Nuclear waste shift may aid PFS

WASHINGTON — A new effort to keep nuclear waste at commercial power plants may help keep Private Fuel Storage alive, according to its chairman, but Utah lawmakers will continue to fight it.

John Parkyn, Private Fuel Storage chairman and chief executive officer, said by supporting a bill that "shuts Yucca down," Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, has shifted sides in the nuclear waste debate. This could allow companies to renew their involvement with Private Fuel Storage in the future or encourage other ones to sign up that would need storage.

"It's a question of where is the fuel going to go and is this country going to honor the 1982 vote," Parkyn said. "We have to have a place to put spent fuel."

Congress voted in 1982 to take nuclear waste from power plants and store it in a federal geologic repository. Congress eventually approved Yucca Mountain in Nevada as the site but it did not open in 1998 as planned. Utilities have been waiting for the government to come through with a storage site, and eight companies created PFS, which planned to use the Goshute Skull Valley Land in Tooele County.

Four of the eight original investors, making up about 68 percent of the consortium, have written Hatch this month pulling their financial backing of PFS. All of them mentioned the government's progress on Yucca or any federal storage facility as a reason for their decision.

"Everything is predicated on progress at Yucca Mountain," Parkyn said.

Three of the companies that have changed their minds — Florida Power and Light, Southern Company and Entergy — were part of the six pledging to Hatch and Utah Republican Sen. Bob Bennett in 2002 that they would not put any money toward constructing PFS "so long as the Yucca Mountain project is approved by Congress and repository development proceeds in a timely fashion."

"We want to emphasize that our clear preference is that Yucca Mountain licensing, construction and operation proceed in a timely manner," the six companies wrote in 2002. "We understand and respect your opposition to PFS, and want to make it clear that our support for PFS comes entirely from the past failures of the United States government to fulfill its obligations under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act and concerns about the timely development of the Yucca Mountain facility."

Xcel Energy, which held 33 percent of the consortium, was not on the 2002 letter but told Hatch on Dec. 8 it also would hold future investments. Entergy does not mention Yucca specifically in its letter but wants to see progress toward "federally sponsored away-from-reactor storage and disposal for the nation's spent nuclear fuel."