Press Room

The Blue Ribbon Commission on America's  Nuclear Future report released today received mixed reviews from groups that monitor sites where large quantities of radioactive waste are stored. The Alliance for Nuclear Accountability (ANA) and the Livermore, CA-based Tri-Valley CAREs, said major flaws in the report include the Commission’s failure to advocate prompt removal of commercial spent fuel from reactor cooling pools with placement in hardened On-Site Storage (HOSS) to safeguard commercial spent fuel at nuclear power plants.  ANA and hundreds of community   groups had told the Commission that HOSS could protect the heavily reactive material for the decades needed to develop a scientifically sound and publicly acceptable waste disposal program.

“The Commission’s decision to support consolidated interim storage at the expense of HOSS continues decades of policy failure in this area,” explained ANA Director Susan Gordon. “The reality, which the Commission recognizes and the nuclear industry is pursuing, is that reactor sites must store their spent fuel for decades. Instead of pursuing centralized facilities, on-site storage should be improved to protect public health and the environment. Centralized storage would leave thousands of tons of waste at operating power plants. It would also create even more storage sites and endanger millions living along transportation routes. At the same time, it would increase the risk that consolidated fuel will be reprocessed.”

“While there are no magic ‘silver bullets’ for nuclear waste, the Commission is ignoring the obvious, superior solution,” added Marylia Kelley, Executive Director or the Livermore, CA-based Tri-Valley CAREs. “The Commission is simply following in the footsteps of the Department of Energy’s longstanding refusal to fully consider the benefits of Hardened On-Site Storage. HOSS would ensure that wastes are monitored and protected from aircraft crashes, terrorist attacks and other potential calamities. HOSS would secure wastes near sites where it was produced, thereby avoiding unnecessary transport.”

ANA ProgramDirector Katherine Fuchs continued, “Just as power plants must safely store their spent fuel, Department of Energy facilities must safely store high-level waste. The recommendation to send those dangerous materials to a non-existent disposal    site ignores the fact that those wastes are not ready for transportation. Funds should be spent to solidify those wastes and provide robust storage."

“We are disappointed in some Commission recommendations. We are not surprised, however, since none of the commissioners represent communities downstream or downwind of major nuclear weapons sites or nuclear power plants. No one on the commission has even worked with such groups, as we have pointed out since the Commission was formed,” said Don Hancock, Director of Southwest Research and Information Center’s Nuclear Waste Safety Program.

ANA and its member groups do support the Commission’s recommendation not to pursue commercial waste reprocessing. “The Commission understands that reprocessing is prohibitively expensive, creates new waste streams, and poses a nuclear proliferation risk,” said ANA Nonproliferation Policy Director Tom Clements. “In these austere times, the government shouldn't even invest in reprocessing research. Instead it must focus on safer    and more secure storage of spent fuel at existing waste storage facilities.”

The Alliance for Nuclear Accountability (ANA) is a 25 year old national network of three-dozen grassroots and national groups representing the concerns of communities near U.S. nuclear weapons sites that are directly affected by 65 years of nuclear weapons production and waste generation. 

-- 30 --