1. 1 Nuclear Waste Brian OConnell NARUC Nuclear Waste Program Office Kansas Corporation Commission Topeka February 2008

2. 2 Intended Outline State interests in nuclear waste Nuclear Waste Policy Act Status of the Nuclear Waste Fund –Warning: May stir feelings of outrage Yucca Mountain repository Transportation of spent nuclear fuel Legislation A little bit on reprocessing

3. 3 Nuclear Gets a Fresh Look

4. 4

5. 5 Nuclear Self-Deception Presidential Division Resolving civilian waste management problems shall not be deferred to future generations. -- President Jimmy Carter 1980

6. 6 State Interests in Nuclear Waste Health, safety Transportation Environment Financial Power supply Financial Power supply PUCPUC Trans Health, Safety

7. 7 The Nuclear Waste Policy Act The Federal Government is responsible for nuclear waste disposal Those who benefit shall pay for disposal Disposal (was) to begin in 1998 The Federal Government is responsible for nuclear waste disposal Those who benefit shall pay for disposal Disposal (was) to begin in 1998

8. 8 "The costs of disposal should be the responsibility of the generators... of waste and spent fuel" -- Nuclear Waste Policy Act Program funding derives from two sources: Nuclear Waste Fund and Defense Nuclear Waste Disposal Appropriation The realities of the Federal budget process have limited the Program's access to the Nuclear Waste Fund Funding over the last 8 years has been over $1 billion less than requested If the site is licensed, outyear funding needs to design, construct, and operation a repository will increase significantly Cost and Funding Overview

9. 9 Current State of the Nuclear Waste Program The Federal Government has our money We have their waste The Federal Government has our money We have their waste

10. 10 Current State of the Nuclear Waste Program The Federal Government has our money We have their waste Commissioner Mike Wilson, FL PSC 1991 The Federal Government has our money We have their waste Commissioner Mike Wilson, FL PSC 1991

11. 11 Nuclear Issues are Political Issues Any decision about the management of nuclear wastes must be made in the cauldron of intense public controversy. - Dr. Richard Meserve Former Chairman Nuclear Regulatory Commission November 2000

12. 12 Current Locations Of Spent Nuclear Fuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste Commercial SNF Dry Storage (On-Site)

13. 13 Nuclear Materials Destined for Geologic Disposal

14. 14 Historical and Projected Commercial Spent Nuclear Fuel Discharges Sources: * Based on actual discharge data as reported on RW-859s through 12/31/02, and projected discharges, in this case, based on 104 license renewals. ** Represents the aggregate industry pool capacity based on pool capacities provided in 2002 RW-859 (less FCR) and supplemented by utility storage plans. However, the industry is not one big pool and storage situations at individual sites differ based on pool capacities versus discharges into specific pools. As of May 14, 2007Discharge Curves 051407.ppt Actual Discharges*, all reactors (operating & shutdown) Projected discharges, all reactors, 48 license renewals Projected discharges*, all reactors, 104 license renewals Actual discharges, shutdown reactors only Actual MTHM in dry storage, all reactors There are 104 operating reactors and 14 shutdown reactors ~ 9,500 MTHM in dry storage (as of 5/14/07) ~ 3,800 MTHM from 14 shutdown reactors Current Inventory: ~ 55,700 MTHM from 118 reactors (as of 12/06) Current pool capacity ~ 61,000 MTHM** Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 2055 ~110,000 MTHM total ~130,000 MTHM total

15. 15 Original Plan Fresh from reactor ~20 MT/yr Cooling Pools Next stageReprocessing To be done on commercial basis Final DispositionTo be determined Spent Fuel Management and Disposition

16. 16 Original Plan Nuclear Waste Policy Act 1982 Fresh from reactor ~20 MT/yr Cooling Pools Cooling Pools Next stageReprocessingBegin disposal in 1998 based on oldest first ReprocessingTo be done on commercial basis Policy decision to not reprocess 1977 Final DispositionTo be determined Geologic Repositories Spent Fuel Management and Disposition

17. 17 Original Plan Nuclear Waste Policy Act 1982 Present Reality Fresh from reactor ~20 MT/yr Cooling Pools Cooling Pools Pools expanded and at capacity Next stageReprocessingBegin disposal in 1998 based on oldest first Dry cask storage and litigation ReprocessingTo be done on commercial basis Policy decision to not reprocess 1977 Being reconsidered Final DispositionTo be determined Geologic Repositories Repository Stalemate Spent Fuel Management and Disposition

18. 18 Why Yucca Mountain?

19. 19 Why Yucca Mountain? –Located on the Nevada Test Site, a Department of Energy facility, where over 800 nuclear weapons tests have occurred –Far from major population centers -- 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas –Located in a closed hydrologic basin Natural features that suggest it may be a suitable site:Natural features that suggest it may be a suitable site: –Arid climate –Extremely deep water table –Relative stability over the past million years Remote and controlled locationRemote and controlled location

20. 20 Repository Reference Design Concept Repository Concept N Waste Handling Building Waste Treatment Building Transporter Maintenance Building Surface Layout Waste Receiving North Portal Entrance Alcove #1 Enhanced Characterization Repository Block Drift Subsurface Layout Waste Emplacement To accommodate 70,000 metric tons, the proposed repository would include approximately 36 miles of tunnels which would hold approximately 10,000 waste packages.

21. 21 Reference Waste Package Design Concept Waste packages contain canisters of defense high-level waste, commercial and DOE spent nuclear fuel, and dispositioned surplus plutonium. 21-PWR commercial SNF waste package Emplacement drift segment Co-Disposal Waste Package Outer Barrier Inner Barrier DOE SNF Canister Vitrified HLW Canisters Note: Engineering enhancements underway. Co-Disposal Waste Package Immobilized plutonium and high-level waste canister

22. 22

23. 23 Design Must Demonstrate Compliance to Strict Radiation Protection Standards Preliminary Base Case Time (years) 100010000100000 Dose Rate (mrem/yr) This information was prepared for illustrative purposes only and is subject to revision; not appropriate for assessing regulatory compliance. 95th Percentile Mean Median 5th Percentile Proposed Compliance Timeframe = 10,000 years 15 mrem Proposed Individual Protection Standard 360 mrem Average U.S. Individual Exposure Common Sources of Radiation Exposure 150 mrem Cosmic Radiation in Denver 10 mrem One Chest X-Ray 5 mrem N.Y. to L.A. Flight 7 mrem Exposure from Living in a Brick House 4 mrem EPA Groundwater Policy (equivalent to eating a banana a day for a year). 80 mrem Exposure from Working in Capitol 110 mrem CAT Scan

24. 24 Spent Fuel Transportation Excellent safety record Public anxiety nonetheless WIPP helped establish cooperative planning and coordination w/ States Yucca would start no sooner than 2017 and continue 24 yrs Yucca would include emergency response training and $ CSGMW Balance public info & security

25. 25 Nuclear Waste Legislation Not a good track record S. 2589/H.R. 5360 –Land withdrawal for the site –Lift the 70,000 MT statutory cap –Reform the NWF appropriation process –Provide licensing, transportation and other regulatory improvements Inhofe Multi-stage Licensing (S. 2551) Reid take title proposal (S. 784)

26. 26 Nuclear Waste Fund Balance (in millions of dollars, based on FY 2009 Budget) Balance at start of year $21,542 Receipts Fee payments from utilities 764 Earnings on investments 1,173 Total receipts and collections 1,937 Appropriations from NWF for Yucca 247 (32 pct of fees paid) Other related salaries and expenses 41 Balance at end of year $ 23,191

27. 27 Why NWF Reform is Needed Projected fee revenue $750 M FY 2008 appropriation 187 M* Line loss 563 M The balance is credited to the NWF but in reality is either gone (spent) or inaccessible * Defense adds $199M for total $387M in FY 2008

28. 28 HLW Options and Possibilities* *AFCI-2005

29. 29

30. 30 Reprocessing Basics Banned in U.S. by Ford, Carter Done in UK, RU, FR, JA Present methods separate plutonium Economics not apparent, $ of U Decades away in US Likely siting and transport concerns Requires different waste storage Still need at least one repository

31. 31 New Nuclear Plant Storage NWPA still applies –New Standard Contract needed –Fee for power sold still required COL will require a spent fuel management plan Likely to have more pool capacity Some utilities consider lack of disposal a dealbreaker; others dont Reprocessing still a question

32. 32 For More Information NARUC –Brian OConnell 202-898-2215 boconnell@naruc.orgboconnell@naruc.org –www.naruc.org DOE –www.rw.doe.gov www.ymp.govwww.ymp.gov –www.gnep.energy.gov NRC –www.nrc.gov NEI –www.nei.org

33. 33 Questions