Today, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) issued its final environmental impact statement on an application by Interim Storage Partners LLC. Indeed, the latter company is a joint venture of Waste Control Specialists LLC and Orano CIS.
Read more of our news content, here; Smart Cities – crucial toward net-zero emissions (IEA)
Accordingly, the owners would construct a facility to store from 5,000 (in the beginning) to 44,000 short tons of spent commercial nuclear fuel; also, of a small quantity of spent mixed-oxide fuel for about 40 years.
The power of the commercial nuclear power industry
Indeed, U.S. Department of Energy statistics indicates that the U.S. commercial nuclear power industry generates about 2,000 metric tons of used uranium fuel per year. After being spent and removed from the reactor, used fuel rods are stored at close to 75 sites in 34 states.
In this way, the proposed interim site would be in Andrews County, Texas; indeed, less than a mile from the New Mexico border. There, the owners would build and operate the project within a 14,000-acre parcel of land accessible by rail and road.
According to interim Storage Partners, the project costs could be about $350 million during the construction phase. Besides, the Project’s total expenses could close to $2.3 billion by the end of the 40-year lifespan, according to the NRC report.
Additionally, once Interim Storage Partners ends building the project, operators could begin receiving and storing the spent nuclear fuel within three months. In fact, the original plan is to store 5,000 short tons with subsequent expansion; thus, eventually bringing the total to close to 44,000 tons, equal to about 20 years of operation by the entire U.S. nuclear power generation fleet.
According to information reported by Power Engineering International (PEI), when a geologic repository becomes available; Interim Storage would remove the spent fuel stored at the proposed interim storage site. Consequently, it would send to the warehouse for disposal.
In fact, “defueling would involve similar activities to those associated with shipping spent nuclear fuel from nuclear power plants and Independent Spent Fuel Storage Facilities,” PEI says, quoting the NRC report.
NRC on its environmental assessment
Lastly, the NRC staff concluded that land, air, and water impacts would be relatively small, and transportation infrastructure and activities also would not be a significant issue. Additionally, the environmental implications report states exposure risk was low; particularly, considering the transportation safeguards and relatively short time in transport.
Worth noting, the NRC staff also evaluated the potential occupational and public health impacts of the proposed SNF transportation under accident conditions. Accordingly, based on an ISP analysis of cask response to transportation accident conditions; the commission does not expect releases of SNF; particularly, from the xxiv proposed SNF shipments under accident conditions.
Indeed, it is worth noting; currently, the nation’s 94 operating nuclear power units generate about 20 percent of electricity capacity. Besides, nuclear units also create more than half of the nation’s current carbon-free power.
Particularly, nuclear power could benefit from conversations currently underway in Senate. Accordingly, struggling nuclear power reactors could be given a $6 billion lifeline in the bipartisan infrastructure bill.
In fact, Bloomberg News reported that DOE could be creating a program to evaluate nuclear reactors that are in jeopardy of closing. Besides, this initiative could provide them with aid; particularly under the $550 billion bipartisan infrastructure package.
Notably, DOE hasn’t still released the text of the infrastructure bill. Finally, the nuclear program could be a boon for operators such as Southern Co. and Exelon Corp. Also, for uranium miners like Lakewood, Colorado-based Energy Fuels, Inc.
