Presented to Disposal Subcommittee of the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future
Presented to the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future Subcommittee on Disposal
Presented to Disposal Subcommittee of the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future
After an exhaustive review process that encompassed EPAÕs proposed rule, as presented in the Federal Register Notice, as well as the reference materials cited in that Notice, Nevada concludes that EPAÕs proposed standard is inconsistent with the recommendations of the National Academy of Sciences (as required by the Energy Policy Act of 1992) and the July 9, 2004 ruling of the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.
Management of civilian radioactive waste has posed difficult issues for Congress since the beginning of the nuclear power industry in the 1950s. Federal policy is based on the premise that nuclear waste can be disposed of safely, but proposed storage and disposal facilities have frequently been challenged on safety, health, and environmental grounds.
The effective termination of the Yucca Mountain program by the U.S. Administration in 2009 has left the U.S. program for management of used fuel and high level radioactive waste (HLW) in a state of uncertainty.
Nuclear waste disposal in the USA is a difficult policy issue infused with
science, technology, and politics. This issue provides an example of the co-production
of scientific knowledge and politics through public policy. The proponents of a
repository site at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, argue that their decision to go ahead
with the site is based on ‘sound science’, but the science they use to uphold their
decision is influenced by politics. In turn, the politics of site selection has been altered
Beginning with the role of "stakeholders" - those whose interests are, knowingly or unknowingly, affected - in the siting of noxious facilities, this paper seeks to develop principles for acceptable and democratically arrived at polices related to problems associated with advances in and products of science and technology. Although widely regarded as a necessary condition for success, the principles underpinning stakeholder involvement, such as representativeness, are often violated in practice.
U.S. efforts to site and construct a deep geologic repository for used fuel and high level radioactive waste (HLW) proceeded sporadically over a three-decade period from the late 1950s until 1982, when the U.S. Congress enacted the Nuclear Waste Policy Act (NWPA) codifying a national approach for developing a deep geologic repository. Amendment of the NWPA in 1987 resulted in a number of dramatic changes in direction for the U.S. program, most notably the selection of Yucca Mountain as the only site of the three remaining candidates for continued investigation.
Comments by John Greeves, Former Director, Division of Waste Management, NRC, presented to BRC Disposal Subcommittee
Presented to the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future Subcommittee on Disposal
The Blue Ribbon Commission on America_s Nuclear Future (BRC) was formed by the Secretary<br>of Energy at the request of the President to conduct a comprehensive review of policies for<br>managing the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle and recommend a new strate
The purpose of this study is to assist decision makers in evaluating the centralized interim<br>storage option. We explore the economics of centralized interim storage under a wide variety of<br>circumstances. We look at how a commitment to move forward with centralized interim storage<br>today could evolve over time. And, we evaluate the costs of reversing a commitment toward<br>centralized storage if it turns out that such a decision is later considered a mistake.
The principal factors that affected the scope of scientific investigations at Yucca Mountain over the last 20 years included both regulatory and technical aspects. Examples of regulatory factors include the regulations themselves as well as the associated quality assurance requirements. Examples of technical factors include the repository and waste package designs, new information that affected the post-closure safety basis, and technical reviews from peers, stakeholders and the regulators.
Presented to the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future Subcommittee on Disposal
This report puts forth a number of options and recommendations for how to engage stakeholders and other members of the public in the storage and management of spent nuclear fuel and high level waste in the United States. The options are generated from a scientific review of existing publications proposing criteria for assessing past efforts to engage publics and stakeholders in decision-making about risky technologies.
On the historic evidence, but also for the distinctive qualities of the challenge, nuclear waste siting conflicts are assuredly among the most refractory in the large variety of NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard) facility siting disputes. Since the president brought the Yucca Mountain process to a halt in 2010 (or, more accurately, issued its death certificate), the search for a permanent waste fuel repository is at the starting line again.
