, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Even after being subpoenaed by the US government, Holtec belligerently refused to help the US government understand the costs of spent nuclear fuel dry cask storage, costing the US taxpayer unknown amounts. As Holtec has moved into nuclear power station decommissioning, Holtec is belligerently refusing to work with state and local governments and citizens, as well. Why has Holtec gotten by with this for so long? When will it be stopped? Will the investigation of Holtec spear-headed by New Jersey’s Governor Murphy lead to change? Who really owns Holtec? Only India born and raised Kris Pal Singh, as apparently assumed? Why didn’t they throw him in jail for obstruction? You will see Holtec called an “American” company, even in India! Yet, we don’t even know who owns it, but by all appearances it is an Asian-Indian who moved to the United States as an adult.
As US attorneys noted:
Holtec should not be able to use a highly regulated and publicly funded industry to make profits, but to refuse to provide information about the cask business when the information it possesses about cask costs are an integral part of the damages claimed by the plaintiff in this case. When faced with damages of the magnitude of those being claimed by ComEd, it is imperative that we determine the reasonableness of these claims against the Federal Treasury.” “COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY, Plaintiff, v. No. 98-621C Judge Hewitt UNITED STATES, Defendant, Case 1:98-cv-00621-ECH , Document 288 , Filed 03/12/2004“, Page 6 of 9 https://www.plainsite.org/dockets/7qrrxb8n/united-states-court-of-federal-claims/commonwealth-edison-v-usa/

What is Holtec hiding? Cheap costs with huge profits?
Holtec casks Diablo Dec. 26 2005 or 2006
Holtec Spent Fuel Canisters-Casks at Diablo Canyon
Each US Nuclear power station requires around 4 spent fuel canisters-casks per year.

Holtec sells its canisters-casks to utilities for an unknown amount. Estimates range from $1.2 million or more per canister-cask alone, to $4 million or more, each, including labor. The $4 million estimate is for San Onofre Nuclear Power Station.

In the context of lawsuits against the US goverment, who promised to take spent nuclear fuel off the hands of the utilities, and did not, Holtec refused to comply with a US subpoena to give information related to costs of its spent nuclear fuel canisters/casks. To our knowledge, they never cooperated with the US government.

Rather, it appears that the US government “settled” for well over $1 billion with the various utilities, many, or most, of whom use Holtec canister-cask systems. The quality of Holtec spent fuel canisters appears questionable, and decreasing over time, as the NRC gives what appear to be endless exemptions, but the US taxpayer must pay up just the same.

Exelon subsidiary, “ComEd is claiming damages of hundreds of million of dollars, based almost exclusively upon estimates of what it expects to pay in the future for casks and ISFSI construction“. Page 1 of 9

Only an economic analysis of Holtec’s costs can determine if the future costs asserted by ComEd as damages are reasonable. Only Holtec can provide information about its costs and profits in producing these casks… In addition to documents regarding Holtec’s costs to design, manufacture, engineer, and license its products, we are also seeking documents and information about the prices that Holtec has charged to each of its nuclear utility clients over time, again in an effort to determine if the estimated costs that ComEd is assuming in its damages claims are reasonable. By analyzing the amounts that Holtec has charged for these products over the course of its 16 years in business, we can determine whether ComEd’s estimates are reasonable.“Case 1:98-cv-00621-ECH, Document 288, Filed 03/12/2004, p. 5
Case 1:98-cv-00621-ECH, Document 288, Filed 03/12/2004, p. 1
Case 1:98-cv-00621-ECH, Document 288, Filed 03/12/2004, p. 2
Case 1:98-cv-00621-ECH, Document 288, Filed 03/12/2004, p. 3
Case 1:98-cv-00621-ECH, Document 288, Filed 03/12/2004, p. 4
Case 1:98-cv-00621-ECH, Document 288, Filed 03/12/2004, p. 5
Case 1:98-cv-00621-ECH, Document 288, Filed 03/12/2004, p. 6
Case 1:98-cv-00621-ECH, Document 288, Filed 03/12/2004, p. 7
Case 1:98-cv-00621-ECH, Document 288, Filed 03/12/2004, p. 8
Case 1:98-cv-00621-ECH, Document 288, Filed 03/12/2004, p. 9
https://www.plainsite.org/dockets/7qrrxb8n/united-states-court-of-federal-claims/commonwealth-edison-v-usa/ (Emphasis added)
GAO 2014 Spent Fuel costs

Since 1998, owners and generators of spent nuclear fuel have sued DOE primarily in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims for failing to meet its obligations under the contracts that DOE had entered into with them. The Department of Justice reported that as of March 2014, 90 such lawsuits had been filed. As of the end of fiscal year 2013, the federal government had reimbursed owners and generators about $3.7 billion in connection with such lawsuits. 4 The reimbursements come from the U.S. Department of Treasury’s judgment fund,5 In 2008, DOE submitted a license application for a repository at Yucca Mountain to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), which is financed by U.S. taxpayers. DOE estimates that future federal liability for litigation related to storing spent nuclear fuel will amount to $21.4 billion through 2071http://www.gao.gov/assets/670/666454.pdf

Over a decade ago, an article by Wired, put the cost for 8 Holtec casks bolted to concrete at $100 million, although they gave “more than $1 million each” as the basic cost of the cask system: “Workers will load eight Holtec casks bolted to hulking slabs of cement. The cost of the operation is $100 million“. That would be $12.5 million each. See: “WITH NO LONG-TERM SOLUTION, NUCLEAR PALLBEARERS BURY WASTE IN AMERICA’S BACKYARD“, March 16, 2009: https://archive.li/LP6TV

The canisters and the casks appear to be separate and thus the price around $1 million and probably more:
Appendix V: Process and Costs of Transferring Spent Nuclear Fuel from Wet to Dry Storage
1. Nuclear power reactor and spent nuclear fuel pools Nuclear power reactor and spent nuclear fuel pools—Spent nuclear fuel typically cools for at least 5 years in a pool before a canister ($700,000 to $1.5 million) is placed in the pool, filled with spent nuclear fuel, removed from the pool, and dried. A reusable steel transfer cask ($1.5 million to $3 million) provides shielding for nearby workers as the spent nuclear fuel is transferred from the pool and placed into either a vertical or horizontal dry storage system. The process of transferring spent nuclear fuel, excluding the canister, transfer cask, and storage system costs $150,000 to $550,000. Then the canister is placed into either a vertical or horizontal dry storage system.
2. Transporter Transporter— For vertical storage, a crawler-type transporter ($1 million to $1.5 million) carries the entire canister and storage cask in a vertical orientation to a storage pad. For horizontal storage, a tractor with a transfer trailer carries the canister in a reusable transfer cask in a horizontal orientation ($1.5 million to $3 million) to the horizontal module.
3. Vertical storage cask/horizontal storage module Vertical storage cask/horizontal storage module—Utilities typically choose either a vertical storage system ($250,000 to $350,000 per cask) or a horizontal storage system ($500,000 to $600,000 per module) for a particular site.
4. Safety and security systems and annual operations Safety and security systems and annual operations—Design, licensing, and construction of the dry storage facility and safety and security systems ($5.5 million to $42 million). Annual operations include costs of security, operations, and maintenance cost. Annual operations at an operating reactor site: $100,000 to $300,000 and at a shutdown reactor site: $2.5 million to $6.5 million
” Source: GAO analysis of Nuclear Energy Institute data. | GAO-15-141.

Click to access 666454.pdf

$1.00 in 2014 is approximately $1.08 in 2019.

Exelon, Federal Government Reach Agreement Over Spent Nuclear Fuel Storage Costs“: Aug 10, 2004, 01:00 ET from Exelon Corporation
Under the agreement, Exelon will receive $80 million immediately in gross reimbursements for storage costs already incurred, with additional amounts reimbursed annually for future costs. If a national repository opens by 2010 and DOE begins accepting spent nuclear fuel as the department has said, grossreimbursements to Exelon would eventually total about $300 million.http://www.prnewswire. com/news-releases/exelon-federal-government-reach-agreement-over-spent-nuclear-fuel-storage-costs-71572432.html

Brad Fagg: “led Morgan Lewis teams that have won the industry an aggregate of well over $1 billion in judgments and settlements.http://www.uscfc.uscourts.gov/brad-fagg

This appears a “deal”, however, compared to the 1.8$ billion for 2017 and $1.9 billion for 2016 that the US DOE uses to dump foreign nuclear waste upon itself in the name of nuclear non-proliferation. Wherever does a country so in debt get this money from? http://energy.gov/fy-2017-department-energy-budget-request-fact-sheet

It appears that an estimated $1.2 million per canister-cask without installation, in 2019 dollars, is the lowest estimate.

Southern California Edison is ignoring the problems of thin canisters. Instead they plan to buy almost 100 Holtec thin canisters and store them in an experimental unproven system. Cost is estimated at $4 million each, including labor. Edison refuses to disclose the actual cost, even though this is ratepayer money“. https://sanonofresafety.org