DECOMMISSIONING COST ANALYSIS for the CLINTON POWER STATION
DECOMMISSIONING COST ANALYSIS for the CLINTON POWER STATION
<div class="page" title="Page 1">
<div class="section">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
<div class="page" title="Page 1">
<div class="section">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
<div class="page" title="Page 2">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
<div class="page" title="Page 8">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
<div class="page" title="Page 1">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
The main question before the Transportation and Storage Subcommittee was whether the United States should change its approach to storing and transporting spent nuclear fuel (SNF) and high-level radioactive waste (HLW) while one or more disposal facilities are established.
In the course of producing electrical power in light water reactors (LWRs), the uranium
fuel accumulates fission products until the fission process is no longer efficient.for power
production. At that point the fuel is removed from the reactor and stored in water basins
to allow radioactivity to partially decay before further disposition. This fuel is referred
to as "spent fuel." Although spent fuel as it is discharged from a reactor is intensely
radioactive, it has been stored safely in moderate quantities for decades. Spent fuel could
In his January 12, 1993 letter to Senator Johnston, Secretary Watkins promised to develop a
conceptual revised program strategy for public review. The enclosed document represents the
final report of the Task Force on an Alternative Program Strategy that was established to fulfill
that commitment. The report incorporates refinements to the preliminary draft you received on
March 8, based on discussions with key people in the program.
In developing this alternative strategy, the Task Force has drawn on the extensive analyses of
When Congress passed the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, it created the
Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management within the Department of
Energy to spearhead the implementation of this landmark legislation.
In Section 303 of the Act, however, Congress directed the Secretary of Energy
to study alternative approaches to managing the radioactive waste program, as
follows:
ALTERNATIVE MEANS OF FINANCING
SEC. 303. The Secretary shall undertake a study with respect to
This report is in response to the directive of the House Appropriations Subcommittee for Energy and Water
Development that the Department of Energy (DOE) update a 1984 report of alternative means of financing and
managing (AMFM) the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management (OCRWM) in the DOE. The
President’s FY 2002 budget also stated: “DOE will submit to Congress an updated report regarding alternative
approaches to finance and manage the program by June 30, 2001[.] DOE will identify in this report models of
After more than 20 years of commercial nuclear power, the Federal
Government has yet to develop a broadly supported policy for fulfilling
its legal responsibility for the final isolation of high-level radioactive waste.
OTA's study concludes that until such a policy is adopted in law, there
is a substantial risk that the false starts, shifts of policy, and fluctuating support
that have plagued the final isolation program in the past will continue.
Final isolation-the last step in radioactive waste management-is intended
The main objective of this report is to identify conditions which affect public concern (either
increase or decrease) and political acceptance for developing and implementing programmes
for geologic disposal of long-lived radioactive waste. It also looks how citizens and relevant
actors can be associated in the decision making process in such a way that their input is
enriching the outcome towards a more socially robust and sustainable solution. Finally, it
aims at learning from the interaction how to optimise risk management addressing needs and
This report summarizes the results of EPA's review of the AEC
draft environmental statement, "Management of Commercial High-Level
and Transuranium-Contaminated Radioactive Waste" (WASH-1539). The
means by which high-level and long-lived radioactive wastes are
managed constitutes one of the most important questions upon which
the public acceptability of nuclear power, with its social and economic
benefits, will be determined. While the generation of power by
nuclear means offers certain benefits from the environmental viewpoint,
The Strategy for the Management and Disposal of Used Nuclear Fuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste is a framework for moving toward a sustainable program to deploy an integrated system capable of transporting, storing, and disposing of used nuclear fuel1 and high-level radioactive waste from civilian nuclear power generation, defense, national security and other activities.
The Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future (BRC) was formed by the Secretary of Energy at the request of the President to conduct a comprehensive review of policies for managing the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle and recommend a new strategy
The Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future (BRC) was formed by the Secretary of Energy at the request of the President to conduct a comprehensive review of policies for managing the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle and recommend a new strategy
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 strategy. It was cochaired<br>by Rep. Lee H. Hamilton and Gen. Brent Scowcroft. Other Commissioners are Mr.<br>Mark H. Ayers, the Hon. Vicky A. Bailey, Dr. Albert Carnesale, Sen. Pete Domenici, Ms. Susan<br>Eisenhower, Sen. Chuck Hagel, Mr. Jonathan Lash, Dr. Allison M. Macfarlane, Dr.
Email from Steven Kraft to Alex Thrower
Map-U.S. Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installations
The Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future was formed by the Secretary of<br/>Energy at the direction of the President. The Commission was formed to conduct a<br/>comprehensive review of policies for managing the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle, including<br/>all alternatives for the storage, processing, and disposal of civilian and defense used nuclear fuel,<br/>high–level waste, and materials derived from nuclear activities.