• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer

Savannah River Site

Monitors a host of energy and nuclear issues from a public interest perspective

  • Home
  • About Us
  • News
  • SRS Watch News
  • Library
    • Department of Energy
    • General Documents
    • Freedom of Information Act Documents
  • Photos
  • Show Search
Hide Search

Environmental Shocker: South Carolina Proposes Investigation of Disposal of Highly Radioactive Spent Nuclear Fuel in “Boreholes,” SRS Watch News based on FOIA Request, July 17, 2026

SRSW · July 17, 2026 ·

In an Environmental Shocker, South Carolina Proposes Investigation of Disposal of Highly Radioactive Spent Nuclear Fuel in “Boreholes,” Part of a Submission to DOE for a “Nuclear Lifecycle Innovation Campus” – obtained via FOIA Request by SRS Watch

S.C. Department of Commerce Comes Up Empty on New Nuclear Reactor Projects

Full print version of SRS Watch news release:  News release SRSW on nuclear lifecycle campus doc July 17 2026

Columbia, SC — In a proposal not publicly released, the South Carolina Department of Commerce has informed the U.S. Department of Energy that the state has interest in investigating the disposal in “deep boreholes” of the nation’s highly radioactive spent nuclear fuel.

In a March 21, 2026 submission to DOE, the state claimed: “South Carolina is interested in exploring the potential role emerging technologies may play in the future of nuclear-fuel management, including concepts such as deep borehole disposal as a potential pathway for long-term isolation.” Such a controversial proposal was put forward absent political and public support.

The document has been kept from the public but was obtained from the S.C. Department of Commerce on July 15, 2026 via Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request by the non-profit organization Savannah River Site Watch (SRS Watch).

Commercial spent fuel, stored at nuclear reactor sites around the country, is highly radioactive nuclear waste that must be isolated from the environment due to its threat to the environment and public health. There is no indication that the public would be supportive of a borehole plan, that could result in South Carolina become a dumping ground for a portion of the nation’s 100,000 metric tons of deadly irradiated nuclear fuel, via a questionable method that has not undergone technical or environmental review.

“The poorly-thought-out scheme to look into spent fuel disposal in boreholes in South Carolina should be immediately withdrawn as it could hold significant environmental, health and cost downsides that the people of South Carolina won’t tolerate,” said Tom Clements, director of Savannah River Site Watch, a public-interest groups that monitors DOE’s Savannah River Site and other nuclear matters in South Carolina.

“We feel obligated to publicly release the document as the Department of Commerce has failed to act in the public interest and make it widely available,” said Clements.

The startling revelation is found in the “Nuclear Lifecycle Innovation Campus” proposal by SC NEXUS (in the Department of Commerce), submitted in response to a January 28, 2026 DOE “Request for Information,” (RFI) which solicited states to make proposals about hosting such a “nuclear campus.” Such a campus would, in theory, contain the gamut of nuclear facilities, from “small modular reactors” and “advanced reactors” – which exist only on paper – to the costly and dirty and “reprocessing” of spent fuel to remove plutonium (for which there is no demand as a nuclear fuel). The “campus” idea exists only as a concept.

The RFI states, with no evidence or scientific analysis provided, that “Deep geologic disposal facilities (including boreholes) for HLW would ensure safe, long-term isolation of radioactive waste, protecting communities and ecosystems.” (p. 12 in RFI explanation, at bottom of sam.gov website)

The state’s response to DOE’s RFI, sent to DOE on March 21, makes unsubstantiated claims about job and economic impacts, is an overview of well-known resources that the Department of Commerce thinks will somehow simulate nuclear facilities to locate in the state, with the Savannah River Site area seemingly being the hub. The state’s proposal makes no concrete plans for specific nuclear facilities, names no companies participating, presents no clear timelines (beyond 2027), makes no presentation of committed private funding and fails to name any new nuclear power reactors to be located in S.C.. The state’s response to the RFI also claims credit for past and existing federal facilities at SRS, which are not under state control.

“DOE’s RFI requested plans for ‘permanent final disposition’ of spent fuel and the state buckled to DOE’s political pressure and proposed, without scientific justification and with no input by the public, the absurd and dangerous idea of borehole disposal,” Clements.

“The politically driven proposal likely changes nothing for private nuclear companies, which already know the landscape in South Carolina,” said Clements. “The state government will have little to do with what happens next on the nuclear front; that will overwhelmingly be economics and technical viability, which are now tilted heavily against new nuclear projects despite weakening of regulatory and environmental standards,” said Clements.

Perhaps the most startling thing presented in the state’s proposal concerns spent fuel disposal in boreholes. The executive director of SC NEXUS, in a public April 13 presentation to the South Carolina Nuclear Advisory Council, failed to mention the borehole idea. It is unclear why the Department of Commerce, which does say more discussions with DOE are needed about final waste disposal, thinks it has expertise to speak on behalf of the state regarding high-level nuclear waste disposal in boreholes, which is a federal matter.

Likewise, the submitted document promotes reprocessing of spent fuel, which is costly and dirty and presents a proliferation risk as it would yield separated plutonium, for which there is no demand as a nuclear reactor fuel. In the April 13 presentation, it was claimed, absent documentation, that the state wants to become “the premier hub for nuclear waste reprocessing.”

The proposal, which includes a cover letter by Governor McMaster, does not even list a single author or a SC NEXUS or Department of Commerce contact.

The governor reveals in his cover letter that nobody from the public-interest sector or environmental community was involved in preparation of the one-sided document: “In preparing the state’s response to the Department’s request for information, we assembled a cross-sector steering committee including leaders from state government, research universities, the Savannah River National Laboratory, utilities, private industry, workforce institutions, and economic development organizations.” “The bias of steering committee has resulted in flawed approach and flawed document,” said Clements.

“As it’s controversial, it’s clear to me why the state has withheld the nuclear waste disposal proposal from the public and why nobody’s name appears on the document,” said Clements. “The Department of Commerce, which veered way out of its lane in promoting disposal of spent fuel in boreholes, should withdraw the idea,” added Clements.

About 25 or so states have been reported to have submitted RFIs to DOE and most of those RFIs are public. Utah’s proposal and Tennessee’s proposal also have proposed looking into borehole disposal.  For extremely wide boreholes, into which a spent fuel canister would fit, it is unknown if such technology exists to drill thousands of boreholes that would be need to “dispose of” the nation’s 100,000 metric tons of spent fuel. Under US law, high-level waste, such as spent fuel and vitrified high-level waste at SRS, would have to go into a “geologic repository.”

The representative of SC NEXUS, the entity in the Department of Commerce in charge of the proposal, said on April 13 that DOE would make a decision by the end of the summer about state requests that would be considered for next steps.

###

Notes: Links to key documents:

Submission by SC Department of Commerce to DOE: “South Carolina: America’s first fully integrated Nuclear Lifecycle Innovation Campus,” March 21, 2026:, obtained on July 15, 2026 in response to a FOIA request filed on July 9, 2026 by SRS Watch:

https://srswatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/07/SC-Nuclear-Lifecycle-Innovation-Campus-Response-provided-July-15-2026.pdf

DOE’s January 28, 2026 “Request for Information on Establishment of Nuclear Lifecycle Innovation Campuses,” note attachment at bottom of page with solicitation details: https://sam.gov/workspace/contract/opp/4e30976204964df3b556ff7149dae444/view

Presentation by Ms. Cristina Long Paredes of the SC Department of Commerce (Executive Director, SC NEXUS), to the SC Nuclear Advisory Council, April 13, 2026: S.C. Department of Commerce – SC NEXUS RFI Overview – https://s3.amazonaws.com/cdn.sccommerce.com/scdoc-public/inline-files/SC%20Dept.%20of%20Commerce-SC%20NEXUS%20RFI%20Overview.pdf?VersionId=ea72WlmSk3.esSJKgNBdaHMSmiDgKbTN

See archived video of April 13, 2026 meeting of the South Carolina Nuclear Advisory Council for Department of Commerce (SC NEXUS) presentation, by starting at about 2 minutes 30 seconds. Monday, April 13, 2026  1:00 pm, Governor’s Nuclear Advisory Council – Part 1 – https://www.scstatehouse.gov/video/archives.php

——-

Full print version of SRS Watch news release:  News release SRSW on nuclear lifecycle campus doc July 17 2026

Filed Under: SRS Watch News

Primary Sidebar

Subscribe to Updates via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to updates and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Recent Posts

  • Environmental Shocker: South Carolina Proposes Investigation of Disposal of Highly Radioactive Spent Nuclear Fuel in “Boreholes,” SRS Watch News based on FOIA Request, July 17, 2026
  • Georgia Public Radio: “Nuclear watchdogs seek answers on plutonium pit need before comment deadline,” July 16, 2026
  • “The End of Another Surplus Plutonium Disposition Program” – The Aiken Chronicles, Aiken, SC, July 12, 2026
  • “Consequence Analysis of Major Fires at Plutonium Pit Production Facilities” [SRS, Los Alamos] – Science & Global Security, July 10, 2026
  • SRS Watch Files FOIA Request for Scheme for Subsidized Nuclear Facilities at SRS, July 9, 2026

Categories

  • Events
  • Latest News
  • SRS Watch News

Archives

  • July 2026
  • June 2026
  • May 2026
  • April 2026
  • March 2026
  • February 2026
  • November 2025
  • October 2025
  • September 2025
  • August 2025
  • July 2025
  • May 2025
  • April 2025
  • March 2025
  • February 2025
  • January 2025
  • December 2024
  • November 2024
  • October 2024
  • September 2024
  • May 2024
  • April 2024
  • March 2024
  • February 2024
  • January 2024
  • December 2023
  • November 2023
  • October 2023
  • September 2023
  • August 2023
  • July 2023
  • June 2023
  • May 2023
  • April 2023
  • March 2023
  • February 2023
  • January 2023
  • November 2022
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • July 2022
  • June 2022
  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014

SAVANNAH RIVER SITE WATCH
1112 Florence Street, COLUMBIA, SC 29201  | 803-834-3084  – srswatch@gmail.com

Footer

The information produced on this website is the sole property of SRS Watch unless otherwise noted and may be reproduced or quoted if credit is given to SRS Watch. Materials published on this website are for non-profit public interest purposes only. SRS Watch is a registered corporation in South Carolina and in December 2014 and has obtained non-profit 501(c)(3) public -interest organization status from the IRS. SRS Watch is responsible for all material published on this website. We strive to be accurate in all material produced. For inquiries, comments or corrections, please contact us at srswatch@gmail.com or 803-834-3084. Donations are most welcome and are tax deductible. Mailing address: Savannah River Site Watch, 1112 Florence Street, Columbia, SC 29201. This site or product includes IP2Location LITE data available from https://lite.ip2location.com.

©SRS Watch 2019  All Rights Reserved in All Media.