Copyright 1999 Federal News Service, Inc.
Federal News Service
MARCH 24, 1999, WEDNESDAY
SECTION: IN THE NEWS
LENGTH:
1194 words
HEADLINE: PREPARED TESTIMONY OF
LAKE H.
BARRETT
ACTING DIRECTOR
OFFICE OF CIVILIAN RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
BEFORE THE SENATE COMMITTEE
ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
BODY:
INTRODUCTION
Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee, I am pleased
to appear before you today to discuss S. 608, the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of
1999, as well as the proposal to take title to spent nuclear fuel from civilian
nuclear power plants onsite until we are able to permanently dispose of it in a
geologic repository.
The Administration continues to believe that the
overriding goal of the Federal Government's high-level radioactive waste
management policy should be the establishment of a permanent, geologic
repository. We are committed to resolving the complex and important issue of
nuclear waste disposal in a manner consistent with sound science and the
protection of public health and safety, and the environment.
The repository
effort is essential not only for the disposal of commercial spent nuclear fuel,
but also for the disposal of spent fuel and high-level waste from the cleanup of
the nuclear weapons complex and from the Navy's nuclear-powered fleet. A
permanent repository is also important to our nuclear non-proliferation efforts
to demonstrate alternatives to reprocessing and for the disposal of foreign
research reactor fuel being returned to the U.S. It is also an option for the
disposition of surplus plutonium from nuclear weapons stockpiles. It is
important to keep in mind that this project is the first of its kind, and the
knowledge being gained by the United States in our effort to develop a permanent
repository is also impacting how other nations confront their nuclear waste
management responsibilities.
This Administration has made substantial
progress toward meeting the goal of establishing a permanent geological
repository. I would like to review this progress briefly before addressing the
proposed legislation on interim storage.
STATUS REPORT ON YUCCA
MOUNTAIN
Since 1993, we have drilled miles of tunnel into
Yucca Mountain to permit scientific investigations of the
geological setting and to enable us to verify model predictions that could not
be confirmed without being inside the mountain. We are conducting various
thermal tests to evaluate how the heat of the waste could impact the repository
structure and the surrounding rock. We are investigating water movement through
the repository structure and the effects of water on waste packages, as well as
the ways the heat from the decay of radioactive materials may affect the site's
geologic and hydrologic behavior. We are also evaluating different designs to
reduce uncertainties associated with the long-term performance of the
repository.
We are reaching the conclusion of our site characterization
effort at Yucca Mountain. As you know, in December 1998,
Secretary Richardson submitted the Viability Assessment of a Repository at
Yucca Mountain to the Congress and to the President. The
Viability Assessment revealed that no technical "show stoppers" have been
identified at the site, but it did identify additional scientific and technical
work needed before a decision can be made whether to recommend Yucca
Mountain as the site for a repository. In the Department's FY 2000
budget request to Congress, the Secretary has asked for close to a $50 million
increase for site characterization - a 17.4 percent increase - to continue this
ongoing work and fully address the scientific concerns raised in the Viability
Assessment.
We axe on schedule for the Secretary to make a decision in 2001
whether to recommend Yucca Mountain as the location of a
permanent repository, and, if the site is suitable, to submit a license
application to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in 2002.
CONTRACTUAL
OBLIGATION TO ACCEPT SPENT FUEL
Notwithstanding the progress being made at
Yucca Mountain, the nuclear utility industry and state utility
commissions are understandably concerned about the Department's inability to
accept spent fuel on the schedule anticipated at the time of enactment of the
Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982. As you are aware, the Department is currently
in litigation with a number of utilities over our inability to meet our
contractual obligation to begin taking spent fuel from those utilities by
January 31, 1998. Ten utilities have filed claims for damages. In preliminary
rulings in the first three cases, the Court ruled that the Department had
breached its contracts and that the utilities are entitled to pursue their
damage claims against the Department. The other Court of Federal Claims cases
are in very preliminary stages with potentially years of litigation still ahead.
The damages being sought by the ten utilities before the Court of Federal Claims
total $8.5 billion. This is more than the existing balance in the Nuclear Waste
Fund and is roughly 85 percent of the remaining cost to open the repository in
2010. Potential claims from other utilities could be many times this amount.
A decision is pending on whether payments for any potential judgments would
come out of the Nuclear Waste Fund. Should it become necessary to use the Fund
to pay these claims, the Department's ability to complete the repository program
would be in jeopardy. Ironically, claims against the Fund could also require a
significant increase in the fee charged utilities to maintain the program, and
could trigger yet another round of litigation and claims.
Some utilities
have come to the Department to discuss their specific spent fuel problems and
proposed potential solutions. In an effort to respond to these needs, the
Secretary has begun discussion of a proposal to take title to spent fuel on-site
at reactors. This approach appears to offer the potential to end the uncertainty
that continuing litigation brings to all parties and ensure the continuance of
the repository program. Before I discuss this approach, I would first like to
address the provisions of S. 608.
ADMINISTRATION'S VIEWS OF S. 608
The
Administration opposes any legislation, including S. 608, that calls for siting
an interim storage facility in Nevada before we have completed the necessary
work to decide whether Yucca Mountain will be the permanent
repository site. Making a decision now to put interim storage in Nevada is not
the right approach. The Administration does not believe it would make sense to
transport spent fuel across the country to Yucca Mountain until
we have completed the scientific work and know where a final repository will be.
Spent fuel is currently being stored safely at reactor sites, under U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission oversight, and can continue to be stored safely there
until a repository is open.
Enactment of S. 608 could have several negative
impacts on the repository program. First, it will add the cost of construction
of an interim storage facility to the program budget, and it will advance the
costs of transportation much earlier than now planned. Between now and the year
2010, we estimate that interim storage would add approximately $1.5 billion to
the total cost of the civilian radioactive waste program. It would also require
expending between $2 billion and $3 billion for transportation prior to knowing
whether Yucca Mountain will be the site for a permanent
repository.
LOAD-DATE: March 26, 1999
