Skip to main content

Yucca Mountain Hearing Alert

The Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee held a full committee hearing on the Yucca Mountain Project this morning. For a path to all the details on this morning's hearing, as well as transcripts of witness testimony submitted for the record, click here.

Our CEO, Skip Bowman, submitted written testimony to the committee as well. Click here for a press release summarizing the key points. From our release:
Bowman said that DOE must make visible and measurable progress in implementing an integrated national management strategy for used reactor fuel. The department must address several issues to provide stability, clarity and predictability of the nation's used fuel policy and conditions must be in place for near-term movement of used nuclear fuel, assurance of transportation safety and security, and licensing and construction of the repository planned for the Nevada desert 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas.

The industry's policy priorities for meeting this obligation are:
  • DOE is eight years in arrears of meeting its legal responsibility to manage used nuclear fuel and should move fuel to a secure federal facility as soon as practicable. The failure to do so already is subject of more than 60 lawsuits. Three of these suits, representing a fraction of reactor sites, have resulted in settlements or judgments of $340 million.
  • The nation's policymakers must be confident that policies are in place to ensure the safe and secure storage and disposal of used nuclear fuel. Managing the nation's used nuclear fuel is a firmly established federal obligation and, as such, is a matter of broad national policy. Therefore, Congress should codify its confidence that nuclear waste can be managed safely.
  • The congressional process for funding DOE'’s used fuel management program should be changed so that fees paid to the nuclear waste trust fund can be used as needed. Under the current system, funding for the Yucca Mountain project must compete with other programs despite a dedicated source of revenue ($750 million annually) to pay for the program.
  • Artificial constraints on the repository capacity should be eliminated. Although the statutory limit for Yucca Mountain is 70,000 metric tons of uranium (MTU), the environmental impact statement projected a capacity of up to 120,000 MTU. Additional scientific analyses show that four to nine times the original fuel disposal capacity could be achieved without major changes to the repository design.
  • Federal licensing for the repository should be restructured so that the process is prioritized by four areas: construction of the repository; facilities such as a rail line and other infrastructure that can be developed before a decision on the construction license; authorization to receive fuel; and clarification of the regulations that apply to repository construction and operation and which agencies administer those regulations.
More, including a link to download Skip Bowman's complete testimony, later.

UPDATE: Here's the link to Skip Bowman's (NEI president and CEO)testimony.

Technorati tags: , , , , , ,

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

How Nanomaterials Can Make Nuclear Reactors Safer and More Efficient

The following is a guest post from Matt Wald, senior communications advisor at NEI. Follow Matt on Twitter at @MattLWald.

From the batteries in our cell phones to the clothes on our backs, "nanomaterials" that are designed molecule by molecule are working their way into our economy and our lives. Now there’s some promising work on new materials for nuclear reactors.

Reactors are a tough environment. The sub atomic particles that sustain the chain reaction, neutrons, are great for splitting additional uranium atoms, but not all of them hit a uranium atom; some of them end up in various metal components of the reactor. The metal is usually a crystalline structure, meaning it is as orderly as a ladder or a sheet of graph paper, but the neutrons rearrange the atoms, leaving some infinitesimal voids in the structure and some areas of extra density. The components literally grow, getting longer and thicker. The phenomenon is well understood and designers compensate for it with a …

Why America Needs the MOX Facility

If Isaiah had been a nuclear engineer, he’d have loved this project. And the Trump Administration should too, despite the proposal to eliminate it in the FY 2018 budget.

The project is a massive factory near Aiken, S.C., that will take plutonium from the government’s arsenal and turn it into fuel for civilian power reactors. The plutonium, made by the United States during the Cold War in a competition with the Soviet Union, is now surplus, and the United States and the Russian Federation jointly agreed to reduce their stocks, to reduce the chance of its use in weapons. Over two thousand construction workers, technicians and engineers are at work to enable the transformation.

Carrying Isaiah’s “swords into plowshares” vision into the nuclear field did not originate with plutonium. In 1993, the United States and Russia began a 20-year program to take weapons-grade uranium out of the Russian inventory, dilute it to levels appropriate for civilian power plants, and then use it to produce…

Nuclear Is a Long-Term Investment for Ohio that Will Pay Big

With 50 different state legislative calendars, more than half of them adjourn by June, and those still in session throughout the year usually take a recess in the summer. So springtime is prime time for state legislative activity. In the next few weeks, legislatures are hosting hearings and calling for votes on bills that have been battered back and forth in the capital halls.

On Tuesday, The Ohio Public Utilities Committee hosted its third round of hearings on the Zero Emissions Nuclear Resources Program, House Bill 178, and NEI’s Maria Korsnick testified before a jam-packed room of legislators.


Washingtonians parachuting into state debates can be a tricky platform, but in this case, Maria’s remarks provided national perspective that put the Ohio conundrum into context. At the heart of this debate is the impact nuclear plants have on local jobs and the local economy, and that nuclear assets should be viewed as “long-term investments” for the state. Of course, clean air and electrons …