J.F. Lehman & Company takes over bankrupt Waste Control Specialists, LLC

J.F. Lehman & Company ("JFLCO") has acquired Waste Control Specialists, LLC (WCS), the company announced in a press release on Jan. 26, 2018.

A year ago, WCS, with complicity from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), was poised to enter into a licensing proceeding to construct and operate a so-called "centralized interim storage facility" (CISF) at its Andrews County, west Texas location. The CISF was proposed to store 40,000 metric tons of commercial irradiated nuclear fuel, about half of what currently exists in the country.

However, when the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) last June successfully blocked in court WCS's acquisition by rival EnergySolutions of Utah, WCS asked NRC to suspend its CISF licensing proceeding for lack of funds. DOJ argued that the takeover of WCS by EnergySolutions would have created a monopoly on "low-level" radioactive waste disposal in the U.S. The federal court in Delaware agreed.

It is unclear yet whether JFLCO's takeover of WCS will lead to the play button being pushed again on the CISF licensing proceeding.

WCS already operates a national so-called "low-level" radioactive waste dump for all categories, Class A, B, and C.

It has specialized over the years in accepting some of the most controversial and troublesome wastes to be had from across the U.S., including Belgian Congo K-65 ore wastes from the Manhattan Project (which were hauled down from Fernauld, Ohio), and potentially exploding barrels of military plutonium contaminated wastes from Los Alamos.

In addition, JFLCO also owns NorthStar, in which WCS was already a major partner. NorthStar would like to become the go-to company for decommissioning permanent shutdown nuclear power plants in the U.S. NorthStar has already made a major move to purchase the Vermont Yankee shutdown reactor from Entergy Nuclear. NorthStar is very likely also eyeing doing the same at soon-to-close Entergy reactors, such as Pilgrim in MA.

In this way, both the "low-level" radioactive waste (LLRW) stream from decommissioning nuclear power plants, as well as the highly radioactive irradiated nuclear fuel (INF) from those and other atomic reactors, could be shipped to the TX/NM border. The LLRWs would be permanently buried at WCS. The INF would supposedly only be stored there, at the surface, on an "interim" basis. But this could easily last a century, if not continue indefinitely -- leading to the risk of WCS becoming a de facto permanent "parking lot dump."

The WCS site is either above, or very near to (and upstream of), the Ogallala Aquifer, North America's single largest. The Ogallala is a critical source of drinking and irrigation water for eight states on the High Plains, stretching from TX to SD. Thus, it is essential for the lives of millions of Americans and Native Americans over a very broad region. The radioactive waste dumping, and storage, at WCS, puts this vital fresh water supply at risk.

Don't Waste New Mexico! Don't Waste Texas! Don't Waste Nevada! Don't Waste America!

Beyond Nuclear has been honored and privileged to spend the past two weeks in New Mexico, with anti-nuclear colleagues and allies. We participated in, and presented at, a symposium entitled "Dismantling the Nuclear Beast: Connecting Local Work to the National Movement." It was organized by the Nuclear Issues Study Group at the University of New Mexico at Albuquerque on Dec. 1-3. We also took part in, and presented at, a large grassroots gathering in Roswell, NM focused on stopping the irradiated nuclear fuel "centralized interim storage site" targeted at southeast NM on Dec. 9.

We can report back that, in addition to military trans-uranic (plutonium, americium) disposal at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) near Carlsbad, NM, many New Mexicans are none too keen on also becoming the commercial irradiated nuclear fuel "parking lot" surface storage dumping ground for the entire U.S.

120,000 metric tons of commercial irradiated nuclear fuel -- 40,000 metric tons more than currently exists in the U.S. -- are proposed to be "temporarily stored" at the Holtec/Eddy-Lea [Counties] Energy Alliance (ELEA) site, not far from WIPP in southeast New Mexico.

The Holtec/ELEA "centralized interim storage facility" (CISF), or "monitored retrievable storage (MRS) site," Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) licensing proceeding will very likely begin, in earnest, early next year. Once NRC staff docket (that is, declare complete enough to proceed with) Holtec/ELEA's CISF/MRS license application, the licensing proceeding will begin.

Our side will have 45 short days to submit environmental scoping comments under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), and 60 short days to establish legal standing, file safety and environmental contentions, and otherwise intervene against the scheme, or else forever hold our peace. Even if we meet such insanely short deadlines, and clear such high hurdles, we will undoubtedly face a very daunting, protracted battle. Along with our local grassroots environmental allies, we will not shy away, but will meet the many challenges, head on!

The Holtec/ELEA CISF licensing proceeding could well run concurrently with the resumption of another, overlapping, also daunting NRC licensing proceeding -- for yet another proposed parking lot dump, for 40,000 metric tons of commercial irradiated nuclear fuel -- targeted at Waste Control Specialists, LLC (WCS) in Andrews County, Texas.

WCS is immediately upon the border of New Mexico, just 5 miles or so from Eunice, NM. WCS already "serves" as a national, so-called "low" level radioactive waste dump. It specializes in storing or burying some of the "hottest," most hazardous radioactive waste streams in the U.S., including the Fernald, Ohio K65 Belgian Congo uranium ore wastes from the Manhattan Project, potentially bursting barrel of trans-uranium waste from Los Alamos National Lab, etc. WCS is a mere 38 miles from Holtec/ELEA, and happens to be located either very near to, or even directly above, the Ogallala Aquifer.

The Ogallala underlies eight states. It provides vital drinking and irrigation water to many millions of people, from Texas and New Mexico, up through the Great Plains, all the way to South Dakota.

As shown by the New Mexico Threats Map, prepared by Sacred Trust NM, the "Land of Enchantment" suffers plenty enough already from: high concentrations of oil and gas wells (which emit technically enhanced naturally occuring radioactive material, TENORM); existing and proposed Superfund sites; brownfields; coal mines and coal-fired power plants (which also emit TENORM); sites contaminated with depleted uranium and nuclear materials; sites contaminated with hazardous materials; active landfills; historic and current accidental releases from petroleum tanks; a large number of uranium mines; mine processing sites; trans-uranic military radioactive waste transport routes, and a national geologic disposal site (WIPP); impaired rivers and streams, as well as groundwater; areas with high concentrations of air and ground pollution; methane hot spots; areas contaminated with radioactive fallout from the July 16, 1945 "Trinity" nuclear weapon test blast; downwind contamination from the Valentine's Day, 2014 WIPP leak; and radioactive fallout from massive wildfires at Los Alamos National (Nuclear) Lab. Given the large concentrations of Native American (Pueblo, Diné, Apache, etc.) communities, Hispanic communities, low income communities, etc., this amounts to a severe violation of environmental justice (EJ).

The present attempt to turn the NM/TX borderlands into an even worse "nuclear sacrifice zone" -- vis a vis CISFs -- smacks of ever worsening environmental injustice, or radioactive racism. The immediate area is home to large Hispanic populations. The region is already badly polluted by fossil fuel (oil and fracked natural gas), as well as nuclear industries ("low level" as well as trans-uranic radioactive waste disposal, at WCS and WIPP, respectively, not to mention uranium enrichment in Eunice itself).

NM ranks towards the very bottom of numerous socio-economic wellbeing criteria, despite (or because of?!) 75 years of nuclear activities in the state, beginning with the Los Alamos National Lab during the earliest days of the Manhattan Project.

If constructed and operated, the CISFs/MRS sites in NM and/or TX could well become de facto permanent, risking eventual leakage of catastrophic amounts of hazardous radioactivity into the environment, as containers corrode and degrade to failure.

While the rallying cry in these states is "Don't Waste New Mexico!" and "Don't Waste Texas!", "Don't Waste America!" is also appropriate! This is because the opening of the NM and/or TX CISFs would begin decades of unprecedentedly large-scale transport of highly radioactive irradiated nuclear fuel through most states, and 100+ major cities. Whether by truck, train, or barge, these shipments would be very high-risk, due to the potential for severe accidents or attacks surpassing the shipping containers' design to withstand.

In addition to inadequate design criteria, widespread documented quality assurance violations (as with Holtecs) mean these containers are even more vulnerable to catastrophic failure, especially during transport.

As but one example of the nationwide impacts of these dangerous schemes, consider the Great Lakes region. Truck and train shipments within the Great Lakes basin could threaten downstream contamination, as via spills into tributaries, or downwind fallout onto surface waters. Proposed barge shipments on Lake Michigan would threaten the Great Lakes downstream, all the more directly so. The Great Lakes is an irreplaceable drinking and irrigation water supply (and so much more!) for 40 million people, in eight U.S. states, two Canadian provinces, and a very large number of Native American First Nations.

H.R. 3053, the Nuclear Waste Policy Amendments Act of 2017, would authorize these CISFs. The bill is poised for a U.S. House floor vote. Americans need to urge their U.S. Representatives to oppose it.

If the CISFs ever did re-export the irradiated nuclear fuel stored there (some decade, or century, from now), another round of transport risks would follow, this time bound for a permanent burial dump. But that dump could well be right back in the same direction the irradiated nuclear fuel shipments came from in the first place -- making the entire high-risk exercise absurdly meaningless -- depending on the location ultimately chosen for geologic disposal. Nevada can be expected to oppose the Yucca Mountain dump scheme tooth and nail, rightfully so, as it has done for 30+ years.

As with the TX and NM CISFs, Yucca fails the basic tenets of safe, sound highly radioactive waste management/disposal: scientific suitability; environmental justice; consent-based siting.

H.R. 3053 would also expedite the opening of the Yucca dump (as by arbitrarily shortening the licensing proceeding), and expand the amount of waste that could be buried there (from 70,000 metric tons, to 110,000).

Tell your U.S. Representative: Don't Waste TX! Don't Waste NM! Don't Waste NV! Don't Waste America!

TX, NM, NV, and America are not wastelands, to borrow a phrase from Citizen Alert of NV, a phrase (and banner) still proudly proclaimed (and displayed) by the Native Community Action Council (NCAC), based in Las Vegas.

In addition, Yucca Mountain is Western Shoshone land, as affirmed by the US government in 1863, when it signed the "peace and friendship" Treaty of Ruby Valley. The Western Shoshone have opposed the dump since it was first proposed, and still do.

The only real solution for radioactive waste is to not make it in the first place. Atomic reactors must be abolished ASAP.

For the waste that already exists, hardened on-site storage (HOSS) is the best interim alternative. For sites where HOSS is not appropriate, as close as possible (inland, to higher, more stable ground) to the point of generation, is the fall back.

Groups plan opposition to proposed nuclear fuel site

As reported by the Roswell Daily Record.

Oct. 11, 2017: Group Letter to U.S. House opposing H.R. 3053

October 11, 2017

Dear Representative:

On behalf of our millions of members, the undersigned organizations urge you to oppose H. R. 3053, the “Nuclear Waste Policy Amendments Act of 2017” (115^th Congress, 1^st Session). This bill will put our nation’s nuclear waste storage policy on the wrong track yet again. It ignores environmental concerns, states’ rights and consent to host the waste in the first instance, and attempts to truncate public review in order to force a “solution” – either Yucca Mountain or a new consolidated interim storage site – that have both proven to be unworkable. Rather than blindly charge forward at the cost of public safety and public resources, we urge Congress to reject this bill and start the important and necessary work on a comprehensive set of hearings to commence building a publicly accepted, consent based repository program.

The bill you will vote on retains the flaws contained in its earlier forms. Some of these harms include unwise efforts to recommence the licensing process for proposed repository at Nevada’s Yucca Mountain. This is a project certain to fail the NRC’s licensing process due to the geology and hydrology of the site that make it unsuitable for isolating spent nuclear fuel for the required time. Next, the draft legislation suggests going forward with a consolidated storage proposal before working out the details of a comprehensive legislative path to solve the nuclear waste problem, entirely severing the link between storage and disposal, and thus creating, an overwhelming risk that an interim storage site will determine or function as de facto final resting place for nuclear waste. The draft provides no safety, environmental or public acceptance criteria, only speed of siting and expense. This is precisely the formula that produced the failure of the Yucca Mountain process and made it, as the previous administration noted, “unworkable.”

Other provisions conflict with the well-established and necessary requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act, 42 U.S.C. §4321, et seq. Doing so exacerbates the public interest community’s (and that of Nevada) objection of the last two decades – that the process of developing, licensing, and setting environmental and oversight standards for the proposed repository has been, and continues to be, rigged or weakened to ensure that the site can be licensed, rather than provide for safety over the length of time that the waste remains dangerous to public health and the environment. 

This bill was largely changed for the worse in committee. The bill now sets us on path to go forward in the next few years with a consolidated storage proposal before working out the details of a comprehensive legislative path to solve the nuclear waste problem and, frankly, creates an overwhelming risk that an interim storage site in New Mexico, Utah, or even Texas (although the Texas site just requested that its license application be held in abeyance) will be the de facto final resting place for nuclear waste.

This will not work. It is likely those states will, in some form or another, resist being selected as the dumping ground for the nation’s nuclear waste without a meaningful consent based process and regulatory authority that garners both public acceptance and a scientifically defensible solution. Further, and also just as damning, it sets up yet another attempt to ship the waste to Yucca Mountain irrespective of its certain likelihood of failing the regulatory process, or seek to revive the licensed Private Fuel Storage site that has been strongly opposed in Utah or even open up New Mexico’s Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) facility for spent nuclear fuel disposal despite strong opposition and contrary to 25 years of federal law. The latter site also was designed and intended for nuclear waste with trace levels of plutonium, not spent fuel (and we note, a site that has already seen an accident dispersing plutonium throughout the underground and into the environment, contaminating 22 workers, and thus the site was functionally inoperable for years). All of this runs precisely counter to the core admonition of the previous administration’s Blue Ribbon Commission on America’s Nuclear Future (“BRC”) that “consent” come first.

The waste will not be going anywhere for years and it should be incumbent on Congress to fix problems in a meaningful fashion, not attempt an expedient solution that is destined to fail, again.

Our concerns, many of which were detailed above or in earlier letters, remain. We would be pleased to work with any representative on a feasible, constructive path forward, but this legislation would put the nation’s nuclear waste storage policy on the wrong track yet again and we urge you to reject it. Thank you for your consideration of our views.  

Sincerely,

350Kishwaukee

350NYC

Alliance for a Green Economy

Alliance for Environmental Strategies

Alliance to Halt Fermi 3

Baltimore Nonviolence Center

Basin and Range Watch

Bellefonte Efficiency & Sustainability Team; Mothers Against TN River Radiation

Beyond Nuclear

California Communities Against Toxics

Cape Downwinders

Chesapeake Physicians for Social Responsibility

Citizen Action New Mexico

Citizen Power

Citizens Awareness Network

Citizens’ Environmental Coalition

Citizens for Alternatives to Radioactive Dumping

Citizens’ Resistance at Fermi 2 (CRAFT)

Clean Water Action

Coalition for a Nuclear Free Great Lakes

Code Pink: Women for Peace

Concerned Citizens for Nuclear Safety

Concerned Citizens for SNEC Safety

Consumers Health Freedom Coalition

Council on Intelligent Energy & Conservation Policy
Crabshell Alliance

CT Coalition Against Millstone

Don’t Waste Arizona

Don’t Waste Michigan

Ecological Options Network (EON)

Energía Mía

Energy Justice Network

Environmental Defense Institute

Environmental Working Group

Fairmont, MN Peace Group

Food & Water Watch

Frack Free Illinois

Franciscans for Justice

Friends of the Earth

Georgia Women's Action for New Directions (Georgia WAND)

Grandmothers Mothers and More for Energy Safety

Great Basin Resource Watch

Great Lakes Environmental Alliance

Green State Solutions, Iowa

Ground Zero Center for Nonviolent Action

Hip Hop Caucus

Hudson River Sloop Clearwater

Indian Point Safe Energy Coalition

Indigenous Rights Center

Indivisible South Bay Los Angeles

Kawartha lakes land trust

League of Conservation Voters

League of Women Voters of the United States

LEPOCO Peace Center

Los Alamos Study Group

Mankato Area Environmentalists

Merrimack Valley People for Peace

Michigan Safe Energy Future, Kalamazoo MI Chapter

Michigan Safe Energy Future, Shoreline Chapter

Michigan Stop the Nuclear Bombs Campaign

Milwaukee Riverkeeper

Missouri Coalition for the Environment

Multicultural Alliance for a Safe Environment

Native Community Action Council

Natural Resources Defense Council

Nevada Nuclear Waste Task Force

New England Coalition on Nuclear Pollution

No More Fukushimas

No Nukes NW

North American Climate, Conservation and Environment (NACCE)

North American Water Office

Northwest Environmental Advocates

Nuclear Age Peace Foundation

Nuclear Energy Information Service

Nuclear Free World Committee; Dallas Peace and Justice Center

Nuclear Information and Resource Service

Nuclear Issues Study Group

Nuclear Watch New Mexico

Nuclear Watch South

Nukefree.org

Nukewatch

On Behalf of Planet Earth

OurRevolution Ocala

Partnership for Earth Spirituality

Peace Action

Peace Action of Michigan

Physicians for Social Responsibility

Physicians for Social Responsibility – Chesapeake

Physicians for Social Responsibility – Kansas City

Physicians for Social Responsibility – Los Angeles

Physicians for Social Responsibility – Oregon

Physicians for Social Responsibility – San Francisco Bay Area Chapter

Pilgrim Legislative Advisory Coalition PLAC

Pilgrim Watch

Planet Cents

Portsmouth/Piketon Residents for Environmental Safety and Security (PRESS)

Proposition One Committee

Public Citizen

Public Health and Sustainable Energy (PHASE)

Public Watchdogs

Rachel Carson Council

Radiation and Public Health Project

Radiation Truth

Redwood Alliance

Residents Organized for a Safe Environment

Riverkeeper

ROAR (Religious Organizations Along the River)

Rocky Mountain Peace and Justice Center

Safe Utility Meters Alliance NW (SUMA-NW)

San Clemente Green

San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace

San Onofre Safety

Save The River / Upper St. Lawrence Riverkeeper

Seacoast Anti-Pollution League

Sierra Club

Snake River Alliance

Southern Alliance for Clean Energy

Southwest Research and Information Center

Stand Up/Save Lives Campaign

Straits Area Concerned Citizens for Peace, Justice and the Environment (SACCPJE)

SUN DAY Campaign

Support and Education for Radiation Victims (SERV)

Sustainable Energy & Economic Development (SEED) Coalition

Task Force on Nuclear Power, Oregon and Washington Physicians for Social Responsibility

Tennessee Environmental Council

Tewa Women United

Texas River Revival

The Colorado Coalition for Prevention of Nuclear War

The Lands Council

The Nuclear Resister

The Peace Farm

Thomas Merton Center

Three Mile Island Alert

Toledo Coalition for Safe Energy

Touching Earth Sangha

Tri-Valley CAREs (Communities Against a Radioactive Environment)

Uranium Watch

Ursuline Sisters of Tildonk, U.S. Province

UUFHC (Unitarian Universalist Fellowship of Harford County)

Vermont Citizens Action Network

Vermont Yankee Decommissioning Alliance

Veterans For Peace Golden Rule Project

Veterans For Peace Chapter 74

Western States Legal Foundation

West Valley Neighborhoods Coalition

Youth Arts New York

Beyond Nuclear letter to the editor in the L.A. Times

The following letter to the editor was published in the Los Angeles Times, written in response to a Sept. 11, 2017 L.A. Times editorial:

To the editor: For 15 years, hundreds of environmental groups have advocated for hardened on-site storage of irradiated nuclear fuel, as close and safely as possible, to the point of generation as a necessary interim measure.

Why ship highly radioactive waste a thousand miles to the east when it could be moved just a few miles? San Onofre’s wastes can be transferred out of the tsunami zone, away from the earthquake faults, across the 5 Freeway, further inland and to higher ground. By moving the dangerous nuclear fuel rods into the heart of Camp Pendleton, there would be the added bonus of many thousands of U.S. Marines to help guard it.

The push to turn the New Mexico-Texas borderlands into a nuclear wasteland is an environmental injustice. The large Hispanic population already suffers significant pollution from oil drilling, natural gas fracking, uranium enrichment and “low-level” radioactive waste disposal.

Kevin Kamps, Takoma Park, Md. 

The writer monitors radioactive waste for the group Beyond Nuclear.