House Republicans want to revisit the Department of Energy’s nuclear waste program, first with the request that congressional auditors determine what resources are available to complete the Nuclear Regulatory Commission license review for the repository planned at Yucca Mountain in Nevada.
House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton (R-Mich.) and Rep. John Shimkus (R-Ill.), who chairs the panel’s environment subcommittee, in a letter Monday requested that the Government Accountability Office (GAO) analyze what contracts, contractors, and federal resources are available to complete the application.
“Management of spent nuclear fuel, which includes a permanent repository at Yucca Mountain, remains a priority for the committee,” Shimkus said in a statement. “That’s why we’ve asked GAO to tell us how much the Obama Administration’s failure to follow the law has delayed this 30 year, $15 billion investment, and what resources will be necessary to restart the project.”
The Obama administration in 2011 ceased funding for the Nevada repository and established a blue-ribbon panel that in 2012 suggested a consent-based strategy for dealing with storage of America’s nuclear waste. NRC has testified that it needs $330 million to finish the license process, while DOE has not offered a number. As of December, NRC had about $3.1 million left in nuclear waste funding, which it plans to spend on the supplemental environmental impact statement for a Yucca Mountain groundwater study, expected this spring, and the publication of Yucca licensing documents.
The NRC issued its Yucca Mountain safety evaluation report in January 2015, finding that DOE meets the applicable regulatory requirements for the project. However, two outstanding issues remain over ownership of land and water rights. Additionally a supplement to DOE’s environmental impact statement has not been completed.
The Department of Energy has about $19.5 million in unobligated balances in its Defense Nuclear Waste Disposal and Nuclear Waste Disposal accounts, money that can only be spent on development of Yucca. Those balances represent ratepayer money that was paid into the Nuclear Waste Fund, a now-$34 billion fund that Congress appropriated for the sole purpose of developing Yucca. Both agencies will require appropriations in order to complete the licensing process.
In its 2017 fiscal budget proposal the Obama administration did not include funding for Yucca. The next budget year begins on Oct. 1.
Upton and Shimkus are requesting that the GAO determine whether DOE has outlined a Yucca restart plan, and whether that plan complies with the Nuclear Waste Policy Act, which in the 1980s designated Yucca as the only national geologic repository for high-level waste.
“If so, are funds adequate to enable completion of the (license application) review process?” the letter asks. “If not, what funding is needed and what are the cost and schedule estimates for funding?”
The GAO report will take several months to complete, with results expected in the second half to late 2016, at the earliest.
In a hearing of the House Appropriations energy and water subcommittee Tuesday, Ranking Member Marcy Kaptur (D-Ohio) asked Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz whether he thought there was a chance Yucca Mountain could one day open its doors to shipments of nuclear waste.
“No,” Moniz said. “We continue to say we think it’s unworkable. That goes back to the need for a consent-based process. We have asked for an increase in the nuclear waste arena precisely to get the consent-based process.”
DOE for fiscal 2017 has requested $76.3 million – $61 million from the Nuclear Waste Fund and $15.3 million from defense funding — for its Integrated Waste Management System (IWMS). This effort is meant to lay the foundation for one or more spent fuel management facilities under DOE’s consent-based siting program, an effort that will involve large-scale fuel transportation preparation for waste that has accumulated at American power plants. Plans call for the development of a separate repository for high‐level defense waste within the storage, transportation, and consent‐based siting subprograms. The IWMS in 2017 includes $39.4 million in new funding for consent-based siting.
Assistant Secretary Says DOE Wants to be Ready to Move
A senior DOE official explained Wednesday that the transportation plan the department is developing in 2017 will be applicable no matter what storage and disposal destinations Congress ultimately chooses.
Acting Assistant DOE Secretary for Nuclear Energy John Kotek said the plan is for DOE to be ready to move fuel when Congress gives the green light. The consent-based siting request, he said, will provide funding for a large-scale public outreach campaign, a series of public meetings around the country that kicked off in January. The amount will include funding for grants to states, local governments, and tribes to educate the public on what it means to host a waste facility, for storage and disposal of both civilian and defense waste.
“(DOE is going to) help them understand what those challenges might be so that they can decide for themselves whether they might be interested in becoming over the long term what we call a willing and informed host,” Kotek said during a House Appropriations energy and water subcommittee hearing.
Kotek’s comments were spurred by questions from subcommittee Chairman Mike Simpson (R-Idaho), who asked how much research and development within the IWMS applies specifically to Yucca Mountain and how much to interim storage. Kotek said there are no plans specifically tied to Yucca. While Simpson said he’s not opposed to the effort Kotek described, he said the department can’t ignore Yucca Mountain forever.
“We’ve got to face that reality at some point in time that we need a facility, more than one facility as a matter of fact,” Simpson said.
