Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 10221996 - D9 D. 9 THE BOARD OR SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Adopted this Order on _October 22, 1996 by the following vote: AYES: Supervisors Rogers, Bishop, DeSaulnier, Torlakson, Smith NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None SUBJECT: U. S. Department of Energy's Spent Nuclear Fuel Policy Victor J. Westman, County Counsel, provided a status report (copy attached) , including reporting that the representative from the U. S. Department of Energy was unable to attend the Board's meeting and had requested that the matter be continued to November 5, 1996. The following .persons spoke in opposition to the DOE's plan to transship spent nuclear fuels through the Concord Naval Weapons Station: Dennis Thomas, 147 St. Germain, Pleasant Hill 94523 ; Wes Nicholson, 4810 Myrtle Drive, Concord; Cayolyn S. Mecum, 1132 Jamie Drive, Concord; Loulena Miles, 610 Azores Circle; Bay Point 94565; Bob Mannaberg, 3 Rampo Court, Pleasant Hill 94523 . All persons desiring to speak were heard. Following Board discussion on filing a lawsuit against the U. S. Department of Energy, the Board recessed into Closed Session in its public Chambers, (Room 106) , County Administration Building, 651 Pine Street, Martinez, California. The following action was approved by all five Board Members: "Authorized County Counsel to file a lawsuit against the U. S. Department of Energy (DOE) in part for failing to fully comply with provisions for Environmental Impact Statements (EISs) in its plan to transship spent nuclear fuel rods through the Concord Naval Weapons Station; instructed County Counsel to suspend negotiations with the DOE on the development of a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) and other contractual obligations as may be required; and requested County Counsel to engage the Cities of Concord, Martinez, Pittsburg, Antioch, and Brentwood in supporting the County's legal action against the DOE. " Thereupon the Board reconvened in its Chambers. By unanimous vote of the five Supervisors, the Board announced and ratified its action taken in Closed Session. cc: County Counsel 11tar"*W*NOfib rasrWdoweof an 66*0 van d uAMad an"SWAM a ans County Administrator go"deuo waon"dftSw� Health Services Director ��fsGw 2'=196 "K ftaofftbwd HAZMAT Division Community Development Director 2&4=4ig avw9r M TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FROM: Victor J. Westman, County Counsel By: Lillian T. Fujii, Deputy County Counsel DATE: October 17, 1996 SUBJECT: STATUS REPORT ON U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY'S SPENT NUCLEAR FUEL POLICY SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Accept staff's status report regarding the U.S. Department of Energy's Nuclear Weapons Nonproliferation Policy Concerning Foreign Research Reactor Spent Nuclear Fuel, and plans to transship the spent nuclear fuel through the Concord Naval Weapons Station. 2. Consider giving further direction to staff and other future action and options. i FISCAL IMPACT: If the County can reach agreement with the Department of Energy on an MOU and adequate grant document for the reimbursement of County emergency preparedness, law enforcement and other costs which could be incurred if the Department of Energy implements its plan to transship spent nuclear fuel through the Concord Naval Weapons Station, the County general fund may not be substantially impacted. BACKGROUND: On May 13, 1996, the United States Department of Energy issued its Record of Decision on its Nuclear Weapons Nonproliferation Policy Concerning Foreign Research Reactor Spent Nuclear Fuel. This policy calls for the receipt and management in the United States, of foreign research reactor spent nuclear fuel. As the Board is aware, following analysis of ten ports of entry in the Environmental Impact Statement, the Department of Energy selected the Charleston Naval Weapons Station and the Concord Naval Weapons Station as the ports of entry. The stated reasons for the selection of the Charleston and Concord Naval Weapons Stations were DOE's stated preference for military ports, and the Charleston and Concord sites' proximity to the selected nuclear fuel management sites (Idaho National Engineering Laboratory and the Savannah River Site in South Carolina). The Board has never agreed to or acquiesced in the porting of the spent fuel at the Concord Naval Weapons Station. In fact, the Board has consistently opposed the DOE's policy; has questioned the DOE's decision to port five shipments at Concord; and has directed the County Counsel's Office to research litigation options. This office has done so, as well as sought input from environmental groups, and solicited funding support for any litigation if initiated against the DOE. No final decision has been made concerning contesting of DOE's policy. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMEN YES SIGNATURE: 19 U4_ ^RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR _RECOMMENDATION OF BOA D COMMITTEE —APPROVE _OTHER SIGNATURE(S): Al OF BOARD ON APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER VOTE OF SUPER UNANIMOUS(ABSENT ) I HEREBY CERTIFY THIS IS A TRUE AND CORRECT AYES: NOES: COPY OF ION TAKEN AND ENTERED N THE MINUTES OF OARD OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. ABSENT: ABSTAIN: TESTED PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERK OF THE BOARD OF cc: S SOBS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR BY 'DEPUTY P", � STATUS REPORT ON U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY'S SPENT NUCLEAR FUEL POLICY Simultaneously, staff has been negotiating with the DOE on the terms of an MOU as well as . terms of a grant agreement for the reimbursement of local costs necessarily incurred as a result of any transshipment of nuclear fuel through the County. In the past, the County has incurred significant law enforcement expenses due to demonstrations at the Concord Naval Weapons Station. County staff is concerned about possible general fund impacts of DOE's decision to port at Concord and County staff has been negotiating with the DOE on an MOU and grant agreement to address and mitigate such impacts. Most recently, this office met with staffs of the cities of Concord and Martinez, for the purpose of seeking to reach general agreement on an MOU and grant document with the DOE. A further meeting is scheduled with the Cities of Concord and Martinez staffs and legal representatives on October 21, 1996. This office will report on the results of that meeting on October 22. Implementation and Transportation Plans The DOE has, through the Western Governor's Association, sponsored several meetings with the officials of the various affected States and local governments to develop an implementation plan and transportation plan for the movement of the spent fuel from Concord to Idaho. According to the DOE's Record of Decision, the transportation plan should provide the details concerning how the shipments will be carried out, the routes to be used, roles and responsibilities of emergency response personnel along the transportation route, emergency plans and communications strategies. Due to the importance of these plans, County staff has been participating in the meetings, and will continue to be involved in and comment on these plans, so that the County's position is presented and the County will be fully informed of the shipment plans and schedules, so as to best be in a position to safeguard the public's safety and convenience. DOE Invitation. At its public meeting of August 13, 1996, the Board considered the matter of the nuclear fuel shipments. It is in the public's interest to discuss further the statues and issues concerning this important matter. For this reason, staff has extended an invitation to the DOE as well as representatives of the Cities of Concord and Martinez to attend the Board's October 22, 1996 meeting on this subject. H:\dpfis\Itf\doc11 2.