For Oklahoma U.S. Sen. Jim Inhofe, it’s been a long, long conversation in this country on the subject of how to deal with spent nuclear fuel.
At a recent hearing held by the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, the Republican Senator again stressed the need for a permanent solution. The hearing focused on S2373, the American Nuclear Infrastructure Act and S.1290, the STRANDED Act.
“I’ve long supported nuclear energy and ensuring spent fuel is safely and properly stored in a permanent repository. We’ve been talking about this issue for so long now. I keep thinking we are getting closer, and I think we are,” said the Senator during his opportunity ask questions of the witnesses.
However, Inhofe also contends there has been opposition over the years to permanently dispose of the nuclear waste sites and resistance to such places at Yucca Mountain.
“Taxpayers nationwide, including Oklahomans, already pay the liability cost of storing spent fuel where it is after a government failed to build a permanent repository. So, instead of sending more Oklahoman’s taxpayer dollars to localities with spent fuel, we should work together to secure a permanent solution,” added the Senator.
Witnesses included: David Knabel, Director of Accounts and Finance, City of Zion, IL; Armond Cohen, Executive Director, Clean Air Task Force; Maria Korsnick, President and CEO, Nuclear Energy Institute; and Jeremey Harrell, Chief Strategy Officer, ClearPath Action.
Click here to watch Inhofe’s full remarks.
Inhofe: First of all, let me thank both the chairman and the vice chairman for acknowledging the fact that we have a lot of competing committees taking place all the time.
This is very important to me, though, and I enjoy it, all four the statements; I thought there were great statements that were made. Ms. Korsnick, I’ve long supported nuclear energy and ensuring spent fuel is safely and properly stored in a permanent repository. We’ve been talking about this issue for so long now. I keep thinking we are getting closer, and I think we are. While Senator Duckworth’s bill is a good faith effort to help her state a concern that, basically, kind of pays the communities to tolerate long-term problems. No locality should have stranded nuclear waste, but this is a result of the fact that we have had opposition over the years to permanently dispose of the sights, and there has been resistance such as there was for such a long period of time over at Yucca Mountain. Taxpayers nationwide, including Oklahomans, already pay the liability cost of storing spent fuel where it is after a government failed to build a permanent repository. So, instead of sending more Oklahoman’s taxpayer dollars to localities with spent fuel, we should work together to secure a permanent solution. Ms. Korsnick, would you agree that Congress should return its focus to securing a permanent repository for the spent fields? What ideas do you have along that line?
Korsnick: Thank you very much, Senator Inhofe. And yes, we very much support a long-term, durable solution for nuclear storage. Perhaps if I could just step back for a moment, to say, we should be very proud of the American nuclear industry for all that it has brought. We are the strongest operating fleet in the world. We bring a lot of American innovation, and that American innovation can be used to help solve this long-term storage issue. We simply need to put our mind to it. When we began the nuclear industry 50 years ago, of course, things were put in place to manage used fuel, and we have done that part of it. Money has been collected; over 40 billion dollars in the nuclear waste fund, and we have promised to operate safely and to store this fuel in a safe manner until the government kept up its end of the bargain to pick up this fuel. The government has not picked up that end of the bargain. I think it’s high time that we focus on that. I applaud the DOE for recently putting out an RFI on a consent-based citing process for interim storage. I think that’s a good step. We’re happy to work together to make in-roads, but as a nation, we need a long-term storage repository. If you look across the world – it was mentioned earlier – Sweden is doing this, France is doing this, Finland is doing this, Switzerland is doing this, so we’re behind.
Inhofe: We’re behind, and I’m getting a little behind also. Let me mention, Mr. Harrell, several people in your opening statements talked about NEIMA, and the successes that we’ve had, and we have had successes. NRC’s core mission is conducting inspections and license reviews, yet only twenty-one percent of its budget is allocated for that purpose while corporate support is over thirty percent. Mr. Harrell, do you agree that the NRC needs to streamline its corporate support budget so it does not exceed that of the inspections and license review budget? This is kind of an interesting thing because you are dealing with government here, and some of this comes out quite accidentally. What do you think?
Harrell: Yeah, that’s a great question to ask, Senator Inhofe, and thank you for your strong support for nuclear. Particularly, your work at the Armed Services Committee on microreactors in the NDAA. I agree. I think that the resources need to be focused on key areas in modernization. No doubt, we need to inject new talent into the NRC. As I mentioned in my testimony, ten new reactor designs could be coming in the next three years. We need to be able to focus and bring the NRC to the 21st century and get them focused on these new technologies. Making sure resources that are coming in, whether it’s corporate support or off-fee resources, whatever it may be, need to be zeroed in on the key licensing areas to accelerate the licensing and ultimate deployment of those enhanced reactors.
Inhofe: I appreciate that very much, and let me also compliment you on the statement that needs to be made all the time, and that is: if we don’t do it, China and Russia are going to do it, alright? Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Carper: Thank you, Senator Inhofe, for your leadership all these years on getting us to a place where we have safe, clean nuclear energy and do it in ways that are smart.
Inhofe: I appreciate that. You know, each member of this committee would say this is the least partisan of the committees in dealing with such serious subjects. I think all of you have been doing well.