Solving the Nuclear Waste Storage Dilemma · Solving the Nuclear Waste Storage Dilemma Thursday,...

Solving the Nuclear Waste

Storage Dilemma

Thursday, September 3, 2015National Conference of State Legislatures

For audio, 1 (415) 655-0059; access code 210-067-427

Presenters

Everett L. Redmond II Betsy MadruJoy Russell

Presenter

Everett L. Redmond IISenior Director, Fuel Cycle and Technology Policy, Nuclear Energy Institute

Used Fuel ManagementWhere are we and how did we get here?

Everett L Redmond II, Ph.D.Nuclear Energy Institute

September 3, 2015

4

NEI Mission

• To foster the beneficial uses of nuclear technology before Congress, the White House and executive branch agencies, federal regulators, and state policy forums; proactively communicating accurate and timely information; and provide a unified industry voice on the global importance of nuclear energy and nuclear technology

5

• All U.S. nuclear utilities• International nuclear utilities• NSSS and major component vendors• Architect/engineering firms• Radiopharmaceutical manufacturers• Fuel suppliers• Universities• Labor unions• Law firms

NEI MembershipOver 350 Members in 17 Countries

6

What Will We Dowith Nuclear Waste?

• Decisions to build new nuclear plants will turn on electricity generation fundamentals, not whether a particular used fuel facility is successful.

• We must, however, have a plausible, durable policy and plan to manage used fuel responsibly including storage and disposal in a deep geologic repository

7

Deep Geologic Repository

• Yucca Mountain: Nye County, NV

• Waste Isolation Pilot Plant: Carlsbad, NM

8

Used Nuclear Fuel in Storage in the U.S.December 2014

• Used fuel inventory- 74,258 MTU (pools and casks)- Increases ~2000 MTU annually or

less than 180 casks per year

• ISFSI* storage - 22,233 MTU (casks)- 2079 casks/modules loaded- 65 Operating ISFSIs

*ISFSI = Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation

9

Dry Storage Systems

10

Vertical Storage Cask Horizontal Storage Module

Shutdown Sites Without An Operating Reactor

• California- Humboldt Bay*- Rancho Seco*- San Onofre

• Colorado- Ft. St. Vrain

• Connecticut- Connecticut Yankee*

• Florida- Crystal River

• Illinois- Zion*

• Maine- Maine Yankee*

• Massachusetts- Yankee Rowe*

• Michigan- Big Rock Point*

• Oregon- Trojan*

• Vermont- Vermont Yankee

• Wisconsin- LaCrosse*- Kewaunee

Humboldt Bay

Rancho Seco

Trojan

* total of 248 used fuel casks and 11 GTCC casks at these sites

12

Yucca Mountain Timeline1982 - Nuclear Waste Policy Act (NWPA)

1987 - NWPA amended – Site study narrowed to Yucca Mountain

2002 - Yucca Mountain Development Act – licensing begins

1998 - contractual deadline for DOE waste acceptance

2004 - DOE misses License Application (LA) commitment, initiates changes

2008 November - DOE submits LA

2010 February - NRC staff questions on LA answered

2010 October - DOE Terminates Project13

1980 2000199519901985 201520102005

2010 August - NRC issues Vol. 1 of Safety Evaluation (SER)

2011 Sept. - NRC suspends licensing process

2013 Aug. - Court orders license restart

2015 Jan.

NRC

completes

SER

Impact of Lack of Federal Program

• Challenges to NRC regulations

• Used fuel continues to accumulate at reactor sites – safely and securely managed

• Lack of confidence in federal government

• U.S. has lost leadership in international community

14

Who Pays?

• Rate payers - one mill/kWh - one tenth of a cent/kWh -

adjustable

- $750 million per year prior to 2014

- Nuclear Waste Fund – more than $35 billion –investment income more than $1 billion per year

• All taxpayers- Payments from taxpayer funded Judgment Fund

for lawsuits resulting from failure to accept used fuel beginning in 1998

15

Taxpayers Paying Billions For Federal Government’s Failure to Accept Used Nuclear Fuel

• $4.5 Billion paid from taxpayer-funded Judgment Fund as of September 2014 for damages incurred because DOE did not begin accepting used nuclear fuel in 1998

• Liabilities will continue to grow after DOE begins accepting used fuel until backlog eliminated (decades)

• DOE estimates the total taxpayer liability at $27.1 Billion if it begins accepting used fuel in 2021

• Every year of delay in opening a facility will cost the taxpayer an additional $500 million (estimated)

• Taxpayer liabilities not paid from Nuclear Waste Fund

16

Key Used Fuel Events

• Yucca Mountain project suspended 2010

• Blue Ribbon Commission on America’s Nuclear Future recommendations January 2012

• DOE Strategy January 2013

• Court ordered NRC to restart review 2013

• Nuclear Waste Fee suspended by Court order, May 2014

• NRC Yucca Mountain Safety Evaluation Report issued January 2015

17

De-Comingling Defense and Civilian Radioactive Waste

• March 2015 - Secretary of Energy recommended, and the President authorized, pursuing a Defense HLW Repository for some defense waste

• DOE’s view: - Yucca Mountain is not workable.- A defense high-level waste repository could be

selected, licensed, and built sooner than a common NWPA repository.

- In parallel, DOE will move forward to address storage and disposal of commercial spent fuel. Consolidated interim storage.

18

Industry Strategy

• New management entity – board and CEO

• Access to the waste fund and fees

• Completion of the Yucca Mountain licensing process

• Consolidated interim storage for commercial used fuel and DOE high-level waste

• Research, development and demonstration on advanced fuel cycles

19

Legislation Introduced• 111th Congress

- Voinovich and Upton on Fedcorp

• 112th Congress- Senator Murkowski – used fuel storage- Senators Feinstein, Alexander, Bingaman, and Murkowski – used

fuel storage in appropriations- Senator Bingaman – Nuclear Waste Administration Act 2013

• 113th Congress- Senators Wyden, Murkowski, Feinstein, and Alexander– Nuclear

Waste Administration Act 2014

• 114th Congress - Senators Murkowski, Cantwell, Alexander and Feinstein—

Nuclear Waste Administration Act 2015- Senate appropriations – used fuel storage

20

The Political Landscape

• Legislation will be considered in both Houses of Congress

• Senate – no deal that does not eliminate Yucca Mountain as an option

• House – no deal that does not include Yucca Mountain

21

Possible Timelines for Yucca Mountain Repository

2028: Yucca Mountain opens -assumes annual average funding of $1.4 billion**

2038: Yucca Mountain opens – assumes a max of $750 million/year funding***

Estimate of total damage awards that will eventually be paid from taxpayer-funded Judgment Fund if acceptance

of used fuel begins on this date (billions)

* Taken from 2014 DOE Audit Report of Nuclear Waste Fund OAS-FS-15-03 – out years estimated assuming $500 million per year increase based on Blue Ribbon Commission Final Report**These dates assume that the land and water rights have been obtained by the time NRC completes its review. Construction will not be permitted to begin until land and water rights are secured.*** Historical maximum appropriation was $576 million

2014 2015 20422021 2028 2038

2042: Yucca Mountain opens – assumes a max of $600 million/year funding***

2015: Yucca Mountain licensing resumes

2014: $4.5 Billion* in damages already paid from Judgment Fund

2038: $35.6

2021: $27.1*

2028: $30.6

2042: $37.6

Funding Options

22

Artist Rendition of a Transport Cask

• Nuclear fuel is transported in strong vault-like containers

- Truck containers weigh 25 to

40 tons

- Rail containers weigh 75 to

125 tons

• Multiple barriers provide “defense in depth protection”

23

Transportation Safety Record• Four decades of safety.

• Over 3,000 shipments in US.- 78% by truck and 22% by rail.

- Transported over 1.7 million miles

• Over 24,000 shipments internationally.- More than 73,000 MTHM SNF/HLW

transported

• No injuries, fatalities or environmental damage as a result of the radioactive nature of the cargo

24

Questions?

Everett Redmond

Nuclear Energy Institute

[email protected]

202-739-8122

25

mailto:[email protected]

Presenter

Joy RussellVice President Corporate Business Development, Holtec International

a generation ahead by design

Holtec & ELEA, LLC’s Vision for a Consolidated Interim Storage Facility

By: Joy Russell

VP Corporate Business Development

C.I.S.A Partnership of Holtec and ELEA

for Consolidated Interim Storage


Why Consolidated Storage?

Holtec Overview

ELEA Overview

Holtec’s Proposed

Technical Solution

Timeline

Conclusion

28

Contents


29

Some Storage Is In The Most Densely Populated Areas of U.S.

D&D Plant Sites Want to Turn Them Back To Green Fields

Transportation of SNF & HLW is Proven Safe—Thousands of Tons

Radioactivity Decreases Rapidly with Time. Gamma & Heat Decay

Breach of Contracts - DOE Required To Take SNF In 1998

‒ Settlement Fund Will Pay Out $20 Billion by 2020 From Treasury

‒ After 2020 Will Pay $500 Million Per Year Until CIS or Repository

Dispels Arguments There Are No Solutions For SNF

Why Consolidated Interim Storage?


30

Established in USA since 1986

Annual Revenues: Over $500

Million USD

Backlog: 6.0 Billion USD

Over 1000 employees

No history of long-term debt

Self financed company growth –

D&B (5A2)

Power Generation Technologies

61 Patents plus 29 Pending

1,000,000 Square Feet of

Manufacturing-USA

Corporate Technology Center

Marlton, NJ

Headquarters

Jupiter, FL

Turtle Creek, PAOrrvilon, OH

Holtec International Company Overview


31

Heat Transfer Equipment In-pool Spent Fuel Storage Racks

Spent Fuel and Non-Fuel Waste

Dry Storage and Transport Casks

Dry Spent Fuel Loading Equipment Vertical Air Cooled CondensersTechnical and Consulting Services

A Global Leader in Power Generation Technologies


32

101 nuclear plants worldwide rely on Holtec’s dry storage technology

for their storage and transport needs; 59 domestic, 42 international

Holtec’s Worldwide Dry Storage and Transport Experience


Holtec’s Dry Storage &Transport Expertise

Holtec offers a complete line of equipment for dry fuel storage and transportation

101 plants worldwide (59 in the U.S.) are under contract for use of Holtec’s dry storage systems

Over 770 Holtec canisters have been successfully loaded

– This number grows by 70-90 canisters per year

Holtec’s experience includes PFS & Ukraine’s Central Storage

33


34

Who is the EDDY-LEA Alliance?

Alliance of the Cities of Carlsbad &

Hobbs and the Counties of Eddy &

Lea

Formed Under the Local Economic

Development Act (LEDA) for

Economic Development Purposes

in 2006 & to Respond to Global

Nuclear Energy Partnership

(GNEP) Proposal from DOE

ELEA purchased 1,000 acres of

land approximately halfway

between Carlsbad and Hobbs,

N.M. for potential use


Why the ELEA Site?

Land studied extensively during Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP) process

Remote location

Geologic stability

Dry area

Infrastructure present, including rail

Preexisting robust scientific and nuclear operations workforce

STRONG CONSENT FROM AREA

35


36


37

R

E

T

R

I

E

V

A

B

L

E

Holtec’s Proposed Technical Solution

HI-STORM UMAX (Holtec International STORage Module Universal

MAXimum security)

Complete physical protection by storing the fuel below grade in

reinforced vertical silos

Corrosion-Resistant

Stainless Steel Spent

Fuel Canister

Steel

Liner

Steel/Concrete

Lid

Reinforced Concrete

Base Mat

Reinforced Concrete

Top Pad


HI-STORM UMAX = Safe & Secure

Safety: Utilizes the sub grade

during storage for superior radiation

protection to workers and public and

to the stored contents from dangers

presented by earthquakes and other

extreme environmental phenomena

such as hurricanes, tornado borne

missiles, earthquakes, tsunamis

Security: The above ground

height of the HI-STORM UMAX is

below waist height making the

facility visibly inconspicuous &

provides a clear, unobstructed view

of the entire facility from any

location38


HI-STORM UMAX ISFSI Location at San Onofre Site

HI-STORM UMAX has already been

constructed at Ameren Missouri's

Callaway Nuclear Plant

In December 2014, Southern

California Edison selected the HI-

STORM UMAX for storing the used

nuclear fuel from the

Decommissioned San Onofre NPP

HI-STORM UMAX was selected

because it is robust, can withstand

the enhanced earthquake

conditions, low sight line, and was

flexible in layout design

ISFSI

Completed HI-STORM UMAX ISFSI at Callaway

HI-STORM UMAX = Economical & Proven


Phase 1 includes design, licensing, construction and operation of the

storage facility as a pilot site to store:

– the entire complement of Holtec canisters currently deployed at Independent

Spent Fuel Storage Installations (ISFSI) around the country,

– a prospective client, Wolf Creek, which can avail itself of the ELEA CIS

facility without having to establish an onsite ISFSI, and

– all canisters from shutdown plants and near term shutdown plants

(Connecticut Yankee, Humboldt Bay, Kewaunee, La Crosse, Maine Yankee,

Millstone Unit 1, Oyster Creek, Rancho Seco, SONGS, Trojan, Yankee

Rowe, and Zion).

– Phase 1 includes design, licensing, construction and operation of the storage

facility as a pilot site to store:

Phase 2 includes further expansion of cask contents in HI-STORM

UMAX to include all other canisters deployed at presently operating

ISFSIs in the U.S.40

Approach to Establish the CIS


41

Submit an amendment to the HI-STORM UMAX docket # 72-

1040 that will expand the allowable contents

Submit a site-specific license application for the CIS on the

ELEA site

The ELEA site specific licensing application will invoke the HI-

STORM UMAX FSAR by reference

Approach to Licensing


42

Letter of Intent Submitted to NRC ……….Aug 3, 2015

Pre-Application Meeting with NRC………...Dec 1, 2015

Application Submittal to NRC……………….Jun 1, 2016

Safety Evaluation Report…………………….Oct 30, 2018

License Issued…………………………………Jan 30, 2019

Construction Phase I Begins………………..Apr 1, 2019

Operations Begin……………………………...Apr 1, 2020

Preliminary Licensing & Construction Schedule


43

CIS is a viable short-term solution for SNF

The ELEA NM Site can be made available in Five years

There are no technical impediments

Holtec UMAX System is Certified by the NRC

Benefits to NM are measured in Revenues and Jobs

Conclusions

Presenter

Betsy Madru

Vice President of Government Affairs, Waste Control Specialists

Update on WCS’ Plans for Consolidated Interim Storage of Used Nuclear Fuel

WCS current facilities

4646

Compact Facility

ByproductFacilityHazardous

WasteLandfill

Federal Facility

Treatment Facilities

Compact Facility

Federal Facility

LSA Pad

Hazardous Waste Landfill

Byproduct Facility

Administration Buildings andTreatment Facility

Clive Facility(Previous Industry Standard for Class A)

47

Barnwell Facility(Previous Industry Standard for Class B/C)

48

WCS Compact Facility(New Industry Standard)

49

Compact Waste Facility

Location of ISFSI

51

Project Scope

• Environmental impacts will be analyzed with storage of 40,000 MTHM for 40 years.– 8 separate phases; storage of up to 5,000 MTHM in each phase.

• License includes three NUHOMS storage systems, which cover three decommissioned and seven operating sites.– Discussions underway to include other systems for other sites

• Storage of used fuel from up to 10 decommissioned nuclear power plants (9 locations) will fit in Phase 1.

• License for 40 years with renewals of up to 20 years.• Licensing with NRC has already started.• Discussions with DOE have started on how this could

impact the DOE strategy for used nuclear fuel.

52

Timeline

53

• February 2015 – filed the notice of intent

• Currently – meetings with interested parties, legislative members, NRC pre-application meetings

• April 2016 – file license application

• June 2019 – NRC issues license application– Assumes a three year review period

• September 2019 – Construction begins

• December 2020 – Operations could begin

License Application

• WCS has the lead role in preparing the license application, with support from AREVA.

• First public pre-application meeting is in June.

• License application for Private Fuel Storage that was approved by the NRC provides a template.

• Safety Analysis Report will be prepared for AREVA’S NUHOMS system.

– Additional systems to be added as license amendments.

54

Community Support

• WCS initiated discussions with Andrews County, Texas for support to site a Centralized Interim Storage Facility in the County.

• WCS underscored we were proceeding with the project only with the support of the local community.

• Andrews County resolution passed unanimously on January 20, 2015.

55

No Impact on Yucca

• The WCS facility has no real impact on the debate about a permanent repository.

- Industry has generated 71,780 mtu/date and at a rate of 2,000-3,000 mtu/year, there is still need a permanent solution

• Allows transportation system to be developed and tested.

56

WCS is Budget Friendly

• No up-front federal expenditures for site selection, characterization and licensing.

• Consolidation of multiple sites into one will save licensing and security costs.

• Federal expenditures for transportation and storage will result in progress instead of studies.

• Opportunity to reduce payments from the unappropriated Judgment fund.– Federal government estimates their liability to be

almost $13 billion by 2020.

57

What Does WCS Need?

• WCS is willing to start the process with no federal funding, but needs to be able to be paid for storage along with DOE taking title to the waste for consolidated interim storage.– Legislation or policy clarification

• Industry support for using the waste fund to pay for interim storage.

• DOE to make significant progress in transportation of used fuel so we have something to store in December 2020.

58

59

Questions?

www.WCSstorage.com

Archived WebinarSlides and a recording of today's event will be made available within 5

business days at http://www.ncsl.org/default.aspx?tabid=29288.

Register for additional webinars at the address above.

Questions or Comments?Contact Gretchenn DuBois, NCSL

[email protected], 303-856-1390

Solving the Nuclear Waste Storage Dilemma · Solving the Nuclear Waste Storage Dilemma Thursday,...

Documents

Transcript of Solving the Nuclear Waste Storage Dilemma · Solving the Nuclear Waste Storage Dilemma Thursday,...