Skip to main content

House Hearing on Revised Yucca Mountain Schedule Today at 2:00 p.m.

Here in Washington today, all eyes are on the the House Energy and Commerce Committee's Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality holds a hearing at 2:00 p.m. U.S. EDT on the revised schedule for the Yucca Mountain Project. Click here for all the information, and be sure to check back beginning at 1:50 p.m. U.S. EDT in order to access the Web cast of the hearing.

Earlier this week, the Department of Energy announced that the new target date for opening the facility had been moved to March 2017. In addition, DOE plans to submit a license application for the facility by June 30, 2008.

In the wake of the news, Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Chairman Pete Domenici issued the following statement:
“This is an ambitious schedule but it’s nice to actually see a schedule. This is the most detailed schedule on Yucca Mountain that I have seen in recent memory. I congratulate DOE for setting these goals. I continue to support Yucca as a long-term strategy and remain committed to funding this project. However, since a decade will have passed since the deadline for DOE to begin to accept spent fuel, we must do something now to meet this obligation. In the near term, the Consolidation and Preparation facilities in my appropriations bill will get us to 2017 and complements the long-term Yucca plan outlined by DOE today.”
I'll be back later this afternoon once the hearing wraps up.

UPDATE: Here's a release (PDF) we just got via email from DOE:
DOE Announces Yucca Mountain License Application Schedule
New Director Ward Sproat Testifies on Revised Timeline

WASHINGTON, DC – The Department of Energy (DOE) today announced that it will submit a license application to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) for a nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, no later than June 30, 2008. The Department also announced that if requested legislative changes are enacted, the repository will be able to accept spent nuclear fuel and high-level waste starting in early 2017. Announcing a schedule for submitting a license application is another step in the Department’s mission to provide stability, clarity and predictability in moving the Yucca Mountain Project forward as quickly as possible based on sound science.

“I am confident that we will prepare and submit a defensible and credible license application that accurately reflects a design for the Yucca Mountain repository which meets or exceeds the safety criteria specified by the NRC no later than Monday, June 30, 2008,” said Edward “Ward” Sproat, Director of the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management, in testimony before the House Energy & Commerce Committee’s Energy & Air Quality subcommittee.

Sproat announced that independent, external assessments will be conducted on the draft license application, several key engineering processes, and the quality assurance programs at DOE, the primary Yucca Mountain contractor, and several national laboratories. Requests for proposals will be issued within the next few weeks seeking qualified experts to conduct these assessments.

“These reviews will tell us the gaps that currently exist between where the program stands right now and where it needs to be when we submit the application. Safety, quality and schedule discipline are not mutually exclusive; in fact, we will need all three of these elements to meet these licensing expectations,” Sproat said.

Sproat emphasized that submitting a license application by June 30, 2008, is his first priority. He said before an application is submitted the following conditions will be met to his satisfaction: design of license meets the licensing requirements; application accurately reflects the design; data which is used to justify the design is accurate and generated in compliance with quality assurance requirements; application adequately addresses all of the requirements of NUREG 1804 (NRC’s Yucca Mountain Review Plan); and writers of the application have attested to the accuracy and completeness of their sections.

Submittal of the license application by this date is one of four strategic objectives that Sproat said are “of utmost importance to this program and will be the basis of planning and resource allocation during my tenure.”

Sproat’s four objectives are to:
  • Submit a license application to the NRC by June 30, 2008;
  • Staff and train the OCRWM organization so that it has the skills and culture needed to design, license, manage construction and operate the Yucca Mountain project with safety, quality and cost effectiveness;
  • Address the impasse and growing government liability associated with unmet contractual obligations to move spent fuel from nuclear plant sites;
  • Develop and begin implementation of a comprehensive national spent fuel transportation plan that accommodates state, local and tribal concerns to the greatest extent possible.
More later.

UPDATE: For a copy of Sproat's testimony, click here. One highlight from the Q&A: One congressman asked Sproat why the committee should believe that DOE would be able to stick to the revised schedule. In response, Sproat said that his background as an engineer gave him an advantage in the job, and that he was committed to holding people "accountable" for the schedule.

Technorati tags: , , , , , , , ,

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Fluor Invests in NuScale

You know, it’s kind of sad that no one is willing to invest in nuclear energy anymore. Wait, what? NuScale Power celebrated the news of its company-saving $30 million investment from Fluor Corp. Thursday morning with a press conference in Washington, D.C. Fluor is a design, engineering and construction company involved with some 20 plants in the 70s and 80s, but it has not held interest in a nuclear energy company until now. Fluor, which has deep roots in the nuclear industry, is betting big on small-scale nuclear energy with its NuScale investment. "It's become a serious contender in the last decade or so," John Hopkins, [Fluor’s group president in charge of new ventures], said. And that brings us to NuScale, which had run into some dark days – maybe not as dark as, say, Solyndra, but dire enough : Earlier this year, the Securities Exchange Commission filed an action against NuScale's lead investor, The Michael Kenwood Group. The firm "misap

An Ohio School Board Is Working to Save Nuclear Plants

Ohio faces a decision soon about its two nuclear reactors, Davis-Besse and Perry, and on Wednesday, neighbors of one of those plants issued a cry for help. The reactors’ problem is that the price of electricity they sell on the high-voltage grid is depressed, mostly because of a surplus of natural gas. And the reactors do not get any revenue for the other benefits they provide. Some of those benefits are regional – emissions-free electricity, reliability with months of fuel on-site, and diversity in case of problems or price spikes with gas or coal, state and federal payroll taxes, and national economic stimulus as the plants buy fuel, supplies and services. Some of the benefits are highly localized, including employment and property taxes. One locality is already feeling the pinch: Oak Harbor on Lake Erie, home to Davis-Besse. The town has a middle school in a building that is 106 years old, and an elementary school from the 1950s, and on May 2 was scheduled to have a referendu

Wednesday Update

From NEI’s Japan micro-site: NRC, Industry Concur on Many Post-Fukushima Actions Industry/Regulatory/Political Issues • There is a “great deal of alignment” between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the industry on initial steps to take at America’s nuclear energy facilities in response to the nuclear accident in Japan, Charles Pardee, the chief operating officer of Exelon Generation Co., said at an agency briefing today. The briefing gave stakeholders an opportunity to discuss staff recommendations for near-term actions the agency may take at U.S. facilities. PowerPoint slides from the meeting are on the NRC website. • The International Atomic Energy Agency board has approved a plan that calls for inspectors to evaluate reactor safety at nuclear energy facilities every three years. Governments may opt out of having their country’s facilities inspected. Also approved were plans to maintain a rapid response team of experts ready to assist facility operators recoverin