Karl Herchenroeder
RW Monitor
01/22/16
Department of Energy officials addressed some pointed questions Wednesday at the kickoff event for the agency’s national search for consent-based interim sites that would house spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste.
Three speakers were pressed on issues concerning how DOE will define “consent,” how the effort will withstand an administration change, and what happens with interim storage if the U.S. can’t come to terms on a long-term solution at Yucca Mountain. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission expects two license applications in the coming months for consent-based siting: from Waste Control Specialists in Texas and Holtec International in New Mexico.
The department in late December laid out a three-stage process for siting facilities: a pilot site that would primarily accept used nuclear fuel from closed reactors, followed by larger interim facilities with greater capabilities, and finally one or more long-term geologic repositories for spent fuel and high-level waste. The Obama administration sees this as the replacement for the shuttered Yucca project, though there is support in some quarters for resuming development at the Nevada site.
On the question of an impending administration change, acting Assistant Secretary for Nuclear Energy John Kotek said the department will have to show that its effort is worthwhile, engaging stakeholders and building a design along the way, so there is reason to continue after a year of work. “It’s our challenge over the next year,” Kotek said.
Kotek was also asked how the U.S. can prevent these interim sites from becoming de facto repositories if Congress can’t come to terms on development at the stalled Yucca Mountain project. He responded that part of the negotiation process will be that the potential hosts must recognize that schedules are not always kept, and it will be their duty to protect the community if the waste lingers on site.
“It’s my observation that that’s going to be an element in the negotiations,” Kotek said.
He was also asked if DOE would consider interim storage at the Yucca site, to which he responded that DOE is ready to work with any state willing to discuss the potential for consent.
The three-member panel also included Associate Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fuel Cycle Technologies Andrew Griffith and Office of Used Nuclear Fuel Disposition Director William Boyle. When asked whether corridor communities will have to consent to the transportation of waste within proximity or across their borders, Griffith said many details still have to be worked out. Security will be a priority, he said, and it will impact transparency concerning the transportation routes for waste.
When asked to describe how DOE will define “consent,” Kotek said a report from the Blue Ribbon Commission for America’s Nuclear Future, an advisory group Obama tasked with studying the management of America’s nuclear waste, wisely did not define the term. DOE is taking the same approach, he added, saying his understanding is that a potential host state can opt out of consent until the applicant submits a license application.
Griffith said that confidence-building in interested states will be key because “confidence and trust can be lost in a heartbeat.”
“It’s important we move forward with a durable solution for this very tough problem,” Griffith said. “We need a solution that can move forward through all the things that have tripped it up in the past.”
Kotek explained that, ultimately, the long-term solution will be the protection of people and the environment in America, and that means the best option in the long run is a permanent repository.
