HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-10-17; City Council; ; San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station Decommissioning Update and H.R. 474 - The Interim Consolidated Storage Act of 2017environment. San Onofre stores used uranium fuel on site using a combination of technologies:
enclosed, steel-lined pools (spent fuel pools) and sealed stainless steel canisters that are
housed in reinforced concrete structures (dry cask storage).
Now that San Onofre is permanently retired, SCE is taking steps to transfer all of the used
nuclear fuel into dry cask storage. This technology involves sealing used fuel in airtight steel (or
in steel and concrete) containers or casks that provide both structural strength and shielding.
Dry cask storage systems are designed to withstand various natural phenomena such as floods,
tornados, seismic events, temperature extremes and lightning. Currently, about one-third of
San Onofre's used nuclear fuel is in dry storage and SCE plans to transfer all remaining fuel to
dry storage by mid-2019.
The fuel will remain on site until the federal government puts in place a program to dispose of
these materials. By law, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is responsible for developing a
disposal facility for the long-term management of used uranium fuel from San Onofre and other
U.S. nuclear power plants. However, the federal government does not currently have a viable
plan to establish a permanent repository for used nuclear fuel.
Consent-based Consolidated Interim Storage (CIS) of used nuclear fuel was recommended by
the President's Blue Ribbon Commission on Nuclear Energy in 2012 as part of an integrated
waste management plan. Public interest in CIS has grown in southern California following the
retirement of San Onofre nuclear plant. Two proposed CIS sites in the southwest are the
primary focus: Carlsbad, New Mexico, which already is home to a deep geologic depository
called the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, and Andrews, Texas, home to Waste Control Specialists.
CIS is part of DOE's three-pronged strategy to manage used nuclear fuel: a pilot, interim storage
facility with limited capacity that will be focused on fuel from the decommissioned sites
(scheduled to open by 2021); a larger CIS facility (either co-located with the pilot facility and/or
geologic repository); and a permanent geologic repository for disposal of used nuclear fuel and
high-level radioactive waste (i.e., Yucca Mountain, NV).
Pending legislation to authorize CIS and manage used nuclear fuel includes H.R. 474, the
Interim Consolidated Storage Act of 2017 (Exhibit 1) and H.R. 3053, the Nuclear Waste Policy
Amendments Act of 2017.
Staff is recommending that Council adopt a support position and authorize the attached letter
of support for H.R. 474 (Exhibit 2). The bill would allow the Secretary of Energy to enter into
contracts and settle agreements with nuclear Regulatory Commission-licensed nuclear reactor
operators in order to move the spent nuclear fuel and high-level nuclear waste into an interim
consolidated storage facility. The bill prioritizes the removal of spent nuclear fuel and high-level
nuclear waste at decommissioned sites, such as San Onofre. And the bill maintains the principal
balance in the federal Nuclear Waste Fund designated for a permanent repository (such as
Yucca Mountain, NV), and authorizes the interest paid on the Fund to be used for title fees and
transportation of the spent nuclear fuel or high-level nuclear waste to an interim storage
facility.
October 17, 2017 Item #2 Page 2 of 11
A support position is consistent with the city's legislative platform and the City Council's
Sustainability Guiding Principles.
Staff is recommending a watch position on H.R. 3053, due to a variety of concerns regarding the
bill's provisions for expedited and informal review procedures, potential infringements on
state's rights, limitations on environmental review, and a lack of commitment to consent-based
siting.
Fiscal Analysis
No funding is being requested at this time.
Next Steps
Upon City Council approval, staff will deliver a letter of support for H.R. 474 to Rep. Darrell Issa.
Environmental Evaluation (CEQA)
The proposed action does not qualify as a "project" under the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) per State CEQA Guidelines Section 15378, as it does not result in a direct or
reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment.
Public Notification
This item was noticed in accordance with the Ralph M. Brown Act (California Government Code
Section 54950 et seq.), published and distributed at least 72 hours prior to the meeting date
and time.
Exhibits
1. H.R. 474, the Interim Consolidated Storage Act of 2017
2. Letter of support for H.R. 474
October 17, 2017 Item #2 Page 3 of 11
''·"''''"'' ,,,,.,9 _;,-.•·'\(!!"'-\',::--.!
1:-,.. • l'\'-\ll •:\.
GI'()
115TH CONGRESS
1ST SESSION H.R.474
EXHIBIT 1
To amend the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 to authorize the Secretary
of Energy to enter into contracts for the storage of certain high-level
radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel, take title to certain high-level
radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel, and make certain expendi-tures
from the Nuclear Waste Fund.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
JANUARY 12, 2017
Mr. ISSA (for himself, Mr. CONAWAY, Mr. CALVERT, Mr. CULBERSON, Mr.
YoUNGof Alaska, Ms. PINGREE, Mr. SAMJOHNSONofTexas, Mr. CAR-TER
of Texas, Ms. BoRDALLO, Mr. PETERS, Mr. WELCH, Ms. MATSUI, Mr.
GENE GREEN of Texas, Mr. HUNTER, Mr. BERA, Mr. NEAL, Mr.
COURTNEY, and Mr. LEWIS of Minnesota) introduced the following bill;
which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce
A BILL
To amend the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 to authorize
the Secretary of Energy to enter into contracts for the
storage of certain high-level radioactive waste and spent
nuclear fuel, take title to certain high-level radioactive
waste and spent nuclear fuel, and make certain expendi-
tures from the Nuclear Waste Fund.
1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
October 17, 2017 Item #2 Page 4 of 11
1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
2 This Act may be cited as the "Interim Consolidated
3 StorageActof2017".
4 SEC. 2. DEFINITION OF INTERIM CONSOLIDATED STORAGE
5 FACILITY.
6 Section 2 of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982
7 (42 U.S.C. 10101) is amended by adding at the end the
8 following new paragraph:
9 "(35) The term 'interim consolidated storage
10 facility' means a facility that possesses a specific li-
11 cense issued by the Com.mission that authorizes stor-
12 age of high-level radioactive waste or spent nuclear
13 fuel received from. the Secretary or from. two or more
14 persons that generate or hold title to high-level ra-
15 · dioactive waste or spent nuclear fuel generated at a
16 civilian nuclear power reactor.".
17 SEC. 3. INTERIM CONSOLIDATED STORAGE OF HIGH-LEVEL
18
19
RADIOACTIVE WASTE AND SPENT NUCLEAR
FUEL.
20 (a) STORAGE OF SPENT NUCLEAR FUEL-Section
21 135(h) of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 (42
22 U.S.C. 10155(h)) is amended by striking "Notwith-
23 standing any other provisions oflaw" and inserting "Ex-
24 cept as provided in section 302, and subtitle I of title I".
OHR 4741H October 17, 2017 Item #2 Page 5 of 11
1 (b) INTERIM CONSOLIDATED STORAGE. -Title I of
2 the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 (42 U.S.C. 10121
3 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:
4 "Subtitle I-Interim Consolidated
5 Storage
6 "SEC. 190. INTERIM CONSOLIDATED STORAGE.
7 "(a) IN GENERAL-The Secretary may enter into
8 contracts for the storage of high-level radioactive waste
9 or spent nuclear fuel with any person that holds a license
10 for an interim consolidated storage facility.
11 "(b) DEFINITION OF HIGH-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE
12 WASTE.-For purposes of this subtitle and section 302,
13 the term 'high-level radioactive waste' includes Greater
14 than Class C waste as defined in section 72.3 of title 10,
15 Code of Federal Regulations. Nothing in this section or
16 section 191 shall be interpreted to affect existingjudicial
17 interpretation of the term high-level radioactive waste or
18 to require the disposal of Greater than Class C waste in
19 a repository.
20 "SEC. 191. CONTRACTS.
21 "(a) IN GENERAL-The Secretary may enter into
22 new contracts or modify existing contracts with any person
23 who generates or holds title to high-level radioactive waste
24 or spent nuclear fuel of domestic origin for the acceptance
25 of title and subsequent storage of such waste or fuel at
DHR 4741H October 17, 2017 Item #2 Page 6 of 11
1 an interim consolidated storage facility, with priority for
2 storage given to high-level radioactive waste and spent nu-
3 clear fuel located on sites without an operating nuclear
4 reactor.
5 "(b) CONTRACT TERMs.-A contract entered into or
6 modified under this section shall provide that acceptance
7 by the Secretary, and transfer of title under subsection
8 (d), of any high-level radioactive waste or spent nuclear
9 fuel for an interim consolidated storage facility satisfies
10 the Secretary's responsibility under a contract entered
11 into under section 302(a) to accept title to such waste or
12 fuel for disposal, with respect to such accepted waste or
13 fuel.
14 "(c) LIMITATION.-The Secretary shall not require a
15 person to settle claims against the United States for the
16 breach of a contract entered into under section 302(a) for
17 the disposal of high-level radioactive waste or spent nu-
18 clear fuel as a condition precedent of entering into or
19 modifying a contract under this section.
20 "(d) TITLE TO MATERIAL.-Delivery, and acceptance
21 by the Secretary, of any high-level radioactive waste or
22 spent nuclear fuel for an interim consolidated storage fa-
23 cility shall constitute a transfer to the Secretary of title
24 tosuchwasteorfuel.".
DHR 4741H October 17, 2017 Item #2 Page 7 of 11
1 (c) NUCLEAR WASTE FUND.-Section 302(d) of the
2 Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 (42 U.S.C. 10222(d))
3 is amended-
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
(1) in paragraph (4), by striking "in a mon-
itored, retrievable storage site" and inserting "in an
interim consolidated storage facility or monitored re-
trievable storage site,";
(2) in paragraph (5)-
(A) by striking "a monitored, retrievable
storage site" and inserting" an interim consoli-
dated storage facility site, a monitored retriev-
able storage site,";
(B) by striking "such repository, mon-
itored, retrievable storage facility" andinsert-
ing "such repository, interim consolidated stor-
age facility, monitored retrievable storage facil-
ity,"; and
( C) by striking "; and" and inserting a
semicolon;
(3) by redesignating paragraph (6) as para-
21 graph (7);
22 (4) by inserting after paragraph (5) the fol-
23 lowing:
24 "(6) the fees and costs in connection with the
25 storage of high-level radioactive waste or spent nu-
DHR 4741H October 17, 2017 Item #2 Page 8 of 11
1 clear fuel in an interim consolidated storage facility;
2 and"; and
3 (5) by inserting "For purposes of the preceding
4 sentence, fees and costs described in paragraph ( 6)
5 shall not be considered amounts for the construction
6 or expansion of any facility." after "this or subse-
7 quent legislation.".
8 (d) APPROPRIATIONS FROM THE WASTE FUND.-
9 Section 302(e)(2) of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act oh982
1 O (42 U.S.C.10222(e)(2)) is amended-
11 (1) by inserting "(A)" before "The Secretary
12 shall submit"; and
13 (2)byaddingattheendthefollowing:
14 "(B) Notwithstanding subparagraph (A), subject to
15 subparagraph (C), necessary amounts shall be available to
16 the Secretary from the Waste Fund without additional ap-
17 propriations to pay for the following:
18 "(i) Costs described in subsection (d)(4) in con-
19 nection with storage in an interim consolidated stor-
20 age facility.
21 "(ii) Costs described in subsection (d)(5) 1n
22 connection with an interim consolidated storage fa-
23 cility.
24 "(iii) Fees and costs described in subsection
25 (d)(6).
OHR 4741H October 17, 2017 Item #2 Page 9 of 11
CA Review __
1 " ( C) The Secretary shall not expend, on fees for dry
2 modes of storage of high-level radioactive waste or spent
3 nuclear fuel, amounts totaling more than the cumulative
4 amount of interest generated by the Waste Fund each fis-
5 cal year, beginning in fiscal year 2018.".
IE
October 17, 2017 Item #2 Page 10 of 11
October 18, 2017
Honorable Darrel Issa
United States House of Representatives
2269 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Dear Congressman Issa,
{_ City ofCarlsbad
The City of Carlsbad supports H.R. 474, the Interim Consolidated Storage Act of 2017.
This bill will allow the Secretary of Energy to contract for the removal of spent nuclear fuel from
nuclear generating stations, and for the interim consolidated storage of such materials at more
suitable locations. Given that several decades are expected to pass before a permanent
repository is established for the nation's nuclear waste, this bill presents a necessary and viable
interim storage solution.
This bill prioritizes the removal of spent nuclear fuel from decommissioned sites, such as the
San Onofre Nuclear Power Generating Station (SONGS), which is located just 25 miles from
Carlsbad. With nearly 8 million Californians living within 50 miles of SONGS, the results of a
radioactive leak there could be catastrophic. The site's vulnerability to natural disasters, and its
proximity to the Pacific Ocean and the 1-5 freeway, highlight the urgency of removing
radioactive material from SONGS.
Thank you for your diligent work to advance this important legislation, which provides a much
needed path forward for the removal of spent nuclear fuel from San Onofre. Furthermore, the
City of Carlsbad encourages Congress to enact legislation that not only authorizes new contracts
for interim consolidated storage facilities, but also requires a permanent geologic repository to
be sited and a mandatory timeline for solid waste transport and permanent storage. We are
eager to assist you in this endeavor and would be happy to offer testimony or any other manner
of support to help ensure passage in the 115th Congress.
Sincerely, vi JI.I/
Mattfj
Mayor
City of Carlsbad City Council
City Hall 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive I Carlsbad, CA 92008 I 760-434-2820 t
October 17, 2017 Item #2 Page 11 of 11
Jim Madigan
Director, Chief Nuclear Officer
Technical Advisor
October 17, 2017
San Onofre
Update
Decommissioning
San Onofre
Nuclear Generating Station
Decommissioning
2
Decommissioning
San Onofre
Nuclear Generating Station
Southern California Edison and co-participants committed to:
Safety
•Safely decommissioning San Onofre
•Safely moving the power plant’s used fuel into dry cask storage, until
government approved long-term storage options are available
Stewardship
•Spending Nuclear Trust Funds wisely
•Returning any unused money to customers
Engagement
•Decommissioning process is inclusive, forward-thinking, involving diverse
stakeholders
3
Decommissioning Principles
Decommissioning
San Onofre
Nuclear Generating Station
San Onofre Plant History
•Unit 1
-Online January 1968
-Retired 1992, partially decommissioned
•Unit 2
-Online November 1983
-Removed from service January 9, 2012
•Unit 3
-Online April 1984
-Removed from service January 31, 2012
•Units 2 &3
-Retired June 7, 2013
4
Decommissioning
San Onofre
Nuclear Generating Station
Overview
Decommissioning
Planning (2 years)Decommissioning License Termination
(2 years)
Once a utility declares cessation of operation,
specific activities are governed by NRC Regulations
10 CFR 50.82 with specific time periods:
60 Years
5
Decommissioning
San Onofre
Nuclear Generating Station
I I
Decommissioning Activities
and Schedule
6
•Met all US NRC requirements in 3Q 2015
•Future Activities and Schedule
–California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)requirements
–Prompt Decontamination & Dismantlement, Conduit Disposition
(2019-2026)
–ISFSI Operation/Maintenance (2019-2035)
–ISFSI Removal, Additional Substructure Removal, Shoreline
Structure Disposition, and Final Site Restoration (2035 or later)
Decommissioning
San Onofre
Nuclear Generating Station
Used Fuel Management
7
Decommissioning
San Onofre
Nuclear Generating Station
•Spent fuel pool and dry cask storage are robust, proven
technologies
–In “wet storage” fuel is under 23 feet of water in stainless steel-lined pool
–Pool is inside reinforced concrete structures, with multiple, redundant
systems to keep fuel cool and covered with water
–In dry storage, the dry cask systems are passively cooled
–Passive dry storage preferred for shuttered nuclear plants
•Comprehensive security plan with highly trained security force to
protect the plant and public
•Robust emergency plan coordinated with offsite emergency
response organizations, exceeding minimum requirements
•Rigorous oversight by NRC
8
Used Fuel
Safety and SecurityDecommissioning
San Onofre
Nuclear Generating Station
CURRENT STATE EXPANDED ISFSI
Spent Fuel
Pools
2668 fuel
assemblies 3855 fuel
assemblies in
123 canisters
FUTURE STATE
9
73 canisters
(2668 fuel
assemblies)
+
existing 50
canisters
(1187 fuel
assemblies)Existing ISFSI
50 canisters (1187
fuel assemblies)
Onsite Used Fuel Storage
Fuel Assembly
10
Decommissioning
San Onofre
Nuclear Generating Station
Increased Fuel
Side-Supported
'"~·-\ ~
Increased
Shoulder
Gap
-+--Axial
Blankets
Advanced Alloy
-Cladding for In-
Reactor
Performance
Design
-+--Guardian"'
Debris-
Resistant Grid
Spent Fuel Pool
“Wet”Storage
11
Decommissioning
San Onofre
Nuclear Generating Station
Fuel Assembly
Placement in Canister
12
Decommissioning
San Onofre
ISFSI Expansion
13
AREVA
NUHOMS ISFSI
14
Decommissioning
San Onofre
Nuclear Generating Station 1---------!lottom ,hlvld pllJIJ
•'
,--• --• -• -Aflf'nlm.m rail! /
•
j
St~I 1111I t~mpi!rtml"I •• •' . I I I
Ne.Jtro~ absorber ll!iltfrlal -· J
I
lnN>r pl••~•.:
,• •• Top Shidel pl119
I I j j
I
I I
Concrete and
Stainless Steel Lid
15
HOLTEC UMAX System
Reinforced
Concrete Pad
(Top)
Corrosion-Resistant
Stainless Steel Multi-
Purpose Canister
Reinforced
Concrete Pad
(Bottom)
No.11 Rebar Placed for Seismic Pad
16
Cavity Enclosure Container placement,
each weighing ~30,000 lbs
ISFSI Expansion
Support Foundation Pad
Concrete Strength = 5000 psi,.
•
i,
Top Pad of ISFSI is Complete
Used Fuel
Readiness for Transportation
•Some fuel qualified for transport now
•Remaining fuel qualifies over time
NOW ‘18 ‘19 ‘20 ‘21 ‘22 ‘23 ‘24 ‘25 ‘26 ‘27 ‘28 ‘29 ‘30 TOTAL
Units 2/3
AREVA
NUHOMS 24PT4
Unit 1
AREVA
NUHOMS 24PT1
Units 2/3
HOLTEC
MPC-37
21 6 33
2 1 5 9 17
67 2 2 1 1 73
6
20
HOLTEC transportation cask approved by NRC
D
D OD D
D
D
D
34 States have at least one ISFSI
21
1.Transfer all used fuel from “wet” to dry storage
2.Options or combination of:
•DOE Permanent Repository
•Consolidated Interim Storage (CIS)
3.Transportation planning, including rail car
22
Offsite Storage Strategy
Decommissioning
San Onofre
Nuclear Generating Station
Community Engagement
23
Decommissioning
San Onofre
Nuclear Generating Station
San Onofre
Community Engagement Panel
24
•Created in 2014 to serve as an open conduit between the public and the utility
•Eighteen representatives from surrounding cities and counties, including:
−Elected officials and agency representatives
−Representatives of the U.S.military
−Local environmental organizations
−Local law enforcement
−Business and labor communities
−Local schools and academic
institutions
Decommissioning
San Onofre
Nuclear Generating Station
Since 2014, 2000+ visitors including:
•The Public -walking tours twice monthly
•High school students, teachers and parents
•California Energy Commission
•Members of Congress: Darrell Issa (R-49), Scott Peters (D-52), Mimi Walters (R-45); John
Shimkus (R-IL); Dana Rohrabacher (R-48)
•Native American Tribal Nations
•City of San Diego Fire Department
•Orange County Coastkeepers
•Ocean Institute
•San Diego Union Tribune
•Sierra Club, Los Angeles and San Diego Chapters
•Surfrider Foundation
More information on www.SONGScommunity.com
25
Visitors
Decommissioning
San Onofre
Nuclear Generating Station
Southern California Edison and co-owners committed to:
Safety
Stewardship
Engagement
26
Decommissioning Principles
Decommissioning
San Onofre
Nuclear Generating Station
Additional Slides
27
Decommissioning
San Onofre
Nuclear Generating Station
Site Restoration
$1.023
License Termination
$2.112
Spent Fuel
Management
$1.276
28
Decommissioning Cost
Estimate
•Total estimate = $4.411 Billion (100% share, 2014$)
•Current trust fund balances expected to fully fund decommissioning
Decommissioning
San Onofre
Nuclear Generating Station
Lawsuit Settlement &
SCE Commitments
29
•Lawsuit filed November 2015
•Settlement Agreement was signed in August 2017
•SCE to use “commercially reasonable efforts” to relocate SONGS
fuel to offsite storage facility
•SCE’s commitments (up to $4M):
–Retain experts team to advise SCE
–Prepare transportation plan, strategic plan to move fuel offsite
–Submit request to Palo Verde to store SONGS fuel
–Develop inspection/maintenance plan and contingency plan
–Provide progress reports
Decommissioning
San Onofre
Nuclear Generating Station