1. No, when it came to his actions on Waste Confidence, he did not act illegally. I think his actions they were politically motivated and shortsighted but he stayed within the bounds of protocol and procedure. Frankly, most of the actions taken by the Administration on Yucca and OCRWM were politically motivated and shortsighted so Dr. Jaczko had plenty of company.

  1. I somehow feel that the crime here does not matter. If the next Presidential election goes against Reid and his followers, I think Dr J will face justice.

    If Obama wins, Dr J will be off the hook.

  2. Did Jimmy Carter make the right decision when he decided to block wet processing of spent nuclear fuel? In my opinion he did not. However, several presidents failed to reverse his decision and now it is too late.

    Barack Obama made a comparable momentous decision by refusing to continue funding Yucca mountain. In my opinion this president got it right but for the wrong reasons. Obama’s decision would make sense if he had committed the USA to build Gen IV reactors that would consume the materiars that were destined for Yucca mountain.

    What a shame that Obama failed to understand the opportunity to provide real leadership.

    1. Actually, Ronald Regan reversed Carter’s action on recycle but by that time the there were shakeouts in the nuclear industry and slowdowns in new builds. Economic as much as political issues stopped the re-start of recycling.

  3. A friend pointed out that the 1998 Waste Confidence was really a reaffirmation of the 1990 decision. I should have made that clear in a footnote and will do so in an update. But of importance was the 1998 timing since it was also when the DOE was supposed to start accepting fuel. I believe that in 1998 the Waste Confidence update was one of the reasons for deciding not to pursue centralized interim storage by DOE and the Congress. A decision we all wish we could go back and fix today.

  4. Why did the Executive Branch presume to “test” a federal law (NWPA) that prior administrations of both parties had conformed to? Failure to act – by repeatedly not requesting funding when there is a clear legislative imperative seems to be misfeasance and conspiracy to violate federal law. Similarly under waste confidence, the determination that a repository would be available “when needed”, and concluding that without fully vetting as required by agency regulation, is a misfeasance that abetted the actions on YM. Doesn’t the same brush tar both decisions?

  5. I believe that monitored retrievable storage in a geological repository is the method most likely to have any chance of success. Reprocessing is also essential. Not from an economics standpoint, but from the view that there has never been a natural resource we can afford to waste.

Comments are closed.

Recent Comments from our Readers

  1. Avatar
  2. Avatar
  3. Avatar
  4. Avatar
  5. Avatar

Similar Posts