Skip to main content

Yucca Mountain And Political Will

hastings Ever since Energy Secretary Steven Chu set about closing Yucca Mountain, Congress members have been handing DOE staff – and Chu – considerable grief for the decision at virtually every hearing since then. So the recent decision that the used fuel repository’s license application cannot be withdrawn from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission seems a kind of vindication, reasserting Congressional will – the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 that, via a 1987 amendment, designated Yucca Mountain as the used fuel repository – over an executive decision.

Drawing the lines between branches of government is, of course, a perpetual issue in American governance, but this decision seems clear cut: the Act and its amendment were passed by Congress and signed by President Ronald Reagan. Closing Yucca Mountain means overturning or further amending the Act – and no one seems eager to do either.

So if Congress does feel vindicated, why not press the point?

Some 91 members of Congress on Tuesday called on Energy Secretary Steven Chu to halt the dismantling of the high-level nuclear waste repository project at Yucca Mountain, Nevada.

The lawmakers, 67 of whom are Republicans, told Chu in a letter that they "are deeply  troubled" that the US Department of Energy is continuing to move forward with its plan to terminate the Yucca Mountain project despite recent actions by … the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission Atomic Safety and Licensing Board.

67 Republicans might feel like mischief, but those 24 Democrats provide a hefty bipartisan spirit. The Platts story notes this, but inflects it differently than we would:

All 91 lawmakers who signed the letter represent states that have nuclear power or DOE nuclear facilities with high-level defense waste stored on site.

That might make you think a fairly low number of states are represented by the letter, but in fact it includes 35 states. It’s hard to suggest a Congressperson represents a “nuclear state.” When you include businesses that provide materials and services for nuclear power plants (for example, New Mexico’s new uranium enrichment plant), every state is a nuclear state, one way or another.

---

Here’s the text of the letter:

Dear Secretary Chu:

We write today to request that the Department of Energy immediately halt all actions to dismantle operations at Yucca Mountain at least until legal action regarding the withdrawal of the application is resolved by the DC Circuit Court and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

The DC Circuit Court has taken the important step of approving the motion to expedite legal actions and has combined the cases involving the State of Washington, State of South Carolina, Aiken County, and Tri-Cities, Washington community leaders. This is a clear demonstration by the Court that the merits of the case must be heard and ruled upon prior to further action by the Department of Energy to shut down Yucca Mountain.

On June 29, 2010, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Atomic Safety and Licensing Board denied the Department's motion to withdraw its license application for Yucca Mountain, a clear statement that the Department does not have the authority under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act to unilaterally terminate Yucca Mountain.

In light of the recent legal and regulatory actions, we are deeply troubled that the Department continues to move forward with terminating the project regardless of this decision. We are also concerned that the Department is using its budget proposal in an attempt to justify the termination of Yucca Mountain.

As you know, the Nuclear Waste Policy Act designated Yucca Mountain as the only candidate site for the national repository. Congressional intent is clear - Congress has voted several times to retain Yucca Mountain as the national repository. We are deeply disappointed that DOE has overstepped its bounds and has ignored congressional intent without peer review or proper scientific documentation in its actions regarding Yucca Mountain.

We ask that you recognize the letter and spirit of the law, honor the timeline set by the court, and halt all efforts to reprogram funds or terminate contracts related to Yucca Mountain.

Thank you for your consideration and we look forward to your timely response.

Sincerely, etc.

You can find a complete list of the signatories and a pdf copy of the letter here. This is Sen. Patty Murray’s (D-Wash.) site. She and Rep. Doc Hastings (R-Wash.) initiated the letter.

Rep. Doc Hastings rather surprisingly shaves off his beard regularly and equally regularly grows it back – not standard “brand” management, but perhaps Hasting doesn’t need it or care - the beard somehow seems right for a man named Doc.

Comments

DocForesight said…
"67 Republicans might feel like mischief..." -- seems like a rather interesting formulation. Could it be that those representatives actually support what NEI supports - more nuclear power plants - and believe that acts of Congress and the separation of powers actually ought to be abided by?

Now let's see both parties endorse, in word and in deed, reviving alternative reactor designs that can extract multiples of more power from the "used fuel" and leave a fraction of the true "waste" for long-term storage.
Joffan said…
The correct split for party allegiance is 14 Democrats and 77 Republicans. The split between houses of Congress was 67 Representatives and 24 Senators - no doubt the "Rep" was misinterpreted at some stage.

Even so - and indeed even if only one member of Congress had raised the issue - stopping Yucca's reprository prior to changing the law is simply the wrong way round to do things. And as far as I have heard there is not even an outline timetable to change the law at present.
Tom said…
Chu should restart the IFR project and start building of a demonstration plant immediately. That's the silver bullet.

Popular posts from this blog

Knowing What You’ve Got Before It’s Gone in Nuclear Energy

The following is a guest post from Matt Wald, senior director of policy analysis and strategic planning at NEI. Follow Matt on Twitter at @MattLWald.

Nuclear energy is by far the largest source of carbon prevention in the United States, but this is a rough time to be in the business of selling electricity due to cheap natural gas and a flood of subsidized renewable energy. Some nuclear plants have closed prematurely, and others likely will follow.
In recent weeks, Exelon and the Omaha Public Power District said that they might close the Clinton, Quad Cities and Fort Calhoun nuclear reactors. As Joni Mitchell’s famous song says, “Don’t it always seem to go that you don’t what you’ve got ‘til it’s gone.”
More than 100 energy and policy experts will gather in a U.S. Senate meeting room on May 19 to talk about how to improve the viability of existing nuclear plants. The event will be webcast, and a link will be available here.
Unlike other energy sources, nuclear power plants get no specia…

Making Clouds for a Living

Donell Banks works at Southern Nuclear’s Plant Vogtle units 3 and 4 as a shift supervisor in Operations, but is in the process of transitioning to his newly appointed role as the daily work controls manager. He has been in the nuclear energy industry for about 11 years.

I love what I do because I have the unique opportunity to help shape the direction and influence the culture for the future of nuclear power in the United States. Every single day presents a new challenge, but I wouldn't have it any other way. As a shift supervisor, I was primarily responsible for managing the development of procedures and programs to support operation of the first new nuclear units in the United States in more than 30 years. As the daily work controls manager, I will be responsible for oversight of the execution and scheduling of daily work to ensure organizational readiness to operate the new units.

I envision a nuclear energy industry that leverages the technology of today to improve efficiency…

Nuclear: Energy for All Political Seasons

The electoral college will soon confirm a surprise election result, Donald Trump. However, in the electricity world, there are fewer surprises – physics and economics will continue to apply, and Republicans and Democrats are going to find a lot to like about nuclear energy over the next four years.

In a Trump administration, the carbon conversation is going to be less prominent. But the nuclear value proposition is still there. We bring steady jobs to rural areas, including in the Rust Belt, which put Donald Trump in office. Nuclear plants keep the surrounding communities vibrant.

We hold down electricity costs for the whole economy. We provide energy diversity, reducing the risk of disruption. We are a critical part of America’s industrial infrastructure, and the importance of infrastructure is something that President-Elect Trump has stressed.

One of our infrastructure challenges is natural gas pipelines, which have gotten more congested as extremely low gas prices have pulled m…