xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
EM Recovery News - September 2010 - Issue 16
September 03, 2010 - Environmental Management Recovery Act
EM Recovery News - September 2010 - Issue 16
View File: EM Recovery News - September 2010 - Issue 16
This 16th issue of Recovery News focuses on the Office of Environmental Management American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Program’s benefits to stakeholders such as community groups, as well as Tribal Nations and regulators. We highlight Savannah River Site’s (SRS) work with community groups such as the Citizens Advisory Board, which provides advice to SRS on its cleanup. In another article, we provide a perspective on the Recovery Act’s impact in West Valley, N.Y. In Washington state, we show how Recovery Act dollars are cleaning up a large stretch of land of historical significance to regional Tribal Nations. We also focus on the Oak Ridge Office in Tennessee, and its work with regulators.
CRESP Newstories and Links related to risk-based cleanup of the nation’s nuclear weapons production facility waste sites and cost-effective, risk-based management of potential future nuclear sites and wastes. CRESP seeks to improve the scientific and technical basis for environmental management decisions by the Department of Energy (DOE) and by fostering public participation in that search.
My Blog List
Tuesday, September 7, 2010
Wednesday, July 14, 2010
BRC July 14-15, 2010 Meeting Information, Documents & Presentations
July 14-15, 2010 Meeting Information, Documents & Presentations
Updated 07/13/2010
Updated 07/13/2010
DOE Meets TPA Milestone in the 300 Area
DOE News ReleaseMedia Contact: Cameron Hardy, DOE For Immediate Release:
(509) 376-5365, Cameron.Hardy@rl.doe.gov July 13, 2010Five Waste Sites, One Burial Ground Completed Ahead of Deadline
RICHLAND, WASH. – The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) met a Tri-Party Agreement Milestone three months early when contractors completed remediation of five waste sites and one burial ground recently in the 300 Area of the Hanford Site in southeastern Washington State.
The active remediation of these waste sites helps Hanford get rid of sources of contamination to area groundwater, which can migrate to the Columbia River.
(509) 376-5365, Cameron.Hardy@rl.doe.gov July 13, 2010Five Waste Sites, One Burial Ground Completed Ahead of Deadline
RICHLAND, WASH. – The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) met a Tri-Party Agreement Milestone three months early when contractors completed remediation of five waste sites and one burial ground recently in the 300 Area of the Hanford Site in southeastern Washington State.
The active remediation of these waste sites helps Hanford get rid of sources of contamination to area groundwater, which can migrate to the Columbia River.
Monday, July 12, 2010
Report on Office of Technology Innovation and Development Program Plan
Friday, June 18, 2010
The Department is responding to House Conference Report 111-203, Energy and Water
Development Appropriations Bill, Fiscal Year 2010, which directs the Department to update and
submit Appendices A and B of the Status of Environmental Management Initiatives to
Accelerate the Reduction of Environmental Risks and Challenges Posed by the Legacy of the Cold
War (Status Report). The original Status Report, provided to Congress in January 2009,
responded to a requirement in the National Defense Authorization Act Fiscal Year 2008,
Section 3130.
Friday, June 18, 2010
Update Appendices to the Status of EM Initiatives to Accelerate the Reduction of Environmental Risk and Challenges Posed by the Legacy of the Cold War Updated Appendices A and B containing the requested information are enclosed. The Office ofEnvironmental Management (EM) has had great success in meeting the terms of its regulatorycommitments, as shown in the update to Appendix A. EM'S overall record of meeting regulatory milestones exceeds 90 percent. EM has also had great success in containing lifecycle cost growth, as shown in the update to Appendix B. Despite baseline changes and the acceptance of nearly $600 million of new scope not contained in the January 2009 Status Report, EM has reduced its life-cycle costs from a range between $274 and $329 billion in 2008
to $273 to $327 billion today. In addition, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funds
have helped EM avoid another $3.2 billion in life-cycle costs.
The Department is responding to House Conference Report 111-203, Energy and Water
Development Appropriations Bill, Fiscal Year 2010, which directs the Department to update and
submit Appendices A and B of the Status of Environmental Management Initiatives to
Accelerate the Reduction of Environmental Risks and Challenges Posed by the Legacy of the Cold
War (Status Report). The original Status Report, provided to Congress in January 2009,
responded to a requirement in the National Defense Authorization Act Fiscal Year 2008,
Section 3130.
Friday, June 18, 2010
Update Appendices to the Status of EM Initiatives to Accelerate the Reduction of Environmental Risk and Challenges Posed by the Legacy of the Cold War Updated Appendices A and B containing the requested information are enclosed. The Office ofEnvironmental Management (EM) has had great success in meeting the terms of its regulatorycommitments, as shown in the update to Appendix A. EM'S overall record of meeting regulatory milestones exceeds 90 percent. EM has also had great success in containing lifecycle cost growth, as shown in the update to Appendix B. Despite baseline changes and the acceptance of nearly $600 million of new scope not contained in the January 2009 Status Report, EM has reduced its life-cycle costs from a range between $274 and $329 billion in 2008
to $273 to $327 billion today. In addition, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funds
have helped EM avoid another $3.2 billion in life-cycle costs.
Analysis Triples U.S. Plutonium Waste Figures
July 10, 2010 New York Times
By MATTHEW L. WALD
WASHINGTON — The amount of plutonium buried at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation in Washington State is nearly three times what the federal government previously reported, a new analysis indicates, suggesting that a cleanup to protect future generations will be far more challenging than planners had assumed.
Plutonium waste is much more prevalent around nuclear weapons sites nationwide than the Energy Department’s official accounting indicates, said Robert Alvarez, a former department official who in recent months reanalyzed studies conducted by the department in the last 15 years for Hanford; the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory; the Savannah River Site, near Aiken, S.C.; and elsewhere.
By MATTHEW L. WALD
WASHINGTON — The amount of plutonium buried at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation in Washington State is nearly three times what the federal government previously reported, a new analysis indicates, suggesting that a cleanup to protect future generations will be far more challenging than planners had assumed.
Plutonium waste is much more prevalent around nuclear weapons sites nationwide than the Energy Department’s official accounting indicates, said Robert Alvarez, a former department official who in recent months reanalyzed studies conducted by the department in the last 15 years for Hanford; the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory; the Savannah River Site, near Aiken, S.C.; and elsewhere.
NEW RICHLAND OPERATIONS MANAGER ANNOUNCED
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Media Contact: July 9, 2010 Colleen French, 509-539-0210
The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) today named Matthew S. McCormick Manager of the Richland Operations Office (DOE-RL) at the Hanford Site in southeast Washington State. In this role, he will continue the momentum of cleanup along the Columbia River, further implement the Department’s strategy for shrinking the footprint of active cleanup operations from 586 square miles to 10 square miles in ten years, oversee groundwater protection remedies that will stop the migration of contaminants into the Columbia River, and dispose of hazardous waste and facilities across the Hanford Site.
“Matt's extensive experience in nuclear project management will be critical in continuing the success of the cleanup along the Columbia River and across the Hanford Site. Matt’s strength is his breadth of project management experience – reducing risk at some of DOE’s highest-hazard facilities – combined with his drive to push for better and smarter approaches to complex cleanup challenges,” said Dr. Ines Triay, DOE’s Assistant Secretary of Energy for Environmental Management. “He has been a leader not only in helping shape and implement footprint reduction at the Hanford Site, but also in putting together the strategy and regulatory support for how to complete cleanup of the Central Plateau. He has worked alongside Dave Brockman for years at DOE’s Hanford and Rocky Flats sites, and is uniquely qualified to continue Richland’s momentum and successes.”
The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) today named Matthew S. McCormick Manager of the Richland Operations Office (DOE-RL) at the Hanford Site in southeast Washington State. In this role, he will continue the momentum of cleanup along the Columbia River, further implement the Department’s strategy for shrinking the footprint of active cleanup operations from 586 square miles to 10 square miles in ten years, oversee groundwater protection remedies that will stop the migration of contaminants into the Columbia River, and dispose of hazardous waste and facilities across the Hanford Site.
“Matt's extensive experience in nuclear project management will be critical in continuing the success of the cleanup along the Columbia River and across the Hanford Site. Matt’s strength is his breadth of project management experience – reducing risk at some of DOE’s highest-hazard facilities – combined with his drive to push for better and smarter approaches to complex cleanup challenges,” said Dr. Ines Triay, DOE’s Assistant Secretary of Energy for Environmental Management. “He has been a leader not only in helping shape and implement footprint reduction at the Hanford Site, but also in putting together the strategy and regulatory support for how to complete cleanup of the Central Plateau. He has worked alongside Dave Brockman for years at DOE’s Hanford and Rocky Flats sites, and is uniquely qualified to continue Richland’s momentum and successes.”
Monday, June 7, 2010
Nuclear Nonproliferation: DOE Needs to Address Uncertainties with and Strengthen Independent Safety Oversight of Its Plutonium Disposition Program.
1444 words/ 1 June 2010/ General Accounting Office Reports & TestimonyGAORNAVolume 2010; Issue 6EnglishCopyright 2010 Gale Group Inc. All rights reserved. GAO-10-378 March 26, 2010
The end of the Cold War left the United States with a surplus of weapons-grade plutonium, which poses proliferation and safety risks. Much of this material is found in a key nuclear weapon component known as a pit. The Department of Energy (DOE) plans to dispose of at least 34 metric tons of plutonium by fabricating it into mixed oxide (MOX) fuel for domestic nuclear reactors. To do so, DOE's National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) is constructing two facilities--a MOX Fuel Fabrication Facility (MFFF) and a Waste Solidification Building (WSB)--at the Savannah River Site in South Carolina. GAO was asked to assess the (1) cost and schedule status of the MFFF and WSB construction projects, (2) status of NNSA's plans for pit disassembly and conversion, (3) status of NNSA's plans to obtain customers for MOX fuel from the MFFF, and (4) actions that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and DOE have taken to provide independent nuclear safety oversight. GAO reviewed NNSA documents and project data, toured DOE facilities, and interviewed officials from DOE, NRC, and nuclear utilities.
The end of the Cold War left the United States with a surplus of weapons-grade plutonium, which poses proliferation and safety risks. Much of this material is found in a key nuclear weapon component known as a pit. The Department of Energy (DOE) plans to dispose of at least 34 metric tons of plutonium by fabricating it into mixed oxide (MOX) fuel for domestic nuclear reactors. To do so, DOE's National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) is constructing two facilities--a MOX Fuel Fabrication Facility (MFFF) and a Waste Solidification Building (WSB)--at the Savannah River Site in South Carolina. GAO was asked to assess the (1) cost and schedule status of the MFFF and WSB construction projects, (2) status of NNSA's plans for pit disassembly and conversion, (3) status of NNSA's plans to obtain customers for MOX fuel from the MFFF, and (4) actions that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and DOE have taken to provide independent nuclear safety oversight. GAO reviewed NNSA documents and project data, toured DOE facilities, and interviewed officials from DOE, NRC, and nuclear utilities.
Sending more Hanford waste to Idaho would save cash
Annette Cary;Herald staff writer /Cary Annette/719 words/28 May 2010/Tri-City Herald/TRIC/B1/English/(c) 2010 The Tri-City Herald. All Rights Reserved.
Not shipping certain Hanford radioactive waste to Idaho for processing as earlier planned is costing the nation $25 million in increased costs, according to an audit by the Department of Energy Office of Inspector General.
The Department of Energy questions that, saying that the long-term costs of dealing with that waste at Hanford will be reduced by at least $135 million because the project has been accelerated with federal economic stimulus money.
Similar long-term savings could be achieved by sending the waste to Idaho for processing, the audit countered.
At issue is transuranic waste — typically debris contaminated with plutonium — that temporarily was buried at Hanford when Congress ordered a national repository for transuranic waste created in 1970. The waste was buried in drums and boxes until the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, or WIPP, in New Mexico opened as a repository.
In February 2008, the Department of Energy announced a plan to ship as much as 8,500 cubic yards of transuranic waste from Hanford to the Advanced Mixed Waste Treatment Project at the Idaho National Laboratory.
Not shipping certain Hanford radioactive waste to Idaho for processing as earlier planned is costing the nation $25 million in increased costs, according to an audit by the Department of Energy Office of Inspector General.
The Department of Energy questions that, saying that the long-term costs of dealing with that waste at Hanford will be reduced by at least $135 million because the project has been accelerated with federal economic stimulus money.
Similar long-term savings could be achieved by sending the waste to Idaho for processing, the audit countered.
At issue is transuranic waste — typically debris contaminated with plutonium — that temporarily was buried at Hanford when Congress ordered a national repository for transuranic waste created in 1970. The waste was buried in drums and boxes until the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, or WIPP, in New Mexico opened as a repository.
In February 2008, the Department of Energy announced a plan to ship as much as 8,500 cubic yards of transuranic waste from Hanford to the Advanced Mixed Waste Treatment Project at the Idaho National Laboratory.
The Blue Ribbon Commission on America’s Nuclear Future
Events/Public Meetings
Updated 06/01/2010
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2010 Meeting Schedule
Full Commission Meetings
July 14th and 15th - Richland, Washington
September 21st and 22nd – TBD
November 15th and 16th – TBD
Public Teleconferences may be held as necessary on:
June 17th
August 17th
October 19th
December 14th
Previous Meeting Information, Documents & Presentations
May 25 and 26, 2010 - Washington, DC
March 25 and March 26, 2010 - First Commission Public Meeting, Washington, D.C.
Updated 06/01/2010
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2010 Meeting Schedule
Full Commission Meetings
July 14th and 15th - Richland, Washington
September 21st and 22nd – TBD
November 15th and 16th – TBD
Public Teleconferences may be held as necessary on:
June 17th
August 17th
October 19th
December 14th
Previous Meeting Information, Documents & Presentations
May 25 and 26, 2010 - Washington, DC
March 25 and March 26, 2010 - First Commission Public Meeting, Washington, D.C.
Friday, April 30, 2010
Senate plan leaves Yucca project off the budget
Steve Tetreault /386 words23 April 2010/The Las Vegas Review-Journal/LVGS/2B/English/© 2010 The Las Vegas Review-Journal. Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning. All Rights Reserved. By STEVE TETREAULT/ STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU
WASHINGTON - The Senate took an initial step Thursday to end funding for the Yucca Mountain Project when its budget committee approved a 2011 blueprint that senators said contains no room for the nuclear waste repository plan.
The budget plan put together by Chairman Sen. Kent Conrad, D- N.D., "supports the president's request to close the Yucca Mountain nuclear repository and establish a blue ribbon commission to investigate alternatives," according to a Senate Budget Committee document.
The budget resolution is an early but not surprising sign that senior senators under the direction of Majority Leader Harry Reid, D- Nev., do not want to continue spending for the Yucca Mountain Project. President Barack Obama has declared he wants to end the underground waste storage program, and a blue ribbon study panel began work last month on searching for other strategies.
Although the Obama administration plan is being challenged through several lawsuits, Reid said Thursday the Senate budget "makes very clear that taxpayer dollars will no longer be wasted on Yucca Mountain and without funding the project is dead."
Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., who sits on the budget committee, said the panel "affirmed President Obama's decision to shut down Yucca Mountain and I look forward to the full Senate voting to do the same."
The budget resolution is a broad stroke overview of how Congress might prioritize its spending and taxing for the upcoming fiscal year that starts in October. It serves as a guideline for appropriations subcommittees to write follow-up spending bills over the summer.
Senators on the subcommittee that writes the Department of Energy spending bill could ignore the budget plan and set their own priorities. But if they added money for Yucca Mountain they would do so at the risk of crossing Reid, who has made the project's shutdown a signature career issue.
The Senate Budget Committee, by a 12-10 vote, approved a blueprint that calls for tighter limits on spending than what Obama has proposed. Ensign voted against it, according to his office, because it still contained too much "wasteful and out-of-control government spending."
Contact Stephens Washington Bureau Chief Steve Tetreault at stetreault@stephensmedia.com or202-783-1760.
WASHINGTON - The Senate took an initial step Thursday to end funding for the Yucca Mountain Project when its budget committee approved a 2011 blueprint that senators said contains no room for the nuclear waste repository plan.
The budget plan put together by Chairman Sen. Kent Conrad, D- N.D., "supports the president's request to close the Yucca Mountain nuclear repository and establish a blue ribbon commission to investigate alternatives," according to a Senate Budget Committee document.
The budget resolution is an early but not surprising sign that senior senators under the direction of Majority Leader Harry Reid, D- Nev., do not want to continue spending for the Yucca Mountain Project. President Barack Obama has declared he wants to end the underground waste storage program, and a blue ribbon study panel began work last month on searching for other strategies.
Although the Obama administration plan is being challenged through several lawsuits, Reid said Thursday the Senate budget "makes very clear that taxpayer dollars will no longer be wasted on Yucca Mountain and without funding the project is dead."
Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., who sits on the budget committee, said the panel "affirmed President Obama's decision to shut down Yucca Mountain and I look forward to the full Senate voting to do the same."
The budget resolution is a broad stroke overview of how Congress might prioritize its spending and taxing for the upcoming fiscal year that starts in October. It serves as a guideline for appropriations subcommittees to write follow-up spending bills over the summer.
Senators on the subcommittee that writes the Department of Energy spending bill could ignore the budget plan and set their own priorities. But if they added money for Yucca Mountain they would do so at the risk of crossing Reid, who has made the project's shutdown a signature career issue.
The Senate Budget Committee, by a 12-10 vote, approved a blueprint that calls for tighter limits on spending than what Obama has proposed. Ensign voted against it, according to his office, because it still contained too much "wasteful and out-of-control government spending."
Contact Stephens Washington Bureau Chief Steve Tetreault at stetreault@stephensmedia.com or202-783-1760.
NRC sets deadline for Yucca Mountain decision
By Steve Tetreault, Las Vegas Review-Journal /McClatchy-Tribune Regional News/ 273 words/ 23 April 2010/ Las Vegas Review-Journal (MCT)/ KRTLVEnglish/ Distributed by McClatchy - Tribune Information Services
Apr. 23--WASHINGTON -- The leaders of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission Friday set a June 1 deadline for decisions whether to allow for the termination of the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste site, a move that could speed the shutdown of the controversial project.
A panel of administrative judges within the NRC had wanted to delay ruling on whether the Department of Energy could withdraw the controversial Nevada project until a federal court could weigh legal challenges against DOE's efforts to shut it down.But in a 4-0 vote, the commissioners who head the nuclear safety agency ordered the judges to get back to work and issue a decision by June 1.The commissioners said the NRC shouldn't be sitting on the sidelines while courts take up an issue that is clearly within the agency's purview, and that federal judges might benefit from whatever decision the NRC reaches."We think a prudent course of action is to resolve the matters pending before our agency as expeditiously and responsibly as possible," the commissioners said in a five-page order.
NRC officials said the board's order could put the agency on an assured course to decide the fate of the nuclear waste project the Obama administration wants to bring to an end.
Apr. 23--WASHINGTON -- The leaders of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission Friday set a June 1 deadline for decisions whether to allow for the termination of the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste site, a move that could speed the shutdown of the controversial project.
A panel of administrative judges within the NRC had wanted to delay ruling on whether the Department of Energy could withdraw the controversial Nevada project until a federal court could weigh legal challenges against DOE's efforts to shut it down.But in a 4-0 vote, the commissioners who head the nuclear safety agency ordered the judges to get back to work and issue a decision by June 1.The commissioners said the NRC shouldn't be sitting on the sidelines while courts take up an issue that is clearly within the agency's purview, and that federal judges might benefit from whatever decision the NRC reaches."We think a prudent course of action is to resolve the matters pending before our agency as expeditiously and responsibly as possible," the commissioners said in a five-page order.
NRC officials said the board's order could put the agency on an assured course to decide the fate of the nuclear waste project the Obama administration wants to bring to an end.
NUCLEAR WASTE; Obama admin says cleanup stimulus exceeds expectations
Mike Soraghan, E&E reporter / 335 words/ 22 April 2010/ Environment & Energy Daily/ ENEND/ English/
© 2010 E&E Publishing, LLC. All Rights Reserved
President Obama's stimulus plan has created more jobs than expected in the field of nuclear cleanup, an administration official testified yesterday.
The $6 billion in the stimulus plan for nuclear cleanup was projected to "create or save" 13,000 jobs. But the administration says it has exceeded that number by 3,000.
"We have been able to substantiate 16,000 workers," Inés Triay, DOE's assistant secretary for Environmental Management told the Strategic Forces Subcommittee of the Senate Armed Services Committee.
That number includes 9,200 direct jobs at contractors and subcontractors, and thousands more indirect jobs at vendor companies, such as those manufacturing the special shipping containers used to move nuclear waste, Triay said.
Subcommittee Chairman Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) said the stimulus cleanup program has fallen behind and $1.7 billion has been spent, though he cautioned against haste. "It is less important that this work be done quickly than correctly," Nelson said.
The government's effort to clean up Cold War legacy radioactive waste is often criticized for costly delays and missed deadlines. The $6 billion boost from the $787 billion economic stimulus bill was intended to speed up some cleanup efforts, including removing uranium mill tailings from a Moab, Utah, site and accelerating processing of transuranic wastes from 11 sites.
Though some projects have fallen years behind schedule, the Obama administration did not seek significant boosts for the Environmental Management program's fiscal 2011 budget.
The administration did target the Office of River Protection for a $60 million research and development program to help stabilize and dispose of radioactive liquid tank waste -- one of the most difficult cleanup challenges DOE faces and that, if fruitful, could help significantly decrease timelines for several cleanup sites. The office's goal is ultimately to reduce the legacy footprint by 40 percent by the end of fiscal 2011 and up to 90 percent by fiscal 2015.
© 2010 E&E Publishing, LLC. All Rights Reserved
President Obama's stimulus plan has created more jobs than expected in the field of nuclear cleanup, an administration official testified yesterday.
The $6 billion in the stimulus plan for nuclear cleanup was projected to "create or save" 13,000 jobs. But the administration says it has exceeded that number by 3,000.
"We have been able to substantiate 16,000 workers," Inés Triay, DOE's assistant secretary for Environmental Management told the Strategic Forces Subcommittee of the Senate Armed Services Committee.
That number includes 9,200 direct jobs at contractors and subcontractors, and thousands more indirect jobs at vendor companies, such as those manufacturing the special shipping containers used to move nuclear waste, Triay said.
Subcommittee Chairman Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) said the stimulus cleanup program has fallen behind and $1.7 billion has been spent, though he cautioned against haste. "It is less important that this work be done quickly than correctly," Nelson said.
The government's effort to clean up Cold War legacy radioactive waste is often criticized for costly delays and missed deadlines. The $6 billion boost from the $787 billion economic stimulus bill was intended to speed up some cleanup efforts, including removing uranium mill tailings from a Moab, Utah, site and accelerating processing of transuranic wastes from 11 sites.
Though some projects have fallen years behind schedule, the Obama administration did not seek significant boosts for the Environmental Management program's fiscal 2011 budget.
The administration did target the Office of River Protection for a $60 million research and development program to help stabilize and dispose of radioactive liquid tank waste -- one of the most difficult cleanup challenges DOE faces and that, if fruitful, could help significantly decrease timelines for several cleanup sites. The office's goal is ultimately to reduce the legacy footprint by 40 percent by the end of fiscal 2011 and up to 90 percent by fiscal 2015.
REID STATEMENT ON ELIMINATION OF FUNDING FOR YUCCA MOUNTAIN
183 words/22 April 2010/ States News Service/ SNS/ English/ (c) 2010 States News Service
The following information was released by Nevada Senator Harry Reid:
– Nevada Senator Harry Reid today made the following statement on the release of the U.S. Senate Budget Committee Chairman's mark of the 2011 budget and the elimination of funding for Yucca Mountain.
“Chairman Conrad's mark of the 2011 budget reflects my shared commitment with President Obama to eliminate funding and bring the Yucca Mountain Project to its rightful end,” Reid said. “The anticipated challenges to the closure of this ill-conceived project neglect what this budget language makes very clear, that taxpayer dollars will no longer be wasted on Yucca Mountain and without funding the project is dead.”
Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad includes the following language in his mark of the 2011 budget.Ø Yucca Mountain
The Chairman's Mark supports the President's request to close the Yucca Mountain nuclear repository and establish a blue ribbon commission to investigate alternatives.
http://budget.senate.gov/democratic/documents/2010/Chairman%27s%20Mark_042110.pdf
04/22/10 13:00:05
The following information was released by Nevada Senator Harry Reid:
– Nevada Senator Harry Reid today made the following statement on the release of the U.S. Senate Budget Committee Chairman's mark of the 2011 budget and the elimination of funding for Yucca Mountain.
“Chairman Conrad's mark of the 2011 budget reflects my shared commitment with President Obama to eliminate funding and bring the Yucca Mountain Project to its rightful end,” Reid said. “The anticipated challenges to the closure of this ill-conceived project neglect what this budget language makes very clear, that taxpayer dollars will no longer be wasted on Yucca Mountain and without funding the project is dead.”
Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad includes the following language in his mark of the 2011 budget.Ø Yucca Mountain
The Chairman's Mark supports the President's request to close the Yucca Mountain nuclear repository and establish a blue ribbon commission to investigate alternatives.
http://budget.senate.gov/democratic/documents/2010/Chairman%27s%20Mark_042110.pdf
04/22/10 13:00:05
New Hanford radiation cleanup deadlines proposed
ANNETTE CARY / 797 words/22 April 2010/08:33Associated Press Newswires/APRS/English/(c) 2010. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.
TRI-CITIES, Wash. (AP) - The Department of Energy and its regulators have agreed to new legally binding environmental cleanup deadlines for radioactive waste that has been temporarily buried at central Hanford since 1970.
The proposed new package of deadlines would allow more time for some work but also add new deadlines DOE must meet. They include the first-ever deadlines for when some of the waste must be shipped to a national repository in New Mexico and a final cleanup deadline for some of the most difficult-to-handle solid waste, which Hanford now lacks the capabilities to prepare for disposal.
"We've come up with a change package that satisfies the interest of DOE, Ecology and the public," said Deborah Singleton, project manager for the Washington State Department of Ecology. The state and the Environmental Protection Agency are Hanford regulators.
TRI-CITIES, Wash. (AP) - The Department of Energy and its regulators have agreed to new legally binding environmental cleanup deadlines for radioactive waste that has been temporarily buried at central Hanford since 1970.
The proposed new package of deadlines would allow more time for some work but also add new deadlines DOE must meet. They include the first-ever deadlines for when some of the waste must be shipped to a national repository in New Mexico and a final cleanup deadline for some of the most difficult-to-handle solid waste, which Hanford now lacks the capabilities to prepare for disposal.
"We've come up with a change package that satisfies the interest of DOE, Ecology and the public," said Deborah Singleton, project manager for the Washington State Department of Ecology. The state and the Environmental Protection Agency are Hanford regulators.
CAMPAIGN 2010: Reid banking on Yucca's death to help win over skeptical electorate (04/30/2010)
Alex Kaplun, E&E reporter
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has spent much of his congressional career battling the construction of the Yucca Mountain nuclear repository.
Now, the Democratic leader is banking on that advocacy to pay off politically and help sway an electorate that at the moment appears unwilling to give him another term on Capitol Hill.
Faced with a tough re-election fight, Reid has again and again pointed to the slow death of the Yucca facility as a sign of his power in Washington and his ability to deliver for Nevada.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has spent much of his congressional career battling the construction of the Yucca Mountain nuclear repository.
Now, the Democratic leader is banking on that advocacy to pay off politically and help sway an electorate that at the moment appears unwilling to give him another term on Capitol Hill.
Faced with a tough re-election fight, Reid has again and again pointed to the slow death of the Yucca facility as a sign of his power in Washington and his ability to deliver for Nevada.
SCIENCE: House panel approves $84B research, innovation bill (04/29/2010)
Katie Howell, E&E reporter
The House Science and Technology Committee last night approved, 29-8, an $84 billion research and education bill that reauthorizes an innovative energy technology research program at the Energy Department.
The committee approved the bill (H.R. 5116) with a substitute amendment that would keep key science agencies on a path to doubling their budgets from 2007 appropriated levels after hours of debate on nearly 60 amendments.
"Honestly, this bill is a big deal and is important," said Chairman Bart Gordon (D-Tenn.). "It's a big deal and important for our country and for this committee's stature in the Congress. It's a big deal and an important step in leading our innovation agenda."
The House Science and Technology Committee last night approved, 29-8, an $84 billion research and education bill that reauthorizes an innovative energy technology research program at the Energy Department.
The committee approved the bill (H.R. 5116) with a substitute amendment that would keep key science agencies on a path to doubling their budgets from 2007 appropriated levels after hours of debate on nearly 60 amendments.
"Honestly, this bill is a big deal and is important," said Chairman Bart Gordon (D-Tenn.). "It's a big deal and important for our country and for this committee's stature in the Congress. It's a big deal and an important step in leading our innovation agenda."
Letter: Recycling plutonium is an insane policyfrom Nuclear waste Environment guardian.co.uk
Your dispatch (Pakistan arsenal in spotlight at US nuclear summit as report warns of terrorist threat, 13 April) says "the summit will endorse Obama's goal of locking up the world's stockpile of plutonium or HEU [highly enriched uranium] within four years". Later it records that "as a contribution to the aims of the summit, the US and Russia are due to sign an agreement … to take 34 tonnes of weapons-grade plutonium out of their reserve stockpiles and use it for the generation of nuclear power." The problem is that these two aims are in direct contradiction!
The recycling of plutonium is the most dangerous counter-terrorism and non-proliferation policy imaginable. It will normalise the use of the prime nuclear explosive material in international commerce, and ensure the movement from secured nuclear sites of huge quantities of weapons-usable nuclear material on roads, highways and public railways, placing it into the most vulnerable locations and inviting terrorist interventions.
At the nuclear summit, David Miliband fronted his brother Ed's policy in the Labour manifesto he authored. The manifesto claims: "We have created Britain's first ever National Security Strategy to strengthen our response to fast-moving and interconnected threats, from terrorism and nuclear proliferation … We will fight for multilateral disarmament, working for a world free of nuclear weapons, in the Non Proliferation Treaty Review conference and beyond – combining support for civilian nuclear energy with concerted action against proliferation."
This policy is insane, hugely increasing global insecurity. It is out of the nuclear frying pan, into the atomic fire!
Dr David LowryFormer director, European Proliferation Information Centre
The recycling of plutonium is the most dangerous counter-terrorism and non-proliferation policy imaginable. It will normalise the use of the prime nuclear explosive material in international commerce, and ensure the movement from secured nuclear sites of huge quantities of weapons-usable nuclear material on roads, highways and public railways, placing it into the most vulnerable locations and inviting terrorist interventions.
At the nuclear summit, David Miliband fronted his brother Ed's policy in the Labour manifesto he authored. The manifesto claims: "We have created Britain's first ever National Security Strategy to strengthen our response to fast-moving and interconnected threats, from terrorism and nuclear proliferation … We will fight for multilateral disarmament, working for a world free of nuclear weapons, in the Non Proliferation Treaty Review conference and beyond – combining support for civilian nuclear energy with concerted action against proliferation."
This policy is insane, hugely increasing global insecurity. It is out of the nuclear frying pan, into the atomic fire!
Dr David LowryFormer director, European Proliferation Information Centre
Completion of 300 Area Waste Sites Meets TPA Milestone
RICHLAND, Wash. – The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) met a Tri-Party Agreement (TPA) milestone by completing cleanup work on 11 different waste sites at Hanford’s 300 Area just north of Richland, Wash.
Work on the waste sites began in 2002 and was completed in April by DOE’s River Corridor contractor, Washington Closure Hanford.
During that time, 426,000 tons of soil and debris were removed from the waste sites, with the most significant volumes coming from a waste site called the 618-7 Burial Ground. Volumes of waste in the group of waste sites ranged in size from 10 tons to 178,000 tons removed.
The TPA milestone required that cleanup work be completed before December 31, 2012 at these waste sites: 300-8, 300-18, 300-VTS, 600-47, 600-259, 618-2, 618-3, 618-5, 618-7, 618-8, and 618-13.
Of the 11 waste sites, six were surface sites with smaller volumes of waste, while five of the burial grounds had larger volumes and more significant hazards. One of the most hazardous and challenging burial grounds was 618-7, which held more than 800 barrels of hazardous materials, twenty large contaminated stainless steel tanks, 100 drums of zircaloy chips and extensive amounts of soil and debris containing lead contamination.
DOE’s former contractor, Bechtel Hanford Inc., began work on all but a few of the sites. The cleanup work was later transferred to Washington Closure Hanford when DOE selected the company to lead the River Corridor Closure Project in 2005.
“What we learned from the hazards of the early waste sites gave us a tremendous leg up on the tougher burial grounds,” said Dave Brockman, Manager of the Richland Operations Office. “Our contractors gained a great deal of knowledge about how to safely and efficiently work these hazardous burial grounds.”
John Darby, a project manager for Washington Closure who worked on several of the sites said that work at the 618-2 Burial Ground, “fundamentally changed the way we clean up waste sites at Hanford – from how we protect people to how we manage the site and unknown items we discover along the way. It totally changed our approach to remediation,” said Darby.
With the completion of the burial grounds, most of which were outside the 300 Area perimeter fence, work has shifted to waste sites inside the fence. Most of the remaining sites are associated with buildings that must be removed in order to reach the waste sites underneath.
Work on the waste sites began in 2002 and was completed in April by DOE’s River Corridor contractor, Washington Closure Hanford.
During that time, 426,000 tons of soil and debris were removed from the waste sites, with the most significant volumes coming from a waste site called the 618-7 Burial Ground. Volumes of waste in the group of waste sites ranged in size from 10 tons to 178,000 tons removed.
The TPA milestone required that cleanup work be completed before December 31, 2012 at these waste sites: 300-8, 300-18, 300-VTS, 600-47, 600-259, 618-2, 618-3, 618-5, 618-7, 618-8, and 618-13.
Of the 11 waste sites, six were surface sites with smaller volumes of waste, while five of the burial grounds had larger volumes and more significant hazards. One of the most hazardous and challenging burial grounds was 618-7, which held more than 800 barrels of hazardous materials, twenty large contaminated stainless steel tanks, 100 drums of zircaloy chips and extensive amounts of soil and debris containing lead contamination.
DOE’s former contractor, Bechtel Hanford Inc., began work on all but a few of the sites. The cleanup work was later transferred to Washington Closure Hanford when DOE selected the company to lead the River Corridor Closure Project in 2005.
“What we learned from the hazards of the early waste sites gave us a tremendous leg up on the tougher burial grounds,” said Dave Brockman, Manager of the Richland Operations Office. “Our contractors gained a great deal of knowledge about how to safely and efficiently work these hazardous burial grounds.”
John Darby, a project manager for Washington Closure who worked on several of the sites said that work at the 618-2 Burial Ground, “fundamentally changed the way we clean up waste sites at Hanford – from how we protect people to how we manage the site and unknown items we discover along the way. It totally changed our approach to remediation,” said Darby.
With the completion of the burial grounds, most of which were outside the 300 Area perimeter fence, work has shifted to waste sites inside the fence. Most of the remaining sites are associated with buildings that must be removed in order to reach the waste sites underneath.
DOE Awards Small Business Contract for Environmental Remediation Project at the Paducah Site
Lexington, KY– The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) today awarded a small-business contract to LATA Environmental Services of Kentucky, LLC, of Westerville, Ohio. The cost-plus-awardfee contract is estimated at approximately $285 million and will continue the environmental remediation project at the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant in Paducah, Kentucky. The contract was awarded based on the best value to DOE. Under this contract, LATA Environmental Services of Kentucky, LLC will be responsible for
completing the following remediation activities:
Groundwater removal and treatment
Containment of the site’s burial ground materials and inactive facilities disposition
Surface soil removal, treatment, and containment
Surface water treatment and sediment removal
Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB) disposal
Environmental monitoring and reporting
Waste disposal and project support
completing the following remediation activities:
Groundwater removal and treatment
Containment of the site’s burial ground materials and inactive facilities disposition
Surface soil removal, treatment, and containment
Surface water treatment and sediment removal
Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB) disposal
Environmental monitoring and reporting
Waste disposal and project support
WIPP Trucks Surpass 10 Million Loaded Miles
CARLSBAD, N.M., April 19, 2010 – The U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) Carlsbad Field Office said drivers, who haul defense-related transuranic (TRU) waste to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, surpassed 10 million safe, loaded miles. The first of more than 8,400 shipments to WIPP arrived 11 years ago from Los Alamos National Laboratory in northern New Mexico.
“There’s no doubt, some of the best drivers in the transportation industry work for WIPP,”said Dr. Dave Moody, Carlsbad Field Office manager. Loaded miles, he explained, are the number of miles traveled hauling a waste payload. The milestone shipment contained contact-handled TRU waste that originated from the Hanford Site in Washington State.
“If you consider round-trips, our trucks have traveled 20 million miles on the nation’s highways without a serious injury or release of radioactive material. I am extremely proud of the WIPP transportation system and all of those dedicated to ensuring the safety of our shipments,” added Moody. Two transportation carriers, CAST Specialty Transportation of Henderson, Colo. and Visionary Solutions LLC out of Oak Ridge, Tenn. contract to DOE to haul waste for WIPP. WIPP
“There’s no doubt, some of the best drivers in the transportation industry work for WIPP,”said Dr. Dave Moody, Carlsbad Field Office manager. Loaded miles, he explained, are the number of miles traveled hauling a waste payload. The milestone shipment contained contact-handled TRU waste that originated from the Hanford Site in Washington State.
“If you consider round-trips, our trucks have traveled 20 million miles on the nation’s highways without a serious injury or release of radioactive material. I am extremely proud of the WIPP transportation system and all of those dedicated to ensuring the safety of our shipments,” added Moody. Two transportation carriers, CAST Specialty Transportation of Henderson, Colo. and Visionary Solutions LLC out of Oak Ridge, Tenn. contract to DOE to haul waste for WIPP. WIPP
Tuesday, April 27, 2010
Hanford Cleanup: The First 20 Years
This report was written and produced by the Oregon Department of Energy’s Nuclear Safety Division,
with the support of U.S. Department of Energy Grant #DE-FG06-RL14780.
http://www.oregon.gov/ENERGY/NUCSAF/docs/HanfordFirst20years.pdf
with the support of U.S. Department of Energy Grant #DE-FG06-RL14780.
http://www.oregon.gov/ENERGY/NUCSAF/docs/HanfordFirst20years.pdf
Tuesday, April 20, 2010
NRC HISTORIAN RECEIVES PRESTIGIOUS AWARD FOR YUCCA MOUNTAIN BOOK
J. Samuel Walker, an NRC historian for more than 30 years, has been awarded the Richard W. Leopold Prize for his book “Yucca Mountain: The Development of Radioactive Waste Policy in the U.S.” The prize is given every two years by the Organization of American Historians (OAH) for the best book written by a government historian. In the book, published by University of California Press, Walker traces the U.S. government’s efforts to deal with radioactive waste from the Manhattan Project through the 1987 designation of Yucca Mountain as a high-level waste repository. According to the OAH, the book is “solidly researched and effectively written” and makes “an original and insightful contribution to understanding this important story.” The OAH also noted the book includes “perspectives beyond the government, especially interest groups and protest movements.”
DOE EM Testimonials (1)
DOE EM Testimonials (1)Assistant Secretary Triay's Written Statement before the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development (March 16, 2010)from DOE EM Testimonials by DOE Environmental Management
Monday, April 19, 2010
Community ready for talks on future of Hanford lands
Herald editorial staff; Sivula Chris444 words26 March 2010Tri-City HeraldTRICA8English(c) 2010 The Tri-City Herald. All Rights Reserved.
Community leaders are right to push for more say in Hanford’s future, and they need to keep up the pressure.
Planning for life after cleanup needs to be a partnership between the Tri-Cities and the Department of Energy.
In a recent letter to Ines Triay, DOE assistant secretary for environmental management, Tri-City political leaders and economic development officials turned up the heat.
Forging a common vision doesn’t seem out of reach, but the process could benefit from a greater sense of urgency.
Community leaders are right to push for more say in Hanford’s future, and they need to keep up the pressure.
Planning for life after cleanup needs to be a partnership between the Tri-Cities and the Department of Energy.
In a recent letter to Ines Triay, DOE assistant secretary for environmental management, Tri-City political leaders and economic development officials turned up the heat.
Forging a common vision doesn’t seem out of reach, but the process could benefit from a greater sense of urgency.
Tests show DOE waste meets state standards
Judy Fahys /By Judy Fahys The Salt Lake Tribune/619 words/5 April 2010/The Salt Lake Tribune/SLTR
/nglish/© 2010 The Salt Lake Tribune. Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning. All Rights Reserved.
Samples of the depleted uranium waste from a government cleanup in South Carolina show that it meets a key safety limit, said the Utah Department of Environmental Quality.
State regulators heard about the test results Monday from a Tennessee laboratory, which sampled 171 of the 5,400 drums sent most recently to Utah from the Savannah River Project cleanup for technetium-99, a waste product of reprocessing.
Gov. Gary Herbert requested the tests after the Healthy Environment Alliance of Utah and a scientist at the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research challenged whether the Savannah River DU has too much technetium-99 for EnergySolutions Inc.'s low- level radioactive waste landfill in Tooele County.
In its initial assessment years ago, the U.S. Department of Energy had checked samples from just 33 of about 15,000 drums. And, because of the way the waste was generated, there was a potential for an excess of contaminants that are only permitted in Utah at trace levels, the environmental groups said.
"We took a much more conservative and thorough approach to sampling," said DEQ Director Amanda Smith. "We believe that given questions raised about the nature of this waste, the state should do its due diligence and perform additional tests."
/nglish/© 2010 The Salt Lake Tribune. Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning. All Rights Reserved.
Samples of the depleted uranium waste from a government cleanup in South Carolina show that it meets a key safety limit, said the Utah Department of Environmental Quality.
State regulators heard about the test results Monday from a Tennessee laboratory, which sampled 171 of the 5,400 drums sent most recently to Utah from the Savannah River Project cleanup for technetium-99, a waste product of reprocessing.
Gov. Gary Herbert requested the tests after the Healthy Environment Alliance of Utah and a scientist at the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research challenged whether the Savannah River DU has too much technetium-99 for EnergySolutions Inc.'s low- level radioactive waste landfill in Tooele County.
In its initial assessment years ago, the U.S. Department of Energy had checked samples from just 33 of about 15,000 drums. And, because of the way the waste was generated, there was a potential for an excess of contaminants that are only permitted in Utah at trace levels, the environmental groups said.
"We took a much more conservative and thorough approach to sampling," said DEQ Director Amanda Smith. "We believe that given questions raised about the nature of this waste, the state should do its due diligence and perform additional tests."
Triay says Yucca decision won't delay Hanford cleanup; Murkowski differs
Derek Sands, Elaine Hiruo /907 words/22 March 2010/Inside Energy/IE/13/ISSN: 1556-3928/English/(c) 2010 McGraw-Hill, Inc. /
The Obama administration's decision to terminate a long-planned nuclear-waste repository in Nevada will not disrupt the Energy Department's cleanup schedule at a highly contaminated Hanford Site in Washington state, a senior DOE official said last week, despite warnings from a prominent senator that delays will occur and states will file lawsuits in response."It is not slowing down the current work," Ines Triay, assistant secretary for environmental management, said at a hearing Wednesday. "We are talking about that decision not being on the critical path, not preventing the cleanup at Hanford to move forward. ... [Current] activities do not necessitate a decision for disposal, especially because we are going to be producing a very protective waste form." Waste from Hanford, a former nuclear weapons facility, was destined for the national nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain in Nevada until the administration decided to kill the project last year. Washington's attorney general, Rob McKenna, has expressed concern that the decision will mean delays at Hanford, one of the largest nuclear cleanup projects in the world.
The Obama administration's decision to terminate a long-planned nuclear-waste repository in Nevada will not disrupt the Energy Department's cleanup schedule at a highly contaminated Hanford Site in Washington state, a senior DOE official said last week, despite warnings from a prominent senator that delays will occur and states will file lawsuits in response."It is not slowing down the current work," Ines Triay, assistant secretary for environmental management, said at a hearing Wednesday. "We are talking about that decision not being on the critical path, not preventing the cleanup at Hanford to move forward. ... [Current] activities do not necessitate a decision for disposal, especially because we are going to be producing a very protective waste form." Waste from Hanford, a former nuclear weapons facility, was destined for the national nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain in Nevada until the administration decided to kill the project last year. Washington's attorney general, Rob McKenna, has expressed concern that the decision will mean delays at Hanford, one of the largest nuclear cleanup projects in the world.
Tank farm safety management criticized
Annette Cary;Herald staff writer Cary Annette774 words19 March 2010Tri-City HeraldTRIC B1English(c) 2010 The Tri-City Herald. All Rights Reserved.
A federal oversight board has concerns about whether the safety management system used at Hanford’s tank farms is adequate. The tank farm contractor’s work planning directives “are unnecessarily complex and confusing,” among other problems, said a letter sent by the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board to Ines Triay, the Department of Energy assistant secretary for environmental management. The safety board requested a report within 90 days outlining actions taken or planned by the DOE Hanford Office of River Protection and its tank farm contractor, Washington River Protection Solutions (WRPS). The Office of River Protection also has had concerns and sent a letter to its contractor five months ago saying that “less-than adequate work packages and procedures have been released for work.” “This has resulted in work being stopped, workers performing steps out of sequence, workers not performing steps when they are required to be performed, work being performed to the wrong requirements and personnel being placed at risk,” it said.
A federal oversight board has concerns about whether the safety management system used at Hanford’s tank farms is adequate. The tank farm contractor’s work planning directives “are unnecessarily complex and confusing,” among other problems, said a letter sent by the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board to Ines Triay, the Department of Energy assistant secretary for environmental management. The safety board requested a report within 90 days outlining actions taken or planned by the DOE Hanford Office of River Protection and its tank farm contractor, Washington River Protection Solutions (WRPS). The Office of River Protection also has had concerns and sent a letter to its contractor five months ago saying that “less-than adequate work packages and procedures have been released for work.” “This has resulted in work being stopped, workers performing steps out of sequence, workers not performing steps when they are required to be performed, work being performed to the wrong requirements and personnel being placed at risk,” it said.
Institute for Energy and Environmental Research, Takoma Park, Md; IEER: French-Style Nuclear Reprocessing Will Not Solve U.S. Nuclear Waste Problems
285 words/23 April 2010/Energy Weekly News/ENRGWK/122/English/ Copyright 2010 Energy Weekly News via NewsRx.com /
2010 APR 23 - (VerticalNews.com) -- Contrary to some prevailing opinion, reprocessing would not eliminate the need for a deep geologic disposal program to replace Yucca Mountain. It aggravates waste, proliferation, and cost problems. The volume of waste to be disposed of in deep geologic repository is increased about six times on a life-cycle basis in the French approach compared to the once-through no-reprocessing approach of the United States.
A new report by the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research (IEER), a nonprofit scientific research group, shows that France uses less than 1 percent of the natural uranium resource, contrary to an impression among some policy makers. The report has several recommendations for President Obama's Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future, which was created to address U.S. nuclear waste issues after the administration's cancellation of the Yucca Mountain program.
. Arjun Makhijani, the author of the report: "In recent years, a 'French fever' has gripped the promoters of nuclear power in the United States. Praise of France's management of spent fuel by reprocessing, including its use of the extracted plutonium as fuel in its nuclear power reactors, is now routinely heard. But it is a fantasy on the scale of the 1950s "too cheap to meter" mythology about nuclear power to imagine that 90 or 95 percent of the "energy value" of U.S. spent fuel can be extracted by reprocessing."
2010 APR 23 - (VerticalNews.com) -- Contrary to some prevailing opinion, reprocessing would not eliminate the need for a deep geologic disposal program to replace Yucca Mountain. It aggravates waste, proliferation, and cost problems. The volume of waste to be disposed of in deep geologic repository is increased about six times on a life-cycle basis in the French approach compared to the once-through no-reprocessing approach of the United States.
A new report by the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research (IEER), a nonprofit scientific research group, shows that France uses less than 1 percent of the natural uranium resource, contrary to an impression among some policy makers. The report has several recommendations for President Obama's Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future, which was created to address U.S. nuclear waste issues after the administration's cancellation of the Yucca Mountain program.
. Arjun Makhijani, the author of the report: "In recent years, a 'French fever' has gripped the promoters of nuclear power in the United States. Praise of France's management of spent fuel by reprocessing, including its use of the extracted plutonium as fuel in its nuclear power reactors, is now routinely heard. But it is a fantasy on the scale of the 1950s "too cheap to meter" mythology about nuclear power to imagine that 90 or 95 percent of the "energy value" of U.S. spent fuel can be extracted by reprocessing."
Yucca closing takes timeout
Steve Tetreault /651 words/15 April 2010/The Las Vegas Review-Journal/LVGS/1A/English/© 2010 The Las Vegas Review-Journal. Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning. All Rights Reserved. /By STEVE TETREAULT STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU
WASHINGTON - The Department of Energy on Wednesday halted dismantling of the Yucca Mountain project, offering a 21-day timeout so federal judges can weigh the latest legal challenges to the planned scrapping of the nuclear waste project.
The freeze until May 5 appears to prevent for now the termination of the department's contract with USA Repository Services, the project's main operating company. According to a document filed in court, the Department of Energy was to issue a termination letter Friday, with the contractor stopping work immediately. Also during the period, "we aren't planning to take any actions to eliminate positions, terminate contracts or cut the work force," DOE spokeswoman Stephanie Mueller said. Fewer than 600 workers remain on the Las Vegas-based project, which has been shrinking through transfers, layoffs and attrition since the Obama administration began bringing it to an end.
WASHINGTON - The Department of Energy on Wednesday halted dismantling of the Yucca Mountain project, offering a 21-day timeout so federal judges can weigh the latest legal challenges to the planned scrapping of the nuclear waste project.
The freeze until May 5 appears to prevent for now the termination of the department's contract with USA Repository Services, the project's main operating company. According to a document filed in court, the Department of Energy was to issue a termination letter Friday, with the contractor stopping work immediately. Also during the period, "we aren't planning to take any actions to eliminate positions, terminate contracts or cut the work force," DOE spokeswoman Stephanie Mueller said. Fewer than 600 workers remain on the Las Vegas-based project, which has been shrinking through transfers, layoffs and attrition since the Obama administration began bringing it to an end.
Plutonium level in waste to triple
By Rob Pavey, The Augusta Chronicle, Ga. /McClatchy-Tribune Regional News/394 words/15 April 2010/The Augusta Chronicle (MCT)/KRTAG/English/Distributed by McClatchy - Tribune Information Services /
Apr. 15--The amount of plutonium in high-level waste converted to glass at Savannah River Site will nearly triple this year as a consequence of the U.S. Energy Department's decision to abandon its Yucca Mountain waste repository. The SRS-based Defense Waste Processing Facility uses a process called vitrification to convert liquid radioactive wastes into a solid glass form suitable for long-term storage and permanent disposal. Plutonium is among many dangerous materials in the 36 million gallons of waste left behind at SRS by decades of nuclear weapons production. In 2008, as the department prepared its application to license the Yucca Mountain site in Nevada -- where vitrified waste was to be buried -- SRS lowered plutonium levels in vitrified waste from 2,500 grams per cubic meter to 897 grams per cubic meter. The reduction would allow SRS waste to meet Yucca Mountain's acceptance criteria -- but would have increased the number of canisters needed to hold the remaining vitrified waste from 4,000 to 9,000, according to a 2008 memo. Once the Energy Department made the decision to stop work on Yucca Mountain, the plutonium levels were restored to the higher concentrations in hopes of reducing the need for so many canisters, according to site officials.
Apr. 15--The amount of plutonium in high-level waste converted to glass at Savannah River Site will nearly triple this year as a consequence of the U.S. Energy Department's decision to abandon its Yucca Mountain waste repository. The SRS-based Defense Waste Processing Facility uses a process called vitrification to convert liquid radioactive wastes into a solid glass form suitable for long-term storage and permanent disposal. Plutonium is among many dangerous materials in the 36 million gallons of waste left behind at SRS by decades of nuclear weapons production. In 2008, as the department prepared its application to license the Yucca Mountain site in Nevada -- where vitrified waste was to be buried -- SRS lowered plutonium levels in vitrified waste from 2,500 grams per cubic meter to 897 grams per cubic meter. The reduction would allow SRS waste to meet Yucca Mountain's acceptance criteria -- but would have increased the number of canisters needed to hold the remaining vitrified waste from 4,000 to 9,000, according to a 2008 memo. Once the Energy Department made the decision to stop work on Yucca Mountain, the plutonium levels were restored to the higher concentrations in hopes of reducing the need for so many canisters, according to site officials.
STATEMENT OF DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY PRESS SECRETARY STEPHANIE MUELLER ABOUT YUCCA MOUNTAIN
139 words/14 April 2010/States News Service/SNS(c) 2010 States News Service
The following information was released by the U.S. Department of Energy:Statement of Department of Energy Press Secretary Stephanie Mueller about Yucca Mountain
"We are confident that we have the legal authority to withdraw the application for the Yucca Mountain repository. However, the parties need some time to prepare and the Court needs time to consider the issues. We are proposing to halt temporarily any actions to shut down Yucca Mountain simply to provide that time. As the Secretary has said consistently, Yucca Mountain is not an option and he looks forward to receiving the recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Commission for the long term management of our spent nuclear fuel and nuclear waste."
The following information was released by the U.S. Department of Energy:Statement of Department of Energy Press Secretary Stephanie Mueller about Yucca Mountain
"We are confident that we have the legal authority to withdraw the application for the Yucca Mountain repository. However, the parties need some time to prepare and the Court needs time to consider the issues. We are proposing to halt temporarily any actions to shut down Yucca Mountain simply to provide that time. As the Secretary has said consistently, Yucca Mountain is not an option and he looks forward to receiving the recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Commission for the long term management of our spent nuclear fuel and nuclear waste."
DC's oversight of Hanford construction increases
By SHANNON DININNY /Associated Press Writer412 words/14 April 2010/8:24/Associated Press Newswires/APRS/English/(c) 2010. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.
YAKIMA, Wash. (AP) - Federal officials in Washington, D.C., are assuming a larger role overseeing construction of a massive plant to treat radioactive waste in south-central Washington.
The $12 billion vitrification plant at the Hanford nuclear reservation is among the largest industrial construction projects nationally, both in cost and sheer size. The plant is being built to convert highly radioactive waste into a safe form for permanent disposal.
The Energy Department has largely overseen plant construction from its Office of River Protection at Hanford. According to an internal Energy Department memo, dated March 31 and obtained by The Associated Press, a full-time staffer in Washington D.C. will oversee the project, thus ensuring someone in the nation's capitol is intricately involved with the high-profile project.
The move allows the project director at Hanford greater access to resources in the nation's capital, Energy Department spokeswoman Carrie Meyer said.
"The Department of Energy remains committed to ensuring that the Hanford waste treatment plant project is completed safely on time and on budget," she said.
YAKIMA, Wash. (AP) - Federal officials in Washington, D.C., are assuming a larger role overseeing construction of a massive plant to treat radioactive waste in south-central Washington.
The $12 billion vitrification plant at the Hanford nuclear reservation is among the largest industrial construction projects nationally, both in cost and sheer size. The plant is being built to convert highly radioactive waste into a safe form for permanent disposal.
The Energy Department has largely overseen plant construction from its Office of River Protection at Hanford. According to an internal Energy Department memo, dated March 31 and obtained by The Associated Press, a full-time staffer in Washington D.C. will oversee the project, thus ensuring someone in the nation's capitol is intricately involved with the high-profile project.
The move allows the project director at Hanford greater access to resources in the nation's capital, Energy Department spokeswoman Carrie Meyer said.
"The Department of Energy remains committed to ensuring that the Hanford waste treatment plant project is completed safely on time and on budget," she said.
Hanford reactor may be removed instead of cocooned
By ANNETTE CARY 846 words/14 April 2010/12:11Associated Press Newswires
APRSEnglish(c) 2010. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.
TRI-CITIES, Wash. (AP) - A decision could be made in June on whether to raze Hanford's K East Reactor, a break from the practice of leaving reactor cores to radioactively decay for decades.The Department of Energy has developed a tentative plan for pulling out the guts of the reactor, but continues to gather more information to make sure the work could be done safely and economically.The plan for Hanford's nine production reactors -- other than B Reactor which may be preserved as a museum -- has been to cocoon them. They are torn down to little more than their radioactive cores, reroofed and sealed up for 75 years to let radiation decay to more manageable levels.But the K East Reactor has significant contamination of soil adjacent and possibly beneath the reactor. It's left from past leaks from its cooling basin, which was used to store irradiated fuel that was not processed to remove plutonium after the Cold War ended.
APRSEnglish(c) 2010. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.
TRI-CITIES, Wash. (AP) - A decision could be made in June on whether to raze Hanford's K East Reactor, a break from the practice of leaving reactor cores to radioactively decay for decades.The Department of Energy has developed a tentative plan for pulling out the guts of the reactor, but continues to gather more information to make sure the work could be done safely and economically.The plan for Hanford's nine production reactors -- other than B Reactor which may be preserved as a museum -- has been to cocoon them. They are torn down to little more than their radioactive cores, reroofed and sealed up for 75 years to let radiation decay to more manageable levels.But the K East Reactor has significant contamination of soil adjacent and possibly beneath the reactor. It's left from past leaks from its cooling basin, which was used to store irradiated fuel that was not processed to remove plutonium after the Cold War ended.
Washington state sues to stop federal government from abandoning Yucca Mountain waste site
By SHANNON DININNY Associated Press Writer509 words13 April 201018:27
Associated Press NewswiresAPRSEnglish(c) 2010. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.
YAKIMA, Wash. (AP) - Washington state filed suit Tuesday to stop the federal government from permanently abandoning the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository, marking the latest clash in a long-standing dispute over where the nation's nastiest radioactive waste should be stored.
Waste and spent nuclear fuel from south-central Washington's Tri-Cities, site of the highly contaminated Hanford nuclear reservation and the Northwest's only commercial nuclear plant, had long been intended to go to Yucca Mountain.Opponents in Nevada for years have been fighting the proposed desert mountain repository 90 miles from Las Vegas.The U.S. Department of Energy has said the site is no longer considered an option for radioactive waste storage. It has a motion pending to withdraw its license application to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission "with prejudice," which would permanently remove it from consideration as the nation's radioactive waste repository.
Associated Press NewswiresAPRSEnglish(c) 2010. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.
YAKIMA, Wash. (AP) - Washington state filed suit Tuesday to stop the federal government from permanently abandoning the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository, marking the latest clash in a long-standing dispute over where the nation's nastiest radioactive waste should be stored.
Waste and spent nuclear fuel from south-central Washington's Tri-Cities, site of the highly contaminated Hanford nuclear reservation and the Northwest's only commercial nuclear plant, had long been intended to go to Yucca Mountain.Opponents in Nevada for years have been fighting the proposed desert mountain repository 90 miles from Las Vegas.The U.S. Department of Energy has said the site is no longer considered an option for radioactive waste storage. It has a motion pending to withdraw its license application to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission "with prejudice," which would permanently remove it from consideration as the nation's radioactive waste repository.
Nuclear Waste May Get A Second Life
1315 words April 2010 NPR: Morning Edition MGED English © 2010 NPR®. All rights reserved. No quotes from the materials contained herein may be used in any media without attribution to NPR. This transcript may not be reproduced in whole or in part without prior written permission. For permission to reuse NPR content, see http://www.npr.org/about/permissioninfo.html.
RENEE MONTAGNE, host:
The Obama administration is promoting nuclear power, and that's complicated by the fact that it has also put an end to plans to bury nuclear waste in Yucca Mountain, Nevada.So a blue-ribbon committee is pondering what to do with the waste. One option they're considering is a process that would dramatically reduce its radioactive lifetime, as NPR's Richard Harris reports.
RICHARD HARRIS: Less than one percent of spent reactor fuel is made up of radioactive elements that last hundreds of thousands of years.And Sherrell Greene at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee says the technology to remove those troublesome elements from waste is as old as nuclear reactors themselves.
Mr. SHERRELL GREENE (Oak Ridge National Laboratory): So you're standing at the face of the X-10 graphite reactor, the world's first continuously operating reactor...
HARRIS: Greene points up at a 24-foot-tall graphite block that's dotted with holes about the size of corks. It looks nothing like a power reactor because it never was. Instead, it was called an atomic pile. And back in the 1940s, the world's first nuclear engineers used long metal rods to slide slugs of uranium into the holes along the front face. Nuclear reactions inside the pile turned uranium into slugs to plutonium and a host of other radioactive elements.
Mr. GREENE: It's hard to see it, but the slugs would fall out the back and there's a trench. And the trench would – you know, we see the transport trench right here, and it would be moved along to the reprocessing building.
RENEE MONTAGNE, host:
The Obama administration is promoting nuclear power, and that's complicated by the fact that it has also put an end to plans to bury nuclear waste in Yucca Mountain, Nevada.So a blue-ribbon committee is pondering what to do with the waste. One option they're considering is a process that would dramatically reduce its radioactive lifetime, as NPR's Richard Harris reports.
RICHARD HARRIS: Less than one percent of spent reactor fuel is made up of radioactive elements that last hundreds of thousands of years.And Sherrell Greene at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee says the technology to remove those troublesome elements from waste is as old as nuclear reactors themselves.
Mr. SHERRELL GREENE (Oak Ridge National Laboratory): So you're standing at the face of the X-10 graphite reactor, the world's first continuously operating reactor...
HARRIS: Greene points up at a 24-foot-tall graphite block that's dotted with holes about the size of corks. It looks nothing like a power reactor because it never was. Instead, it was called an atomic pile. And back in the 1940s, the world's first nuclear engineers used long metal rods to slide slugs of uranium into the holes along the front face. Nuclear reactions inside the pile turned uranium into slugs to plutonium and a host of other radioactive elements.
Mr. GREENE: It's hard to see it, but the slugs would fall out the back and there's a trench. And the trench would – you know, we see the transport trench right here, and it would be moved along to the reprocessing building.
Difficult Hanford cleanup job begins on hot cells
By ANNETTE CARY 652 words9 April 201011:37Associated Press NewswiresAPRS
English(c) 2010. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.
TRI-CITIES, Wash. (AP) - Work has begun to stabilize and remove highly contaminated hot cells that stand up to three stories high at Hanford.It is the most difficult, complex and hazardous work that Washington Closure Hanford expects to face in demolishing old nuclear facilities at Hanford along the Columbia River, said Tom Kisenwether of Washington Closure.The five hot cells being cleaned up are in the 324 Building in Hanford's 300 Area just north of Richland. They were built to allow Hanford employees to work with highly radioactive materials without being exposed to radiation.Workers would stand outside the hot cells and use controls to operate manipulators inside the cells, watching what they were doing through leaded-glass windows.The tallest of the cells is narrow and stands three stories tall. But the largest has dimensions of 24-by-30-by-16 feet.
English(c) 2010. The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.
TRI-CITIES, Wash. (AP) - Work has begun to stabilize and remove highly contaminated hot cells that stand up to three stories high at Hanford.It is the most difficult, complex and hazardous work that Washington Closure Hanford expects to face in demolishing old nuclear facilities at Hanford along the Columbia River, said Tom Kisenwether of Washington Closure.The five hot cells being cleaned up are in the 324 Building in Hanford's 300 Area just north of Richland. They were built to allow Hanford employees to work with highly radioactive materials without being exposed to radiation.Workers would stand outside the hot cells and use controls to operate manipulators inside the cells, watching what they were doing through leaded-glass windows.The tallest of the cells is narrow and stands three stories tall. But the largest has dimensions of 24-by-30-by-16 feet.
State considers Yucca Mountain legal options
Annette Cary;Herald staff writer Cary Annette447 words8 April 2010Tri-City HeraldTRICB6English(c) 2010 The Tri-City Herald. All Rights Reserved.
The state of Washington is considering its options after the Nuclear Regulatory Commission decided to see what happens in federal court regarding the Yucca Mountain, Nev., nuclear repository.
Last month the Department of Energy filed to permanently withdraw its license application with the NRC for Yucca Mountain. The state of Washington filed to become a party to the NRC proceedings in order to have legal standing to oppose the withdrawal.
The state of Washington is considering its options after the Nuclear Regulatory Commission decided to see what happens in federal court regarding the Yucca Mountain, Nev., nuclear repository.
Last month the Department of Energy filed to permanently withdraw its license application with the NRC for Yucca Mountain. The state of Washington filed to become a party to the NRC proceedings in order to have legal standing to oppose the withdrawal.
Government waste on nuclear waste
Jack Spencer and Nicolas Loris, SPECIAL TO THE WASHINGTON TIMES 824 wordsThe Washington TimesWATI02English© 2010 Washington Times Library. Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning. All rights reserved. 8 April 2010
A waste of taxpayer dollars. That's what those who oppose using Yucca Mountain as a nuclear materials repository say.They point to the roughly $10 billion that already has been spent on Yucca, which they say was doomed to fail from the start. Recognizing this, so the argument goes, President Obama is demanding that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) cease its work on the Yucca project - killing it for good.
Seems reasonable. No sense wasting more money on a project with no future. Look closer, though, and it becomes clear that closing Yucca Mountain is the real waste. The real story here is about government ineptitude, not wasteful spending.
A waste of taxpayer dollars. That's what those who oppose using Yucca Mountain as a nuclear materials repository say.They point to the roughly $10 billion that already has been spent on Yucca, which they say was doomed to fail from the start. Recognizing this, so the argument goes, President Obama is demanding that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) cease its work on the Yucca project - killing it for good.
Seems reasonable. No sense wasting more money on a project with no future. Look closer, though, and it becomes clear that closing Yucca Mountain is the real waste. The real story here is about government ineptitude, not wasteful spending.
DOE Acceptance Of States' Push To Preserve Yucca Raises Questions
800 words7 April 2010Energy Washington WeekIEPAVol. 7, No. 14
EnglishCopyright © 2010, Inside Washington Publishers. All rights reserved. Also available in print and online as part of www.EnergyWashington.com.
DOE's argument that it has all necessary authority to seek to withdraw its license application for the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository -- and its decision not to oppose state and local governments' intervention in the administrative proceedings -- is raising questions among state utility regulators who are trying to decipher DOE's legal strategy.
EnglishCopyright © 2010, Inside Washington Publishers. All rights reserved. Also available in print and online as part of www.EnergyWashington.com.
DOE's argument that it has all necessary authority to seek to withdraw its license application for the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository -- and its decision not to oppose state and local governments' intervention in the administrative proceedings -- is raising questions among state utility regulators who are trying to decipher DOE's legal strategy.
From Microsoft to micronuclear ; Turning federal problems into free-market solutions
THE WASHINGTON TIMES 550 words6 April 2010The Washington TimesWATIB02
English© 2010 Washington Times Library. Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning. All rights reserved.
Green groupies of government who fancy themselves on the leading edge of chic-think for their opposition to nuclear power had better rethink their style. Joining - in fact, leading - the ranks of those who think nuke is cool is none other than the man who defines progressive ideas: superentrepreneur Bill Gates.
Those anti-nuke obstructionists suddenly find themselves looking very 20th century as the co-founder of Microsoft moves ahead with futuristic plans to deliver clean, inexpensive power to an energy- needy world.
The software genius already has remade the planet once by leading the personal computer revolution and helping millions of individuals worldwide create wealth. Now he stands to do so again by backing a next-generation nuclear technology called a traveling-wave reactor.
At a February conference in Long Beach, Calif., Mr. Gates waxed enthusiastically about his plans. "If you gave me only one wish for the next 50 years, it'd be to invent the thing that halves the cost of energy with no carbon dioxide. This is the one with the greatest impact," he told the TED (Technology, Entertainment, Design) Conference, referring to his project.
English© 2010 Washington Times Library. Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning. All rights reserved.
Green groupies of government who fancy themselves on the leading edge of chic-think for their opposition to nuclear power had better rethink their style. Joining - in fact, leading - the ranks of those who think nuke is cool is none other than the man who defines progressive ideas: superentrepreneur Bill Gates.
Those anti-nuke obstructionists suddenly find themselves looking very 20th century as the co-founder of Microsoft moves ahead with futuristic plans to deliver clean, inexpensive power to an energy- needy world.
The software genius already has remade the planet once by leading the personal computer revolution and helping millions of individuals worldwide create wealth. Now he stands to do so again by backing a next-generation nuclear technology called a traveling-wave reactor.
At a February conference in Long Beach, Calif., Mr. Gates waxed enthusiastically about his plans. "If you gave me only one wish for the next 50 years, it'd be to invent the thing that halves the cost of energy with no carbon dioxide. This is the one with the greatest impact," he told the TED (Technology, Entertainment, Design) Conference, referring to his project.
Utilities Sue U.S. to Halt Nuclear Waste Fees
By MATTHEW L. WALD ///596 words///6 April 2010/The New York Times/
NYTF//Late Edition - Final/EnglishCopyright 2010 The New York Times Company. All Rights Reserved.
WASHINGTON -- Sixteen utilities and a trade association sued the Energy Department on Monday to halt the government's collection of nuclear waste disposal fees, arguing that the country no longer had a disposal plan after ruling out Yucca Mountain, Nev., as a repository.
The utilities, which filed the lawsuit in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, jointly pay about $750 million a year -- amounting to a tenth of a cent per kilowatt hour -- into the fund. It now stands at about $24 billion and earns about $1 billion annually in interest.
The money was supposed to pay for the development of the Yucca Mountain repository, about 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas, but the Energy Department said last month that it was formally seeking to withdraw its application with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to operate the site.
President Obama had promised while campaigning for office that he would kill the project, in large part at the urging of Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, now the majority leader. But it was also far from clear that the site was technically suitable for waste disposal.
A federal advisory commission on a new waste strategy met for the first time last week, but it is focusing on broad issues like choosing a disposal technology, not finding a new site.
Ellen C. Ginsberg, general counsel for the Nuclear Energy Institute, said there was therefore no longer a basis for collecting the fee. The federal energy secretary makes annual estimates called ''fee adequacy reports,'' based on the cost to build, operate and close up the repository, but there is now no repository to base a cost estimate on, she said.
''Where there is no program being implemented, we don't want to have to pay for something while there's no way to determine whether the number is correct or not,'' she said.
But an Energy Department spokeswoman, Stephanie Mueller, countered that the fees were legally mandated and would eventually go to waste disposal. The advisory commission will recommend how the fees should be handled, she added.
The utilities have been paying into the fund since April 1983. On Friday, the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners, a Washington-based group that represents members of state public service commissions, said in a court filing that the payments should be stopped. It noted that the money was paid by the utilities, but that ultimately the bill was passed to ratepayers.
Two suits have been filed contesting the Obama administration's decision to stop work on Yucca.
Under contracts with the utilities, the Energy Department was to begin taking delivery of the fuel in 1998. It has been sued by many of them and has been forced to pay damages, mostly for the utilities' costs to build additional storage at the reactor sites.
But the waste impasse has gone on so long that in some places, the reactors have been retired and demolished, leaving nothing but small concrete-and-steel silos holding the waste.
Ms. Ginsberg said she hoped that the department would move that waste to a central location, a step the industry said would reduce costs. But the department argues that the 1982 law under which it collects the waste fees does not permit it to use the money for ''interim storage.''
PHOTO: Spent nuclear fuel being moved at the Indian Point Energy Center in Buchanan, N.Y., in 2008. (PHOTOGRAPH BY MICHAEL NAGLE FOR THE NEW YORK TIMES)
Document NYTF000020100406e6460001w
© 2010 Factiva, Inc. All rights reserved.DJ Insider
What's New
Privacy Policy
NYTF//Late Edition - Final/EnglishCopyright 2010 The New York Times Company. All Rights Reserved.
WASHINGTON -- Sixteen utilities and a trade association sued the Energy Department on Monday to halt the government's collection of nuclear waste disposal fees, arguing that the country no longer had a disposal plan after ruling out Yucca Mountain, Nev., as a repository.
The utilities, which filed the lawsuit in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, jointly pay about $750 million a year -- amounting to a tenth of a cent per kilowatt hour -- into the fund. It now stands at about $24 billion and earns about $1 billion annually in interest.
The money was supposed to pay for the development of the Yucca Mountain repository, about 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas, but the Energy Department said last month that it was formally seeking to withdraw its application with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to operate the site.
President Obama had promised while campaigning for office that he would kill the project, in large part at the urging of Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, now the majority leader. But it was also far from clear that the site was technically suitable for waste disposal.
A federal advisory commission on a new waste strategy met for the first time last week, but it is focusing on broad issues like choosing a disposal technology, not finding a new site.
Ellen C. Ginsberg, general counsel for the Nuclear Energy Institute, said there was therefore no longer a basis for collecting the fee. The federal energy secretary makes annual estimates called ''fee adequacy reports,'' based on the cost to build, operate and close up the repository, but there is now no repository to base a cost estimate on, she said.
''Where there is no program being implemented, we don't want to have to pay for something while there's no way to determine whether the number is correct or not,'' she said.
But an Energy Department spokeswoman, Stephanie Mueller, countered that the fees were legally mandated and would eventually go to waste disposal. The advisory commission will recommend how the fees should be handled, she added.
The utilities have been paying into the fund since April 1983. On Friday, the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners, a Washington-based group that represents members of state public service commissions, said in a court filing that the payments should be stopped. It noted that the money was paid by the utilities, but that ultimately the bill was passed to ratepayers.
Two suits have been filed contesting the Obama administration's decision to stop work on Yucca.
Under contracts with the utilities, the Energy Department was to begin taking delivery of the fuel in 1998. It has been sued by many of them and has been forced to pay damages, mostly for the utilities' costs to build additional storage at the reactor sites.
But the waste impasse has gone on so long that in some places, the reactors have been retired and demolished, leaving nothing but small concrete-and-steel silos holding the waste.
Ms. Ginsberg said she hoped that the department would move that waste to a central location, a step the industry said would reduce costs. But the department argues that the 1982 law under which it collects the waste fees does not permit it to use the money for ''interim storage.''
PHOTO: Spent nuclear fuel being moved at the Indian Point Energy Center in Buchanan, N.Y., in 2008. (PHOTOGRAPH BY MICHAEL NAGLE FOR THE NEW YORK TIMES)
Document NYTF000020100406e6460001w
© 2010 Factiva, Inc. All rights reserved.DJ Insider
What's New
Privacy Policy
DOE plan to use FY-10 funds to begin Yucca shutdown challenged
Elaine Hiruo and Derek Sands, Washington 437 words5 April 2010Nuclear FuelNUF14, Volume 35, Issue 7English(c) 2010 McGraw-Hill, Inc.
DOE's plan to reprogram $115 million in fiscal 2010 funds to begin the close-out of the Yucca Mountain repository this year wasn't well received by the top Republican on a House Appropriations subcommittee March 24.
Representative Rodney Frelinghuysen of New Jersey, the senior Republican on the panel's energy and water subcommittee, criticized DOE's action during a hearing on DOE's FY-11 budget request. "What is your authority for doing it?" Frelinghuysen asked Energy Secretary Steven Chu.
The money was part of the $197 million allocation the Yucca Mountain program this fiscal year to continue activities associated with NRC's licensing review of DOE's repository license application. The FY-10 appropriations bill report for energy and water funding states that a DOE reprogramming request must be submitted to House and Senate appropriators and approved before any funds are shifted to different programs or activities.
"You are using fiscal 2010 funds to restructure the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management," Frelinghuysen said. "I think we need some clarity. I know that determination has been made, but quite honestly, I don't think you have the statutory authority to do it."
Chu told the subcommittee that DOE's general counsel had advised him that he could take such action. Chu repeated that assertion in a March 26 letter to subcommittee chairman Peter Visclosky, an Indian Democrat. "My general counsel has studied this matter very closely, and has advised me that we do have the authority within the law to take the reprogramming actions that we have planned," Chu said. "As you know, the Department of Energy sent you a letter on February 17, notifying you of our intent to reprogram funding for FY 2010 for the Office of Civilian and Radioactive Waste Management."
Chu also said in the letter that he does not believe money should be spent on a licensing process that has been suspended, especially in light of the Obama administration's intent to pursue alternatives to a Yucca Mountain repository. "We need to begin actions now to ensure that the shutdown occurs in an orderly fashion that takes into account the impacts on our employees and their families," Chu wrote. He said the department is trying to help affected employees find other jobs within the government for which they are qualified. He added that "an integral part of our plan is to proceed in a manner that preserves all relevant documents and all relevant learning so that no scientific knowledge is lost."
Document NUF0000020100419e6450000i
DOE's plan to reprogram $115 million in fiscal 2010 funds to begin the close-out of the Yucca Mountain repository this year wasn't well received by the top Republican on a House Appropriations subcommittee March 24.
Representative Rodney Frelinghuysen of New Jersey, the senior Republican on the panel's energy and water subcommittee, criticized DOE's action during a hearing on DOE's FY-11 budget request. "What is your authority for doing it?" Frelinghuysen asked Energy Secretary Steven Chu.
The money was part of the $197 million allocation the Yucca Mountain program this fiscal year to continue activities associated with NRC's licensing review of DOE's repository license application. The FY-10 appropriations bill report for energy and water funding states that a DOE reprogramming request must be submitted to House and Senate appropriators and approved before any funds are shifted to different programs or activities.
"You are using fiscal 2010 funds to restructure the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management," Frelinghuysen said. "I think we need some clarity. I know that determination has been made, but quite honestly, I don't think you have the statutory authority to do it."
Chu told the subcommittee that DOE's general counsel had advised him that he could take such action. Chu repeated that assertion in a March 26 letter to subcommittee chairman Peter Visclosky, an Indian Democrat. "My general counsel has studied this matter very closely, and has advised me that we do have the authority within the law to take the reprogramming actions that we have planned," Chu said. "As you know, the Department of Energy sent you a letter on February 17, notifying you of our intent to reprogram funding for FY 2010 for the Office of Civilian and Radioactive Waste Management."
Chu also said in the letter that he does not believe money should be spent on a licensing process that has been suspended, especially in light of the Obama administration's intent to pursue alternatives to a Yucca Mountain repository. "We need to begin actions now to ensure that the shutdown occurs in an orderly fashion that takes into account the impacts on our employees and their families," Chu wrote. He said the department is trying to help affected employees find other jobs within the government for which they are qualified. He added that "an integral part of our plan is to proceed in a manner that preserves all relevant documents and all relevant learning so that no scientific knowledge is lost."
Document NUF0000020100419e6450000i
Blue ribbon panel might consider lessons learned from Yucca project
Elaine Hiruo, Washington /908 words/5 April 2010/Nuclear Fuel///NUF/13/Volume 35, Issue 7/English/
(c) 2010 McGraw-Hill, Inc.
/
The blue ribbon commission on nuclear waste might be willing to consider lessons learned from the process used by the Yucca Mountain repository project in Nevada, but it will not look at decisions about the site itself, co-chairmen Lee Hamilton and Brent Scowcroft said March 26 after the panel's first two-day meeting ended./
The 15-member commission was established by President Barack Obama's administration to conduct a comprehensive review of waste management alternatives to a Yucca Mountain repository and to make recommendations for a new national policy for managing utility spent nuclear fuel and other radioactive waste.
The charter of the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future is broad, but it doesn't require the commission to recommend specific sites, Scowcroft told reporters after the commission meeting. But Hamilton said there is value in learning from past experiences.
"This is an independent commission," Hamilton said, "and we will draw our own conclusions, develop our own alternatives, make our own recommendations."
Hamilton's comment came a day after Energy Secretary Steven Chu, in his opening remarks to the commission, said the panel should keep its focus on the future and not spend time looking at the past and at the now-scuttled Yucca Mountain project.
Chu called for a broad, integrated review of factors early in the fuel cycle, such as advanced reactor technologies, saying they could affect the waste stream at the back end of the fuel cycle. "One really cannot predict what technologies will be available 50 to 150 years from now," Chu said. But, he added, the commission should review all possible ways to reduce the volume of nuclear waste slated for disposal. The task before the panel, according to Hamilton, is "daunting."
The administration intends to scrap the country's existing policy on nuclear waste that would have required utility spent fuel and DOE highly radioactive defense waste to be disposed of in a repository at Yucca Mountain, some 95 miles outside Las Vegas. DOE filed a motion with an NRC Atomic Safety and Licensing Board on March 3 to withdraw its Yucca Mountain repository license application with prejudice, a move that if approved could prevent the department from ever resubmitting that application to NRC. That action comes after DOE has spent more than two decades and $10 billion on work associated with a Yucca Mountain repository. It also comes nearly two years after DOE rushed to submit a repository license application to NRC and to move the program forward.
It could be June, however, before the ASLB takes up the DOE motion to withdraw the application. The licensing board has said that it will deal first with the petitions filed with the board seeking intervenor status in the licensing proceeding before considering the DOE motion.
Chu told the panel to review an assortment of waste streams, including low-level waste and highly radioactive defense waste, both of which are on DOE nuclear defense sites around the country. Chu asked that the commission make recommendations on how the department can effectively and efficiently meet its obligations to manage and cleanup this waste.
But he also told the panel it will review the Nuclear Waste Fund, a federal trust fund that now contains $21 billion in ratepayer payments and interest. Congress established the fund in 1982 to bankroll the DOE civilian nuclear waste program. Based on a 1 mill, or one-tenth of a cent, fee charged nuclear utility customers for every kilowatt-hour of nuclear-generated electricity sold, waste fee collections currently total more than $770 million a year.
Chu has said the department will continue collecting the waste fee during the development of a new national policy on radioactive waste, noting that money will be needed to implement the commission's recommendations.
Under its charter, the commission is to submit its final report and recommendations to Chu within 24 months. "We would like to finish before the two years expire, but we don't know at this time if we can make it," Hamilton told reporters.
The commission must now develop a work plan that will map out what it will evaluate and how it will do that. Commission member Richard Meserve suggested subcommittees be established and staffed to help the commission gather and digest information. Spent fuel reprocessing, long-term storage, and disposal could be the focus of three separate subcommittees, he said. The number of subcommittees will not necessarily be limited to three.
Others suggestions offered by subcommittee members included having an energy economist on staff and making use of the expertise of the Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board, an independent panel Congress established to provide technical oversight to the DOE civilian nuclear waste program.
During the public comment period March 26, Jack Spencer, a nuclear energy research fellow at the Heritage Foundation, urged the commission to put the Yucca Mountain project back in play, saying the panel should use this time to "recalibrate" DOE's approach.
Nevada, which has fought the Yucca Mountain project for decades, should have more control over the project, Spencer said. He also said that the repository program "has to be rooted in the market place" to be successful. More control should be placed in the hands of the companies that produce the waste, he said. That, according to Spencer, should "highly incentivize" them to find a solution.
Document NUF0000020100419e6450000h
(c) 2010 McGraw-Hill, Inc.
/
The blue ribbon commission on nuclear waste might be willing to consider lessons learned from the process used by the Yucca Mountain repository project in Nevada, but it will not look at decisions about the site itself, co-chairmen Lee Hamilton and Brent Scowcroft said March 26 after the panel's first two-day meeting ended./
The 15-member commission was established by President Barack Obama's administration to conduct a comprehensive review of waste management alternatives to a Yucca Mountain repository and to make recommendations for a new national policy for managing utility spent nuclear fuel and other radioactive waste.
The charter of the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future is broad, but it doesn't require the commission to recommend specific sites, Scowcroft told reporters after the commission meeting. But Hamilton said there is value in learning from past experiences.
"This is an independent commission," Hamilton said, "and we will draw our own conclusions, develop our own alternatives, make our own recommendations."
Hamilton's comment came a day after Energy Secretary Steven Chu, in his opening remarks to the commission, said the panel should keep its focus on the future and not spend time looking at the past and at the now-scuttled Yucca Mountain project.
Chu called for a broad, integrated review of factors early in the fuel cycle, such as advanced reactor technologies, saying they could affect the waste stream at the back end of the fuel cycle. "One really cannot predict what technologies will be available 50 to 150 years from now," Chu said. But, he added, the commission should review all possible ways to reduce the volume of nuclear waste slated for disposal. The task before the panel, according to Hamilton, is "daunting."
The administration intends to scrap the country's existing policy on nuclear waste that would have required utility spent fuel and DOE highly radioactive defense waste to be disposed of in a repository at Yucca Mountain, some 95 miles outside Las Vegas. DOE filed a motion with an NRC Atomic Safety and Licensing Board on March 3 to withdraw its Yucca Mountain repository license application with prejudice, a move that if approved could prevent the department from ever resubmitting that application to NRC. That action comes after DOE has spent more than two decades and $10 billion on work associated with a Yucca Mountain repository. It also comes nearly two years after DOE rushed to submit a repository license application to NRC and to move the program forward.
It could be June, however, before the ASLB takes up the DOE motion to withdraw the application. The licensing board has said that it will deal first with the petitions filed with the board seeking intervenor status in the licensing proceeding before considering the DOE motion.
Chu told the panel to review an assortment of waste streams, including low-level waste and highly radioactive defense waste, both of which are on DOE nuclear defense sites around the country. Chu asked that the commission make recommendations on how the department can effectively and efficiently meet its obligations to manage and cleanup this waste.
But he also told the panel it will review the Nuclear Waste Fund, a federal trust fund that now contains $21 billion in ratepayer payments and interest. Congress established the fund in 1982 to bankroll the DOE civilian nuclear waste program. Based on a 1 mill, or one-tenth of a cent, fee charged nuclear utility customers for every kilowatt-hour of nuclear-generated electricity sold, waste fee collections currently total more than $770 million a year.
Chu has said the department will continue collecting the waste fee during the development of a new national policy on radioactive waste, noting that money will be needed to implement the commission's recommendations.
Under its charter, the commission is to submit its final report and recommendations to Chu within 24 months. "We would like to finish before the two years expire, but we don't know at this time if we can make it," Hamilton told reporters.
The commission must now develop a work plan that will map out what it will evaluate and how it will do that. Commission member Richard Meserve suggested subcommittees be established and staffed to help the commission gather and digest information. Spent fuel reprocessing, long-term storage, and disposal could be the focus of three separate subcommittees, he said. The number of subcommittees will not necessarily be limited to three.
Others suggestions offered by subcommittee members included having an energy economist on staff and making use of the expertise of the Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board, an independent panel Congress established to provide technical oversight to the DOE civilian nuclear waste program.
During the public comment period March 26, Jack Spencer, a nuclear energy research fellow at the Heritage Foundation, urged the commission to put the Yucca Mountain project back in play, saying the panel should use this time to "recalibrate" DOE's approach.
Nevada, which has fought the Yucca Mountain project for decades, should have more control over the project, Spencer said. He also said that the repository program "has to be rooted in the market place" to be successful. More control should be placed in the hands of the companies that produce the waste, he said. That, according to Spencer, should "highly incentivize" them to find a solution.
Document NUF0000020100419e6450000h
DOE urged to establish 'Energy Parks' program so workers won't be furloughed
1136 words5 April 2010Inside EnergyIEISSN: 1556-3928English(c) 2010 McGraw-Hill, Inc.
An Energy Department initiative to allow developers to build wind farms, solar plants and other renewable-energy projects at remediated nuclear weapons sites has drawn keen interest from private industry and communities in the shadows of those defunct weapons plants.
Supporters say the so-called Energy Parks initiative will provide new employment opportunities to DOE cleanup workers who would otherwise work themselves out of their jobs when the sites where they work are cleaned up. But some observers fear that DOE will not get the initiative up and running before it spends all of the $6 billion in economic stimulus that it received for environmental cleanup, and that thousands of workers would have to be furloughed as a result.
"A year and a half from now, the cliff arrives," said Lawrence Papay, an energy consultant who sits on DOE's Environmental Management Advisory Board. "EM is going to be left holding the bag of a lot of people who can be employed and don't have prospects moving forward. Even if you were to act today, I am afraid you would not have enough time."
DOE's Environmental Management Office would like to draw on resources from across the department to help with Energy Parks, including tapping into its offices of energy efficiency and renewable energy, science and fossil energy. But to date, EM has not put a formal structure in place to do that.
At a meeting in Washington last week, some members of the EM advisory board said that without a formal structure in place, there could be massive job losses at some of the cleanup sites as the economic stimulus money runs out. The agency must have that money out the door by September 2011, and DOE expects to have completed cleanup on vast stretches of its land by that time.
James Antizzo, the senior coordinator of the Energy Parks initiative, said at the meeting that "conceptually, there is a lot of buy in" for the effort. But Antizzo acknowledged that the initiative "has not been blessed by [senior DOE] management, per se."
Ines Triay, DOE's assistant secretary for environmental management, said at the meeting that the department would soon form a task force to coordinate Energy Parks-related work across various DOE offices.
Despite the lack of a formal plan from DOE, interest has been strong in the Energy Parks initiative. The Mid-Columbia Energy Initiative, put together by a local-government-run development group, is working on acquiring up to 60 square miles of cleaned-up land at the Hanford Site in Washington state for use in future energy projects, according to Antizzo. Other projects are also in the works at the Pantex site in Texas, Oak Ridge in Tennessee and Mound in southern Ohio, he said.
EM received $6 billion in last year's American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, and a big fraction of the funds are going towards reducing the size of the so-called "cleanup footprint," or the amount of land DOE is responsible for cleaning up.
Using the stimulus funds, EM plans to reduce its overall footprint by some 450 square miles, or by 50% of its current size, by September 2011.
So far, EM has spent $1.5 billion of its $6 billion in stimulus funds, and Energy Secretary Steven Chu said last month that the cleanup program has created 14,000 jobs. Those jobs could dry up with the end of Recovery Act spending.
DOE contractors have used subcontractors for much of the work, and maintaining long-term jobs at the sites in the wake of the Recovery Act has emerged as a primary concern of local community groups. The Energy Communities Alliance, which represents communities near DOE sites, has been a strong advocate of Energy Parks.
Several ECA local-government members have drafted a one-page legislative proposal legislation that would formally establish the Energy Parks program. Seth Kirshenberg, ECA's executive director, said members of his group are working with senators and members of Congress to get the bill introduced.
The current initiative would leave it up to local communities to push for Energy Parks, but the draft legislation from ECA members would establish a formal program at DOE to promote the use of former defense nuclear facilities, such as Hanford and the Savannah River Site in South Carolina.
It is unclear whether DOE would support legislation. In remarks to the board, Merle Sykes, the office's chief of business operations, said that the administration would consider supporting legislation.
"I have actually looked at the legislation. We'll see if there is not a way we can figure out how the administration can support that in a more active way," Sykes said. According to Triay, the purpose of the program is simply to have DOE act as a facilitator for communities hoping to bring in energy projects.
Even after a task force is in place, DOE still faces challenges, according to Antizzo. It must perform an audit of available resources, develop site plans, and determine a strategy for performing the environmental reviews required under the National Environmental Policy Act.
While the Energy Parks Initiative is being thrashed out within the department, some of the sites have been pursuing similar efforts on their own for years, such as land transfers and leasing at the Oak Ridge Site, according to Antizzo.
"I think the idea with the Energy Parks Initiative is to kind of make it a little more strategic, so that you have in addition to the opportunities that come up as an individual opportunity, how do we then take the opportunities and link them to a national strategy," he said.
Still, some local advocacy groups warned that DOE must act in a transparent manner if it pursues its initiative to build renewable-energy projects on remidiated nuclear weapons sites. Tom Carpenter, the executive director of Hanford Challenge, a watchdog group near the Hanford Site, said that his major concern was the lack of transparency in the Energy Parks process.
"I understand the jobs issue," Carpenter said. "But it needs to be done in an open and transparent process with buy in from the regional stakeholders, and not just make it happen in the dark, behind the scenes and hope to get away with it."
Carpenter added that local stakeholders have a number of tools at their disposal, including lawsuits, to delay or derail Energy Parks projects that are not done openly.
"I don't think the Department of Energy has any business whatsoever deciding to use a part of that site, whose future has been undetermined, and just start leasing or selling land off of it without wide agreement," he said. "They can expect resistance." — Derek Sands
Document IE00000020100419e6450000e
An Energy Department initiative to allow developers to build wind farms, solar plants and other renewable-energy projects at remediated nuclear weapons sites has drawn keen interest from private industry and communities in the shadows of those defunct weapons plants.
Supporters say the so-called Energy Parks initiative will provide new employment opportunities to DOE cleanup workers who would otherwise work themselves out of their jobs when the sites where they work are cleaned up. But some observers fear that DOE will not get the initiative up and running before it spends all of the $6 billion in economic stimulus that it received for environmental cleanup, and that thousands of workers would have to be furloughed as a result.
"A year and a half from now, the cliff arrives," said Lawrence Papay, an energy consultant who sits on DOE's Environmental Management Advisory Board. "EM is going to be left holding the bag of a lot of people who can be employed and don't have prospects moving forward. Even if you were to act today, I am afraid you would not have enough time."
DOE's Environmental Management Office would like to draw on resources from across the department to help with Energy Parks, including tapping into its offices of energy efficiency and renewable energy, science and fossil energy. But to date, EM has not put a formal structure in place to do that.
At a meeting in Washington last week, some members of the EM advisory board said that without a formal structure in place, there could be massive job losses at some of the cleanup sites as the economic stimulus money runs out. The agency must have that money out the door by September 2011, and DOE expects to have completed cleanup on vast stretches of its land by that time.
James Antizzo, the senior coordinator of the Energy Parks initiative, said at the meeting that "conceptually, there is a lot of buy in" for the effort. But Antizzo acknowledged that the initiative "has not been blessed by [senior DOE] management, per se."
Ines Triay, DOE's assistant secretary for environmental management, said at the meeting that the department would soon form a task force to coordinate Energy Parks-related work across various DOE offices.
Despite the lack of a formal plan from DOE, interest has been strong in the Energy Parks initiative. The Mid-Columbia Energy Initiative, put together by a local-government-run development group, is working on acquiring up to 60 square miles of cleaned-up land at the Hanford Site in Washington state for use in future energy projects, according to Antizzo. Other projects are also in the works at the Pantex site in Texas, Oak Ridge in Tennessee and Mound in southern Ohio, he said.
EM received $6 billion in last year's American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, and a big fraction of the funds are going towards reducing the size of the so-called "cleanup footprint," or the amount of land DOE is responsible for cleaning up.
Using the stimulus funds, EM plans to reduce its overall footprint by some 450 square miles, or by 50% of its current size, by September 2011.
So far, EM has spent $1.5 billion of its $6 billion in stimulus funds, and Energy Secretary Steven Chu said last month that the cleanup program has created 14,000 jobs. Those jobs could dry up with the end of Recovery Act spending.
DOE contractors have used subcontractors for much of the work, and maintaining long-term jobs at the sites in the wake of the Recovery Act has emerged as a primary concern of local community groups. The Energy Communities Alliance, which represents communities near DOE sites, has been a strong advocate of Energy Parks.
Several ECA local-government members have drafted a one-page legislative proposal legislation that would formally establish the Energy Parks program. Seth Kirshenberg, ECA's executive director, said members of his group are working with senators and members of Congress to get the bill introduced.
The current initiative would leave it up to local communities to push for Energy Parks, but the draft legislation from ECA members would establish a formal program at DOE to promote the use of former defense nuclear facilities, such as Hanford and the Savannah River Site in South Carolina.
It is unclear whether DOE would support legislation. In remarks to the board, Merle Sykes, the office's chief of business operations, said that the administration would consider supporting legislation.
"I have actually looked at the legislation. We'll see if there is not a way we can figure out how the administration can support that in a more active way," Sykes said. According to Triay, the purpose of the program is simply to have DOE act as a facilitator for communities hoping to bring in energy projects.
Even after a task force is in place, DOE still faces challenges, according to Antizzo. It must perform an audit of available resources, develop site plans, and determine a strategy for performing the environmental reviews required under the National Environmental Policy Act.
While the Energy Parks Initiative is being thrashed out within the department, some of the sites have been pursuing similar efforts on their own for years, such as land transfers and leasing at the Oak Ridge Site, according to Antizzo.
"I think the idea with the Energy Parks Initiative is to kind of make it a little more strategic, so that you have in addition to the opportunities that come up as an individual opportunity, how do we then take the opportunities and link them to a national strategy," he said.
Still, some local advocacy groups warned that DOE must act in a transparent manner if it pursues its initiative to build renewable-energy projects on remidiated nuclear weapons sites. Tom Carpenter, the executive director of Hanford Challenge, a watchdog group near the Hanford Site, said that his major concern was the lack of transparency in the Energy Parks process.
"I understand the jobs issue," Carpenter said. "But it needs to be done in an open and transparent process with buy in from the regional stakeholders, and not just make it happen in the dark, behind the scenes and hope to get away with it."
Carpenter added that local stakeholders have a number of tools at their disposal, including lawsuits, to delay or derail Energy Parks projects that are not done openly.
"I don't think the Department of Energy has any business whatsoever deciding to use a part of that site, whose future has been undetermined, and just start leasing or selling land off of it without wide agreement," he said. "They can expect resistance." — Derek Sands
Document IE00000020100419e6450000e
Tests show DOE waste meets state standards
By Judy Fahys The Salt Lake Tribune/619 words/5 April 2010/The Salt Lake Tribune
SLTR/English
© 2010 The Salt Lake Tribune. Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning. All Rights Reserved.
Samples of the depleted uranium waste from a government cleanup in South Carolina show that it meets a key safety limit, said the Utah Department of Environmental Quality.
State regulators heard about the test results Monday from a Tennessee laboratory, which sampled 171 of the 5,400 drums sent most recently to Utah from the Savannah River Project cleanup for technetium-99, a waste product of reprocessing.
SLTR/English
© 2010 The Salt Lake Tribune. Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning. All Rights Reserved.
Samples of the depleted uranium waste from a government cleanup in South Carolina show that it meets a key safety limit, said the Utah Department of Environmental Quality.
State regulators heard about the test results Monday from a Tennessee laboratory, which sampled 171 of the 5,400 drums sent most recently to Utah from the Savannah River Project cleanup for technetium-99, a waste product of reprocessing.
Aiken County says U.S. can't close Yucca
By Julia Sellers, The Augusta Chronicle, Ga. /McClatchy-Tribune Regional News//////390 words/5 April 2010/The Augusta Chronicle (MCT)KRTAG/EnglishDistributed by McClatchy - Tribune Information Services
/Apr. 5--AIKEN -- Aiken County stands by its petition against the closing of Yucca Mountain, saying the Department of Energy can't back out of its agreement to ship nuclear waste to the Nevada repository unless Congress amends the law or its license is turned down for scientific reasons.
The county filed its 15-page response Friday with the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. Last week the Department of Energy and a handful of regulatory agencies said Aiken County was premature in filing a suit against the Obama's administration's plans to terminate the site.
Yucca Mountain, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas, was being designed to accommodate radioactive material stored at 121 temporary sites in 39 states, including SRS, where high-level wastes are stored in steel cylinders that were to be shipped elsewhere. It also would have housed 70,000 tons of waste from the nation's 104 commercial reactors, which are generating about 2,000 additional tons of spent fuel each year. President Obama's 2011 budget does not include funding for the facility, which has been in the works for more than 25 years.
/Apr. 5--AIKEN -- Aiken County stands by its petition against the closing of Yucca Mountain, saying the Department of Energy can't back out of its agreement to ship nuclear waste to the Nevada repository unless Congress amends the law or its license is turned down for scientific reasons.
The county filed its 15-page response Friday with the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. Last week the Department of Energy and a handful of regulatory agencies said Aiken County was premature in filing a suit against the Obama's administration's plans to terminate the site.
Yucca Mountain, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas, was being designed to accommodate radioactive material stored at 121 temporary sites in 39 states, including SRS, where high-level wastes are stored in steel cylinders that were to be shipped elsewhere. It also would have housed 70,000 tons of waste from the nation's 104 commercial reactors, which are generating about 2,000 additional tons of spent fuel each year. President Obama's 2011 budget does not include funding for the facility, which has been in the works for more than 25 years.
NUCLEAR WASTE; State regulators sue DOE over repository fees
Katherine Ling, E&E reporter //573 words/5 April 2010GreenwireGRWREnglish© 2010 E&E Publishing, LLC. All Rights Reserved
The nation's state utility regulators are taking legal action against the Energy Department to stop the government from collecting fees to manage spent nuclear fuel.
The National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners filed a lawsuit Friday in the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia seeking to overturn DOE's decision in October not to suspend payments into the Nuclear Waste Fund.
NARUC asked DOE last July to suspend the one-tenth-cent-per-kilowatt-hour fee paid by customers of nuclear-powered electricity because the Obama administration planned to cancel the waste repository at Yucca Mountain, Nev., and establish a "blue ribbon" commission to consider alternative waste disposal options.
"There is no clearly defined program for disposal of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste. Therefore, there is no basis to assess the adequacy of fees that continue to be paid into the Nuclear Waste Fund," the NARUC letter said. "If we are going to pause to reconsider disposal options, we feel it is also appropriate to pause the fee payments."
The nation's state utility regulators are taking legal action against the Energy Department to stop the government from collecting fees to manage spent nuclear fuel.
The National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners filed a lawsuit Friday in the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia seeking to overturn DOE's decision in October not to suspend payments into the Nuclear Waste Fund.
NARUC asked DOE last July to suspend the one-tenth-cent-per-kilowatt-hour fee paid by customers of nuclear-powered electricity because the Obama administration planned to cancel the waste repository at Yucca Mountain, Nev., and establish a "blue ribbon" commission to consider alternative waste disposal options.
"There is no clearly defined program for disposal of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste. Therefore, there is no basis to assess the adequacy of fees that continue to be paid into the Nuclear Waste Fund," the NARUC letter said. "If we are going to pause to reconsider disposal options, we feel it is also appropriate to pause the fee payments."
GOP Seeks DOE Legal Justification For Plan To Close Nuclear Waste Office
832 words/5 April 2010/Superfund Report/SUFR/Vol. 24, No. 7/English/Copyright (c) 2010 Inside Washington Publishers. All Rights Reserved. Also available in print and online as part of www.InsideEPA.com.
Republicans on the House Appropriations Committee's energy panel are pushing the Energy Department (DOE) to provide a legal justification for its proposed closure of its civilian nuclear waste office that manages the Yucca Mountain repository program, warning that the department first needs congressional approval to scrap the office.But DOE, which outlined the closure plan in its fiscal year 2011 budget request, claims that its general counsel believes the department has existing authority to restructure and shut down the office.
The Republicans are now trying to form a bipartisan group of lawmakers to meet with the department's general counsel to resolve the issue ideally before they consider DOE's pending FY11 funding bill, though congressional sources say that the GOP lawmakers are not looking to block DOE's budget bill over the issue.DOE is proposing to close its Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management (OCRWM) and fold some of its duties into the nuclear energy office run by Assistant Secretary Warren Miller.
Republicans on the House Appropriations Committee's energy panel are pushing the Energy Department (DOE) to provide a legal justification for its proposed closure of its civilian nuclear waste office that manages the Yucca Mountain repository program, warning that the department first needs congressional approval to scrap the office.But DOE, which outlined the closure plan in its fiscal year 2011 budget request, claims that its general counsel believes the department has existing authority to restructure and shut down the office.
The Republicans are now trying to form a bipartisan group of lawmakers to meet with the department's general counsel to resolve the issue ideally before they consider DOE's pending FY11 funding bill, though congressional sources say that the GOP lawmakers are not looking to block DOE's budget bill over the issue.DOE is proposing to close its Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management (OCRWM) and fold some of its duties into the nuclear energy office run by Assistant Secretary Warren Miller.
Obama panel examines nation's nuclear waste issues
Judy Fahys By Judy Fahys The Salt Lake Tribune881 words4 April 2010The Salt Lake Tribune
SLTREnglish© 2010 The Salt Lake Tribune. Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning. All Rights Reserved.
Two recent announcements from the Obama administration have energized nuclear power advocates. The first is his plan to offer $18.5 billion in loan guarantees for new nuclear plants; the other, a task force to look at the dangerously radioactive waste often blamed for delaying what some anticipate will be a nuclear renaissance.
More than a few Utahns are keeping an eye on the new Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future. Tooele County includes the nation's largest low-level radioactive waste disposal site, the mile- square EnergySolutions landfill, and the nation's only high-level nuclear site licensed in the past three decades, the derailed Private Fuel Storage facility on the Goshute reservation in Skull Valley.
SLTREnglish© 2010 The Salt Lake Tribune. Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning. All Rights Reserved.
Two recent announcements from the Obama administration have energized nuclear power advocates. The first is his plan to offer $18.5 billion in loan guarantees for new nuclear plants; the other, a task force to look at the dangerously radioactive waste often blamed for delaying what some anticipate will be a nuclear renaissance.
More than a few Utahns are keeping an eye on the new Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future. Tooele County includes the nation's largest low-level radioactive waste disposal site, the mile- square EnergySolutions landfill, and the nation's only high-level nuclear site licensed in the past three decades, the derailed Private Fuel Storage facility on the Goshute reservation in Skull Valley.
Seeking a 'Plan B' for nuclear waste: With Yucca Mountain site dead, billions paid into project are in limbo.
Margaret Newkirk /Staff/1343 words/4 April 2010/The Atlanta Journal - Constitution
Copyright (c) 2010 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, All Rights Reserved
Georgia electric customers paid the U.S. government more than $701 million over nearly three decades, in exchange for a service now 12 years overdue. Today, the U.S. government is as far away from delivering on its part of the bargain as it has ever been. Electric customers not only can't easily get their money back --- Congress borrowed it for other things --- but must keep on paying. That's a snapshot view of the nation's Nuclear Waste Fund.
The fund was supposed to pay the U.S. Department of Energy to remove radioactive waste from power plants. But that hasn't happened, and the recent decision to scrap the Yucca Mountain waste project in Nevada has left the DOE essentially in a position of starting over.
Copyright (c) 2010 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, All Rights Reserved
Georgia electric customers paid the U.S. government more than $701 million over nearly three decades, in exchange for a service now 12 years overdue. Today, the U.S. government is as far away from delivering on its part of the bargain as it has ever been. Electric customers not only can't easily get their money back --- Congress borrowed it for other things --- but must keep on paying. That's a snapshot view of the nation's Nuclear Waste Fund.
The fund was supposed to pay the U.S. Department of Energy to remove radioactive waste from power plants. But that hasn't happened, and the recent decision to scrap the Yucca Mountain waste project in Nevada has left the DOE essentially in a position of starting over.
YUCCA MOUNTAIN: Bipartisan group of House members float plan to block closure (03/24/2010)
Katherine Ling, E&E reporter
A group of House Democrats and Republicans introduced a resolution yesterday to stop the Obama administration from ending the nuclear waste repository program at Yucca Mountain, Nev., and to save important project data.
The resolution of disapproval aims to stop the Energy Department from using appropriated funds to end the project and to preserve "all scientific and site specific file and data related to Yucca Mountain," said a statement from Rep. Doc Hastings' (R-Wash.) office.
Joining Hastings on the measure are Reps. Jay Inslee (D-Wash.), James Clyburn (D-S.C.), Norm Dicks (D-Wash), John Spratt Jr. (D-S.C.), Fred Upton (R-Mich.) and Gresham Barrett (R-S.C.), all of whom represent districts and states that currently store spent commercial or defense nuclear waste.
"This resolution sends a clear message that members of Congress on both sides of the aisle will continue actively working to keep the Yucca Mountain license moving forward," Hastings said.
Earlier this month DOE officially filed to withdraw its license application for the nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain, with prejudice -- meaning the site could never again be considered for a repository (E&ENews PM, March 3).
Instead a 15-member Blue Ribbon Commission will review and consider alternative means to manage U.S. nuclear waste including interim storage, reprocessing and different geologic formations for a final repository. That commission will hold its first meeting tomorrow and must produce a draft report in about 18 months.
But that timeline is not acceptable for states with nuclear waste sitting on-site, Inslee said.
"Taxpayers have already spent more than $10 billion on Yucca Mountain, compiling 20 years of data that inform us that this is the best choice to securely store tons of nuclear waste," Inslee said. "Keeping waste scattered across the country, or in the case of Washington state at Hanford, is no longer an option. We have a solution to this problem and we must move forward."
Spratt, chairman of the House Budget Committee, said he would do "all I can to make sure some funding goes to defend the Yucca Mountain license application this year."
Upton noted that despite the administration's decision to withdraw from the Yucca project, taxpayers are still paying about $750 million in fees per year on electricity generated by nuclear power for the project. The National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners and the Nuclear Energy Institute are currently exploring their legal options to address this issue, the groups announced recently.
The resolution of disapproval and comments by the bill sponsors echo many questions directed at Energy Secretary Steven Chu and other members of the administration in multiple hearings on the DOE budget in the past few months both in the House and the Senate. Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), ranking member of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, dedicated a floor speech on the matter last week.
Chu argues that the science does not support a repository at Yucca and the United States should reconsider its waste management policy based on advances in technology and science. Chu will appear before the House Energy and Water Development Appropriations Subcommittee this afternoon to defend DOE's $28.4 billion proposed 2011 spending budget, which includes no appropriation for Yucca.
A group of House Democrats and Republicans introduced a resolution yesterday to stop the Obama administration from ending the nuclear waste repository program at Yucca Mountain, Nev., and to save important project data.
The resolution of disapproval aims to stop the Energy Department from using appropriated funds to end the project and to preserve "all scientific and site specific file and data related to Yucca Mountain," said a statement from Rep. Doc Hastings' (R-Wash.) office.
Joining Hastings on the measure are Reps. Jay Inslee (D-Wash.), James Clyburn (D-S.C.), Norm Dicks (D-Wash), John Spratt Jr. (D-S.C.), Fred Upton (R-Mich.) and Gresham Barrett (R-S.C.), all of whom represent districts and states that currently store spent commercial or defense nuclear waste.
"This resolution sends a clear message that members of Congress on both sides of the aisle will continue actively working to keep the Yucca Mountain license moving forward," Hastings said.
Earlier this month DOE officially filed to withdraw its license application for the nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain, with prejudice -- meaning the site could never again be considered for a repository (E&ENews PM, March 3).
Instead a 15-member Blue Ribbon Commission will review and consider alternative means to manage U.S. nuclear waste including interim storage, reprocessing and different geologic formations for a final repository. That commission will hold its first meeting tomorrow and must produce a draft report in about 18 months.
But that timeline is not acceptable for states with nuclear waste sitting on-site, Inslee said.
"Taxpayers have already spent more than $10 billion on Yucca Mountain, compiling 20 years of data that inform us that this is the best choice to securely store tons of nuclear waste," Inslee said. "Keeping waste scattered across the country, or in the case of Washington state at Hanford, is no longer an option. We have a solution to this problem and we must move forward."
Spratt, chairman of the House Budget Committee, said he would do "all I can to make sure some funding goes to defend the Yucca Mountain license application this year."
Upton noted that despite the administration's decision to withdraw from the Yucca project, taxpayers are still paying about $750 million in fees per year on electricity generated by nuclear power for the project. The National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners and the Nuclear Energy Institute are currently exploring their legal options to address this issue, the groups announced recently.
The resolution of disapproval and comments by the bill sponsors echo many questions directed at Energy Secretary Steven Chu and other members of the administration in multiple hearings on the DOE budget in the past few months both in the House and the Senate. Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), ranking member of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, dedicated a floor speech on the matter last week.
Chu argues that the science does not support a repository at Yucca and the United States should reconsider its waste management policy based on advances in technology and science. Chu will appear before the House Energy and Water Development Appropriations Subcommittee this afternoon to defend DOE's $28.4 billion proposed 2011 spending budget, which includes no appropriation for Yucca.
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
WSJ: Outgoing Regulator Slams Obama's Handling Of Yucca
By Stephen Power
Of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL404 words
9 March 201018:20Dow Jones News ServiceDJEnglish
(c) 2010 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.
WASHINGTON (Dow Jones)--The Obama administration's decision to terminate a proposed nuclear-waste repository at Yucca Mountain, Nev., "does not seem to rest on factual findings" and is likely to complicate efforts to find a solution for managing nuclear waste "for years to come," a federal regulator said Tuesday.
The comments by Dale Klein--a member of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission --represent an unusual public rebuke to the Obama administration from a commission whose members tend to refrain from publicly weighing in on matters before them. The NRC is weighing a request by the Obama administration to withdraw a license application in favor of the proposed Yucca Mountain repository. That application was submitted by the George W. Bush administration in 2008, over the fierce objections of Nevada lawmakers--most prominently, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D., Nev.).
(This story and related background material will be available on The Wall Street Journal Web site, WSJ.com.)
Klein's comments are of limited significance because he has announced plans to step down from the commission once the U.S. Senate confirms his successor. But his remarks could give ammunition to Republicans in Congress who support the proposed repository.
"In my personal view ... I have found the handling of this matter from a national policy perspective ... unfortunate," Klein said in a speech before a conference of nuclear industry officials in Rockville, Md. "The administration's handling of the matter has already led to the filing of a number of lawsuits and clouded the path forward in a number of significant ways for years to come ... In my opinion, the administration's stated rationale for changing course does not seem to rest on factual findings and thus does not bolster the credibility of our government to handle this matter competently."
Klein was appointed to the NRC in 2006 by then-President George W. Bush and served as its chairman for several years.
Spokespersons at the White House and Department of Energy didn't immediately respond to a request for comment. The administration has said it believes there are better options for disposing of nuclear waste than Yucca. It has cited improvements in scientists' understanding of some technical issues surrounding nuclear-waste disposal since the 1980s, when the Yucca was initially identified as a possible repository site. [ 03-09-10 1920ET ]
Of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL404 words
9 March 201018:20Dow Jones News ServiceDJEnglish
(c) 2010 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.
WASHINGTON (Dow Jones)--The Obama administration's decision to terminate a proposed nuclear-waste repository at Yucca Mountain, Nev., "does not seem to rest on factual findings" and is likely to complicate efforts to find a solution for managing nuclear waste "for years to come," a federal regulator said Tuesday.
The comments by Dale Klein--a member of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission --represent an unusual public rebuke to the Obama administration from a commission whose members tend to refrain from publicly weighing in on matters before them. The NRC is weighing a request by the Obama administration to withdraw a license application in favor of the proposed Yucca Mountain repository. That application was submitted by the George W. Bush administration in 2008, over the fierce objections of Nevada lawmakers--most prominently, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D., Nev.).
(This story and related background material will be available on The Wall Street Journal Web site, WSJ.com.)
Klein's comments are of limited significance because he has announced plans to step down from the commission once the U.S. Senate confirms his successor. But his remarks could give ammunition to Republicans in Congress who support the proposed repository.
"In my personal view ... I have found the handling of this matter from a national policy perspective ... unfortunate," Klein said in a speech before a conference of nuclear industry officials in Rockville, Md. "The administration's handling of the matter has already led to the filing of a number of lawsuits and clouded the path forward in a number of significant ways for years to come ... In my opinion, the administration's stated rationale for changing course does not seem to rest on factual findings and thus does not bolster the credibility of our government to handle this matter competently."
Klein was appointed to the NRC in 2006 by then-President George W. Bush and served as its chairman for several years.
Spokespersons at the White House and Department of Energy didn't immediately respond to a request for comment. The administration has said it believes there are better options for disposing of nuclear waste than Yucca. It has cited improvements in scientists' understanding of some technical issues surrounding nuclear-waste disposal since the 1980s, when the Yucca was initially identified as a possible repository site. [ 03-09-10 1920ET ]
Yucca Mountain foe: Work paid off: DOE move surprises former state official
By Keith Rogers, Las Vegas Review-Journal
McClatchy-Tribune Regional News591 words March 9, 2010
Las Vegas Review-Journal (MCT)
KRTLVEnglish
Distributed by McClatchy - Tribune Information Services
Mar. 9--The man who led Nevada's charge against the Yucca Mountain Project for more than 20 years says he's surprised that the Department of Energy took action on its own to withdraw its license request to build a nuclear waste repository in the ridge, 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas.
"I have to admit that side of it is kind of a surprise," Bob Loux, former executive director of Nevada's Agency for Nuclear Projects, said after DOE filed a motion last week to withdraw its construction application from a nuclear licensing board.
"I could see DOE getting defeated in the licensing proceedings given the number of contentions that Nevada submitted and were accepted. I never thought they'd come from a licensing proceeding with a license."
After working for the state for 32 years, including 23 at the helm of the Nuclear Projects Agency, Loux resigned in September 2008 amid controversy over giving himself and his staff unauthorized pay raises.
He later offered to pay the state more than $29,000 in salary overpayments in exchange for the withdrawal of an ethics complaint against him, but the Ethics Commission rejected the proposal.
Then in March 2009, the Ethics Commission decided in a 3-2 vote to drop the charges, ruling that he didn't break state ethics laws because the governor, not the Legislature, determines his salary and those of his staff. Since then, Loux said, he has been working on a book and playing golf.
In a telephone interview Thursday, Loux said he is "gratified to know that the work we've done over the years has really paid off."
"There is a real lessen for people facing large government projects," he said. "Commitment will pay off in the end, and you really can fight city hall."
Though the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Construction Authorization Board has not decided yet on accepting DOE's motion to withdraw the license application , Loux noted that the Yucca Mountain Project is similar to two other multibillion-dollar government projects that were canceled. Congress terminated the Clinch River Breeder Reactor in Tennessee in 1983 and the Superconducting Super Collider in Texas in 1993.
"Once they head down the path of no funding, they never recover," Loux said.
He said he thinks that nuclear regulators will accept DOE's motion to kill the Yucca Mountain Project and that the federal government, with the help of the Obama administration's commission, will look outside Nevada to solve the nation's nuclear waste disposal problem.
"There is no reason to believe there are any more suitable sites in Nevada. This is the third-most earthquake-prone state," Loux said.
He said there were too many obstacles with at Yucca Mountain. Besides earthquake faults and volcanic activity, there were problems with transportation such as securing water rights to build a railroad from Caliente to the mountain and potential problems with decaying waste seeping into the water table.
Finding another nuclear waste site and gaining acceptance in another state is going to be difficult.
"You may experience a lot of these things where ever you go," he said. "Unless everybody agrees the site is good ... you're just being a guinea pig for the nuclear industry."Copyright (c) 2010, Las Vegas Review-Journal
McClatchy-Tribune Regional News591 words March 9, 2010
Las Vegas Review-Journal (MCT)
KRTLVEnglish
Distributed by McClatchy - Tribune Information Services
Mar. 9--The man who led Nevada's charge against the Yucca Mountain Project for more than 20 years says he's surprised that the Department of Energy took action on its own to withdraw its license request to build a nuclear waste repository in the ridge, 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas.
"I have to admit that side of it is kind of a surprise," Bob Loux, former executive director of Nevada's Agency for Nuclear Projects, said after DOE filed a motion last week to withdraw its construction application from a nuclear licensing board.
"I could see DOE getting defeated in the licensing proceedings given the number of contentions that Nevada submitted and were accepted. I never thought they'd come from a licensing proceeding with a license."
After working for the state for 32 years, including 23 at the helm of the Nuclear Projects Agency, Loux resigned in September 2008 amid controversy over giving himself and his staff unauthorized pay raises.
He later offered to pay the state more than $29,000 in salary overpayments in exchange for the withdrawal of an ethics complaint against him, but the Ethics Commission rejected the proposal.
Then in March 2009, the Ethics Commission decided in a 3-2 vote to drop the charges, ruling that he didn't break state ethics laws because the governor, not the Legislature, determines his salary and those of his staff. Since then, Loux said, he has been working on a book and playing golf.
In a telephone interview Thursday, Loux said he is "gratified to know that the work we've done over the years has really paid off."
"There is a real lessen for people facing large government projects," he said. "Commitment will pay off in the end, and you really can fight city hall."
Though the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Construction Authorization Board has not decided yet on accepting DOE's motion to withdraw the license application , Loux noted that the Yucca Mountain Project is similar to two other multibillion-dollar government projects that were canceled. Congress terminated the Clinch River Breeder Reactor in Tennessee in 1983 and the Superconducting Super Collider in Texas in 1993.
"Once they head down the path of no funding, they never recover," Loux said.
He said he thinks that nuclear regulators will accept DOE's motion to kill the Yucca Mountain Project and that the federal government, with the help of the Obama administration's commission, will look outside Nevada to solve the nation's nuclear waste disposal problem.
"There is no reason to believe there are any more suitable sites in Nevada. This is the third-most earthquake-prone state," Loux said.
He said there were too many obstacles with at Yucca Mountain. Besides earthquake faults and volcanic activity, there were problems with transportation such as securing water rights to build a railroad from Caliente to the mountain and potential problems with decaying waste seeping into the water table.
Finding another nuclear waste site and gaining acceptance in another state is going to be difficult.
"You may experience a lot of these things where ever you go," he said. "Unless everybody agrees the site is good ... you're just being a guinea pig for the nuclear industry."Copyright (c) 2010, Las Vegas Review-Journal
Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future
538 words
9 March 2010
Federal Register10791Vol. 75, No. 045English(c) 2010 Federal Information & News Dispatch, Inc. All rights reserved
SUMMARY: This notice announces an open meeting of the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future (the Commission). The Commission was organized pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 94-463, 86 Stat. 770) (the Act). The Act requires that agencies publish these notices in the Federal Register . The Charter of the Commission can be found at http://www.energy.gov/news/documents/BRC_Charter.pdf.
DATES: Thursday, March 25, 2010, 1 p.m.-5 p.m.; Friday, March 26, 2010, 8:30 a.m.-12 p.m.
ADDRESSES: Willard Intercontinental, 1401 Pennsylvania Avenue, Washington, DC 20004, (202) 628-9100.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Timothy A. Frazier, Designated Federal Officer, U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585; telephone (202) 586-4243 or facsimile (202) 586-0544; e-mail CommissionDFO @nuclear.energy.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background: The President directed that the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future (the Commission) be established to conduct a comprehensive review of policies for managing the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle. The Commission will provide advice and make recommendations on issues including alternatives for the storage, processing, and disposal of civilian and defense spent nuclear fuel and nuclear waste.
The Commission is composed of individuals of diverse backgrounds selected for their technical expertise and experience, established records of distinguished professional and pubic service, and their knowledge of issues pertaining to nuclear energy.
Purpose of the Meeting: Inform the Commission members about the history and current status of spent nuclear fuel and high-level waste disposal in the United States and projections of disposal needs in the future.
Tentative Agenda: The initial meeting is expected to include presentations on the history of efforts to dispose of civilian light-water reactor spent nuclear fuel (SNF) and defense high-level waste (HLW) in the United States. Presentations are also expected that will provide the status of the SNF and HLW (quantities and locations), projected generation rates for SNF associated with new nuclear plants, and projected quantities of defense HLW.
Public Participation: The meeting is open to the public. Individuals and representatives of organizations who would like to offer comments and suggestions may do so at the end of the meeting on Friday, March 26, 2010. Approximately 15 minutes will be reserved for public comments. Time allotted per speaker will depend on the number who wish to speak but will not exceed 5 minutes. The Designated Federal Officer is empowered to conduct the meeting in a fashion that will facilitate the orderly conduct of business. Those not able to attend the meeting or have insufficient time to address the committee are invited to send a written statement to Timothy A. Frazier, U.S. Department of Energy 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585, or e-mail CommissionDFO@nuclear.energy.gov.
Minutes: The minutes of the meeting will be available by contacting Mr. Frazier. He may be reached at the postal address or email address above.
Issued in Washington, DC on March 3, 2010.Rachel Samuel,Deputy Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 2010-4987 Filed 3-8-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-PDocument FREG000020100309e63900017
9 March 2010
Federal Register10791Vol. 75, No. 045English(c) 2010 Federal Information & News Dispatch, Inc. All rights reserved
SUMMARY: This notice announces an open meeting of the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future (the Commission). The Commission was organized pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 94-463, 86 Stat. 770) (the Act). The Act requires that agencies publish these notices in the Federal Register . The Charter of the Commission can be found at http://www.energy.gov/news/documents/BRC_Charter.pdf.
DATES: Thursday, March 25, 2010, 1 p.m.-5 p.m.; Friday, March 26, 2010, 8:30 a.m.-12 p.m.
ADDRESSES: Willard Intercontinental, 1401 Pennsylvania Avenue, Washington, DC 20004, (202) 628-9100.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Timothy A. Frazier, Designated Federal Officer, U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585; telephone (202) 586-4243 or facsimile (202) 586-0544; e-mail CommissionDFO @nuclear.energy.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background: The President directed that the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future (the Commission) be established to conduct a comprehensive review of policies for managing the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle. The Commission will provide advice and make recommendations on issues including alternatives for the storage, processing, and disposal of civilian and defense spent nuclear fuel and nuclear waste.
The Commission is composed of individuals of diverse backgrounds selected for their technical expertise and experience, established records of distinguished professional and pubic service, and their knowledge of issues pertaining to nuclear energy.
Purpose of the Meeting: Inform the Commission members about the history and current status of spent nuclear fuel and high-level waste disposal in the United States and projections of disposal needs in the future.
Tentative Agenda: The initial meeting is expected to include presentations on the history of efforts to dispose of civilian light-water reactor spent nuclear fuel (SNF) and defense high-level waste (HLW) in the United States. Presentations are also expected that will provide the status of the SNF and HLW (quantities and locations), projected generation rates for SNF associated with new nuclear plants, and projected quantities of defense HLW.
Public Participation: The meeting is open to the public. Individuals and representatives of organizations who would like to offer comments and suggestions may do so at the end of the meeting on Friday, March 26, 2010. Approximately 15 minutes will be reserved for public comments. Time allotted per speaker will depend on the number who wish to speak but will not exceed 5 minutes. The Designated Federal Officer is empowered to conduct the meeting in a fashion that will facilitate the orderly conduct of business. Those not able to attend the meeting or have insufficient time to address the committee are invited to send a written statement to Timothy A. Frazier, U.S. Department of Energy 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585, or e-mail CommissionDFO@nuclear.energy.gov.
Minutes: The minutes of the meeting will be available by contacting Mr. Frazier. He may be reached at the postal address or email address above.
Issued in Washington, DC on March 3, 2010.Rachel Samuel,Deputy Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 2010-4987 Filed 3-8-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-PDocument FREG000020100309e63900017
Thank Reid for death of Yucca Clout as majority leader was the difference From Our Readers
Thank Reid for death of Yucca Clout as majority leader was the difference From Our Readers
Richard Bryan 508 words
7 March 2010The Las Vegas Review-Journal
To the editor:For more than a quarter of a century, Nevadans have been fighting the ill-conceived nuclear waste dump at Yucca Mountain. The nuclear energy lobby and its supporters repeatedly told Nevadans to give up the fight because the dump is "inevitable."
But Nevada hung tough, and recently we received the news that the great majority of Nevadans had long waited to hear - the federal government is abandoning the Yucca Mountain Project. The president's new budget contains no funding for further development, and last week the Department of Energy filed a motion to withdraw its application to license Yucca Mountain. To be sure - we will need to be vigilant and follow through - but the end is in sight.
Many Nevadans - Republicans and Democrats alike - have played key roles in the fight against Yucca. As a newly elected governor in the 1980s, and with my Republican Attorney General, Brian McKay, by my side, we began the fight. It was Sen. Harry Reid, however, as the majority leader in the U.S. Senate, who persuaded President Obama to eliminate funding for Yucca Mountain and abandon the project. He deserves the credit for ultimately driving a silver stake into the heart of the project.
There are many Nevadans who do not support all of Sen. Reid's legislative proposals. As his friend for more than 40 years and his former colleague in the U.S. Senate for a decade, I would be among them. As the election season heats up, I hear some Nevadans asking what Sen. Reid has done for Nevada. Some wonder what Nevada gains because of Sen. Reid's role as majority leader.
Well, Yucca Mountain is a classic case in point. It does not denigrate the role of our congressional delegation and others who have been part of the fight for decades to point out that the power Sen. Reid wields as the majority leader was the key.
Having escaped the nuclear bullet on Yucca, I am now hearing a troubling new proposal: Let's be the host state for nuclear reprocessing. Embracing reprocessing is like jumping out of the nuclear frying pan and into the fire. Our concerns about transportation-related accidents or terrorist activities apply to shipment of high-level waste to Nevada for reprocessing as well. At the end of the reprocessing cycle, there is still high-level nuclear waste. If it's already here in our state, the slippery slope effect would inevitably lead to the argument, "Well, if Nevada accepts some nuclear waste shipments to the state and is prepared to store some nuclear waste, doesn't it make sense for Nevada to take it all?"
We need to be careful what we ask for: We might get it.
Richard H. Bryan
Las Vegas
Richard Bryan 508 words
7 March 2010The Las Vegas Review-Journal
To the editor:For more than a quarter of a century, Nevadans have been fighting the ill-conceived nuclear waste dump at Yucca Mountain. The nuclear energy lobby and its supporters repeatedly told Nevadans to give up the fight because the dump is "inevitable."
But Nevada hung tough, and recently we received the news that the great majority of Nevadans had long waited to hear - the federal government is abandoning the Yucca Mountain Project. The president's new budget contains no funding for further development, and last week the Department of Energy filed a motion to withdraw its application to license Yucca Mountain. To be sure - we will need to be vigilant and follow through - but the end is in sight.
Many Nevadans - Republicans and Democrats alike - have played key roles in the fight against Yucca. As a newly elected governor in the 1980s, and with my Republican Attorney General, Brian McKay, by my side, we began the fight. It was Sen. Harry Reid, however, as the majority leader in the U.S. Senate, who persuaded President Obama to eliminate funding for Yucca Mountain and abandon the project. He deserves the credit for ultimately driving a silver stake into the heart of the project.
There are many Nevadans who do not support all of Sen. Reid's legislative proposals. As his friend for more than 40 years and his former colleague in the U.S. Senate for a decade, I would be among them. As the election season heats up, I hear some Nevadans asking what Sen. Reid has done for Nevada. Some wonder what Nevada gains because of Sen. Reid's role as majority leader.
Well, Yucca Mountain is a classic case in point. It does not denigrate the role of our congressional delegation and others who have been part of the fight for decades to point out that the power Sen. Reid wields as the majority leader was the key.
Having escaped the nuclear bullet on Yucca, I am now hearing a troubling new proposal: Let's be the host state for nuclear reprocessing. Embracing reprocessing is like jumping out of the nuclear frying pan and into the fire. Our concerns about transportation-related accidents or terrorist activities apply to shipment of high-level waste to Nevada for reprocessing as well. At the end of the reprocessing cycle, there is still high-level nuclear waste. If it's already here in our state, the slippery slope effect would inevitably lead to the argument, "Well, if Nevada accepts some nuclear waste shipments to the state and is prepared to store some nuclear waste, doesn't it make sense for Nevada to take it all?"
We need to be careful what we ask for: We might get it.
Richard H. Bryan
Las Vegas
Yucca abandonment panned
Steve Tetreault
553 words
5 March 2010The Las Vegas Review-JournalLVGS2BEnglish© 2010 The Las Vegas Review-Journal. Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning. All Rights Reserved.
By STEVE TETREAULT
STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU
WASHINGTON - Energy Secretary Steven Chu came under more criticism Thursday for moving to terminate work at Yucca Mountain, but he said the government was "pouring good money after bad" by pursuing what he called an outdated nuclear waste project.
At a Senate hearing, Chu got his latest earful from Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash. She demanded to know "who was consulted in making the decision that Yucca Mountain was not viable."
"You say that Yucca Mountain is not a workable option, but what seems to be missing is why," she told Chu, asking him repeatedly what science was used to back up the Obama administration's decision to end plans for the underground waste repository.
Murray said billions of dollars have been spent at the Hanford nuclear reservation in her state to clean up and begin packaging liquid nuclear waste for eventual disposal at the proposed Yucca site, but no consideration was given to residents there and other places where highly radioactive waste awaits removal.
"This is really disturbing to me," Murray said. "This leaves everybody just in complete limbo after 30 years of working on this."
Chu was at the hearing to discuss the DOE budget, a day after department attorneys filed with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in a move to withdraw a construction application for the waste site 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas.
On Wednesday, Chu faced similar criticism from several House members at a science hearing.
Most of the Capitol Hill complaints have come from Republicans. Murray became the first Senate Democrat to challenge the president and Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., an engineer of the administration's policy.
Despite the scattered criticism, no groundswell has risen to reverse the decision to scrap Yucca and put future policy in the hands of a panel that begins work this month.For instance, Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn., said Thursday that he opposed shutting down the Nevada repository effort, but the Obama administration overall has made strides by supporting new loan guarantees for reactors and making quality appointments to federal boards dealing with nuclear energy.
It could not be learned whether Murray was taking her frustration to Reid, or giving him a heads-up that she was going to air her criticism.
Reid understands that "people need to do what they need to do for their home states," said his spokesman, Jon Summers. On the other hand, everyone knows where Reid stands on Yucca Mountain, and "the dump is not going to be built, period."
Previous administrations pressed on with Yucca Mountain, adapting the program when it encountered technical challenges. Chu told Murray that President Barack Obama wants a fresh start.
For instance, he said, when Yucca Mountain was found to have more fractures than expected, which might enable moisture to work its way into waste tunnels, managers came up with a fix that was a "multi-, multibillion-dollar titanium shield that's installed under the ground."
"As these things go on, you are beginning to think, 'Are you pouring good money after bad?' " he said. "I don't believe science is willing to say that Yucca Mountain is the ideal site given what we know today and what we believe we can develop in the next 50 years."
Steve Tetreault
553 words
5 March 2010The Las Vegas Review-JournalLVGS2BEnglish© 2010 The Las Vegas Review-Journal. Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning. All Rights Reserved.
By STEVE TETREAULT
STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU
WASHINGTON - Energy Secretary Steven Chu came under more criticism Thursday for moving to terminate work at Yucca Mountain, but he said the government was "pouring good money after bad" by pursuing what he called an outdated nuclear waste project.
At a Senate hearing, Chu got his latest earful from Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash. She demanded to know "who was consulted in making the decision that Yucca Mountain was not viable."
"You say that Yucca Mountain is not a workable option, but what seems to be missing is why," she told Chu, asking him repeatedly what science was used to back up the Obama administration's decision to end plans for the underground waste repository.
Murray said billions of dollars have been spent at the Hanford nuclear reservation in her state to clean up and begin packaging liquid nuclear waste for eventual disposal at the proposed Yucca site, but no consideration was given to residents there and other places where highly radioactive waste awaits removal.
"This is really disturbing to me," Murray said. "This leaves everybody just in complete limbo after 30 years of working on this."
Chu was at the hearing to discuss the DOE budget, a day after department attorneys filed with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in a move to withdraw a construction application for the waste site 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas.
On Wednesday, Chu faced similar criticism from several House members at a science hearing.
Most of the Capitol Hill complaints have come from Republicans. Murray became the first Senate Democrat to challenge the president and Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., an engineer of the administration's policy.
Despite the scattered criticism, no groundswell has risen to reverse the decision to scrap Yucca and put future policy in the hands of a panel that begins work this month.For instance, Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn., said Thursday that he opposed shutting down the Nevada repository effort, but the Obama administration overall has made strides by supporting new loan guarantees for reactors and making quality appointments to federal boards dealing with nuclear energy.
It could not be learned whether Murray was taking her frustration to Reid, or giving him a heads-up that she was going to air her criticism.
Reid understands that "people need to do what they need to do for their home states," said his spokesman, Jon Summers. On the other hand, everyone knows where Reid stands on Yucca Mountain, and "the dump is not going to be built, period."
Previous administrations pressed on with Yucca Mountain, adapting the program when it encountered technical challenges. Chu told Murray that President Barack Obama wants a fresh start.
For instance, he said, when Yucca Mountain was found to have more fractures than expected, which might enable moisture to work its way into waste tunnels, managers came up with a fix that was a "multi-, multibillion-dollar titanium shield that's installed under the ground."
"As these things go on, you are beginning to think, 'Are you pouring good money after bad?' " he said. "I don't believe science is willing to say that Yucca Mountain is the ideal site given what we know today and what we believe we can develop in the next 50 years."
NUCLEAR WASTE; Salt domes better than Yucca for long-term storage -- Chu
NUCLEAR WASTE; Salt domes better than Yucca for long-term storage -- Chu
Mike Soraghan, E&E reporter 418 words
4 March 2010
GreenwireGRWR© 2010 E&E Publishing, LLC. All Rights Reserved
Under fire from lawmakers for abandoning an effort to develop a nuclear-waste dump at Yucca Mountain, Nev., Energy Secretary Steven Chu told Senate appropriators today that salt domes might make better long-term storage sites.
The domes, Chu said, "have been stable for tens of millions, hundreds of millions of years."
"People ask, 'Why were these sites excluded in the first place?" from consideration as possible storage sites, he said.
Yucca Mountain, he said, has fissures and could be saturated with water if the climate shifts in the distant future.
"So you say we could maybe add a titanium shield," Chu said. "Then you wonder if you're throwing good money after bad."
Chu faced hostile questioning from Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), who had harsh words for the Obama administration's decision on Yucca. She said the decision to pull the plug on Yucca could slow the progress of the cleanup at the Hanford nuclear site in Washington state and other former nuclear weapons sites.
"I think it's irresponsible for DOE to abandon completely the Yucca site," Murray said. "These sites and the communities that support them have been left in limbo."
Murray also asked Chu for an "impact statement" about how shuttering Yucca will affect nuclear cleanups around the country.
Yesterday, the Energy Department filed its motion to withdraw the license at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for the spent nuclear waste repository at Yucca (E&ENews PM, March 3).
Chu reiterated today the administration's plan to convene a commission to review and recommend policies to manage U.S. nuclear waste, and he stressed such a move would not affect future nuclear energy expansion in the United States. Murray said the panels should not have excluded restarting Yucca as an option.
Murray also questioned whether the basis for shutting down the facility was based on science or politics. Chu did not pinpoint a specific scientific study that recommended shutting down the site, but he cited the 25 years of experience working at Yucca as the basis for the decision.
At a hearing last week, John Holdren, director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, told the House Science Committee that the years of experience at Yucca had not been wasted as they led to a better understanding of the characteristics of nuclear waste and the changes necessary to best store it.
Mike Soraghan, E&E reporter 418 words
4 March 2010
GreenwireGRWR© 2010 E&E Publishing, LLC. All Rights Reserved
Under fire from lawmakers for abandoning an effort to develop a nuclear-waste dump at Yucca Mountain, Nev., Energy Secretary Steven Chu told Senate appropriators today that salt domes might make better long-term storage sites.
The domes, Chu said, "have been stable for tens of millions, hundreds of millions of years."
"People ask, 'Why were these sites excluded in the first place?" from consideration as possible storage sites, he said.
Yucca Mountain, he said, has fissures and could be saturated with water if the climate shifts in the distant future.
"So you say we could maybe add a titanium shield," Chu said. "Then you wonder if you're throwing good money after bad."
Chu faced hostile questioning from Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), who had harsh words for the Obama administration's decision on Yucca. She said the decision to pull the plug on Yucca could slow the progress of the cleanup at the Hanford nuclear site in Washington state and other former nuclear weapons sites.
"I think it's irresponsible for DOE to abandon completely the Yucca site," Murray said. "These sites and the communities that support them have been left in limbo."
Murray also asked Chu for an "impact statement" about how shuttering Yucca will affect nuclear cleanups around the country.
Yesterday, the Energy Department filed its motion to withdraw the license at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for the spent nuclear waste repository at Yucca (E&ENews PM, March 3).
Chu reiterated today the administration's plan to convene a commission to review and recommend policies to manage U.S. nuclear waste, and he stressed such a move would not affect future nuclear energy expansion in the United States. Murray said the panels should not have excluded restarting Yucca as an option.
Murray also questioned whether the basis for shutting down the facility was based on science or politics. Chu did not pinpoint a specific scientific study that recommended shutting down the site, but he cited the 25 years of experience working at Yucca as the basis for the decision.
At a hearing last week, John Holdren, director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, told the House Science Committee that the years of experience at Yucca had not been wasted as they led to a better understanding of the characteristics of nuclear waste and the changes necessary to best store it.
DOE files to end Yucca Mountain
Annette Cary;Herald staff writer -Cary Annette-993 words-4 March 2010-Tri-City Herald-TRIC
-English-(c) 2010 The Tri-City Herald. All Rights Reserved.
The Department of Energy filed a petition to withdraw its Nuclear Regulatory Commission license application for the Yucca Mountain, Nev., radioactive waste repository Wednesday afternoon.
Shortly afterward, the state of Washington filed a petition with the NRC in an effort to block DOE from withdrawing the application and permanently terminating the Yucca Mountain project.
“The people of Washington did their part to help America win World War II and the Cold War and it’s long overdue for the federal government to do its part to ensure our state can complete the cleanup process at Hanford,” said Washington Attorney General Rob McKenna in a statement.
His concern was shared by other Washington leaders, both Democrats and Republicans.
Today, Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., plans to question Energy Secretary Steven Chu during a Senate Energy and Water Appropriations Hearing about the Obama administration’s decision. She believes Yucca Mountain needs to move forward and in 2002 voted in favor of the Senate resolution approving Yucca Mountain as the national nuclear waste repository.
Hanford has planned to send its high-level radioactive waste to Yucca Mountain for disposal since 2002. The waste includes high-level radioactive tank waste once it is turned into a stable glass form at the vitrification plant and 1,100 tons of highly radioactive fuel removed from Hanford’s K Basins.
“A unilateral decision to abandon Yucca Mountain without any justification and blocking it from ever being considered in the future is simply indefensible,” said Rep. Doc Hastings, R-Wash., in a statement. DOE filed its petition to withdraw the license application “with prejudice,” which would prevent it from being refiled.
“Under the law, Yucca Mountain remains the national repository,” Hastings said. “No administration is above the law and I fully support Attorney General McKenna’s legal action to intervene.”
Congress is limited by the Obama administration’s decision to reprogram $115 million and put it toward termination of Yucca Mountain, he said. But he’s “committed to pursuing any and all legislative options that will ensure that Yucca Mountain remains viable and is not sacrificed for election year politics.”
Rep. Jay Inslee, D-Wash., also said he will be exploring “every legislative avenue to correct this mistake, including a motion of disapproval, a funding limitation amendment or a resolution of inquiry.”
Gov. Chris Gregoire supports McKenna’s action to file to oppose DOE after working closely with him to review legal options, said her spokeswoman, Karina Shagren. The governor’s primary concern is that the DOE’s action would permanently remove Yucca Mountain from consideration as a national repository and no option should be off the table now, Shagren said.
“Permanently removing Yucca Mountain as the nation’s primary nuclear waste repository significantly sets back cleanup at Hanford and puts at risk both our state’s environment and its people,” McKenna said.
The state’s petition argues that the Nuclear Waste Policy Act requires DOE and the NRC to undertake a licensing process for Yucca Mountain and that neither have the legal authority to terminate the licensing process.
If Yucca Mountain no longer is the nation’s repository, parts of the $12.2 billion Hanford vitrification plant may need to be torn down and rebuilt to meet another repository’s requirements for accepting glassified waste, said a statement from the Attorney General’s office. Not only would costs increase significantly, but work also would be delayed to empty Hanford’s leak-prone tanks and treat the waste, the statement said.
“Congress has selected Yucca Mountain as the nation’s repository and roughly $10 billion has been spent on the project,” McKenna said. “The nation has no ready alternatives to deep geologic disposal nor does it have any ready alternatives to Yucca Mountain as a repository site.”
The state has not ruled out taking further legal action if needed, said Andy Fitz, Washington state assistant attorney general. Three Tri-City business leaders — Bob Ferguson, Bill Lampson and Gary Petersen — already have filed a lawsuit in federal court asking a judge to decide if the Obama administration can legally terminate Yucca Mountain.
“While DOE reaffirms its obligation to take possession and dispose of the nation’s spent nuclear fuel and high-level nuclear waste, the Secretary of Energy has decided that a geologic repository at Yucca Mountain is not a workable option for long-term disposition of these materials,” DOE wrote in its petition to withdraw the Yucca Mountain license application.
The energy secretary has established the Blue Ribbon Commission on America’s Nuclear Future, which will conduct a comprehensive review and consider applications for disposition of the waste and spent fuel, the DOE petition said. The commission will have its first meetings March 25 and 26.
Withdrawing the license application will provide finality in ending the Yucca Mountain project and enable the blue ribbon commission to focus on alternate methods of meeting the federal government’s obligation to take high-level waste and used nuclear fuels, the DOE petition said.
Among topics it will consider are existing fuel cycle technologies that use commercial fuel just once.
“It is the secretary of energy’s judgment that scientific and engineering knowledge on issues relevant to disposition of high-level waste and spent nuclear fuel has advanced dramatically over the 20 years since the Yucca Mountain project was initiated,” the DOE petition said.
Future proposals for disposition of waste and fuel should be based on a comprehensive and careful evaluation of options supported by new knowledge and the ability to secure broad public support, which the Obama administration believes Yucca Mountain did not have, the DOE petition said.
DOE argued that the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 2002 does not prevent the energy secretary from withdrawing the license nor does it outline a step-by-step process for opening Yucca Mountain. Annette Cary: 582-1533; acary@tricity herald.com
-English-(c) 2010 The Tri-City Herald. All Rights Reserved.
The Department of Energy filed a petition to withdraw its Nuclear Regulatory Commission license application for the Yucca Mountain, Nev., radioactive waste repository Wednesday afternoon.
Shortly afterward, the state of Washington filed a petition with the NRC in an effort to block DOE from withdrawing the application and permanently terminating the Yucca Mountain project.
“The people of Washington did their part to help America win World War II and the Cold War and it’s long overdue for the federal government to do its part to ensure our state can complete the cleanup process at Hanford,” said Washington Attorney General Rob McKenna in a statement.
His concern was shared by other Washington leaders, both Democrats and Republicans.
Today, Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., plans to question Energy Secretary Steven Chu during a Senate Energy and Water Appropriations Hearing about the Obama administration’s decision. She believes Yucca Mountain needs to move forward and in 2002 voted in favor of the Senate resolution approving Yucca Mountain as the national nuclear waste repository.
Hanford has planned to send its high-level radioactive waste to Yucca Mountain for disposal since 2002. The waste includes high-level radioactive tank waste once it is turned into a stable glass form at the vitrification plant and 1,100 tons of highly radioactive fuel removed from Hanford’s K Basins.
“A unilateral decision to abandon Yucca Mountain without any justification and blocking it from ever being considered in the future is simply indefensible,” said Rep. Doc Hastings, R-Wash., in a statement. DOE filed its petition to withdraw the license application “with prejudice,” which would prevent it from being refiled.
“Under the law, Yucca Mountain remains the national repository,” Hastings said. “No administration is above the law and I fully support Attorney General McKenna’s legal action to intervene.”
Congress is limited by the Obama administration’s decision to reprogram $115 million and put it toward termination of Yucca Mountain, he said. But he’s “committed to pursuing any and all legislative options that will ensure that Yucca Mountain remains viable and is not sacrificed for election year politics.”
Rep. Jay Inslee, D-Wash., also said he will be exploring “every legislative avenue to correct this mistake, including a motion of disapproval, a funding limitation amendment or a resolution of inquiry.”
Gov. Chris Gregoire supports McKenna’s action to file to oppose DOE after working closely with him to review legal options, said her spokeswoman, Karina Shagren. The governor’s primary concern is that the DOE’s action would permanently remove Yucca Mountain from consideration as a national repository and no option should be off the table now, Shagren said.
“Permanently removing Yucca Mountain as the nation’s primary nuclear waste repository significantly sets back cleanup at Hanford and puts at risk both our state’s environment and its people,” McKenna said.
The state’s petition argues that the Nuclear Waste Policy Act requires DOE and the NRC to undertake a licensing process for Yucca Mountain and that neither have the legal authority to terminate the licensing process.
If Yucca Mountain no longer is the nation’s repository, parts of the $12.2 billion Hanford vitrification plant may need to be torn down and rebuilt to meet another repository’s requirements for accepting glassified waste, said a statement from the Attorney General’s office. Not only would costs increase significantly, but work also would be delayed to empty Hanford’s leak-prone tanks and treat the waste, the statement said.
“Congress has selected Yucca Mountain as the nation’s repository and roughly $10 billion has been spent on the project,” McKenna said. “The nation has no ready alternatives to deep geologic disposal nor does it have any ready alternatives to Yucca Mountain as a repository site.”
The state has not ruled out taking further legal action if needed, said Andy Fitz, Washington state assistant attorney general. Three Tri-City business leaders — Bob Ferguson, Bill Lampson and Gary Petersen — already have filed a lawsuit in federal court asking a judge to decide if the Obama administration can legally terminate Yucca Mountain.
“While DOE reaffirms its obligation to take possession and dispose of the nation’s spent nuclear fuel and high-level nuclear waste, the Secretary of Energy has decided that a geologic repository at Yucca Mountain is not a workable option for long-term disposition of these materials,” DOE wrote in its petition to withdraw the Yucca Mountain license application.
The energy secretary has established the Blue Ribbon Commission on America’s Nuclear Future, which will conduct a comprehensive review and consider applications for disposition of the waste and spent fuel, the DOE petition said. The commission will have its first meetings March 25 and 26.
Withdrawing the license application will provide finality in ending the Yucca Mountain project and enable the blue ribbon commission to focus on alternate methods of meeting the federal government’s obligation to take high-level waste and used nuclear fuels, the DOE petition said.
Among topics it will consider are existing fuel cycle technologies that use commercial fuel just once.
“It is the secretary of energy’s judgment that scientific and engineering knowledge on issues relevant to disposition of high-level waste and spent nuclear fuel has advanced dramatically over the 20 years since the Yucca Mountain project was initiated,” the DOE petition said.
Future proposals for disposition of waste and fuel should be based on a comprehensive and careful evaluation of options supported by new knowledge and the ability to secure broad public support, which the Obama administration believes Yucca Mountain did not have, the DOE petition said.
DOE argued that the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 2002 does not prevent the energy secretary from withdrawing the license nor does it outline a step-by-step process for opening Yucca Mountain. Annette Cary: 582-1533; acary@tricity herald.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)