6 responses to findings and recommendations
F1
While expenses for dealing with waste types "A", "B", "C" and "GTCC" are fully funded through 2028, the storage of used nuclear fuel, costing about $4.5 million per year, is not funded beyond 2008.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The District agrees with this Finding, and provides the following additional information to clarify and provide context. The Finding and Issue Investigation (at 4th full paragraph on page 48) is correct that the Rancho Seco Decommissioning Trust Fund does not fund the cost of used nuclear fuel storage after the year 2008. However, on December 4, 2006, the U. S. Court of Claims issued final judgment ruling that the U. S. Department of Energy ("DOE") is responsible under contract with the District either to remove the spent fuel from the District's site or to pay damages for the long term costs ...
R1
SMUD should identify funding sources for appropriately dealing with storage of used nuclear fuel through at least 2028.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
SMUD concurs. As referenced above, the primary funding source for storage of used or spent nuclear fuel is from DOE, pursuant to the Final Judgment of the Court of Claims. In the unlikely event that the Court of Claims is reversed on appeal, the District's back-up funding source would be treated as an O&M expense and would be covered by the District's revenues. Because it is unlikely that SMUD will have to pay the storage costs and the relative scale of those costs ($4.5 million per year) compared to the District's 2007 budget of $1.4 billion), there is no need to set aside such O&M funds in a...
F2
It is not certain which entity (SMUD or DOE) is responsible for the cost of storing "GTCC" waste and used nuclear fuel rods until they can be removed to a permanent storage facility. SMUD contends, but DOE disagrees, that it is the responsibility of DOE.
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
The District partially agrees with the finding, but provides the following additional information. The District agrees that at the time of the Grand Jury investigation, it was not certain who was responsible for the cost of "GTCC" storage. However, the aforementioned Final Judgment of the Court of Claims affirmed SMUD's position that DOE is responsible for the cost of storing the used nuclear fuel rods, due to DOE's failure to start accepting used nuclear fuel in 1998 pursuant to the "Standard Contract" that it entered into with each nuclear utility, including SMUD. Conversely, the Court of Cl...
R2
In the event that SMUD may ultimately be held responsible for storage of the used nuclear fuel rods, SMUD should develop contingency plans with sufficient funding to meet that obligation.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
The District partially concurs. As noted in our
F3
The Yucca Mountain, Nevada, nuclear waste storage facility may never be opened.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
</b> The District agrees. Recommendation 3. SMUD should develop a plan that includes possible funding sources which will provide for the permanent storage of the Rancho Seco used nuclear fuel.
R3
SMUD should develop a plan that includes possible funding sources which will provide for the permanent storage of the Rancho Seco used nuclear fuel. Response Requirements Penal Code sections 933 and 933.05 require that specific responses to both the findings and recommendations contained in this report be submitted to the Presiding Judge of the Sacramento Superior Court by October 1, 2007, from: Sacramento Municipal Utility District •
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
The District partially concurs. SMUD concurs that there needs to be a plan to fund permanent storage of the used nuclear fuel at Rancho Seco. However, as explained above, SMUD believes that the plan it has in place, as outlined in the
