An anti-nuclear activist on Thursday slammed the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for its handling of a planned interim nuclear waste storage site in West Texas, accusing the agency of collusion with applicant Waste Control Specialists.
Kevin Kamps, radioactive waste watchdog at Beyond Nuclear, criticized the regulator for inappropriately supporting the plan, rushing the licensing process, and violating public meeting law. Kamps made his comments at NRC headquarters during a public hearing on the application.
Dallas-based Waste Control Specialists is seeking a 40-year NRC license for a facility designed to hold 40,000 metric tons of spent nuclear fuel — a large portion of the roughly 75,000 metric tons of waste stranded at commercial reactor sites around the country while the Department of Energy tries to figure out what to do with the material. The NRC expects a licensing decision in 2019, and WCS hopes to begin operating in 2021.
Kamps described events at a 2015 regulatory conference, where he took issue with the NRC’s tone concerning the application process for interim storage of nuclear waste. That was months before WCS submitted its license application; Holtec International is expected next month to file its own application for a storage site in southeastern New Mexico.
“An acting director of the division of NRC in charge of these matters concluded the entire event with leading a cheer that ‘together we can do this. Together we can license a centralized interim storage facility,’ and that was so highly inappropriate,” Kamps said. “NRC’s role is supposed to be safety regulation and security regulation. Not policy setting or industry promotions. So that was a very dark moment for NRC.”
As Kamps pointed out Thursday, the NRC failed to provide proper notice for Thursday’s meeting, announcing the proceeding in the Federal Register only eight days beforehand. NRC rules suggest that the agency announce meetings no fewer than 10 calendar days ahead of time. Brian Smith, a deputy director with the NRC, acknowledged the error.
“We did not get the notice out in the proper amount of time,” Smith said Thursday at NRC headquarters. “There was an administrative error on our end. We had intended to get it out in time. It just didn’t happen this time. Once it got posted, we decided to go ahead and continue (with) the meeting.”
On Friday NRC spokeswoman Maureen Conely wrote in an email: “As Kevin Kamps said, we mentioned in our Jan. 26 press release that there would be a meeting this week. Had we had the date, time and facility details finalized before we issued the PR, that information would have been included.”
Smith said the NRC is considering holding additional meetings. Thursday’s meeting was held as part of the regulator’s process in determing the scope of its environmental review for the license application. The NRC is taking public comment through March 13 on the issue.
The NRC in July notified WCS that its 3,000-page license application lacked the technical detail required for consideration, instead issuing a request for supplemental information from the company. Waste Control Specialists then filed several rounds of supplemental data with the regulator, while also pushing the NRC to begin the environmental review.
NRC Spent Fuel Management Division Director Mark Lombard said in August the NRC was “not quite ready” to proceed with environmental review, as it was still gathering supplemental information. But in October, the agency relented, agreeing to proceed, then docketing the application in January and initiating formal review of the license application.
Kamps also questioned the Energy Department’s handling of WCS’ plans. Trump administration Energy Secretary-designate Rick Perry, in his 2012 presidential bid, received $1.25 million in campaign contributions from late WCS owner and Dallas billionaire Harold Simmons. Kamps claimed Perry is now poised to return the favor to WCS by pushing the interim storage agenda.
The NRC on Thursday also heard from the Navajo Nation, with group member Leona Morgan stating the Navajo are against transportation of nuclear materials through their reservation, which covers areas in New Mexico, Arizona, and Utah. As she put it, New Mexico doesn’t benefit from nuclear power production but has to deal with the risks of nuclear waste transportation.
“The transport issue and facility as a whole are very dangerous to our people and our future,” she said.
WCS Vice President for Licensing and Corporate Compliance Michael Ford pointed to the clean safety record for nuclear waste transportation in the U.S. About 1 percent of the 300 million packages of hazardous material shipped each year contains radioactive materials, he said.
“Over the last 40 years, thousands of shipments of commercially generated spent nuclear fuel have been made through the United States without creating any radiological releases to the environment or harm to the public,” he said. “This is confirmed by the NRC and the World Nuclear Association.”
Ford added that interim storage facilities like the one planned in West Texas will allow taxpayers and the U.S. Treasury to save billions of dollars a year in liabilities that have been piling up as a result of the U.S. nuclear waste stalemate. The federal government has paid more than $30 billion in liabilities borne by American taxpayers as a result of the DOE’s failure to establish a permanent resting place for the waste. The Obama administration in 2010 abandoned the planned Yucca Mountain repository in Nevada, which now appears set for a revival under a Republican president and Congress.
Cyrus Reed, conservation director for the Lone Star Chapter of the Sierra Club, voiced a concern that has echoed throughout the licensing process: what if interim storage becomes permanent? Based on progress at Yucca Mountain, he said it’s a likely scenario.
“If we do license WCS for 40 years, and it turns out there’s no place to put it after, then we’ve just created an interim storage facility that has nowhere to go, and I’m not sure how long those canisters are supposed to survive,” he said.
