Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Nuclear Waste Disclosure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee hears SB 15 97 to require disclosure of waste-storage costs; bill limited to nuclear facilities proposed
Summary
Sen. Frederick said SB 15 97 would require utilities to disclose to customers the costs recovered for storing energy-generated waste; witnesses and members agreed an amendment should limit the bill’s scope to nuclear waste to avoid unintended impacts on renewables.
Sen. Frederick introduced Senate Bill 15 97 on Feb. 4, telling the Senate Committee on Energy and Environment the measure is intended to require electric utilities to disclose to customers the costs recovered from ratepayers to store waste produced by energy facilities.
“This is an attempt really to deal with, to try to avoid past mistakes and to live up to the initiative passed by the voters of Oregon,” Frederick said, describing a long-standing concern about who pays for long-term nuclear-waste storage and the need to be transparent about costs.
Frederick emphasized the bill targets future nuclear facilities and does not apply to existing operations such as the now-closed Trojan nuclear plant or small experimental research reactors at universities. He said the bill’s language and pending amendments would make it clear the focus is nuclear waste.
Committee members asked whether the bill would cover waste from renewable resources such as wind-turbine blades or solar panels; Frederick and multiple witnesses clarified that SB 15 97 is intended to address nuclear waste specifically and that a technical amendment adding the word “nuclear” before references to energy facilities is recommended. Katie Chamberlain of Renewable Northwest said the amendment would avoid unintended reporting requirements for renewable projects and noted existing state and county permitting processes address renewable-waste disposal.
Sen. Pham praised the effort as increasing transparency and called attention to environmental-justice concerns, saying that “often the conversation about which communities have to bear the siting of nuclear waste is often…low income communities and communities of color.” Tom Holt and other members discussed the law’s effect while Oregon maintains a moratorium on nuclear energy development; witnesses said the bill would prepare statutory requirements should the legal framework change in the future.
The committee closed the public hearing after discussion of the amendments; no formal votes were taken.
