180(c) Interregional Team In 2013, the SRGs organized their own Interregional Team on Section 180(c) (IRT) to continue the work that had begun briefly when the NFST Planning Project organized the Section 180(c) AHWG. The hiatus in the AHWG’s operations presented a good opportunity for the states to work together, sepa- rate from the larger group, to review the issue papers that informed the 2008 version of the 180(c) policy and proce- dures published in the Federal Register . Over the course of 11 months, the IRT held four meetings and five conference calls during which the states and the SRG staff reviewed past positions taken by the states on 11 issues related to Section 180(c). The team documented their resolution of 10 of these issues in “State Recommendations on Section 180(c)” (IRT 2014). The only issue the team could not resolve was the question of whether to incorporate a funding formula into the policy to estimate reasonable needs for states in connec- tion with preparing for NWPA shipments. The IRT also updated the 2005 “Principles of Agreement among States on Expectations Regarding Preparations for NWPA Shipments,”which guided the development of the “State Recommendations.”The 2014 “Principles” expanded upon the 2005 version “beyond the limited focus on Sec- tion 180(c)” (CSG Midwest et al. 2014, p. 1). The states also explained their rationale for asking DOE to cover their ship- ment-related costs: States will incur significant costs in connection with ship- ments to facilities for storage and/or disposal, including training, inspections, tracking, escorting, and public informa- tion activities. Shipment-related activities carried out by the states directly contribute to safe, routine transportation and public acceptance of nuclear waste shipments. Congress es- tablished the Nuclear Waste Fund to “…ensure that the costs of carrying out activities relating to the disposal of…waste and spent fuel will be borne by the persons responsible for generating such waste and spent fuel” (NWPA Section 111(b) (4)). For this reason, the states expect their shipment-related costs to be covered by the Nuclear Waste Fund (ibid.). In the Principles, which were approved by all four regions, the states advocated for holding NWPA shipments to a higher stan- dard than that for other DOE shipments given the high level of public interest. Because of heightened awareness, “DOE must not only meet the standard set by theWaste Isolation Pilot Plant program but exceed those requirements by adopting rea- sonable measures that will minimize public risk and maximize public confidence in the transportation program” (ibid.). After DOE-NE resumed its work with the Section 180(c) AHWG, the states continued to interact through the IRT framework to coordinate on issues related to Section 180(c) — e.g., weigh- ing in on the developing plans for the policy implementation exercise and comparing the states’ experiences participating in the exercise (IRT 2017). The accomplishments of the IRT are documented in three progress reports along with summaries of all the team’s meetings and conference calls. The “State Recommendations” document has lasting value as the most recent definitive statement of the states’ collective position on the issues related to their engagement with any future federal program to implement Section 180(c).
needed to participate in the exercise. The group also began to review an evaluation of the SRGs’ funding formula conducted by ORNL (Section 180(c) AHWG 2017b). The purpose of the review was to attempt to resolve the issue over whether to use a formula to estimate the states’ funding needs. The AHWG continued to hold frequent conference calls and web meetings until August 2017. That meeting turned out to be the group’s last, as the change in presidential administrations finally impacted the NFST Planning Project. In November 2017, the project was redirected to place a low priority on active engagement with the SRGs. The reasons cited included the need to get the newmanagement up to speed on transportation; concerns regarding the legacy of the Obama administration’s initiatives; and the lack of a budget and program direction from Congress (MRMTC 2017, p. 2). The Section 180(c) AHWG was one of the casualties of this redirection, being put “on hiatus.”At the time, the group’s three priorities were evaluating the Section 180(c) funding formula, refining the proposed grant application template, and discussing ideas for updating the language of the 2008 draft Section 180(c) policy and procedures (Section 180(c) AHWG 2017a). Despite the Section 180(c) AHWG achieving significant progress, the group was not able to move the ball forward to point of publishing a revised policy and procedures in the Federal Register. As a result, this work runs a high risk of being forgotten as a result of future staff turnover. Transportation Planning AHWG Organized in 2013, the Transportation Planning AHWG had as its purpose “to participate with DOE to develop draft documents that would inform NFST transportation planning” by “provid[ing] pertinent background material, issue papers and recommendations that will contribute to developing draft transportation planning documents” (Transportation Planning AHWG 2014, p. 1). The ultimate goal of the working group was “to address issues of importance to state, tribal and other governmental entities; to effectively plan for, address and resolve issues; and to develop a system for the safe, secure and uneventful transportation of used nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste to a pilot interim storage facility” (ibid.). The leads and members of the group took on a good deal of work, but, ultimately, not much of lasting value was created before DOE-NE disbanded the group in 2015. DOE created a draft National Transportation Plan in 2014 based on a report prepared by a contractor the year before and solicited comments from the members of the Transportation Planning AHWG (DOE-NE 2014). One year later, however, the plan wound up being shelved just like earlier plans developed by OCRWM, DOE-NE’s predecessor. Other minor accomplishments of the group included the production of four mostly incomplete issue papers addressing dedicated trains, overweight trucks, and the
28
Made with FlippingBook Annual report