Advertisement
Advertisement

Coastal Commission ‘sympathetic’ but defends 2015 SONGS nuclear waste permit

Michael Layton, director of the division of Nuclear Security Operations for the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, addresses the California Coastal Commission meeting in Chula Vista on Wednesday.
(Nelvin Cepeda/U-T)
Share

The California Coastal Commission gave no indication Wednesday that it will make any changes to its decision two years ago to approve storing millions of pounds of nuclear waste at the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (SONGS).

But after listening for two hours from people living in the shadow of the now-shuttered nuclear facility, commissioners made plans to urge federal authorities to find a solution to the country’s growing stockpile of spent nuclear fuel.

There is “an urgency to this matter to accelerate the movement from the federal government to move this away from the coast,” said Commissioner Mark Vargas.

Advertisement

Commission Chair Dayna Bochco directed staff to look into crafting a letter to federal officials.

“Nobody wants this stuff,” said Commissioner Aaron Peskin of the waste.

The Coastal Commission is based in San Francisco but hosted its October meeting in Chula Vista, largely to hear residents’ concerns about the 3.55 million pounds of spent nuclear fuel at SONGS.

But at the same time, Coastal Commission staff members at what was called an “informational briefing,” reiterated the commission’s unanimous vote in 2015 was the correct one. Five of the current commissioners were not on the Coastal Commission at the time of the 2015 vote.

Coastal Commission deputy chief counsel Louise Warren said the commission’s hands were essentially tied, saying the federal government pre-empts states when it comes to nuclear matters.

“Staff is very sympathetic” to complaints from critics, Warren said, “but the bottom line is the Coastal Commission does not have the authority to regulate radiological safety.”

Commission staffer Joseph Street said “the commission found no feasible off-site alternatives” in 2015, calling the SONGS storage site “superior.”

Commissioner Steve Padilla said: “The long-term or permanent storage of these canisters in a coastal zone really is completely unacceptable but I also understand the complexities and the constraints upon this commission, frankly, given the structure of the federal law.”

Many who spoke Wednesday called for the commission to revoke — or at least amend or suspend — the 2015 permit.

“There are fault lines that permeate the entire (SONGS) site,” said Charles Langley, executive director of Public Watchdogs, a consumer group that has been critical of Southern California Edison, the operator of SONGS.

In August, Southern California Edison reached an out-of-court settlement with a group of citizen activists, who filed a lawsuit challenging the 2015 Coastal Commission decision.

The group’s attorney, Michael Aguirre, urged commissioners to put together a subcommittee to work with his group to find another location for SONGS waste.

“If something bad happens at San Onofre, there are no do-overs,” Aguirre said.

Aguirre has called for moving SONGS waste to the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station in Arizona, saying it is a logical place because Southern California Edison is a part-owner of Palo Verde, holding a 15.8 percent stake.

However, representatives of Palo Verde have said they have no plans to accept spent fuel from SONGS.

Edison officials say they will file a formal request with Palo Verde by late November.

One potential site for SONGS waste is a proposed site in southeastern New Mexico and representatives of the project were on hand Wednesday.

John Heaton, the chairman of the Eddy-Lea Energy Alliance, named for the two counties backing the project, said the proposed site is located in “an ideal location.”

Pierre Paul Oneid, senior vice president and chief nuclear officer for Holtec International, is partnering with the New Mexico group and said the site expects to receive its license in 2020 and plans to open in 2022 — “2025 at the latest.”

Congress and the Trump administration have made moves in recent months to restart the Yucca Mountain nuclear repository as the nation’s site for spent fuel.

Michael Layton, director of the Division of Spent Fuel Management for the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, told commissioners that process will take time.

Layton estimated the earliest the U.S. Department of Energy could receive nuclear material at Yucca Mountain in 2027, provided their are no delays.

Donna Gilmore, founder of the activist group San Onofre Safety, said her group is filing a petition to revoke the permit the Coastal Commission approved in October 2015 and reiterated her group’s worries about the canisters at SONGS cracking.

Edison officials insist the canisters are safe and Layton, during a break in the meeting, said the SONGS canisters “are safe — they meet our safety requirements.”

Some 51 canisters at SONGS are sitting in what is called “dry storage” on site. Within weeks, a second storage site will begin the process of taking in another 73 canisters of spent fuel.

This story has been updated to correct the the title Michael Layton holds at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and to point out that five of the current members of the Coastal Commission were not members when the vote regarding SONGS storage in 2015 was held.

Business

rob.nikolewski@sduniontribune.com

(619) 293-1251 Twitter: @robnikolewski

ALSO

Inspections of nuclear waste canisters at San Onofre may come sooner

San Onofre nuclear agreement offers hope for some, an ‘illusion’ for others

Moving nuclear waste out of San Onofre: When and how?