skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: Societal-Equity-Enhancing Criteria and Facility-Host Incentives Supporting Five Key Elements in the January 2012 Blue Ribbon Commission Report - 13015

Conference ·
OSTI ID:22224825
 [1];  [2];  [3]
  1. Nuclear Waste Dispositions, 535 N. Interlachen Avenue, Unit 303, Winter Park, Florida 32789 (United States)
  2. B and W Conversion Services LLC, 1020 Monarch Road, Suite 300, Lexington, Kentucky 40513 (United States)
  3. Retired DOE and Consultant, 1218 Countryside Lane, Albuquerque, New Mexico, 87114 (United States)

In February 2009, the Obama Administration announced it would abandon USA's only candidate SNF/HLW-disposal facility since 1987. In 2010, all related activities were stopped and the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future was established 'to recommend a new strategy for managing the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle', which it did in January 2012, emphasizing eight key elements. However, Key Element 1, 'A new, consent-based approach to siting future nuclear facilities', is qualitative/indeterminate rather than quantitative/measurable. It is thus highly-susceptible to semantic permutations that could extend rather than, as intended, expedite the siting of future nuclear facilities unless it also defines: a) Whose consent is needed?; and b) What constitutes consent? The following 'generic', radiation-risk- and societal-equity-based criteria address these questions: 1. Identify areas affected by projected radiation and other health risks from: a. The proposed nuclear facility (facility stakeholders); and b. The related nuclear-materials-transportation routes (transportation stakeholders); then 2. Surround each stakeholder area with a buffer zone and use this enlarged foot print to identify: a. Stakeholder hosts; and b. Areas not hosting any stakeholder category (interested parties). 3. Define 'consent-based' as being at least 60 percent of the 'population' in the respective stakeholder category and apply this yardstick to both 'in favor' and 'against' votes. Although criteria 1 and 2 also need facility-based definitions to make Key Element 1 measurable, the described siting approach, augmented by related facility-host incentives, would expedite the schedule and reduce the cost for achieving Key Elements 4-6 and 8, politics permitting. (authors)

Research Organization:
WM Symposia, 1628 E. Southern Avenue, Suite 9-332, Tempe, AZ 85282 (United States)
OSTI ID:
22224825
Report Number(s):
INIS-US-13-WM-13015; TRN: US14V0258045780
Resource Relation:
Conference: WM2013: Waste Management Conference: International collaboration and continuous improvement, Phoenix, AZ (United States), 24-28 Feb 2013; Other Information: Country of input: France; 17 refs.
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English