Jeremy L. Dillon
RW Monitor
11/14/2014
Republican House lawmakers this week called on Democrats to resume funding for the Yucca Mountain project and make progress on solving the nation’s nuclear waste problem. Although the Obama Administration shuttered the project in 2010, deeming it “unworkable,” the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s release of the Volume Three Safety Evaluation Report this fall said the design at Yucca Mountain meets requirements for post-closure safety. This finding has breathed new life into the project, and House Environment and the Economy Subcommittee Chair John Shimkus (R-Ill.) said this week that the findings enable the country to begin moving forward on the project. “Volume Three is out. It says from our independent experts that once Yucca is closed, then it will be safe for a million years, or at least a million years,” Shimkus said. “That’s pretty good in my book. I think that’s pretty good in a lot of people’s books.” He added, “We can start moving forward. We can start working with the state of Nevada. The industry has to do a huge payment—not even including the Nuclear Waste Fund, this is in addition to—and that payment will help us find routes and the like, so there have been some informal not-to-be-named discussions with individuals, and we’re excited.”
Rep. Joe Wilson (R-S.C) in a speech on the House floor implored Democrats to move past “failed policies” that U.S. voters rejected this past election, including the shuttering of Yucca Mountain. “Failed policy should stop, and together we should work for positive change, such as opening Yucca Mountain to reduce the environmental risk of nuclear waste,” Wilson said. “The Boston Globe editorialized to resume funding the Yucca Mountain project, and Democrats should recognize that.”
DOE’s Liabilities for Stalled Waste Management Strategy at $21.4B, GAO Says
As House Republicans look to breathe new life into Yucca Mountain, a report released by the Government Accountability Office this week says the Department of Energy currently estimates it has $21.4 billion in future liabilities for failing to dispose of spent nuclear fuel. Under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act, DOE is required to deal with the spent fuel generated by commercial nuclear reactors, but due to the shuttering of the Yucca Mountain project, DOE has not been able to fulfil its obligations. The GAO report assessed the financial liabilities of DOE’s current strategy, which calls for interim storage by 2021, while also looking at potential challenges of implementing its strategy.
The GAO report found that DOE has an estimated price tag for its liabilities, but it is based on the Department making progress on spent fuel disposal by 2021. “DOE’s most recent estimate of this liability is $21.4 billion through 2071,” the report says. “This estimate assumes that DOE will begin accepting spent nuclear fuel in 2021 and complete the process in 2071, ending the federal government’s liability. However, DOE has previously extended the dates in its liability estimates several times. For example, in the fiscal year 2006 liability estimate, DOE estimated (1) that the federal liability was $6.9 billion, (2) that DOE would begin accepting spent nuclear fuel in 2017, and (3) it would complete the process by 2055. Each time extension adds to the federal government’s liability.”
DOE Needs to Push Public Education, GAO Says
Ultimately, for DOE to move forward on its strategy, the Department needs Congressional approval and/or funding— neither of which has been easily obtained, the report says. In the meantime, the GAO recommended that DOE take steps to begin solving some of the challenges identified in transportation and licensing issues that could help to streamline the movement of spent fuel to an interim storage facility. The report directly recommends that the Department begins a public outreach program to regain public confidence in DOE’s ability to manage spent fuel, as well as inform communities of risks and benefits of hosting spent fuel. “However, experts and stakeholders believe that one key challenge—building and sustaining public acceptance of how to manage spent nuclear fuel—will need to be addressed irrespective of which path Congress agrees to take,” the report says. “In this context, they suggested the need for a coordinated public outreach strategy regarding spent nuclear fuel management issues, including perceived risks and benefits, which would be consistent with the Administration’s directive to be more transparent and collaborative.”
Interim Storage “Not Immune” to Difficulties, Shimkus Says
Shimkus, who requested the report on spent fuel management along with Energy and Commerce Chair Fred Upton (R-Mich.), felt the GAO report highlighted the difficulties of even moving forward with interim storage. The report notes that licensing challenges with the NRC, along with the need for consent-based siting, could prove difficult in similar ways that Yucca Mountain did. “This report illustrates how interim storage may be more complicated than advertised,” Shimkus said in an email. “Interim storage is not immune to some of the same hurdles confronting development of a repository at Yucca Mountain including unpredictable funding levels, licensing timeliness, and transportation challenges. GAO also noted that ‘…it may be possible to find a willing community to host a consolidated interim storage facility, but obtaining and sustaining state support may be more difficult because of broader state constituencies and state-federal relations.’ This has certainly proved true for Yucca Mountain in Nevada, Private Fuel Storage in Utah, and the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in New Mexico.”
