[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 100 (Wednesday, May 25, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-12787]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: May 25, 1994]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management

 

Waste Acceptance Issues

AGENCY: Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management, Department of 
Energy.

ACTION: Notice of inquiry.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Department of Energy seeks to address the concerns of 
affected parties regarding the continued storage of spent nuclear fuel 
at reactor sites beyond 1998. Through this Notice of Inquiry, the 
Department desires to elicit the views of affected parties on: (1) The 
Department's preliminary view that it does not have a statutory 
obligation to accept spent nuclear fuel in 1998 in the absence of an 
operational repository or a suitable storage facility constructed under 
the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, as amended; (2) the need for an 
interim, away-from-reactor storage facility prior to repository 
operations; and (3) options for offsetting, through the use of the 
Nuclear Waste Fund, a portion of the financial burden that may be 
incurred by utilities in continuing to store spent nuclear fuel at 
reactor sites beyond 1998. While seeking these comments, the Department 
remains committed to pursuing the permanent disposal of spent nuclear 
fuel and developing a strategy to address its interim storage.

DATES: Written submissions are due on or before September 22, 1994.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should be submitted to Mr. Alan Brownstein, 
Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management (RW-432), U.S. 
Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 
20585.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Alan Brownstein at the address 
above, or by telephone at (202) 586-7346 or Mr. Robert Waxman of the 
Office of General Counsel at (202) 586-6975.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

A. The Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982

    The Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, as amended, [Act], 42 U.S.C. 
10101 et seq., provides a comprehensive framework for disposal of 
commercial spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste. Section 
302 of the Act established the Nuclear Waste Fund and required owners 
and generators of spent nuclear fuel and high-level waste to pay fees 
into the Nuclear Waste Fund sufficient to ensure the full-cost recovery 
of all program expenditures. Section 302(a) authorized the Secretary to 
enter into contracts with the owners and generators of spent nuclear 
fuel and high-level waste of domestic origin [herein referred to as 
``utility''] for the acceptance and disposal of such wastes. Section 
302(a)(5) of the Act further stipulated that these contracts shall 
provide that the Secretary shall take title to the spent nuclear fuel 
or high-level waste as expeditiously as practicable following 
commencement of operation of a repository and that, in return for 
payment of the fees established by this section, the Secretary, 
beginning not later than January 31, 1998, will dispose of these 
wastes.

B. Standard Contract for Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel and/or High-
Level Radioactive Waste

    The Department implemented Section 302(a) of the Act through 
rulemaking under which it promulgated the Standard Contract for 
Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel and/or High-Level Radioactive Waste 
(Standard Contract) (48 FR 16590, codified at 10 CFR part 961), which 
was published on April 18, 1983. Article II of the Standard Contract 
states that ``the services to be provided by DOE [Department of Energy] 
under this contract shall begin, after commencement of facility 
operations, not later than January 31, 1998 * * *''. The use of the 
term ``facility'' in the Standard Contract, as contrasted with the use 
of the term ``repository'' in the Act, was in recognition that a 
Monitored Retrievable Storage (MRS) facility may be available before a 
repository and could meet the intent of the statute.

C. Development of a Repository and a MRS

    When the Act was passed, the Department anticipated that a geologic 
repository would be in operation and prepared to begin acceptance of 
spent nuclear fuel by January 31, 1998. As indicated above, when the 
Standard Contract was promulgated, the Department envisioned that it 
would have a waste management facility in operation and would be 
prepared to begin acceptance of spent nuclear fuel by January 31, 1998.
    The Act provides for a comprehensive site selection and site 
characterization process, wherein the Department makes a recommendation 
to the President for approval of a repository. Currently, the Yucca 
Mountain site in Nevada is the only site authorized by the Congress for 
site characterization. Should Yucca Mountain prove scientifically 
suitable, and be licensed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and 
approved by the Congress, the Department currently projects that the 
earliest possible date for acceptance of waste for disposal at a 
repository is 2010.
    With respect to availability of an MRS to accept and temporarily 
store spent nuclear fuel, the Nuclear Waste Policy Amendments Act of 
1987 (Amendments Act) linked the development schedule for an MRS 
facility to the geologic repository. The Amendments Act precludes the 
Department from selecting an MRS site until a repository site is 
recommended to the President, and MRS construction may not be started 
until a construction authorization for a repository is received from 
the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Given these timing restrictions, the 
Department has looked to the negotiated siting process, administered by 
the Nuclear Waste Negotiator, and a negotiated agreement proposing a 
site to the Congress as the appropriate mechanism for achieving the 
1998 waste acceptance target. Experience has shown that there are 
significant challenges associated with siting any facility of this 
type. Thus far, neither the efforts of the Department nor any other 
organization, including the Office of the Nuclear Waste Negotiator, 
have achieved the level of success needed to realize significant 
progress in locating and developing a site by 1998.
    In an April 1, 1993, letter to the Secretary of Energy, the 
National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners (NARUC) 
proposed that a collaborative dialogue be initiated to identify and 
develop constructive recommendations for the Secretary and others for 
their consideration in evaluating alternatives for interim spent 
nuclear fuel storage. In order to establish a dialogue whose 
participants represented a broad range of affected interests, NARUC 
extended invitations to state utility regulators, nuclear utility 
executives, environmental groups, and representatives from the State of 
Nevada. Individuals from the Department of Energy and the Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission were invited to provide technical assistance.
    Over the course of three meetings, the participants identified 
alternatives for interim storage of spent nuclear fuel, and considered 
the advantages and disadvantages of each. On February 25, 1994, NARUC 
issued the Report and Recommendations of the NARUC Dialogue on Spent 
Fuel Management, presenting the results of this stakeholder dialogue. 
In summary, the majority findings of the NARUC dialogue were that:

    Centralized off-site interim storage of spent fuel is far 
preferable to on-site storage at reactor sites throughout the 
country. The federal government should take immediate action to 
establish centralized interim storage capability by 1998, including 
the commencement of an effort to develop such capability at one or 
more federal sites. This represents a sensible, safe, economic 
approach to meeting the nation's near term spent fuel management 
needs. The participants recognize that Congressional action is 
necessary to effectuate many of the recommendations. They also 
recognize that this is a difficult issue and are ready to actively 
assist the federal government in discharging its responsibilities.

D. The Department's Waste Acceptance Obligation

    Many utilities have maintained that certain terms in the Act and 
the Standard Contract created an unconditional obligation on behalf of 
the Department to begin accepting spent nuclear fuel in 1998. Some of 
these utilities have informed the Department that they have implemented 
long term waste management plans based on this interpretation.
    The Department's preliminary view is that it has no statutory 
obligation to accept spent nuclear fuel beginning in 1998 in the 
absence of an operational repository or other facility constructed 
under the Act, although the Department in implementing the Standard 
Contract may have created an expectation that it would begin accepting 
such spent nuclear fuel in 1998. Accordingly, the Secretary has 
indicated her intent to explore with affected parties various options 
and methods for sharing the costs related to the financial burden 
associated with continued on-site storage. Any form of cost sharing 
offered through the Nuclear Waste Fund is not intended to fulfill the 
Department's ultimate obligation under the Standard Contract to take 
title to and physical possession of spent nuclear fuel once a facility 
constructed under the Act is operational.

E. Purpose of Notice

    This Notice of Inquiry is intended to implement the Secretary's 
initiative by eliciting the views of affected parties on: (1) The 
Department's preliminary view that it does not have a statutory 
obligation to accept spent nuclear fuel in 1998 in the absence of an 
operational repository or other facility constructed under the Act; (2) 
the need for an interim, away-from-reactor storage facility prior to 
repository operations; and (3) options for offsetting, through the use 
of the Nuclear Waste Fund, a portion of the financial burden that may 
be incurred by utilities in continuing to store spent nuclear fuel at 
reactor sites beyond 1998.
    Should the Department proceed with some form of cost sharing, each 
utility would be offered an opportunity to modify its Standard 
Contract. As a condition of such cost sharing, it is possible that the 
Department may require a release, in whole or in part, of potential 
contractual liability arising out of any obligation to accept waste 
prior to commencement of repository operation or the operation of 
another facility constructed under the Act.
    The Department recognizes that there are a number of potential 
forms of cost sharing arrangements, but at this time, the Department 
has not reached a decision whether to proceed with, nor is it 
predisposed to, any particular form of cost sharing. Currently, the 
Department is evaluating a design for multi-purpose canisters (MPC) to 
support spent nuclear fuel transportation, storage, and disposal. The 
MPC offers the potential for considerable standardization, 
simplification and, consequently, cost savings for both utilities and 
the Federal waste management system. Given the potential benefits of 
the MPC, the Secretary has directed that the options to be explored by 
the Department should include, to the maximum extent possible, the 
provision and use of MPCs to address both schedule and cost concerns 
arising from the potential unavailability of a repository or an MRS in 
1998.

II. Requests for Submissions

    The Department requests written comments from all affected parties. 
All written information provided by respondents will be available for 
public inspection at the Department of Energy, Freedom of Information 
Reading Room, room 1E-190, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, 
DC 20585 between the hours of 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, 
except Federal holidays. Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 1004.11, 
any person submitting information believed to be proprietary or 
confidential and exempt by law from public disclosure should submit two 
copies of the document; 1 complete copy and 1 copy in which information 
believed to be proprietary or confidential has been deleted, and the 
reasons you believe the information is not subject to disclosure. 
Information identified as proprietary or confidential will be handled 
in accordance with governing Departmental regulations. Specific areas 
for comment are identified below; however, this delineation of issues 
is not intended to limit the content of submissions.

Legal Issue

     Does the Department have a legal obligation under the Act 
or the Standard Contract to accept waste in 1998 in the absence of a 
repository or other facility under the Act? If so, should the 
Department seek a release, in whole or in part, of any liability 
arising out of such obligation as a condition of cost sharing?

Interim Storage Issues

     Does there continue to be a need for a Federal or 
centralized interim storage facility prior to repository operations?
     Should the development of an interim spent nuclear fuel 
storage facility at an existing Federal site be pursued?
     What role, if any, should the Department play in the 
development of private interim storage facilities?
     If the Department is successful in making available 
central interim storage for spent nuclear fuel, should each utility 
have the option to pursue continued storage on-site or elsewhere?
     Should the Department pursue with Congress the elimination 
of the existing restrictions on MRS siting, construction, and 
operations?
     What additional comments do you have on the NARUC 
dialogue? (Copies of their Report are available in the Department of 
Energy's, Freedom of Information Reading Room, room 1E-190, 1000 
Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585 between the hours of 9 
a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.)

Cost Sharing Issues

     Recognizing the full-cost recovery provision and the 
limitations imposed on the use of the Nuclear Waste Fund by Section 302 
of the Act, should the Department consider offering some form of cost 
sharing to utilities if it is unable to begin accepting spent nuclear 
fuel by 1998?
     What basis should the Department use for establishing the 
order and timing by which such cost sharing is offered?
     If it is found that such cost sharing may result in 
increased fees, should the Department continue pursuing implementation 
of a cost-sharing program?
     If cost sharing involves the Department providing MPCs and 
the utilities paying the costs associated with storage modules and 
other on-site storage related needs (e.g., costs of loading and 
handling operations), would the extent of utility expenditures required 
by this approach affect whether utilities would use it?
     If the primary emphasis of a cost-sharing program were to 
be the provision of MPCs by the Department, what should be done for 
utilities unable (e.g., those sites that are physically constrained 
from utilizing MPCs) or unwilling to make use of MPCs?
     What other forms of cost sharing should the Department 
consider?

    Issued in Washington, DC, May 19, 1994.
Daniel A. Dreyfus,
Director, Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management.
[FR Doc. 94-12787 Filed 5-24-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P