Domenici Nuclear Waste Proposal Would Likely Draw State Opposition

1111 words/ 9 December 2009/ Energy Washington Week/ IEPA/ Vol. 6, No. 49/ English/Copyright © 2009, Inside Washington Publishers. All rights reserved. Also available in print and online as part of www.EnergyWashington.com.

A proposal put forth last week by former Senate energy committee chief Sen. Pete Domenici (R-NM) for the U.S. to adopt nuclear waste recycling in light of the Yucca Mountain repository's demise as a waste management option has stirred discussion among lawmakers and others but if it is taken seriously will almost certainly encounter state utility regulators' resistance because it would entail diverting money from the $23 billion nuclear waste fund to build a recycling pilot plant and would abrogate DOE's obligations under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act to transport and store the waste, according to industry sources.

The proposal was put forward by Domenici -- now a senior fellow with the influential Bipartisan Policy Center think tank -- in a Dec. 1 speech at an event sponsored by the U.S. Energy Association (USEA), a group of private and public energy officials, and has attracted attention among parties interested in nuclear policy. Domenici's proposal comes amid continued DOE inaction on Energy Secretary Steven Chu's announced intention to establish a "blue ribbon panel" to design a path forward on waste disposal now that the Obama administration has said the site DOE designated for storing high-level waste under the nuclear waste law -- Nevada's Yucca Mountain -- is no longer an option. For several months DOE has said that the formation of the blue ribbon panel is imminent.

A senior official with Areva, the French-based nuclear power company and one of the world's leading proponents of nuclear waste recycling, although interested in Domenici's proposal, sees significant hurdles in negotiating around the nuclear waste law unless a recycling program can ensure the removal of the waste by the government. The states are not likely to endorse the use of two decades of ratepayer fee collections plus earned interest to invest in what would essentially be a research and development program that would not fulfill DOE's obligations under the law, says the source.

The source cites resolutions from and discussions with members of the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners (NARUC), representing state utility commissioners on federal matters, as the best indication that any proposal to divert funds ahead of designating a new waste repository will encounter stiff opposition from states.
NARUC, in a resolution approved in early 2009, made clear that if the Obama administration followed through on its plans to end the Yucca Mountain program and close the facility it should place all funds accumulated in the nuclear waste trust fund into an escrow account to be used only for another permanent waste site. The Areva source and others say the states continue to support the escrow account position. A NARUC spokesman, responding to the proposal, says the nuclear waste fund should be used for what it was originally intended.
In his proposal, Domenici recognizes the state and local hurdles that would need to be overcome. He calls for DOE to take on the responsibility of educating states and local communities on nuclear waste alternatives and the benefits of nuclear waste recycling. Utility sources say the former senator's proposal is effectively a recommendation to DOE on how to shape its next policy move given that the blue ribbon panel hasn't gotten off the ground.
"We must fully engage the public in this effort," Domenici said in his speech. "A Blue Ribbon Commission, like that discussed within the Administration, could be an important part of that public debate. The Blue Ribbon Commission has been discussed but has no legitimate momentum. We must quickly make this Commission a reality."
DOE has conducted studies on building recycling facilities under the Bush administration's Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP), but more study would be required to pursue what Domenici is proposing, says the Areva source. Despite the state hurdles, the Domenici proposal creates an opening for dialogue on what a new waste program could look like and what issues would need to be considered for various reasons, including proliferation risks that have been the primary reason since the Carter administration that the U.S. has not pursued recycling, says the source.
Nuclear waste consultants say the reasons for not pursuing recycling in the U.S. are primarily political and not technological. However, a number of experts believe that the French method deployed by Areva (considered a model for how to conduct a recycling program) is outdated and new advanced recycling methods need to be adopted to minimize proliferation risks, according to the consultants. DOE's Chu has said that any recycling program in the U.S. would need to be based on more advanced techniques than are currently employed in other countries.
Congressional staffers to members of the Nevada delegation, which unanimously opposes using Yucca Mountain as a permanent waste repository, believe Domenici's proposal is problematic. Even though Domenici has now come out in opposition to the Yucca Mountain option, the Nevada delegates are not convinced of the realistic prospects for ramping up a near-term recycling program without more advanced technology.
The costs of current recycling technologies are too high to make action on Domenici's proposal feasible in the near term, Nevada Congresswoman Shelley Berkeley (D) said in a statement responding to the proposal. The second issue that needs to be resolved is the risk of proliferation inherent in any recycling program, according to Berkeley. Nevertheless, Berkeley and the rest of the Nevada delegation support the former senator's push to develop a new approach for dealing with the U.S. nuclear waste problem, say congressional sources.
Finding a nuclear waste solution is also on the minds of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV), along with Sens. John Ensign (R-NV) and Barbara Boxer (D-CA), who called on the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to examine alternatives to Yucca Mountain and related cost issues. GAO's report, which was sent to Reid and the other senators Nov. 4 and authorized for release by GAO Dec. 2, avoids making recommendations to DOE or the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, but nevertheless identifies two alternative waste solutions that could be ramped up in the near-term as the Yucca Mountain effort is undone. "Centralized storage at two locations provides an alternative that could be implemented within 10 to 30 years, allowing more time to consider final disposal options, nuclear waste to be removed from decommissioned reactor sites, and the government to take custody of commercial nuclear waste, saving billions of dollars in liabilities," according to the report. The report nevertheless underscores that "finding a state willing to host a facility could be extremely challenging."
Document IEPA000020091208e5c900003