新大綱策定会議(第15回)
資料第２号

Highlights of Report on Blue Ribbon
Commission on America’s Nuclear
FutureJeff Miller
Director, DOE Japan Office
March 13, 2012

Nuclear Power in the United States• 104 operating
commercial nuclear
power reactors• 20 percent of total
electricity generation

Net Non-emitting (CO2)
Sources of Electricity• 70 percent of ourcarbon free energy
Source: Energy Information Administration

Current Nuclear Waste Landscape• Fleet generates between 2,000 and 2,400
metric tons of SNF annually• Virtually all SNF stored on site in pools orcasks• ~65,000 metric tons of commercial waste (andgrowing)Current Nuclear Waste Environment• Nuclear Waste Policy Act• NIMBYism• Industry is frustrated
Bottom Line: No interim or permanent disposal path

Nuclear Waste Policy Act Highlights• Quid Pro Quo (Nuclear Waste Fund)– “Polluter pays” provision—no taxpayer impact– Government commitment to accept waste• Approximately USD $750 million in annual
revenues• Approximately USD $27 billion total
The BRC notes that fund is inaccessible to DOE as fees are treated liketax revenue by Congress and use to off‐set the deficit. Waste
management programs are funded through normal appropriations.

Nuclear Waste Policy Act Highlights• Calls for two repository sites with the first limited
to 70,000 metric tons until the second is open
• Allows for consolidated interim storage facility
after a repository has been licensed• NRC responsible for licensing construction andoperation; EPA responsible for environmental
standards• Amendments in 1987 designated Yucca Mountainas the sole site despite Nevada’s opposition

Blue Ribbon Commission Task
• Bipartisan composition• Review policies for back end of the nuclear
fuel cycle and recommend new ideas• Recommend new strategies
Directed by President Obama in January 2010; Final
Report to DOE Secretary Chu in January 2012

Systemic Change Required• Responsibility to current
generation• Responsibility to future
generations

Links to nuclear
safety, security
and disarmament

Links toenvironmental
protection

Energy Security is Key Consideration

Key Recommendations• Consent‐based approach to siting• A new organization dedicated to waste management• Prompt efforts to develop one or more geologic
disposal and consolidated interim storage facilities• Support for continued U.S. innovation in nuclear
energy technology and for workforce development• Active U.S. leadership in international efforts toaddress safety, waste management, non‐proliferation,and security concerns

Consent‐Based Approach to Siting• WIPP is a good model (supportive governmentand community)• Consent‐based• Transparent• Phased• Adaptive• Generic standards and science‐based

New Waste ManagementOrganization• Federal corporation chartered by Congress fora single purpose• Site, license, construct and operate facilities
for disposition of civilian and defense HLWand SNF• Responsibility for transport• Responsibility for research and development

Interim Consolidated Storage• Timely development of one or more facilities• Monitored retrievable storage can be sitedand designed under NPWA
• Amendment to NPWA required to allow for
construction before licensing of a repository• Supports lessons learned on Fukushima• Supports nuclear security• Supports repository programNoteworthy Items• No position on recycling• No position on suitability of Yucca Mountain as ageologic repository• No specific proposals for repository sites• No position on nuclear in US future energy mix

Conclusion• Systemic changes recommended• Recommendations are being studied• Timeline for implementation unclear