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.
###
No comments:
Post a Comment