Add new comment

     I have often blogged about problems with handling various types of radioactive waste. Spent nuclear fuel, leftovers from nuclear weapons manufacture, medical radioisotopes, and other types of waste all have their own problems with disposal.
    The Low-level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985 gave states responsibility for the disposal of low-level radioactive waste created in their states. The Act encouraged states to enter into agreements that would permit them to choose a common waste disposal facility. Brian Walsh is the spokesman for the South Dakota state Department of Environmental and Natural Resources. He said, “In response to this act, South Dakota entered into an agreement with the states of Arizona, California, and North Dakota to form the Southwestern Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Compact.”
    California is the host state for the compact entered by South Dakota mentioned above. California is responsible for the siting and construction of a low-level waste disposal facility. Brian Walsh said, “To date, California has not sited a facility. Instead, the compact uses disposal sites in Texas and Utah which are available to all the states for disposal of low-level waste. A permit process is not necessary for South Dakota because the compact addresses the disposal of low-level waste.”
    Last month, the U.S. government decided that certain types of waste previously classified as high level nuclear waste will now be classified as low level nuclear waste. This will allow the government to move some radioactive waste currently stored on site at nuclear power plants to interim storage facilities.
    One possible choice for disposing of nuclear waste such as spent nuclear fuel consists of drilling bore holes miles deep into basement rock where fuel assemblies could be permanently and safely disposed of. The U.S, has been considering drilling bore holes to test the concept. 
    In 2016, sites in Spink and Haakon counties in South Dakota were identified as possible locations for drilling test boreholes. The federal government was interested in seeing if deep rock was a suitable location for the permanent storage of nuclear waste.
    In Spink County, execution of the project required approval by the county planning and zoning board. The planned test did not include any actual nuclear waste. It was only going to be a dry run to test hole boring. Local citizens opposed the test. They were afraid that if the initial test was successful, then the next step would be testing the storage of actual nuclear waste in the borehole. Hakon County did not have any requirements for a decision by any zoning board that would have prevent the test, but the project was ultimately canceled by the Trump administration.
    After the initial discussions of the test drilling in South Dakota counties in 2016, the South Dakota legislature passed a new law that required the approval of the Legislature and the Governor before any high-level nuclear waste could be stored in the state. There was an exception in the law for the storage of uranium ore or uranium mine tailings.
    Upon hearing of the about the federal decision, the reaction of officials in South Dakota was that this decision would have no affect on South Dakota’s resistance to storage of nuclear waste in the state. Brian Walsh said, “We do not have any facilities permitted to accepted either high- or low-level radioactive waste in our state.”