DOE Certifies License Support Network for Yucca Mountain

Today the Department of Energy certified the public availability of documentary material relevant to the Yucca Mountain licensing process on NRC's Licensing Support Network (LSN). With its launch, DOE in accordance with NRC regulations, may submit a Yucca Mountain license application as soon as six months from now (mid April).

According to my colleagues here at the office, NEI intends to participate actively in the Yucca Mountain licensing process to represent industry interests. Accordingly, we will make all of our documents relevant to Yucca Mountain licensing available to the public within 90 days of DOE certification as required by Nuclear Regulatory Commission regulations.

Comments

Anonymous said…

Do you have a link to the relevant certifying document from DOE? Thanks.

October 23, 2007 at 10:51 AM

Eric McErlain said…

I've gotten hold of the actual document. I'll be posting it online at NEI sometime tomorrow.

October 23, 2007 at 4:27 PM

Anonymous said…

It is beyond belief that the NEI would support the Yucca Mountain Project in any way. Terminal disposal of recyclable nuclear fuel is a completely stupid appeasement to the anti-nukes. Hopefully those with a broader perspective will realize the potential combination of energy resource and carbon emission avoidance in time to stop the licensing process. R. G. Oesterling, Certified Health Physicist (ret.)

October 24, 2007 at 12:07 PM

Activists' Claims Distort Facts about Advanced Reactor Design

Below is from our rapid response team . Yesterday, regional anti-nuclear organizations asked federal nuclear energy regulators to launch an investigation into what it claims are “newly identified flaws” in Westinghouse’s advanced reactor design, the AP1000. During a teleconference releasing a report on the subject, participants urged the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to suspend license reviews of proposed AP1000 reactors. In its news release, even the groups making these allegations provide conflicting information on its findings. In one instance, the groups cite “dozens of corrosion holes” at reactor vessels and in another says that eight holes have been documented. In all cases, there is another containment mechanism that would provide a barrier to radiation release. Below, we examine why these claims are unwarranted and why the AP1000 design certification process should continue as designated by the NRC. Myth: In the AP1000 reactor design, the gap between the shield bu...

What Happens During a Refueling Outage?

You may have noticed over the past few weeks that a number of nuclear plants are shut down for refueling outages or are resuming operations after just returning from one. This type of routine outage usually occurs in the spring or fall when electricity demand is low so that nuclear reactors can replace about one-third of the spent fuel rods with new fuel and conduct other routine maintenance and repairs at the plant. To get a better sense of how refueling works at a nuclear energy facility, I spoke with Marcus Nichol, NEI’s senior project manager for used fuel storage and transportation, and asked him to explain the basics. Why does a nuclear plant need to replace one-third of its fuel? Nichol: The main purpose of a refueling outage is to replace older fuel that is depleted—meaning it can no longer efficiently produce energy from nuclear fission reactions—with new fuel. This “used fuel” has typically been used in the reactor for four-and-a-half to six years before it is pe...

How Much Land Does Nuclear, Wind and Solar Really Need?

Not too long ago, we reviewed a report that looked at nuclear energy (and other energy sources) as biodiversity agents. This had to do, in part, with the amount of land a facility needs to function. Nuclear energy and fossil fuel plants use relatively little, wind farms and solar arrays quite a lot of land . Based on an objective and transparent analysis of our sustainable energy choices, we have come to the evidence-based conclusion that nuclear energy is a good option for biodiversity conservation (and society in general) and that other alternatives to fossil fuels should be subjected to the same cost–benefit analyses (in terms of biodiversity and climate outcomes, as well as sociopolitical imperatives) before accepting or dismissing them. Writer Barry Brook, who collected 75 scientists to endorse his paper, is interested in land use as it impacts flora and fauna. Biodiversity concerns do not get as much play as they might – and, when they do, it annoys many when land is withdraw...

NEI Nuclear Notes

Search This Blog