ECA Update: December 13, 2012
Published: Thu, 12/13/12
Notice of Availability for the Draft Programmatic Environmental Assessment for the Recycling of Scrap Metals Originating From Radiological Areas
DOE Federal Register Notice December 12, 2012 SUMMARY: The Department of Energy (DOE) announces the availability for public review and comment of the Draft Programmatic Environmental Assessment (PEA) for the Recycling of Scrap Metals Originating from Radiological Areas. On September 28, 2011, the Secretary of Energy approved
a recommendation, contingent on the completion of the appropriate National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) review, to delegate authority to manage radiological clearance and release of scrap metal from radiological areas to each Under Secretary for sites under his or her cognizance, in accordance with the processes contained in DOE Order 458.1 (which replaces the order previously governing release procedures). This Draft PEA for the Recycling of Scrap Metals Originating from Radiological Areas analyzes the potential environmental impacts associated with resuming the clearance of scrap metal, originating from DOE radiological areas, for recycling pursuant to improved procedures designed to assure that clearance for release is limited to metals meeting stringent criteria. This Draft PEA also analyzes the reasonable alternatives to this proposal. Metals with volumetric radiological contamination, and scrap metals resulting from Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), are not included in the scope of this PEA.
Committee Assignments for 113th Congress Approved By Democratic Steering Committee Senate Democrats Press Release December 12, 2012 Reid: Assignments "Will Allow All Members Of Our Caucus To Bring Their Unique Talents And Expertise To Bear As We Work Together To Advance The Interests Of The Middle Class."
Washington, D.C. - In a meeting today, the Democratic Steering Committee approved committee assignments for Democratic senators in the 113th Congress. A list of the anticipated assignments is below.
"I am excited to work with the members of our expanded majority. Our caucus is more diverse than ever, with a record sixteen female Democratic senators serving in the next Congress," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. "These committee assignments will allow all members of our caucus to bring their unique talents and expertise to bear as we work together to advance the interests of the middle class."
The anticipated committee assignments are subject to approval by the full Democratic caucus and approval of an organizing resolution by the full Senate when the 113th Congress convenes in January.
Anticipated Committee Democratic Assignments for the 113th Congress
(Subject to Caucus and full Senate approval) Names listed in descending order of seniority with new committee members in italics:
AGRICULTURE - 113th Congress
Leahy Harkin Baucus Stabenow - CHAIRMAN Sherrod Brown Casey Klobuchar Bennet Gillibrand Donnelly Heitkamp APPROPRIATIONS - 113th
Inouye - CHAIRMAN Leahy Harkin Mikulski Murray Feinstein Durbin Tim Johnson Landrieu Reed Lautenberg Pryor Tester T. Udall Shaheen Merkley ARMED SERVICES - 113th
Levin - CHAIRMAN Reed Bill Nelson McCaskill Mark Udall Hagan Begich Manchin Shaheen Gillibrand Blumenthal Donnelly Kaine King BANKING - 113th
Tim Johnson - CHAIRMAN Reed Schumer Menendez Sherrod Brown Tester Warner Merkley Hagan Manchin Warren Heitkamp COMMERCE - 113th
Inouye Rockefeller - CHAIRMAN Kerry Boxer Bill Nelson Cantwell Lautenberg Pryor McCaskill Klobuchar Warner Begich Blumenthal ENERGY - 113th
Wyden - CHAIRMAN Tim Johnson Landrieu Cantwell Sanders Stabenow Mark Udall Franken Manchin Coons Hirono Heinrich EPW - 113th
Baucus Boxer - CHAIRMAN Carper Lautenberg Cardin Sanders Whitehouse Tom Udall Merkley Gillibrand FINANCE - 113th
Baucus - CHAIRMAN Rockefeller Kerry Wyden Schumer Stabenow Cantwell Bill Nelson Menendez Carper Cardin Sherrod Brown Bennet FOREIGN RELATIONS - 113th
Kerry - CHAIRMAN Boxer Menendez Cardin Casey Shaheen Coons Tom Udall Murphy Kaine HELP - 113th
Harkin - CHAIRMAN Mikulski Murray Sanders Casey Hagan Franken Bennet Whitehouse Baldwin Murphy Warren HSGAC - 113th
Levin Carper - CHAIRMAN Pryor Landrieu McCaskill Tester Begich Baldwin Heitkamp INTELLIGENCE - 113th
Rockefeller Feinstein - CHAIRMAN Wyden Mikulski Mark Udall Warner Heinrich King JUDICIARY - 113th
Leahy - CHAIRMAN Feinstein Schumer Durbin Whitehouse Klobuchar Franken Coons Blumenthal Hirono AGING - 113th
Wyden Bill Nelson - CHAIRMAN Casey McCaskill Whitehouse Gillibrand Manchin Blumenthal Baldwin Donnelly Warren BUDGET - 113th
Murray - CHAIRMAN Wyden Bill Nelson Stabenow Sanders Whitehouse Warner Merkley Coons Baldwin Kaine King JOINT ECONOMIC - 113th
Casey - CHAIRMAN Klobuchar Warner Sanders Murphy Heinrich RULES - 113th
Inouye Feinstein Schumer - CHAIRMAN Durbin Murray Pryor Tom Udall Warner Leahy King SMALL BUSINESS - 113th
Levin Harkin Kerry Landrieu - CHAIRMAN Cantwell Pryor Cardin Shaheen Hagan Heitkamp VETERANS' AFFAIRS - 113th
Rockefeller Murray Sanders - CHAIRMAN Sherrod Brown Tester Begich Blumenthal Hirono ETHICS - 113th
Boxer - CHAIRMAN Pryor Sherrod Brown INDIAN AFFAIRS - 113th
Inouye Tim Johnson Cantwell -CHAIRMAN Tester Tom Udall Franken Begich Heitkamp "Fiscal Cliff" Prompts Fresh Push for U.S. Nuke Spending Cut Diane Barnes, Global Security Newswire December 12, 2012 WASHINGTON -- Dozens of Democratic lawmakers have revived a call for $100 billion in U.S. nuclear weapons spending reductions over 10 years as Congress pushes to enact $1.2 trillion in deficit reductions by the beginning of January.
Washington must meet the deadline to avert automatic, across-the-board cuts to federal programs imposed under the 2011 Budget Control Act, but no deal appears imminent. The law's sequestration provisions are part of a series of scheduled tax increases and spending cuts anticipated to have far-ranging implications for the U.S. economy if they are allowed to begin taking effect next month.
Failure in Congress to negotiate a deficit spending agreement would leave open the potential for significant nuclear cuts under budget sequestration. The Defense Department last week received White House instructions to identify $500 billion in potential spending cuts that could be implemented to meet mandates under the budget control law.
"Unchecked spending on nuclear weapons threatens to push us over the fiscal cliff," Representative Edward Markey (D-Mass.) and 44 other House Democrats stated in a Dec. 4 letter to the top Democratic and Republican lawmakers in both chambers, citing the term popularly used to refer to the anticipated funding moves. "We know there is plenty of waste in the nuclear weapons budget."
The lawmakers singled out plans to refurbish approximately 400 B-61 nuclear gravity bombs, a project expected to cost roughly $10 billion. They also cited the scheduled construction of a new highly enriched uranium processing facility in Tennessee; the effort is projected to cost between $4.2 billion and $6.5 billion.
"Cuts to nuclear weapons programs upwards of $100 billion over the next 10 years are possible," the letter says. The United States is now on track to spend at least $640 billion through fiscal 2022 on the operation and upkeep of its nuclear deterrent, the Democrats cited the independent Ploughshares Fund as determining in a September estimate.
"Specific programs have been identified that can be decreased in scope or eliminated to bring our nuclear forces into better alignment with our 21st century needs," the lawmakers wrote. "Such cuts should be included in any final deal to avoid the fiscal cliff."
The letter also calls for reduced spending on the nation's ICBM fleet, as well as on B-52 and B-2 nuclear bomber aircraft.
Those recommendations are not likely to be welcomed by Republicans, who have already criticized President Obama for failing to keep up with nuclear complex spending levels pledged as the administration successfully pressed for Senate ratification of the U.S.-Russia New START arms control treaty.
"During the Senate's consideration of the New START treaty, the president made many promises to achieve support for Senate ratification," House Armed Services Strategic Forces Subcommittee Chairman Michael Turner (R-Ohio) stated in March, referring to a decade-long, $85 billion nuclear weapons spending plan submitted by the administration in 2010. "With the president's [fiscal year 2013] budget request, it is ... apparent that those promises have been broken."
The panel's top Democrat, though, on Wednesday urged Washington to zero any funding for "new nuclear weapons."
"If you see the budget, there's new monies in there to make more nuclear weapons," Representative Loretta Sanchez (Calif.) said at a defense policy luncheon in Washington. The lawmaker did not specify what nuclear arms programs she was referencing, but updates planned for the nation's B-61 bombs would reportedly involve replacing nearly every component of each weapon.
Sanchez called for further examination of "what nonproliferation will bring us," and for the New START pact to "actually be implemented."
Republican lawmakers at the Wednesday event did not address the nuclear arms spending question.
U.S. atomic arsenal spending is likely to face the chopping block even if a compromise is reached to prevent curbs under the 2011 legislation, according to findings from a planning exercise carried out earlier this year by the independent Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments.
Governor's Nuclear Council to Address Nuclear Spent Fuel Dump at SRS Thomas Clements, The Aiken Leader December 11, 2012 The South Carolina Governor's Nuclear Advisory Council (NAC) will discuss the concept of storage of highly radioactive spent fuel at the Savannah River Site, or possibly a private site in South Carolina, at its meeting on Thursday. Given special interests who hope to profit from the scheme, Aiken County and the Savannah River Site are at risk of becoming the nation's spent fuel dump. The public will need to speak up against this dangerous, costly scheme.
A presentation entitled "Interim Storage and Recycling of UNF," is on the agenda for the Nuclear Advisory Council meeting. The presentation will be made by Paul Murray, Technology Director, AREVA Federal Services.
AREVA is a French government-owned company which profits from such things as reprocessing, which creates a huge volume of nuclear waste when plutonium is removed from spent fuel.
"Recycling" is the green-washing term used by AREVA and others in place of the more accurate term "reprocessing." The largest volume of waste from reprocessing would be dumped as nuclear waste, very much like the 37 million gallons of high-level waste now at SRS which the site is struggling to deal with.
See full NAC agenda at: http://www.energy.sc.gov/agenda/1213GNAC_DraftAgenda.pdf
The NAC will meet at 1 p.m. on Thursday, December 13 in the Gressette Building in the state capitol complex in Columbia. The meeting will last approximately three hours and the public can make a comment at the end of the meeting.
The Alliance for Nuclear Accountability encourages the public from Aiken to attend the meeting and speak up against both plans to dump spent fuel at SRS or plans to reprocess that deadly material. It is believed that the public in Aiken and statewide won't stand for us becoming the replacement for Yucca Mountain, according to the Alliance for Nuclear Accountability.
Governor Nikki Haley has been hearing from members of the public against spent fuel storage in South Carolina. Members of the public can write her via a webmail form at: http://governor.sc.gov/Pages/SendMessage.aspx
The Department of Energy (DOE) is soon to deliver a long-delayed strategy document to Congress with recommendations about the way forward with spent fuel management. That document will be based on recommendations by a Blue Ribbon Commission (BRC) which delivered its report to DOE and the White House in January 2012. Recommendations by the BRC include establishment of one or more "consolidated interim storage" facilities for spent fuel and pursuit of a new geologic storage site given the termination of the pursuit of Yucca Mountain in Nevada.
"The cheapest and safest thing to do with radioactive spent fuel is to leave it at reactor sites and store it in robust dry cask facilities," according to Tom Clements of the Alliance for Nuclear Accountability. "Moving spent fuel simply for a period of time will only add to costs, increase radiation exposure of workers and increase the likelihood that special interests will try to get their hands on the spent fuel for government-financed reprocessing."
Legislation is expected to be introduced into Congress early next session concerning spent fuel management. A key to such legislation will be how the issue of "consent" of a community or state targeted for a nuclear dump will be allowed to express its opposition. Many believe that the consent or non-consent must be given on a state-wide basis and not turned over to narrow special interests which would profit off the federal government from a spent fuel storage facility or reprocessing complex.
At the meeting of the SRS Citizens Advisory Board on January 28 -29 in Augusta, the SRS Community Reuse Organization is expected to present its report on the role of SRS in spent fuel management. In its discussion about the report, the SRSCRO indicates that it believes that reprocessing of spent fuel at SRS, which it calls "closing the nation's nuclear fuel cycle," may be worth pursuing from an economic perspective if it can somehow achieve the next, difficult step of obtaining "a broad community consensus about this important issue."
Already key newspapers in South Carolina, the Spartanburg Herald-Journal ("SRS is not suitable for high-level radioactive waste") and Rock Hill Herald ("Don't bring high-level nuclear waste to SRS in South Carolina") have editorialized against a spent fuel dump at SRS.
At this point, it appears clear that the public in Aiken wisely has no interest in becoming the nation's spent fuel dump.
Idaho nuclear cleanup pact: 2 former governors oppose changes to 1995 deal The Associated Press December 11, 2012 Two former governors oppose modifying Idaho's 1995 nuclear cleanup agreement with the federal government after a new draft report suggested changes be considered as part of efforts to assure the Idaho National Laboratory's future.
Republican Gov. Phil Batt sent a letter to the Idaho Statesman Monday and Democratic Gov. Cecil Andrus wrote to Department of Commerce director Jeff Sayer, who headed up the Leadership in Nuclear Energy Commission.
Sayer's panel last week released a preliminary report to spur public comment about Idaho's nuclear future.
Its authors wrote, among other things, that changes to the 1995 pact could help preserve the INL's status as America's lead nuclear energy laboratory.
To that, Batt cautioned Sayer against "modification of my nuclear waste agreement," while Andrus reiterated his opposition to accepting more nuclear waste.
Hanford Planning Document Leaves A Key Question Dangling Anna King, Northwest Public Radio December 11, 2012 Washington environmental regulators say a new 6,000 page plan for the Hanford Nuclear Reservation is very useful. But it lacks a definitive path forward for treating a large part of the radioactive sludge there.
The most radioactively contaminated waste at Hanford is set to be bound up into more stable glass logs in a huge factory being built here. But the government hasn't decided exactly what to do with everything else -- the Low Activity Waste -- in this new massive cleanup roadmap.
That concerns Suzanne Dahl, the tank waste treatment manager for Washington's Ecology department. Dahl says after 10 years of work on this plan, the state wants the federal government to stop exploring options, and commit to binding up that low level waste in glass too.
"We don't think that spending money trying to invent new technologies for something that you already have a perfectly viable technology for is a reasonable thing to do."
The U.S. Department of Energy is keeping several options open: Binding up the waste in grout, or in a system called steam reforming.
Washington environmental regulators say a new 6,000 page plan for the Hanford Nuclear Reservation is very useful. But it lacks a definitive path forward for treating a large part of the radioactive sludge there.
The most radioactively contaminated waste at Hanford is set to be bound up into more stable glass logs in a huge factory being built here. But the government hasn't decided exactly what to do with everything else -- the Low Activity Waste -- in this new massive cleanup roadmap.
That concerns Suzanne Dahl, the tank waste treatment manager for Washington's Ecology department. Dahl says after 10 years of work on this plan, the state wants the federal government to stop exploring options, and commit to binding up that low level waste in glass too.
"We don't think that spending money trying to invent new technologies for something that you already have a perfectly viable technology for is a reasonable thing to do."
The U.S. Department of Energy is keeping several options open: Binding up the waste in grout, or in a system called steam reforming.
Hanford cleanup deadline changes proposed Annette Cary, Tri-City Herald December 9, 2012 Extending some Hanford environmental cleanup deadlines is being proposed because of newly discovered contamination and also to build experience before tackling some challenging central Hanford work.
The Department of Energy and its regulators, the state Department of Ecology and the Environmental Protection Agency, have agreed to the revised deadlines for the Tri-Party Agreement. However, the changes will not be approved until after the public has a chance to comment.
Among changes, the deadline to set a schedule for cleaning up large processing plants in central Hanford would be postponed for a decade. Now, the deadline is March.
However, the Tri-Party Agreement agencies want to see what can be learned from the cleanup of the first processing plant on the list, the U Plant Canyon. It is expected to be the first processing canyon in the nationwide DOE complex to be cleaned up.
Hanford has five processing plants -- sometimes called canyons for their long, narrow, high and windowless interiors -- that were built to chemically process irradiated fuel rods to remove plutonium for the nation's nuclear weapons program.
However, U Plant was never needed for that purposed. I was used to recover uranium from processing waste. It's expected to be the least contaminated.
Extensive work has been done to prepare it for demolition, removing equipment, piping and other contaminated debris. They've been fitted like puzzle pieces inside the 40 cells below U Canyon's deck that were used for chemical processing, and have been grouted in place.
Plans call for the walls to be collapsed and an earthen barrier, or cap, built over the demolished building to keep out water. That won't be done until after most of the environmental cleanup closer to the Columbia River is completed in 2015. It's scheduled to be completed in 2021."The agencies believe it is in the best interest to get the cap on" before other canyons are addressed, said Doug Shoop, deputy project manager for the DOE Hanford Richland Operations Office. "We'll learn from that and get a schedule and plan in place for the rest.
"Other processing canyons include B Plant, T Plant, REDOX and PUREX. The agencies also are proposing the delay because the canyons don't pose an immediate risk to the environment, said Jane Hedges, manager of the Department of Ecology's Nuclear Waste Program.
"They are very robust facilities," and surveillance and maintenance is being conducted, Shoop said.
Other proposed deadline changes are for projects in the area along the Columbia River, where additional contamination has been found since current deadlines were set.
That includes the highly radioactive, concentrated cesium and strontium spill from a hot cell into the soil beneath the 324 Building just north of Richland. The building was supposed to be torn down by September 2015, but that deadline will be extended by three years.
"It's going to be a very challenging project," likely involving robotics, Shoop said.
In a second deadline extension for work near the Columbia River, more time is planned to cocoon the K East Reactor, or put it in temporary storage by tearing it down to little more than its radioactive core, sealing it up and reroofing it. Then it would be left to allow radiation to decay to more manageable levels during 75 years.
However, the reactor's water-filled cooling basin is known to have leaked contaminated water into the soil. It's since been removed, but Hanford officials want to delay cocooning the reactor until more is known about the contaminated soil.
"The potential for additional contamination is the driver," said Dave Einan, an EPA environmental engineer.
However, there also could be a cost savings if the K East and K West reactors are cocooned at the same time, Shoop said. The K West Reactor cannot be cocooned until radioactive sludge is removed from containers in its cooling basin and the basin is demolished.
Now the K East Reactor is required to be demolished by July 2014, but that would be extended to the K West Reactor deadline of December 2019 under the proposed Tri-Party Agreement changes.
More extensive chromium contamination in soil near some reactors is behind another proposed deadline change. Chromium was added to reactor cooling water to prevent corrosion.
Near C Reactor, chromium-contaminated soil has been dug up down to 85 feet deep. Cleanup decisions there would be delayed for about two years to allow more wells to be drilled to collect information about chromium in the groundwater.
In addition, some deadlines are proposed to be extended after 154 additional soil waste sites were identified near the Columbia River as cleanup has progressed there. More information is posted at www.hanford.gov on the event calendar under each day of the comment period.
Comments may be submitted starting Monday through Jan. 24 to TPACH@rl.gov or to Tifany Nguyen, Department of Energy Richland Operations Office, P.O. Box 550, A7-75, Richland, WA 99352.
Issuance of the Final Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement DOE Press Release December 5, 2012 Richland, WA - The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is issuing its Final Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement Hanford Site, Richland, Washington" (Final TC & WM EIS, DOE/EIS-0391), prepared in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Washington State Department of Ecology are cooperating agencies on this Final EIS, which analyzes alternatives for three programmatic areas relevant to future cleanup of the Hanford Site.
The three programmatic areas analyzed in the Final EIS include: retrieve and treat waste from 177 underground storage tanks at Hanford, including closure of 149 single-shell tanks; final decontamination and decommissioning of the Fast Flux Test Facility and its support structures; and ongoing and expanded waste management operations on the Hanford Site, including the disposal of Hanford's low-level radioactive waste (LLW) and mixed low-level radioactive waste (MLLW) and of LLW and MLLW from other DOE sites in an Integrated Disposal Facility.
NEPA requires federal agencies to ensure that high quality environmental information is available to public officials and citizens before decisions are made and actions are taken, and that agencies consider the environmental impacts of their proposed actions and reasonable alternatives. In preparing the Final TC & WM EIS, DOE considered all comments received on the Draft EIS issued in October 2009. DOE will issue a Record of Decision for the TC & WM EIS no sooner than 30 days after EPA publishes its notice of availability in the Federal Register.
"Ecology is pleased that the EIS has been released. As a cooperating agency, we have been very involved in this study and feel it was a positive experience. Ecology extensively reviewed the environmental modeling and agrees that the document is technically sound. It tells us important information about managing waste at Hanford and how to mitigate effects to the environment over time. We have some concerns with the Department of Energy's choice to not select a preferred alternative for supplement treatment of tank waste, which we detail in Ecology's Foreword to the EIS. But the state looks forward to moving ahead with addressing the environmental hazards of Hanford's tank waste, and this EIS is a big step toward doing so," said Suzanne Dahl, Tank Waste Treatment Section Manager.
The Hanford Site is located in southeastern Washington State along the Columbia River, and is approximately 586 square miles in size. From early 1940 through 1980's Hanford's mission included defense-related nuclear research, development, and weapons production. Hanford's mission now is focused on the cleanup and ultimate closure of Hanford.
The Final TC & WM EIS will be available in the next few days at: http://www.hanford.gov/index.cfm?page=1117& and at: http://energy.gov/nepa/office-nepa-policy-and-compliance
US nuclear repository siting: too hot an issue for politicians to handle in 2013? Heba Hashem, Nuclear Energy Insider December 5, 2012 For more than five decades, the United States has been carrying out scientific study of its nuclear waste disposal options. The first effort to develop a deep geologic repository occurred in the 1960s in Lyons, Kansas, where retrievable disposal in rock salt was demonstrated, but for various technological reasons, efforts there were abandoned.
In 1979, an Interagency Review Group chaired by the Secretary of Energy recommended that studies of potential repository sites in different geologic environments should begin immediately. Consequently, the US Department of Energy (DOE) began this study with the 1980 Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The EIS concluded that a mined geologic repository was the most preferred concept, and since then, the problem of high-level waste disposal in the country was no longer a question of how, but where.
Building on the DOE's 1980 EIS, the Congress established the process for developing a geologic disposal site with enactment of the 1982 Nuclear Waste Policy Act (NWPA). A year later, the DOE carried out the first requirement of the Act by identifying nine acceptable sites in six states for the first repository, including Yucca Mountain in Nevada. By the end of 1986, the DOE had conducted 5 years of extensive scientific study at potential repository sites and spent $1.1bn.
The ideal repository?
Eventually, these costly efforts showed that Yucca Mountain was the best of nine sites originally considered. At this point, based on both confidence in Yucca Mountain and concern about escalating costs, the Congress decided to narrow the choices further, and the 1987 Amendment to the NWPA redirected DOE to focus its site characterization studies solely on Yucca Mountain, according to a US Senate report (http://epw.senate.gov/repwhitepapers/YuccaMountainEPWReport.pdf).
"The Yucca repository is a unique repository because it is located in tuff rock in the unsaturated zone, allowing used nuclear fuel (UNF) and high-level wastes to be permanently disposed of while retaining the ability to retrieve it easily for 300 years or longer", says Lake Barrett, an independent energy consultant who headed the DOE's Office of Civilian Nuclear Waste Management and led the complex Yucca Mountain Geologic Repository program through the statutory site selection process.
The Yucca repository, according to Barrett, is a retrievable disposal facility that would easily allow future generations to retrieve the materials, if they desire, or provide completely passive disposal while meeting Environmental Protection Agency and Nuclear Regulatory Commission standards for up to one million years. "The facility has been paid for by the waste producers; that is the nuclear utilities and DOE defense cleanup budget."
Between 1987 and 2002, the DOE spent another $3.8bn on scientific and technical studies of Yucca Mountain, and with this money it completed a 5-mile tunnel through Yucca Mountain to function as an Exploratory Study Facility in 1997. A year later, the DOE completed a second 2-mile cross drift tunnel to facilitate additional experiments in the potential repository host rock. These tunnels, and the numerous niches and alcoves carved off of them, created within Yucca Mountain the world's largest underground laboratory.
Politics as usual?
Despite these tremendous efforts and overwhelming bipartisan votes in the House and Senate in 2002, the project faced a multitude of issues and was delayed due to budget cuts instituted by Nevada's Senator Harry Reid, whose State objects to the repository.
"Implementation of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act has been plagued with delays, but no greater blow was dealt than the Administration's decision to halt work on the repository, setting a series of additional federal agency delays in motion. Politics should give way to the best interest of the nation, and permitting scientific study to proceed is the right approach to determine whether Yucca Mountain will be a feasible solution for permanent disposal," Dr. David Boyd, Commissioner at Minnesota Public Utilities Commission, tells Nuclear Energy Insider.
According to him, the designation of Yucca Mountain as the nation's repository remains the law of the land, and there is no indication that Congress is inclined to change that. "If anything, we've seen evidence of their resolve to ensure that the necessary reviews of the Yucca disposal site continue."
Quickest route to moving used fuel
To relocate, design, license and build a repository other than Yucca Mountain is a process that could take several decades, and therefore, substantial storage for today's UNF is inevitable. Although dry cask storage has proven to be successful at reactor sites, what about the stranded used fuel at shutdown reactors?
"Consolidated storage is the quickest route for the federal government to begin moving used fuel from nuclear energy facilities and to stem the increase in damage awards beyond the estimated $20.8bn through 2020," Henry Barron, president of Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, recently told a US Senate Committee.
Moreover, the development of regional or centralised storage facilities for the UNF at these sites would bridge the gap between current multiple dry storage facilities and a new distant geologic disposal facility.
"The federal government could provide incentive performance contracts to private industry to site, license, build and operate these "bridging" interim storage facilities. Such facilities could be coupled with future advanced nuclear facilities to make them desirable from a state perspective," suggest Barret, stressing that State partnerships are the key to facility siting, as traditional federal government siting has been a proven failure.
Extended onsite storage re-evaluated
Besides straining the government's budget, continuing to store UNF onsite also poses environmental risks. "As economic regulators, state commissioners are mostly focused on the economic impacts of extended on-site storage. Electric consumers and the nation's taxpayers are already bearing the burden associated with utilities storing UNF much longer than originally promised, and that burden will get heavier with each year of delay," Boyd warns.
According to the Blue Ribbon Commission (BRC), the NWF has not been working as intended, and the $27bn in the fund has not been made available for the nuclear waste management programme. Since the passing of the deadline for a US nuclear waste repository in 1998, utilities have successfully sued the government for violation of contract and government liabilities may climb to $16bn under the present contract.
"Huge liabilities associated with delayed performance by the government of its contractual obligations to begin removing fuel in 1998 continue to mount, and claims against the government due to these growing liabilities are ultimately borne by American taxpayers. These additional costs can be reduced substantially with timely performance by DOE to remove UNF from plant sites across the nation," notes Boyd.
To avoid unwanted consequences, the NRC ordered its staff in September to complete an environmental impact review of temporary onsite storage of UNF at the nation's 104 commercial plants. The study, which will be completed within two years, came in response to a June 8 ruling from the US Court of Appeals that the "waste confidence" rule was deficient.
According to the NRC, "waste confidence is a generic finding that UNF can be safely stored for decades beyond the licensed operating life of a reactor without significant environmental effects". The rule enables the NRC to license or renew licenses without examining the effects of extended waste storage at individual sites.
The appeals court said the NRC should have considered the potential environmental impact if a permanent disposal site for UNF is never built, citing deficiencies in the NRC's consideration of leaks and fires involving spent fuel pools. "Resolving this issue successfully is a commission priority," NRC Chairwoman Allison M. Macfarlane said in a statement. Accordingly, the NRC suspended issuing or renewing licenses dependent on the waste confidence rule until the court's mandate is met.
Comprehensive reform
A big question mark remains over the Yucca Mountain repository programme, but for the time being, there is a dire need for a nuclear waste policy reform and for coordination by the numerous stakeholders to make it happen.
"Meaningful, comprehensive reform includes timely federal action to implement existing law, federal action to implement the BRC recommendations under existing federal authority, and key legislative reforms such as protecting ratepayer payments into the NWF, providing for consolidated storage at least for UNF from decommissioned sites, and creating an independent waste management organization. We also need to coordinate with other stakeholders to make sure our calls for reform are heard," notes Boyd.
The Nuclear Waste Strategy Coalition (NWSC) is an organization that facilitates such coordination, representing the collective interests of state utility regulators, consumer advocates, electric utilities, local governments, tribes, and associate members on nuclear waste policy matters.
"The NWSC coordinates with other organisations that are likewise concerned about the nation's UNF strategy and the astounding lack of political will exhibited by those in key federal posts to address this important issue head-on and protect utility consumers and US taxpayers from further harm," says Boyd.
Having delivered its final report in January 2012, the presidentially mandated BRC on America's Nuclear Future emphasised the urgent need for a waste-disposal strategy. And while new rules adopted by the European Union last year require member countries to draw up long-term plans for dealing with their nuclear waste by 2015, the US will soon need to decide on whether it will bury its nuclear waste or reprocess it into new fuel and greatly reduce the amount of leftover waste.
Sen. Jim DeMint leaving the Senate Rachel Weiner, The Washington Post December 6, 2012 Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) is leaving Congress in January to lead the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, as first reported by The Wall Street Journal.
DeMint, a staunch conservative who often clashes with party leadership, was reelected to a second term in 2010. He will depart before the new Congress is sworn in next month. "I've decided to join The Heritage Foundation at a time when the conservative movement needs strong leadership in the battle of ideas," DeMint said in a statement. "My constituents know that being a Senator was never going to be my career."
The senator, a vocal advocate for term limits, had already pledged not to seek a third term.
South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley (R) will appoint DeMint's successor, who will serve until a 2014 special election. That means two Senate races in the Palmetto State that year. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R) -- targeted by many of the conservatives who love DeMint -- is up for reelection.
DeMint's surprising move appears to be a break for Graham, who may see potential primary rivals flock to the open seat instead of challenging him.
Before entering politics, DeMint worked in market research, and he told the Journal that he's excited about taking Heritage Foundation research and working to "translate those policy papers into real-life demonstrations of things that work."
Heritage Chairman of the Board Thomas A. Saunders, in a statement, praised DeMint's "passion for rigorous research, his dedication to the principles of our nation's founding, and his ability to translate policy ideas into action."
DeMint will take over from Ed Fuelner, who helped found the Heritage Foundation in 1973 and has been its president since 1977.
In 2010, Fuelner earned a total compensation (including bonuses and incentives) of $1,098,612. His base salary was $477,097. The annual salary for a senator: $174,000. (DeMint happens to be one of the poorest members of the Senate. According to the Post's Capitol Assets investigation, his estimated wealth in 2010 was $40,501.)
"I couldn't be more pleased with the Board's selection," said Feulner in a statement. "Jim DeMint understands that conservative principles and values advance the interests of all Americans -- regardless of age, gender, wealth or race."
The current president will stay on as chancellor of the foundation and chairman of Heritage's Asian Studies Center.
DeMint phoned McConnell this morning to tell him the news, according to leadership aides.
In a statement, McConnell thanked DeMint "for his uncompromising service to South Carolina and our country in the United States Senate.
"Jim helped provide a powerful voice for conservative ideals in a town where those principles are too often hidden beneath business as usual," McConnell added. "There is no question in my mind that he raised the profile of important issues like spending and debt and helped galvanize the American people against a big government agenda."
In his new role, DeMint will serve as the boss of McConnell's wife, Elaine Chao, the former labor secretary who is a Heritage distinguished fellow.
McConnell's deputy, Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) appeared caught off-guard by the announcement. "I just heard about it," he told reporters outside his office.
DeMint's political allies were quick to congratulate the senator.
Republican Study Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) said it was "disappointing" to lose a fellow conservative in Congress, but "South Carolina's loss is the country's gain."
"Senator DeMint has done more to advance the cause of freedom and liberty in Congress than anyone else since his election," said Chris Chocola, president of the anti-tax Club for Growth, in a statement. "We wish him nothing but the best in his new role at Heritage."
DeMint has helped elect a number of like-minded colleagues in recent years through the now-independent Senate Conservatives Fund -- including Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, Utah Sen. Mike Lee, Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul and Florida Sen. Marco Rubio.
|
|
