||Document, Government publication, National government publication, Internet resource
||Internet Resource, Computer File
|All Authors / Contributors:
United States. Department of Energy. Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future.
||Title from title screen (viewed on Feb. 7, 2012).
||1 online resource (xxi, 158 pages) : color illustrations, color maps
||System requirements: Adobe Acrobat Reader.; Mode of access: World Wide Web.
Executive summary. --
List of acronyms and abbreviations. --
1. Introduction. --
2. Foundations of a new strategy. --
3. Technical and historical background. --
4. The need for geologic disposal. --
5. Storage as a part of an integrated waste management strategy. --
6. A consent-based approach to siting and developing future facilities for nuclear waste management and disposal. --
7. A new organization to lead the nation's waste management program. --
8. Funding the waste management program. --
9. Transportation issues. --
10. Regulatory issues. --
11. Advanced reactor and fuel cycle technologies. --
12. International issues. --
13. Near-term actions.
||Report of the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future
||Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future.
The decision to halt work on a repository at Yucca Mountain in Nevada is but the latest indicator of a policy that has been troubled for decades and has now all but completely broken down. The approach laid out under the 1987 Amendments to the Nuclear Waste Policy Act (NWPA), which tied the entire U.S. high-level waste management program to the fate of the Yucca Mountain site, has not worked to produce a timely solution for dealing with the nation's most hazardous radioactive materials. The United States has traveled nearly 25 years down the current path only to come to a point where continuing to rely on the same approach seems destined to bring further controversy, litigation, and protracted delay. The Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future was chartered to recommend a new strategy for managing the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle. We approached this task from different perspectives but with a shared sense of urgency. Put simply, this nation's failure to come to grips with the nuclear waste issue has already proved damaging and costly and it will be more damaging and more costly the longer it continues: damaging to prospects for maintaining a potentially important energy supply option for the future, damaging to state-federal relations and public confidence in the federal government's competence, and damaging to America's standing in the world, not only as a source of nuclear technology and policy expertise but as a leader on global issues of nuclear safety, non-proliferation, and security. Continued stalemate is also costly to utility ratepayers, to communities that have become unwilling hosts of long-term nuclear waste storage facilities, and to U.S. taxpayers who face mounting liabilities, already running into billions of dollars, as a result of the failure by both the executive and legislative branches to meet federal waste management commitments.