his opposition to the proposed private interim storage facility from Holtec International and the Eddy Lea Energy Alliance in southeastern New Mexico, this amendment would have prevented DOE from sending material to any site, including New Mexico, without establishing a long-term repository solution.
Udall’s main concern involved the liability of DOE taking title to the waste and storing it at private facility, where an accident could occur. “This is a very big change in current law,” he said at the markup. “You don’t put it in the beginning of a provision not withstanding any other provision of law unless you sweep some things aside. What is being swept aside here is the High-Level Nuclear Waste Policy Act. There was a policy that was designed, and it had scientific input that was very significant.” He added, “There is no permanent facility, so what happens is you have a stranded interim facility that the waste is there and the taxpayers are on the line. I think this is something that has many many questions, and it should be resolved over in the Energy and Natural Resources Committee rather than here in the Appropriations Committee.”
Sen. Feinstein Opposes Amendment
Energy and Water Appropriations Ranking Member Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) voiced her opposition to the amendment, saying it would hamper a solution to the nation’s nuclear waste problem. “What this does is simply gives Secretary Moniz the ability to move ahead,” Feinstein said. “It does not sacrifice our appropriations authority. But it does give him that ability to move to any facility licensed by the NRC for such storage. We do have Texas waiting to do this. If we can facilitate it by putting it under the Secretary of Energy, giving him the authority to move, maybe we can get something done to protect the people of America. If we are going to have nuclear power, and if we are going to go to advanced small nuclear reactors, you have to have some place to put the waste.” The amendment failed to be adopted in a vote of 22 to 8.
Spending Bill Paves Way for Interim Storage, But Not Yucca
The Senate’s bill, meanwhile, would pave the way for the Department of Energy to consolidate spent nuclear fuel at interim storage sites. It includes funding for both the construction of a federal pilot facility, but also allows DOE to take title to the waste in order to facilitate moving spent fuel to proposed private facilities in Texas and New Mexico. The bill does not however fund the Yucca Mountain project. The bill cleared the Committee markup this week, but there is no word yet on when it will hit the Senate floor.
The bill includes $97 million for DOE’s used fuel disposition program, of which $30 million would go toward DOE’s interim storage strategy, $3 million would go toward looking at a defense waste repository pathway, and $64 million would go toward spent fuel research. “The chances of moving forward with a solution are greater than they have been in recent memory, and this is another bipartisan issue Sen. Feinstein and I have worked hard on,” Senate Energy and Water Appropriations Subcommittee Chair Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) said. “Our legislation includes a pilot program that Sen. Feinstein suggested and that we have included for the past three years in this bill. They would not take the place of Yucca Mountain—we have more than enough used fuel to fill Yucca Mountain to its legal capacity—but rather complement it.”
The Senate’s version of the energy spending bill stands in stark contrast to the House’s version. The House allocated $175 million to aid in moving the Yucca Mountain license application forward, including $150 million for the Department of Energy and $25 million for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The bill does not include any funding for interim storage, going so far as to outright reject DOE’s proposed reform to the Nuclear Waste Policy Act that would enable the Department to implement interim storage. House Energy and Water Appropriations Subcommittee Chair Mike Simpson (R-Idaho) said last month that he is not opposed to interim storage, but Yucca Mountain must remain the priority before other solutions join the debate.
A consent-based pilot consolidated storage facility is the preferred strategy of the Department of Energy to satisfy the nation’s spent fuel disposal needs, but due to language in the Nuclear Waste Policy Act, the Department cannot consider other sites beyond Yucca Mountain in Nevada without Congressional approval. In its Fiscal Year 2016 Budget Request, the Department requested a reform that would enable it to move forward with its waste management strategy, but it is uncertain whether that will be included in any final legislation.
WCS Sees Language ‘As a Good Start’
Waste Control Specialists, the company looking to construct an interim facility in West Texas, saw the interim storage language as a positive first step for its facility. “I am thrilled that this language has been included in the initial subcommittee markup. Senators Alexander and Feinstein are the Senate leaders on this issue and to have their support for this important project is very gratifying,” WCS President Rod Baltzer said in a blog post this week. “We all realize that securing a pathway for the Department of Energy to take title to the waste and contract with a storage site is the first issue that must be addressed and this is a good start.” When the company announced in February its intentions to construct a facility, it said legislative clarification and support was needed before it would move forward with construction of the site.
