Meeting Minutes Commission on Nuclear Projects May 10, 2016

Transcription

1 NEVADA COMMISSION ON NUCLEAR PROJECTS TUESDAY, MAY 10, 2016; 1:00PM LOCATIONS: LEGISLATIVE BUILDING GRANT SAWYER OFFICE BUILDING 555 E. WASHINGTON AVENUE, #4412 LAS VEGAS, NEVADA LEGISLATIVE BUILDING 401 SOUTH CARSON STREET, #2134 CARSON CITY, NEVADA Commissioners in Attendance: Senator Richard Bryan, Chairman Dr. Marie Boutte Lawrence Brown Michon Mackedon M. Paul Workman Senator Bryan called the meeting of the Commission on Nuclear Projects to order. Executive Director Halstead specified that the meeting agenda had been posted per the open meeting law. The minutes from the December 03, 2015, Nevada Commission on Nuclear Projects meeting were approved as modified. Motioned by: Lawrence Brown Second by: M. Paul Workman. All were in favor. Senator Bryan tendered the floor to the public for anyone who would like to speak on the agenda items. There were no comments at this time from the public. Comments from the public Dr. Paz (Jacob Paz Consultants) Submitted comments to NRC: 1. Requested explanation on the State of Nevada and DOE studies on the release of heavy metals from corrosion of waste canisters. 2. NRC does not have the statutory authority to regulate chemical hazards. Submitted comments to DOE: 1. Requested explanation on what is meant by small amounts of nonradiological and radiological particles. 2. Requested explanation of absorption of chromium and heavy metals entering the groundwater from Yucca Mountain to Amargosa Valley. Report from Executive Director Robert Halstead Reviewing of the NRC Staff Final EIS Supplement on Yucca Mountain Groundwater Impact o The NRC staff s unwillingness to identify impacts of the contamination plumes on Native American groundwater resources and on private lands and water resources. A new map was added to their final EIS Supplement (Figure 2-5, on page 2-13). NRC fails to acknowledge the existence of the town of Amargosa Valley, the presence of Page 1 of 5

2 private lands, the presence of Timbisha Shoshone lands, and omits the local highways and other important landmarks. o As result of preparing this document, NRC is down to $1-2 million in Yucca Mountain funds o We are prepared to challenge every conclusion in this document before a licensing board. Congressional Action o Senators Reid and Heller strongly oppose the appropriation of any new funds for Yucca Mountain licensing. o On April 14, The Senate Appropriations Committee unanimously approved S.2804 (the Fiscal Year 2017 Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act) which contains no Yucca Mountain funding. o On April 19, the House Appropriations Committee adopted by voice vote a Fiscal Year 2017 appropriations bill that in the words of the committee continues congressional effort to support the Yucca Mountain nuclear repository, providing $150 million for the Nuclear Waste Disposal program and $20 million for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to continue the adjudication of DOE s Yucca Mountain License application. The legislation also denies the Administration s funding proposals for non-yucca nuclear waste activities. The House bill includes $5 million for affected local units of government who have formally consented to host Yucca Mountain. o No congressional actions is currently scheduled on S.854, the Nuclear Waste Administration Act of 2015, which would enact recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Commission on America s Nuclear Future and S.1825, the Nuclear Waste Informed Consent Act of 2015, which would prohibit DOE repository construction expenditures form the Nuclear Waste Fund without a written consent agreement with host state, local and tribal governments. U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Invitation for Public Comments on a Consent-Based Siting Program for Nuclear Waste Facilities o In December 2015 DOE announced that it will solicit public comments on how to proceed with implementation of one of the key Blue Ribbon Commission recommendations, consent based siting. Written and comments will be accepted through July DOE has also hosted three public meetings in Chicago, Atlanta, and Sacramento and will host 5 more. Progress Report on Other Work o Staff and contractors are working on the white papers requested in the December 2014 Commission Report. Review drafts of two papers, on the licensing proceedings and the NRC Continued Storage Rule, are nearing completion. Work is under way on transportation risks and impacts, and the business case against Yucca Mountain. Report from Special Deputy Attorney General Marta Adams The NRC staff analysis found that the Department of Energy s Final Supplement analysis was inadequate and deficient on prospective impacts to groundwater and it is not appealable or capable of judicial review. Primarily, it is not accompanying a record of decision; it is Page 2 of 5

3 essentially a supplement to the 2002 Yucca Mountain EIS and the secondary 2008 EIS, both prepared by DOE. A very important element of state sovereignty is ownership of water. The Federal Government has largely deferred to the State both in the area of water rights and water quality. Litigation and Legal Issues o Water Related Issues 1. The water case, U.S. vs. Nevada, in which the DOE challenges the State Engineer s denial of water to construct the proposed repository is pending in the U.S. District Court in Las Vegas. 2. U.S. vs. State of Nevada is also pending in the state court of Tonopah. o DC Circuit of Appeals 1. Challenge to the EPA Radiation Standard is pending. The EPA radiation standards are the measures by which the public health and safety is regulated. We believe that the challenge is viable and the EPA standard fails to protect the public health and safety. 2. Challenge to the NRC License Rule is pending. The NRC licensing rule is based on the EPA radiation standard. o 9 th Circuit, San Francisco 1. Challenge to the Caliente Rail Corridor remains pending. o Other relevant litigation 1. Aiken County Case 2. State of New York vs. the NRC Miscellaneous NRC activities o Taking documents from the Licensing Support Network (LSN) and moving it to a much less accessible data system called Agency-wide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS), it is not intuitive or accessible to the public. o Preparing a memorandum of lessons learned from Yucca Mountain. o There may be a proposal to have the hearings in Rockville, Maryland. This would be a significant expense for us and stretch our meager staff. o The NRC Commission Board will be down to 3 commissioners, which could cause uncertainty on how the commissioners could make decisions on the resumption of licensing. o NRC s expenditure reports shows that they have between 1-2 million dollars at the end it named exercise (EIS, ADAMS, Etc.). Bureau of Land Management o Two public land orders have been allowed to expire. 1. Public land order 6803; land encompassing much of where the Yucca Mountain site expired on January 31, Caliente Corridor expired on December 28, 2015 Affected Units of Local Government and Tribal Representatives George Gholson (Chairman Timbisha Shoshone) Echoing what Executive Director Halstead referred to tribal land being left off of the map; being the only tribe granted affected status in the Page 3 of 5

4 Yucca Mountain project, we would expect to have a fair play and be kept on the same level as the State, county and all other entities affected. This tends to be a trend in Indian Country. We are consistently left out. What makes our people unique to everyone else; we have been on that land for generations. We cannot leave the area and not be tied to that land. It is our aboriginal territory and we are asking generations down the road to accept the possibility of contamination of our water, animals, plants and land. We can t pick up our reservation and move it. It has been very difficult to get those lands in trust in the first place and the government has acknowledged that this is our aboriginal territory. Reading all the technical reports, where are the human factors? We are real, we are here. But, you cannot get that out of a piece of paper. Radiation has affected my family personally, how do I not protect future generations. The tribe vehemently opposes any type of radioactive material that could contaminate our homeland. Senator Bryan: What have you been able to do to enlist others in your consistency to recognize the importance of the tribal land and the potential impact it may have on your tribal members? Do the various tribal units of government get together periodically where they discuss issues that affect the Indian tribes all over the country? o Working with a considerable group including DOE, Native Energy Workgroup, NTSF, Tribal Leaders Prairie Island and Idaho on the impact on our cultures and customs. An opportunity to broaden that would be education not overly technical. o The National Congress of American Indians met semi-annually but would rarely discuss these issues since tribes are not notified of the transportation issues. Phil Klevorick (Program Manager for Clark County Nuclear Waste Division) Clark County is participating in several meeting venues including the Energy Community Alliance and the National Transportation Stake-Holders forum. As a technical member of the Nevada Site Advisory board we have been discussing activities relating to Area 5. Locally, there is a paradigm shift within the Department of Energy including the Assistant Deputy Director, they are getting the message that the local concerns are a concern. Ignoring our local concerns is not the way to go. Having an open dialogue and inclusive government is going to be the way we re going to drive this. The dialogue is working because we are seeing more casual discussions and more enlightening in what information DOE is providing. The problem is most of the decisions are based in Washington and does not have an understanding of what the local communities need. It is important to continue participation and attending meetings whether they are locally, regionally and nationally. Our concerns locally should also be concerns for any other potential local jurisdictions as well as National Transportation forum. Ultimately, if Yucca Mountain was to come online the bottle neck would be in Southern Nevada. 100% of the shipments would go into Nye County but 80-85% of all the shipments will go through Clark County, whether it is rail, truck or a combination. There needs to be an understanding that the bottle neck puts our communities into a higher risk of an incident. Running out or have limited finding for licensing, would need to seek support from the State. Comments from the public No additional comments from the public Page 4 of 5

5 Next Commission meeting: Early December, 2016 time frame. Chairman Bryan called for the adjournment of the meeting. All were in favor. adjournment of the meeting. All were in favor. Page 5 of 5