Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.) on Tuesday lambasted the Nuclear Energy Institute for “impeding” the Energy Department’s consent-based siting program for nuclear waste storage, and for ignoring Nevada’s opposition to the canceled plan for a geologic waste repository at Yucca Mountain.
During the recently closed comment period on the consent-based siting initiative, NEI, the nuclear industry’s legislative and governmental arm, suggested that DOE not collaborate with private entities through the program that replaced Yucca Mountain. Waste Control Specialists and Holtec International are leading separate programs to develop consolidated interim storage sites for spent nuclear fuel in West Texas and New Mexico, respectively. NEI in its comments also demanded the department resume and defend its license application proceedings with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
The NRC estimates it would cost $330 million to complete the licensing process. The federal government has spent about $15 billion on Yucca Mountain since 1987.
“I write today to express my disappointment that the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) continues to impede reasonable efforts towards finding solutions for managing the nuclear industry’s spent nuclear fuel,” the Senate minority leader, who will retire in January, wrote in a letter Tuesday to NEI President and CEO Marvin Fertel. “Instead of working towards short-term solutions and developing a long-term policy framework for addressing nuclear waste, you have maintained an untenable and unrealistic position that the federal government should ignore Nevada’s opposition and build a nuclear waste repository in the state.”
Reid, who has been the catalyst in thwarting plans at Yucca Mountain, regarded NEI’s comments as “sad and unfortunate,” and expressed confusion as to why the organization would “impede progress” on a solution that would benefit its membership. The lawmaker also brought up discussions nearly 10 years ago in which NEI, he said, was not willing to give up on Yucca Mountain, but was “open to other interim storage solutions for nuclear waste.”
Fertel said by email Thursday to RadWaste Monitor: “The industry supports an integrated used nuclear fuel management strategy that includes both Yucca Mountain and a consolidated storage facility. We are committed to working with the Congress and the administration on legislation in that regard.”
NEI in its public comments cautioned DOE against applying its consent-based siting process to ongoing private efforts, saying it might create unnecessary burdens or delays for the companies leading the fuel storage initiatives.
Reid, in his response, raised the political landscape of 2008, and the position NEI ultimately took on Yucca Mountain.
“Everybody knew that I would never allow the Yucca Mountain project to advance and that with President Obama’s election to the White House, the project was all but dead,” Reid wrote in his letter. “Unfortunately discussions (between Reid and NEI) ended, and NEI retreated to a position firmly against any solution to dealing with nuclear waste other than the defunct Yucca Mountain project.”
Nevada is prepared to resume the fight, Reid said, should Nuclear Regulatory Commission licensing proceedings resume on Yucca Mountain. Although he believes Nevada can win that battle, Reid said it shouldn’t have to, as Nevada has already objected to giving the federal government the state’s water, land, and license in order to build the repository.
Noting that he does not oppose nuclear energy, Reid said: “I remain committed to keeping nuclear waste out of Yucca Mountain and I strongly urge that the industry’s top trade association take a leadership role in making progress on addressing nuclear waste from the industry’s reactors.”
