Michele Kearney's Nuclear Wire

Major Energy and Environmental News and Commentary affecting the Nuclear Industry.

Friday, January 27, 2012

NIC Update -- BRC Report 01/28/12

United States
Nuclear Infrastructure
Council

NIC


NIC Update -- BRC Report 

Below is a link to the final Report to the Secretary of Energy by the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future (BRC), which was embargoed until 2:00 pm EDT today.

A quick summary and talking points follow.

The Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future (BRC) released this afternoon its 119-page Report to the Secretary of Energy. 
Recognizing that "America's nuclear waste management program is at an impasse", the BRC recommends a strategy with eight key elements.
1.    A new, consent-based approach to siting future nuclear waste management facilities.
2.    A new organization dedicated solely to implementing the waste management program and empowered with the authority and resources to succeed.
3.    Access to the funds nuclear utility ratepayers are providing for the purpose of nuclear waste management.
4.    Prompt efforts to develop one or more geologic disposal facilities.
5.    Prompt efforts to develop one or more consolidated storage facilities.
6.    Prompt efforts to prepare for the eventual large-scale transport of spent nuclear fuel and high-level waste to consolidated storage and disposal facilities when such facilities become available.
7.    Support for continued U.S. innovation in nuclear energy technology and for workforce development.
8.    Active U.S. leadership in international efforts to address security, waste management, non-proliferation, and security concerns.

The BRC is confident that its waste management recommendations  can be implemented using revenue streams already dedicated for this purpose (in particular the Nuclear Waste Fund and fee). 
Its proposed legislative changes include: Establishing a new facility siting process, Authorizing consolidated interim storage facilities, Broadening support to jurisdictions affected by transportation, Establishing a new waste management organization, Ensuring access to dedicated funding, and Promoting international engagement to support safe and secure waste management.

Access to Waste Fund

The BRC recommends that the DOE's standard contract with nuclear utilities should be amended so that utilities remit only the portion of the annual fee that is appropriated for waste management each year and place the rest in a trust account.  In the long term, legislation is needed to transfer the unspent balance in the Fund to the new waste management organization.

Consent Based Siting

Once the new waste management organization is established, the BRC recommends that it should:
  • Establish a set of basic initial siting criteria
  • Encourage expressions of interest from a large variety of communities that have potentially suitable sites
  • Establish initial program milestones
Fed Corp

Due to lack of confidence and trust from the overall record of DOE and the federal government, the BRC concludes that a new, single-purpose organization is needed to provide the stability, focus, and credibility that are essential to get the waste program back on track.  According to the report, a congressionally chartered federal corporation offers the best model.  The central task of this organization would be to site, license, build, and operate facilities for the safe consolidated storage and final disposal of spent fuel and high-level nuclear waste.

Geologic Disposal Facility

The Report states, "Disposal is needed and that deep geologic disposal is the scientifically preferred approach has been reached by every other country that is pursuing a nuclear waste management program...We believe permanent disposal will very likely also be needed to safely manage at least some portion of the commercial spent fuel inventory even if a closed fuel cycle were adopted."

Consolidated Storage

The BRC believes developing consolidated storage capacity would allow the federal government to begin the orderly transfer of spent fuel from reactor sites to safe and secure centralized facilities independent of the schedule for operating a permanent repository.

Transportation

According to the Report, the BRC believes state, tribal, and local officials should be extensively involved in transportation planning and should be given the resources necessary to discharge their roles and obligations in this arena.

The BRC recognizes that while it would be premature to fully fund a technical assistance program before knowing with some certainty where the destination sites for spent fuel are going to be, substantial benefits can be gained from a modest early investment in planning for the transport of spent fuel from shutdown reactor sites.

Advanced Technologies

The BRC recommends ongoing work by the NRC to develop a regulatory framework for advanced nuclear energy systems.  Specfically, the BRC recommends "adequate federal funding be provided to the NRC to support a robust effort in this area. 

The BRC does not make specific recommendations concerning future DOE funding for nuclear energy RD&D, given the extraordinary fiscal pressures the federal government will confront in coming years.

Closing the Fuel Cycle

The report takes a dim view of closing the fuel cycle - in fact calling any policy to close the fuel cycle "premature" and arguing that available and reasonably foreseeable reactor and fuel cycle technology developments - including advances in reprocessing and recycling technology - cannot impact the current paradigm over at least the next several decades if not longer.
   
"... It is the Commission's view that it would be premature for the United States to commit, as a matter of policy, to "closing" the nuclear fuel cycle given the large uncertainties that exist about the merits and commercial viability of different fuel cycles and technologies options."
  
... no currently available or reasonably foreseeable reactor and fuel cycle technology developments - including advances in reprocessing and recycling technologies - have the potential to fundamentally alter the waste management challenge this nation confronts over at least the next several decades if not longer.
Other

It should also be noted that the Commission, consistent with its charter, did not:
  • Render an opinion on the suitability of the Yucca Mountain site or on the request to withdraw the license application for Yucca Mountain.  Instead, we focused on developing a sound strategy for future storage and disposal facilities and operations that we believe can and should be implemented regardless of what happens with Yucca Mountain.
  • Propose any specific site (or sites) for any component of the waste management system.
  • Offered a judgment about the appropriate role of nuclear power in the nation's (or the world's) future energy supply mix.


U.S. Nuclear Infrastructure Council
Talking Points
Regarding the
Report to the Secretary of Energy by the
Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future (BRC)

While we regret that the Blue Ribbon Commission did not choose to consider the Yucca Mountain project or consider site specific options, its report corroborates once again that a geologic disposal facility is the foundation for any national spent fuel management program -- and that there is no "silver bullet" for Yucca Mountain.  To this end, we are pleased that the BRC recommendations do not preclude Yucca Mountain as an option going forward.  We continue to support the completion of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's review of the Energy Department's license application for Yucca Mountain in concert with the provisions of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act.

We agree with the BRC that a prompt solution to the nation's spent fuel management challenge is urgently needed and that failure by the federal government to come to grips with its responsibilities has proved damaging and enormously expensive with the cost of inaction now measured in the billions of dollars -- and mounting.  The report is crystal clear that the U.S. Department of Energy's commitments to utilities and electricity consumer stakeholders have not been met over decades and that a new organization is needed to lead the nation's spent fuel management program - specifically an empowered federal corporation with authority, funding and portfolio.

We are encouraged that the report affirms key components of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act, while suggesting some overdue enhancements, most notably an independent "FedCorp" with the resources and authority to succeed; ensured access to dedicated funding; and more flexibility in constructing one or more consolidated interim storage facilities. Consolidated storage can be an important element in any comprehensive strategy to jumpstart forward progress toward meeting contractual and statutory obligations, including shut-down nuclear plants.  As the BRC notes, there is no safety or security risks with current storage.  Along with consolidated storage, we also believe that "closing" the fuel cycle and recycling should be on the table as part of any integrated approach. We strongly disagree with the BRC's observation that no technology development has the potential to fundamentally alter the waste management paradigm for the next several decades if not longer.
Although the BRC report does not lay out a definitized path forward with timetables, we hope that its review will lend clarity to the need, urgency, structure and available avenues to meet the solvable challenges of the nation's current spent fuel management impasse.

Please note that while this statement reflects the consensus of the Council , it may not necessarily reflect the views of individual members.
###


 


 
Harrison Akins
Policy Fellow - Small Reactor Commercialization
U.S. Nuclear Infrastructure Council
1317 F Street NW, Suite 350
Washington, DC 20004

No comments:

Post a Comment