Group items tagged

Storing spent nuclear fuel at reactor sites and eventually depositing the waste in a geologic repository is likely to be the most expensive of several options available for addressing the US' atomic waste problem, the Government Accountability Office said in a report evaluating different storage and repository options. Nevada senators Harry Reid, a Democrat, and John Ensign, a Republican, requested the GAO report on nuclear waste management in addition to Senator Barbara Boxer, a California Democrat. The report evaluates the Department of Energy's nuclear waste management program and other possible approaches to storing spent nuclear fuel in the long term. It evaluates the attributes, challenges and cost of the Yucca Mountain waste repository program in Nevada, which President Barack Obama's administration is terminating, and alternative waste management approaches. The Obama administration plans to establish a commission to evaluate the alternatives to Yucca Mountain, which is roughly 95 miles outside Las Vegas. GAO does not make a final recommendation in the report but does call on federal agencies, industry and policymakers to consider a "complementary and parallel" strategy of interim and long-term disposal options. Such a route "would allow [the government] time to work with local communities and to pursue research and development efforts in key areas," GAO said in the report. GAO estimates that developing Yucca Mountain to dispose of 153,000 metric tons of spent nuclear fuel would cost $41 billion to $67 billion in 2009 present value over a 143-year period until the repository is closed. The US is expected to generate 153,000 metric tons of nuclear waste by 2055, GAO said.

Storing spent nuclear fuel at reactor sites and eventually depositing the waste in a geologic repository is likely to be the most expensive of several options available for addressing the US' atomic waste problem, the Government Accountability Office said in a report evaluating different storage and repository options. Nevada senators Harry Reid, a Democrat, and John Ensign, a Republican, requested the GAO report on nuclear waste management in addition to Senator Barbara Boxer, a California Democrat. The report evaluates the Department of Energy's nuclear waste management program and other possible approaches to storing spent nuclear fuel in the long term. It evaluates the attributes, challenges and cost of the Yucca Mountain waste repository program in Nevada, which President Barack Obama's administration is terminating, and alternative waste management approaches. The Obama administration plans to establish a commission to evaluate the alternatives to Yucca Mountain, which is roughly 95 miles outside Las Vegas. GAO does not make a final recommendation in the report but does call on federal agencies, industry and policymakers to consider a "complementary and parallel" strategy of interim and long-term disposal options. Such a route "would allow [the government] time to work with local communities and to pursue research and development efforts in key areas," GAO said in the report. GAO estimates that developing Yucca Mountain to dispose of 153,000 metric tons of spent nuclear fuel would cost $41 billion to $67 billion in 2009 present value over a 143-year period until the repository is closed. The US is expected to generate 153,000 metric tons of nuclear waste by 2055, GAO said.

Since 2006, GAO has issued 12 reports examining DOE's contract and project management. Two of these reports examined the performance of DOE's largest construction projects-nearly all of which are managed by NNSA or EM-and EM's largest nuclear waste cleanup projects. These reports documented that the cost increases and schedule delays that have occurred for most of these projects have been the result of inconsistent application of project management tools and techniques on the part of both DOE and its contractors. Specifically, GAO reported in March 2007 that 8 of the 10 major NNSA and EM construction projects that GAO reviewed had exceeded the initial cost estimates for completing these projects-in total, DOE added nearly $14 billion to these initial estimates. GAO also reported that 9 of the 10 major construction projects were behind schedule-in total, DOE added more than 45 years to the initial schedule estimates. In particular, the Waste Treatment Plant project at the Hanford Site had exceeded its original cost estimate by almost $8 billion and experienced schedule delays of over 8 years. GAO also reported in September 2008 that 9 of the 10 major EM cleanup projects GAO reviewed had experienced cost increases and schedule delays-in total, DOE estimated that it needed an additional $25 billion to $42 billion to complete these cleanup projects over the initial cost estimates and an additional 68 to 111 more years than initially estimated. In addition, GAO has issued a number of other reports over the past 3 years on specific

The Government Accountability Office has dismissed a protest against the award of the $3 billion Mission Support Contract to a team led by Lockheed Martin. But the dismissal doesn't clear the way for Lockheed Martin to take over support services at Hanford now provided by outgoing contractor Fluor Hanford. Instead, the Department of Energy will address concerns raised by the GAO and a new decision will be made, according to the GAO. No timeline was given, but DOE released a statement Tuesday saying that it was "confident that the issues raised by the GAO can be addressed both thoroughly and expeditiously."

"Rep. Edward J. Markey, D-Mass., chairman of the Energy and Environment Subcommittee, today announced his request that the Government Accountability Office (GAO) commence a thorough review of the adequacy of nuclear reactor safety regulations and oversight, as well as the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC's) process of granting licenses for both new and existing nuclear power plants. "For nuclear power to play a major role in our nation's clean energy future, the public must have confidence that new reactors can be built safely and that existing reactors can continue to operate reliably," said Markey. "We need to make sure that nuclear plants are adequately protected from both safety and fiscal problems that could place the public at risk." Chairman Markey, whose Energy and Environment Subcommittee has jurisdiction over the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the nuclear power industry, requested the GAO report in order to find out:"

"Weak management of the National Ignition Facility is being blamed for more cost overruns and delays to experiments at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory project, according to a recently released report by congressional auditors. The cost of NIF's experimental program has already grown by 25%, or $400 million, to an estimated $2 billion through fiscal year 2012, and the scheduled completion of ignition experiments has been pushed back by a year, to September 2012, says the Government Accountability Office (GAO). The 192-laser NIF was officially completed more than a year ago, at a cost of $3.5 billion-$1.4 billion above the estimate when construction began in 1997. But GAO said that LLNL had been allowed to put off "major aspects of NIF's safety infrastructure," including installation of concrete doors and other target-area shielding to protect personnel from neutron radiation. Funding for those safety items, totaling around $50 million, has had to come from the National Ignition Campaign, and NIF's preliminary experimental program, which includes "nonignition" experiments producing temperatures and pressures below the ignition threshold, had to be suspended for several months while their installation was completed. That stoppage could delay attainment of NIF's experimental objective-ignition, the point at which the energy from fusion exceeds the energy needed to initiate the reaction-beyond the already postponed 2012 deadline."

Terrie Barrie of the Alliance of Nuclear Worker Advocacy Groups circulated a Dec. 30 letter she received from Sen. Harry Reid of Nevada regarding the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program. As for the earlier request he and other senators made for a comprehensive investigation of the federal program, Reid wrote, "I am pleased to let you know that GAO is giving priority status to our request. In fact, I was recently informed that the investigation is already under way, and I plan to closely monitor its progress." Reid said the findings of that GAO investigation would used for develop reforms of the program in the 111th Congress. He said he and Sen. Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico had recently asked NIOSH to establish a new online system to make it easier for claimants to check the status of their applications. "As a result of our persistence, NIOSH set up a special form at the following Web site: http://www2a.cdc.gov/ocas/status.html.

"Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) commented today on the findings of a Government Accountability Office (GAO) report he requested on the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000 (EEOICPA). The EEOICPA provides compensation to workers and their survivors for occupational diseases arising from toxic and radiation exposure in the government's nuclear weapons program. Several Iowans who worked on the Department of Energy's Line 1 are currently pursuing claims with the Department of Labor (DOL) through the EEOICPA. "I requested an audit of this program after constituents reported delayed compensation, difficulty navigating the program and inconsistencies with the adjudication process," Senator Harkin said. "Some claimants had to wait three years just for the government to rule on their case, and that's unacceptable. The recommendations the GAO makes in this report will help the DOL be more responsive to affected workers, and I am currently looking at the best way to implement these fixes." "

"Throughout the Senate debate on the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START) one of the central issues has been funding for nuclear weapons. Earlier this year, President Obama asked Congress for the largest nuclear weapons budget in history. However, Republicans, led by Senator Jon Kyl (R-AZ), continually question whether the nuclear weapons stockpile and its supporting industrial infrastructure are adequately funded. With the release of a new government report, it appears that both Senate Republicans and the administration may lack sufficient information for either side to determine how much money is actually needed for long term maintenance of the U.S. nuclear arsenal. Last week, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) released a report titled "Actions Needed to Identify Total Costs of Weapons Complex Infrastructure and Production Capabilities" detailing the federal government's loose budgeting and accounting practices for nuclear weapons programs. According to GAO, the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), which is responsible for maintaining the U.S. nuclear stockpile, determines its future budgets by simply looking at each of its program's prior year budget and then adds or subtracts money based on programmatic changes. This means, rather than looking at what programs actually cost in any given year, NNSA simply assumes that it is working with the right numbers. "

The Government Accountability Office (GAO) told a Senate oversight committee Sept. 16 that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has ignored recommendations from an advisory committee established to assist the agency in creating policies to protect children's health. For example, in developing three recent air quality standards on particulate matter, ozone, and lead, EPA either rejected the committee's recommendations or treated them as one of many public comments, according to GAO.

he U.S. Government Accountability Office has found that the National Nuclear Security Administration's is not doing enough to prevent rogue actors from acquiring nuclear-weapon components from at least one facility, the Kansas City Star reported yesterday (see GSN, June 8). The GAO report focuses on current operations and plans for a site that would replace a facility in Kansas City. Mo. The Kansas City Plant, overseen by the nuclear agency and managed by a private contractor, produces 85 percent of the non-nuclear components that go into building the average nuclear weapon. Congressional auditors said it has not done enough to ensure that sensitive "dual-use" equipment does not fall into the hands of terrorist organizations or foreign countries.

he U.S. Government Accountability Office has found that the National Nuclear Security Administration's is not doing enough to prevent rogue actors from acquiring nuclear-weapon components from at least one facility, the Kansas City Star reported yesterday (see GSN, June 8). The GAO report focuses on current operations and plans for a site that would replace a facility in Kansas City. Mo. The Kansas City Plant, overseen by the nuclear agency and managed by a private contractor, produces 85 percent of the non-nuclear components that go into building the average nuclear weapon. Congressional auditors said it has not done enough to ensure that sensitive "dual-use" equipment does not fall into the hands of terrorist organizations or foreign countries.

Sen. Lamar Alexander is among seven U.S. senators who wrote Sept. 16 letter asking the Government Accountability Office to "review the implementation" of the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act. The senators asked the GAO to focus on a number of concerns, including delays in processing claims and the credibility of the compensation decisions for sick nuclear workers.

Federal agents posing as workers have completed an undercover investigation of the Department of Labor (DOL) that has resulted in claims that the department frequently mishandles serious worker complaints, placing many workers at risk. The outcome of the investigation is detailed in a new report from the Government Accountability Office (GAO) that found DOL mishandled nine out of the 10 cases included in the undercover operation. The report, which is scheduled to be released on March 25, found that the agency's Wage and Hour Division (WHD) not only failed to properly investigate wage and hour complaints, but also ignored a complaint that underage children were working at a California meatpacking plant during school hours, a violation of a number of labor laws.

If no federal repository for spent nuclear fuel is opened in the next 100 years, the nation's taxpayers could be on the hook to pay for on-site storage, such as the dry casks at Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant in Vernon. That cost could run anywhere between $10 billion and $26 billion. That was the conclusion of the Government Accounting Office, which just released a report on the costs of nuclear waste management -- whether it be a long-term repository, centralized storage or on-site storage. The United States has 70,000 tons of waste stored at 80 sites in 35 states. By 2055, the amount of waste is expected to increase to 153,000 tons. The GAO also conducted a scenario in which fuel stays on site for 500 years. It concluded the cost for that scenario could range between $34 billion to $225 billion.

If no federal repository for spent nuclear fuel is opened in the next 100 years, the nation's taxpayers could be on the hook to pay for on-site storage, such as the dry casks at Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant in Vernon. That cost could run anywhere between $10 billion and $26 billion. That was the conclusion of the Government Accounting Office, which just released a report on the costs of nuclear waste management -- whether it be a long-term repository, centralized storage or on-site storage. The United States has 70,000 tons of waste stored at 80 sites in 35 states. By 2055, the amount of waste is expected to increase to 153,000 tons. The GAO also conducted a scenario in which fuel stays on site for 500 years. It concluded the cost for that scenario could range between $34 billion to $225 billion.

There are many reasons why it was a terrible idea for the federal government to designate Yucca Mountain, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas, as a potential dumping ground for the nation's high-level nuclear waste. We can now add to that long list a report released Wednesday by the Government Accountability Office showing that it is far less expensive to store the radioactive waste where it is generated than to bury it in Nevada. The GAO, the investigative arm of Congress, estimated it would cost as little as $10 billion to store on site the 70,000 metric tons of waste that has been generated in this country, versus a minimum $27 billion at Yucca Mountain. When factoring in the possibility of even more waste, the difference in cost widens. The findings, prepared for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., and Senate Environmental and Public Works Committee Chairwoman Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., are important because taxpayers would pay 20 percent of the costs of building a permanent dump. Nuclear utility ratepayers would be responsible for the balance.

There are many reasons why it was a terrible idea for the federal government to designate Yucca Mountain, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas, as a potential dumping ground for the nation's high-level nuclear waste. We can now add to that long list a report released Wednesday by the Government Accountability Office showing that it is far less expensive to store the radioactive waste where it is generated than to bury it in Nevada. The GAO, the investigative arm of Congress, estimated it would cost as little as $10 billion to store on site the 70,000 metric tons of waste that has been generated in this country, versus a minimum $27 billion at Yucca Mountain. When factoring in the possibility of even more waste, the difference in cost widens. The findings, prepared for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., and Senate Environmental and Public Works Committee Chairwoman Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., are important because taxpayers would pay 20 percent of the costs of building a permanent dump. Nuclear utility ratepayers would be responsible for the balance.

The Yucca Mountain waste repository could turn out to be less expensive in the long run than other options for the management of the USA's high-level nuclear waste, a government report has found. The report, Nuclear Waste Management: Key Attributes, Challenges, and Costs for the Yucca Mountain Repository and Two Potential Alternatives, was prepared by the US Government Accountability Office (GAO) at the request of Nevada senators Harry Reid and John Ensign and California senator Barbara Boxer. Reid and Ensign are both vocal in their opposition to the proposed Yucca Mountain waste repository, while Boxer was instrumental in blocking plans for a nuclear waste site at Ward Valley, California.

The Yucca Mountain waste repository could turn out to be less expensive in the long run than other options for the management of the USA's high-level nuclear waste, a government report has found. The report, Nuclear Waste Management: Key Attributes, Challenges, and Costs for the Yucca Mountain Repository and Two Potential Alternatives, was prepared by the US Government Accountability Office (GAO) at the request of Nevada senators Harry Reid and John Ensign and California senator Barbara Boxer. Reid and Ensign are both vocal in their opposition to the proposed Yucca Mountain waste repository, while Boxer was instrumental in blocking plans for a nuclear waste site at Ward Valley, California.

"The Alliance of Nuclear Worker Advocacy Groups applauded the Government Accountability Office's recommendation of an indepdendent advisory board to oversee the Dept. of Labor work in carrying out the goverment's sick nuclear work compensation program. But spokespeople within the network of advoacy groups said more needs to be done. Here is a link to the GAO report, "Energy Employees Compensation: Additional Independent Oversight and Transparency Would Improve Program's Credibility." The Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program has the subject of contention and controversy from its creation a decade ago. In a statement, Scott Yundt of Tri-Valley CARES, said: "The GAO's call for scientific oversight of Part E is no small matter. It challenges the current program leadership's understanding of the complexity of the issues and highlights their unwillingness to assure the scientific integrity of the decision. GAO's recommendations support ANWAG's contention that program decisions are often arbitrary and capricious, and without scientific basis. Moreover, it supports the advocates' concerns and those of the program's last medical director, who was forced out of his job when he raised these very issues."

"In the last few months, the PR team for the National Ignition Facility (NIF) at Lawrence Livermore National Lab has certainly earned its keep. Even though the project is not complete, 400 percent over budget, at least 10 years behind schedule, and hiding its costs within other Lab program budgets, it has gotten a lot of buzz in the media. However, today, the GAO released a report stating that it is too soon to say that the project is a success, and that the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) and the Lab have conducted "weak oversight" of the project. From the report:"

HSS falls short of fully meeting GAO's elements of effective independent oversight of nuclear safety: independence, technical expertise, ability to perform reviews and have findings effectively addressed, enforcement, and public access to facility information. For example, HSS's ability to function independently is limited because it has no role in reviewing the "safety basis"-a technical analysis that helps ensure safe design and operation of these facilities-for new high-hazard nuclear facilities and because it has no personnel at DOE sites to provide independent safety observations. In addition, although HSS conducts periodic site inspections and identifies deficiencies that must be addressed, there are gaps in its inspection schedule and it lacks useful information on the status of the safety basis of all nuclear facilities. For example, HSS was not aware that 31 of the 205 facilities did not have a safety basis that meets requirements established in 2001. Finally, while HSS uses its authority to enforce nuclear safety requirements, its actions have not reduced the occurrence of over one-third of the most commonly reported violations in the last 3 years, although this is a priority for HSS.

Five others join Salazar, Allard in signing letter Pressure is mounting for the investigative arm of Congress to probe how the federal government is treating sick nuclear weapons workers. Meanwhile, officials from the agency responsible for compensating the workers have been to Capitol Hill this week defending their work.

DOE's Office of Environmental Management (EM) currently oversees more than 80 of these cleanup projects, primarily at government-owned, contractor-operated sites throughout the nation. Some of these highly complex projects have completion dates beyond 2050. Ten of these projects meet or nearly meet DOE's definition of "major": projects whose costs exceed $1 billion in the near-term-usually a 5-year window of the project's total estimated life cycle.1,2 These 10 projects have combined estimated near-term costs of almost $19 billion and combined life cycle costs estimated to range between $115 billion and $143 billion, and they account for almost half of EM's $5.5 billion fiscal year 2009 budget request.3 These 10 projects are described in detail in appendix II and include the remediation, decontamination, and decommissioning, or the stabilization and disposition of: