BILL ANALYSIS 1
1
SENATE ENERGY, UTILITIES AND COMMUNICATIONS COMMITTEE
DEBRA BOWEN, CHAIRWOMAN
SJR 13 - McClintock Hearing
Date: June 12, 2001 S
As Introduced: May 10, 2001 FISCAL J
R
1
3
DESCRIPTION
Current federal law , the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982
(NWPA), calls for disposal of spent nuclear fuel in a repository
in a geologic formation that's unlikely to be disturbed for
thousands of years. The Department of Energy (DOE) is required
to develop such a repository and the program's civilian costs
are covered by a fee on nuclear-generated electricity.
Current federal law , via amendments to the NWPA in 1987,
restricts DOE's repository site studies to Yucca Mountain in
Nevada.
Current state law precludes California from licensing any
nuclear fission thermal power plant until the following
conditions are met:
q The California Energy Commission (CEC) finds there has
been developed, the United States (U.S.) has approved and
there exists a demonstrated technology or means for the
disposal of high-level nuclear waste; and,
q The CEC has reported its findings and the reasons
therefore to the Legislature. The CEC can proceed to
certify nuclear fission thermal power plants 100
legislative days after reporting its findings unless within
those 100 legislative days either house of the Legislature
adopts a resolution disaffirming the findings made by the
CEC.
Current state law allows the state's investor-owned utilities
(IOUs) to recover from ratepayers the uneconomic costs of their
generation-related assets and obligations, including nuclear
facilities.
This resolution finds and declares that:
q California's acute shortage of electricity generating
capacity presents an immediate threat to the health and
safety of its citizens and the prosperity of its economy;
q To secure a safe and prosperous future for its citizens,
California must dramatically expand its capacity to
generate clean, cheap, abundant electricity;
q California needs a broad portfolio of energy supply
options to hedge against fuel price fluctuations, fuel
shortages, and import disruptions;
q California's nuclear power plants have proven to be
safe, dependable, economic, and environmentally benign
sources of electricity to California citizens, producing
16% of the electricity generated in California today;
q Nuclear power requires minimal land intrusion, and
prevents the release of millions of tons of air pollutants
and greenhouse gases, thus being critical for compliance
with air quality laws and regulations;
q New advanced standardized nuclear power plant designs
with increased safety and reliability features have been
recently certified by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(NRC) and are ready to meet the strict siting requirements
set forth by the NRC in its regulations;
q California law precludes approval of new nuclear power
plants until an appropriate site for a high level nuclear
waste repository has been approved by the federal
government;
q Over $7 billion has been spent on studies of Yucca
Mountain, Nevada that show the proposed site is an ideal
repository to safely contain radioactive materials, with a
capacity sufficient to meet all foreseeable storage needs;
q Studies of Yucca Mountain have yielded the scientific
information necessary for a decision by the U.S. Secretary
of Energy that there are no technical or scientific issues
to prevent Yucca Mountain from serving as a permanent
repository, clearly supporting a recommendation by the
Secretary to the President of the U.S. to proceed on
licensing a permanent repository at Yucca Mountain; and
q Since 1983, consumers of electricity from California's
existing nuclear plants have committed more than $817
million into the federal Nuclear Waste Fund to finance site
assessment and nuclear waste management.
This resolution resolves by the Senate and Assembly of the State
of California that the Legislature:
q Determines nuclear energy is a necessary source of
electricity generation, with no detrimental impact on its
citizens and environment;
q Urges the U.S. Secretary of Energy to expedite the
review of the scientific data regarding Yucca Mountain's
suitability as a permanent federal repository and make his
recommendation to the President this year;
q Memorializes the President to move forward with the
licensing of Yucca Mountain as an ideal site for a
permanent repository; and
q Declares its intent that, upon successful completion of
the federal government's actions finding that Yucca
Mountain is an acceptable site for the licensing of a
permanent high level waste repository, the CEC should make
an expedited finding that California is ready to accept
nuclear facilities certified by the NRC on sites approved
by the CEC for the purpose of providing clean, abundant,
reliable, and affordable electricity for the families of
California.
BACKGROUND
The NWPA, enacted by Congress in 1982, calls for disposal of
spent nuclear fuel in a repository in a geologic formation
that's unlikely to be disturbed for thousands of years. The DOE
was required to develop such a repository and required the
program's civilian costs to be covered by a fee on
nuclear-generated electricity. In 1987, the NWPA was amended to
restrict DOE's repository site studies to Yucca Mountain in
Nevada.
DOE is studying a number of scientific issues in determining the
suitability of Yucca Mountain for a nuclear waste repository,
which must be licensed by the NRC before it can open. Those
studies include looking at questions relative to the likelihood
of earthquakes, volcanoes, groundwater contamination, and human
intrusion.
The NWPA hoped to begin loading waste into the repository by
1998, but DOE doesn't expect to open the facility until 2010 at
the earliest. A draft environmental impact statement was issued
for the Yucca Mountain site by DOE in July 1999 and the agency
plans to apply for an NRC license in 2003 to build the
repository.
COMMENTS
1)Findings That Nuclear Power Plants Have Been Safe, Dependable
& Economic . This resolution declares that California's
nuclear power plants have proven to be safe, dependable,
economic, and environmentally benign sources of electricity
for California citizens. The resolution further declares that
nuclear power requires minimal land intrusion, and prevents
the release of millions of tons of air pollutants and
greenhouse gases, thus being critical for compliance with air
quality laws and regulations.
Whether these findings are truly representative of
California's experience with nuclear power plants is subject
to a number of differing opinions. The Rancho Seco nuclear
power plant owned and operated by the Sacramento Municipal
Utility District (SMUD) was shut down by voters in 1989
following a series of reliability problems that led to rate
increases topping 200%.
Meanwhile, Pacific Gas & Electric's Diablo Canyon plant has
suffered from some reliability problems as well, along with $5
billion in cost overruns. Those cost overruns are being paid
for by ratepayers as a part of AB 1890 (Brulte), Chapter 854,
Statutes of 1996. That statute specifically allows the IOUs
to recover from ratepayers the uneconomic costs of their
generation-related assets and obligations, including nuclear
facilities.
Given those issues, the author and committee may wish to
consider whether the findings in this resolution truly reflect
California's experiences with nuclear power plants.
2)Asking The Legislature To Deem Yucca Mountain To Be An Ideal
Site . This resolution makes a number of findings relative to
the suitability of Yucca Mountain and memorializes the
President to move forward with the licensing of Yucca Mountain
as an ideal site for a permanent high-level nuclear waste
repository.
According to the National Research Council, "There is no
scientific or technical reason to think that a satisfactory
geological repository cannot be built." The DOE contends that
to date, the evidence indicates Yucca Mountain is likely to
prove suitable and that studies of the site should continue.
A viability assessment issued by DOE in December 1998
concluded that "no show stoppers have been identified to date
at Yucca Mountain" and a draft environmental impact statement
issued in July 1999 reiterated those findings.
However, Nevada has fought DOE's studies on the grounds that
the site is unsafe. Nevada points to the potential volcanic
activity, earthquakes, water infiltration, underground
flooding, nuclear chain reactions, and the fossil fuel and
mineral deposits that might encourage future human intrusion.
As noted in the background section, DOE is studying a number
of scientific issues in determining the suitability of Yucca
Mountain as a nuclear waste repository. Those studies include
looking at questions relative to the likelihood of
earthquakes, volcanoes, groundwater contamination, and human
intrusion. Given the fact that the studies into Yucca
Mountain's suitability as a repository are still ongoing, the
author and the committee may wish to consider the
appropriateness of having the Legislature make a scientific
conclusion that Yucca Mountain is an ideal site for a
permanent high-level nuclear waste repository when neither the
Legislature nor the relevant California state agencies have
reviewed the science in question.
3)Asking The CEC To Make A New Set of Findings . This resolution
declares the intent of the Legisalture that, upon successful
completion of the federal government's actions finding that
Yucca Mountain is an acceptable site for the licensing of a
permanent high level waste repository, the CEC should make an
expedited finding, in accordance with Section 25524.2 of the
Public Resources Code (PRC), that California is ready to
accept nuclear facilities certified by the NRC.
Under PRC Section 25524.2, the CEC is precluded from
certifying any nuclear power plant for construction until it
finds the U.S. has approved and there exists a demonstrated
technology or means for the disposal of high-level nuclear
waste. Furthermore, the Legislature has 100 legislative days
to disaffirm the CEC findings once they are submitted to the
Legislature. The law doesn't appear to require the CEC to
make any type of finding that California is ready to accept
nuclear facilities certified by the NRC prior to accepting or
approving applications to construct a nuclear power facility.
Inasmuch as a resolution stating the Legislature's intent that
the CEC make such a finding cannot actually compel the CEC to
make such a finding, the author and committee may wish to
consider whether a bill making a statutory change requiring
the CEC to make such a finding might better effect the
author's intent.
Furthermore, it's unclear why it's appropriate, given the fact
that studies into the appropriateness of the Yucca Mountain
facility have been going on - and may continue to go on - for
a number of years, to ask the CEC to make an expedited finding
on an issue such as nuclear waste storage that may be years
away from resolution.
POSITIONS
Sponsor:
Author
Support:
None on file
Oppose:
Sierra Club California
Evan Goldberg
SJR 13 Analysis
Hearing Date: June 12, 2001