You’d be hard-pressed to find a Southern Californian who doesn’t know the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (SONGS). It’s a landmark we’ve all seen driving on Interstate 5. What many people don’t know is that the facility is also a de facto permanent storage site for spent nuclear fuel.
Even fewer people are aware that this situation is a big financial problem for both taxpayers and nuclear utility ratepayers — a problem that only a renewed focus on government efficiency can solve.
The federal government has failed to make good on a decades-old legal and contractual obligation to build a permanent spent fuel disposal facility, as established in the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982.
When a regular person breaks the terms of a contract, they are frequently responsible for paying financial damages. Unfortunately for U.S. taxpayers, the federal government is no different. Because the government has failed to fulfill its obligation to begin disposing of spent fuel each and every year since 1998, we’re on the hook for the costs of continued storage at nuclear reactor sites like SONGS, which is one of 76 sites in 34 states across the country with stranded spent fuel.
Just how much are we paying? It costs taxpayers a mind-boggling $2 million daily to store spent nuclear fuel on-site. That’s on top of the $10.6 billion we’ve already paid. This situation isn’t fair, and it’s not sustainable.
There’s also the question of ratepayer dollars. Electric utility customers in San Diego County and nationwide have pre-paid to develop a permanent repository that would house spent fuel deep underground. We’ve already paid $46 billion — including interest income — for that purpose, yet taxpayers continue to foot the bill for on-site storage.
To stop the financial waste, we must address the nuclear waste. That’s why, four years ago, I took action by signing on as co-chair of the Spent Fuel Solutions (SFS) coalition to advocate for real solutions at the federal level. I have been working directly with local leaders, members of Congress, and regulatory agencies to push for a clear path forward.
The Department of Energy was already doing its part by pursuing a collaborative siting process for consolidated interim storage (CIS) facilities. Providing nuclear utilities access to offsite storage would help reduce the financial damages taxpayers currently pay to house spent fuel at nuclear reactor sites. Although DOE’s program has been temporarily placed on hold, we are hopeful they will resume work quickly.
In addition to this administrative work, legislative changes will be needed due to limitations in the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 that prevent the timely development of spent fuel solutions. Our coalition has adopted policy principles that address these deficiencies and prioritize efficiencies.
Specifically, we would like to see the U.S. spent fuel management program transferred to a new organization established for that sole purpose. That organization must also have access to reliable funding.
Current law also includes a rigid linkage between construction authorization for CIS and a repository that must be revised to avoid a decades-long delay in developing temporary storage facilities.
Finally, SFS supports a collaborative repository siting program similar to the ones that have succeeded in Finland, Sweden and other countries. Recently, Canada formally announced the selection of an informed and willing host community.
Residents in the Township of Ignace confirmed their willingness in a vote, with 77% of respondents affirming their support. A majority in the Wabigoon Lake Ojibway Nation also agreed to host a spent fuel repository. With the site selection complete after a nearly 15-year process, Canada is now poised to begin regulatory reviews.
Legislation that mirrors our coalition’s priorities would affect the critical changes necessary to ensure a successful spent fuel management program similar to Canada’s. It would also help improve the program’s efficiency to safeguard taxpayer dollars and fulfill the federal government’s commitment to disposing of spent nuclear fuel.
Our communities deserve more than empty promises. They deserve fiscally responsible leadership that delivers real results. It’s time to fix this problem once and for all.
Jim Desmond represents District 5 on the San Diego County Board of Supervisors.
