HUNTSVILLE | Officials say there have been no discussions about — and are no plans for — the permanent storage of nuclear waste in Scott County as part of Tennessee’s attempt to secure federal funding for a vast nuclear campus in Oak Ridge.
The U.S. Dept. of Energy announced last week (July 28) that Tennessee is one of five finalists to host a Nuclear Lifecycle Innovation Campus, a federal initiative that could bring billions of dollars in investment, thousands of jobs, and expanded nuclear research and manufacturing to Oak Ridge.
That announcement became a political flashpoint in both Scott and Morgan counties over the weekend, as news of the Dept. of Energy’s announcement spread. The anxiety centers around a document published by the administration of Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee, which lays out the state’s plan for the nuclear campus. Within it, the northern Cumberland Plateau region — Scott, Morgan, Fentress and Pickett counties — is identified as a “candidate area” for a “long-term geologic repository,” based on an initial evaluation.
The repository, as explained in the document, would be the “final stage” in the nuclear lifecycle. The state cites scientific research as showing that “1,000 feet or more into a suitable geologic formation (rock) is the best solution for a Long-Term Geologic Repository.” In addition to its geology, the northern plateau was identified due to its low population density, low seismic vulnerability, and its proximity to Oak Ridge.
The document states that West Tennessee and East Tennessee were eliminated from consideration due to their geology, while Middle Tennessee was eliminated due to its high population density.
However, the document also states that nothing has been finalized and the northern plateau is only a “potential candidate area” for the repository.
“There are unknown parameters associated with the potential candidate area that currently limit our complete analysis for the intended purpose and require further study for a full site characterization,” the document states.
The document further states that the state is committed to “thorough community engagement and education, in participation with DOE and the White House, once the State has more information regarding site characterization and suitability.” To date, there have been no public hearings or other attempts to engage with the community.
As previously reported by the Independent Herald, Sen. Ken Yager, R-Kingston, visited Scott County in May and addressed concerns about the potential storage of nuclear waste, saying that any such storage was not a permanent solution and would only be temporary as part of a recycling process. That story was published on May 28.
Mayors not in the loop, Jeffers says
Part of the weekend firestorm involves the state document’s identification of a “Mayors Energy Caucus,” which the Lee administration says consists of representation from Anderson, Campbell, Claiborne, Cumberland, Greene, Hamilton, Knox, Loudon, McMinn, Meigs, Morgan, Rhea, Roane, Scott and Union counties. The document specifically states that the caucus has been meeting biweekly. In both Scott and Morgan counties, there were accusations that local officials have been in secretive talks with the state about the storage of nuclear waste in these Cumberland Plateau communities.
However, Scott County Mayor Jerried Jeffers said Monday that he has attended only one meeting about the Nuclear Lifecycle Innovative Campus, which he was invited to in April.
“Was it officially called the Mayors Caucus? I have no idea what they called it,” Jeffers said. “They just called a bunch of mayors and said can you come to this meeting in Oak Ridge, we’d love to have you. I was curious and wanted to see what it was about. Considering that we had already had all this landfill drama, I wanted to see what was possibly coming to town.”
Jeffers said the subject of a storage repository came up at the meeting, and he voiced his opinion that Scott County would not be a candidate for it.
“I told them that these campuses will not be successful in rural areas,” Jeffers said. “No matter how well you explain them, they will not be accepted in rural areas of Tennessee. The only way you will make this successful is if you put these on Dept. of Energy, TVA, or Dept. of Defense reservations within the State of Tennessee.”
With that said, Jeffers added that he informed the group that a number of local factories in Scott County stand ready to assist in subcontractor roles if Tennessee is ultimately selected for the nuclear campus.
“Scott County already has CTI and we have MSC Manufacturing that does contracting with the Dept. of Energy,” Jeffers said. “And we have Thermoid, Tennier, and others that do contracting with the Dept. of Defense. So we could absolutely assist in a non-radioactive role.”
Beyond that initial meeting in April, Jeffers said he had no knowledge of caucus meetings involving county leaders.
“I have never been informed of biweekly meetings,” he said. “I didn’t even realize Tennessee was a finalist until I saw it on the Channel 8 or Channel 10 news.”
According to the state’s document, the coalition of local governments is not limited to discussion about the storage of spent nuclear waste but is more broadly associated with the overall project, and is intended to allow “community-level priorities” to be expressed to project leaders.
No permanent storage, Yager says
Yager reiterated to the IH on Monday that there are no plans for the permanent storage of spent nuclear materials on the Cumberland Plateau or elsewhere.
Yager, who is the Senate Republican Caucus chairman, said he was asked by Gov. Lee to serve on the committee tasked with developing the proposal for the Dept. of Energy’s nuclear project. The committee determined that one community — Oak Ridge, which has been a national leader in nuclear innovation since the World War II era — would serve as the hub, with other communities providing support for the project.
However, those communities have not been identified, according to Yager.
“There have been no final decisions made about who’ll be designated as a nuclear lifecycle community in Tennessee,” he said.
Yager said that there is some misconception about spent nuclear fuel. He called the recycling of nuclear waste “a brand new technology in Tennessee,” one with a promising future.
“Previously, the only alternative for spent fuel was to store it,” he said. “Once fuel is spent it can no longer be used, and that’s why it winds up in these barrels, sitting on property in Oak Ridge or buried in a mine in a Western state.
“This is an exciting technology that is an alternative to permanent storage of spent fuel,” he added. “We’re not talking about any kind of permanent storage of nuclear waste. We’re talking about recycling spent fuel.”
There would have to be temporary storage as part of the recycling process, Yager said, which is where the long-term repository comes into play. But, he added, “There would be nothing permanent at all.”
Part of the angst created on social media this weekend was due to redactions that were made in the documents released by the Lee administration. While there were various redactions of sensitive information throughout the document, large blocks of information were redacted in the section identifying possibilities for the storage repository.
“The redactions have caused confusion and raised doubts and I hope we’ll be able to remove them and provide clarity,” Yager said. “But we’re talking about the recycling of spent nuclear fuel, which is ironically the exact opposite of permanent storage.”
Yager said claims that the northern Cumberland Plateau region might be used to permanently store nuclear waste are not helpful to the broader discussion.
“I appreciate the concern in preserving the environment,” said Yager, who earlier this year wrote legislation aimed at protecting the Big South Fork River by stopping a proposed landfill at Bear Creek, “but I think some of these statements are misleading to the point of not being helpful.
“I do not and will never support the permanent storage of nuclear waste on the Cumberland Plateau,” he added.
A long way from done
A total of 26 states submitted applications to the U.S. Dept. of Energy for the Nuclear Lifecycle Innovative Campus. Tennessee is among five finalists, along with Idaho, Louisiana, Oklahoma and Utah. Ultimately, one or more of those states will be chosen for the project, which the federal government says could result in as much as $50 billion in private investment and the generation of up to $10 billion in state and local tax revenue. It is part of the larger initiative to dramatically expand domestic nuclear energy production to meet the growing demand for electricity. It is also aimed at addressing the challenge of managing the 95,000 metric tons of spent nuclear fuel currently stored at reactor sites across the country.
Oak Ridge is viewed as a strong candidate because of its existing nuclear infrastructure. The city is home to Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Y-12 National Security Complex, and a growing number of private nuclear companies. Recent projects include Orano’s proposed multibillion-dollar uranium enrichment facility and Oklo’s advanced nuclear fuel recycling center.
The selection as a finalist does not guarantee that Tennessee will ultimately host a campus. Congress must authorize the program and establish oversight before the project can move forward. Meanwhile, the Dept. of Energy continues to work with finalist states to refine potential sites and development plans — meaning little has been written in stone, regarding a storage repository or any other aspect of the plan.
As part of the state’s application to the Dept. of Energy, a number of support letters were written — including letters from Anderson County, Roane County, and Oak Ridge. Scott County did not write a letter of support for the project. Neither did Morgan County.
What is spent fuel?
“When you think about nuclear waste, you might have in mind something like the creeping blobs of green goo on ‘The Simpsons,'” says The Breakthrough Institute, a global research center that promotes technological solutions to environmental and human development challenges. The reality, it adds, is much more boring.
Locally, older residents remember a story that the Independent Herald broke in the 1970s, after nearly 700 tons of nuclear waste were discovered improperly stored in a two-acre pond near what is now Tennier Industries. (Tennier was not responsible for the storage; rather, it was sludge that was linked to a nuclear chemical company that had formerly owned the property.) That story was part of the very first edition of the IH in June 1976. The Industrial Development Board of Scott County applied for and received grant funding to clean up the site.
These days, nuclear waste looks much different, according to The Breakthrough Institute. The bulk of it is spent fuel rods — the very thing Tennessee could potentially accept from across the nation as part of the Nuclear Lifecycle Innovation Campus, if it is approved. The ultimate goal of the program is to develop ways to recycle the spent fuel instead of simply storing it indefinitely.
Currently, there are 95,000 metric tons of spent fuel rods across the nation — a number that increases by 2,000 tons per year. However, The Breakthrough Institute says that isn’t quite as much as it seems. Uranium is extremely heavy, with a density that is 1.5 times greater than lead and 2.5 times greater than steel.
“If the whole volume of spent fuel (in the U.S.) were stacked on a football field, it would pile up to a depth of fewer than 10 yards, according to the Department of Energy,” the institute said.
Meanwhile, spent nuclear fuel isn’t the most hazardous form of waste. Some chemical pollutants, like mercury and arsenic, are considered to be eternal. Spent nuclear fuel actually becomes easier to handle over time, though its half-life varies depending on the exact makeup. The longer the half-life, the less radiation the spent fuel emits. Most fragments will lose their radioactivity after a few hundred years. The Breakthrough Institute describes it like this: the fragments that give off the most radiation have been through so many half-lives that they’re almost entirely gone; the longer-lived components, which are only slightly radioactive, are still emitting. “Yet from a substance that was initially too radioactive to stand near, now the spent fuel is safe to be around, but probably unwise to eat (and definitely something we want to keep out of drinking water sources),” the institute says.
The question — which The Breakthrough Institute describes as “America’s political football” — is what to do with the spent fuel. Even if it can be stored in an area the size of a football field, it’s something that no one wants in their backyard. Nuclear recycling is not a new technology in Europe, and the Trump administration hopes to bring the same idea to the U.S. with the help of states. That’s where the concept of the Nuclear Lifecycle Innovation Campus comes from. Many news stories in the aftermath of last week’s announcement have framed the issue as Tennessee agreeing to store the nation’s nuclear waste in exchange for federal aid. But that narrative is misleading, advocates say. Rather, they insist, the storage would be temporary as part of a larger project to develop ways to recycle it.
As far as Gov. Bill Lee is concerned, Oak Ridge will be the hub for that effort if Tennessee is successful in its application — generating billions of dollars in economic activity and tax revenue, and thousands of jobs, both within the city and in outlying neighboring areas. But where will the interim storage of the spent fuel take place? Project leaders have preliminarily identified the northern Cumberland Plateau — Scott, Fentress, Morgan, and Pickett counties — as a potential location for the repository. However, exactly where within the region — or if the region is a suitable candidate at all — is still a matter of question, according to the state; one that can only be answered with additional assistance from the Dept. of Energy. In the meantime, county officials like Jeffers say that they have not been part of any ongoing preliminary conversations, though Jeffers said he has voiced his opinion to project leaders that the storage of spent nuclear fuel would not be acceptable to the people of Scott County.
