Interim Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel - Woods Hole Research Center

Chapter 1: Introduction 5
enue streams that could be used to finance other nonproliferation
and disarmament objectives, such as security and
disposition for Russia’s excess weapons plutonium. Proposals
for international spent fuel sites, however, also raise a
number of troubling issues and face a range of difficult
obstacles.
Objectives and Organization of
This Report
This report is intended to:
1. Clarify the current economic and technological
status of interim storage of spent fuel in the
United States, Japan, and worldwide.
2. Illuminate the institutional, legal and political
issues with regard to spent fuel storage and its
relationship with basic nuclear energy and
non-proliferation policies.
3. Explore possible policy options to overcoming
the obstacles to interim storage of spent fuel,
and assess the advantages and disadvantages of
various approaches to both domestic and international
spent fuel storage.
The remainder of this report consists of four major chapters,
followed by conclusions and recommendations. Chapter
2 examines current approaches to interim storage of
spent nuclear fuel in Japan, the United States, and other
countries, including safety, economics, flexibility, and nonproliferation
aspects, as well as an assessment of current
status and experience. The review shows that there are no
substantial technical or economic obstacles to implementation
of interim storage of spent fuel. Nevertheless, we note
one important technical and economic (as well as political)
issue—namely transportation of spent fuel to storage facilities.
Transportation of spent fuel is not a technically complex
operation, but it requires careful handling and special
attention to safety.
Chapter 3 examines the institutional, legal and political
factors affecting spent fuel storage in the United States
and Japan. This chapter reviews the history of the issue,
exploring how institutional, legal and political commitments
to the current approaches have built up over time,
and created increasing rigidity in spent fuel management
programs. The analysis highlights the importance of integrating
the uncertainties in predicting the future into longterm
planning, and the importance of maintaining flexibility
to respond to changing circumstances. At the same time,
however, the review focuses on the challenges to gaining
support for siting of spent fuel storage facilities from local
communities and regions.
Chapter 4 examines the possibilities for international
storage of spent fuel, including the history of the issue, the
advantages and disadvantages of an international approach
to the issue, current proposals (including a review of the
various concepts for a site in Russia and their status), and
obstacles to establishing international facilities.
Chapter 5 assesses a number of the key choices to be
made in pursuing interim storage of spent nuclear fuel, and
then outlines steps toward a new approach to overcoming
some of the obstacles to siting interim storage facilities. It
emphasizes that to increase the chances of success in siting
such facilities requires a trust-building process based on the
principles of transparency, democracy, and fairness, involving
all the parties who have major interests in the outcome,
and ensuring that all negative aspects of a facility are
addressed and benefits provided so that the affected communities
are better off once the facility is built than they
were before. It also emphasizes the substantial value of
maintaining flexibility (and, in many cases, pursuing multiple
approaches)—in the choice of interim storage sites and
technologies, in the balance of emphasis on at-reactor vs.
away-from-reactor storage, in the balance between national
and international approaches, and on when permanent
solutions such as geologic disposal should be implemented.
Avoiding too great a dependence on any one solution can be
crucial.
Finally, Chapter 6 summarizes our conclusions and
recommendations.