 The    Mobile Chernobyl mock nuke waste cask, a full size replica of a truck    shipping container, shown in front of the State Capitol in Jefferson    City, MO during a cross-country educational tourAs reported by Hannah Northey of E&E on Nov. 22nd ("Senate panel to take up repository bill next month"),    U.S. Senators Ron Wyden (D-OR) and Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), the Chair and    Ranking Member of the U.S. Senate Energy and Natural Resources (ENR)    Committee, had threatened to bring S. 1240, the so-called  "Nuclear   Waste Administration Act of 2013," up for a committee vote in  December   2013. Dec. 19th was floated as a date for a committee mark up. But in  recent days, it has become known that any action has been postponed into  next year.
The    Mobile Chernobyl mock nuke waste cask, a full size replica of a truck    shipping container, shown in front of the State Capitol in Jefferson    City, MO during a cross-country educational tourAs reported by Hannah Northey of E&E on Nov. 22nd ("Senate panel to take up repository bill next month"),    U.S. Senators Ron Wyden (D-OR) and Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), the Chair and    Ranking Member of the U.S. Senate Energy and Natural Resources (ENR)    Committee, had threatened to bring S. 1240, the so-called  "Nuclear   Waste Administration Act of 2013," up for a committee vote in  December   2013. Dec. 19th was floated as a date for a committee mark up. But in  recent days, it has become known that any action has been postponed into  next year.
However, vigilance is still required. Thanks to all of you who have contacted your U.S. Senators to express opposition to S. 1240, the "Nuclear Waste Administration Act." If you haven't contacted your two U.S. Senators yet, please do so now. You can call them via the U.S. Capitol Switchboard at (202) 224-3121.
If you have contacted your U.S. Senators already, thank you! But there is more you can do. Please continue to  let them know you oppose this bill, and urge everyone you know to do the  same.
Check to see if your U.S. Senator is on the ENR Committee.  If so, consider organizing your friends and colleagues, and request to  meet with your Senator during their holiday break back home. Your  meeting with them could make a huge difference on their vote re: S.  1240! If a meeting with your Senator is refused, follow up with a  request to meet with your Senator's staff on this issue.
If neither of your Senators serve on the ENR Committee, you can still urge them to contact their colleagues who do. Your Senators should urge their Senate colleagues on the ENR Committee to vote  against S. 1240, in order to protect the interests of constituents in  your state, including yourself!
The bill expresses a preference for centralized interim storage sites (CIS) being co-located with repository sites. The danger is the gutting of informed consent principles leading to a rubberstamped CIS, thereby locking in a permanent dumpsite -- "nuclear sacrifice area" style.
See below for more background information.
BACKGROUND
Along with Wyden and Murkowski, U.S. Senators Dianne Feinstein (D-CA)  and Lamar Alexander (R-TN), the   Chair and Ranking Member on the  Senate Subcommittee on Energy and  Water  Appropriations, are  co-sponsors of S. 1240. Critics have dubbed the "Gang of  4"  U.S.  Senators' proposed legislation the "Mobile Chernobyl/Parking  Lot  Dump"  bill. It would represent a huge giveaway to  the already filthy rich  nuclear power industry, and coup for its lobbyists, if they get  away   with the radiologically-risky, multi-billion dollar boondoggle.
Beyond Nuclear provided extensive background on    the dangerous bill last June, when it was first introduced. Despite    calling for public comments on their draft legislation, the "Gang of 4"    effectively ignored environmental and public interest concerns    registered by the thousands. Shamefully, the bill, as introduced, was    actually significantly worse than the initial "discussion    draft," an indication of nuclear lobbyists' shady "ways and means"    behind closed doors on Capitol Hill!
S. 1240 further revved its engines on July 30th, at an ENR Committee hearing.
It is urgent that you contact your two U.S. Senators,    and urge that they put the brakes on this "Mobile Chernobyl/Parking   Lot  Dump" bill, and stop it dead in its tracks. They can be contacted   via  the U.S. Capitol Switchboard at (202) 224-3121.
If enacted, it would launch large numbers of risky high-level    radioactive waste trucks, trains, and/or barges. The unprecedented    shipping campaign would accomplish exactly nothing in terms of    protecting public health, safety, and the environment. Quite to the    contrary, it would bring high-level radioactive waste, in shipping    containers vulnerable to severe accidents or terrorist attacks, through    the heart of major metropolitan areas, such as Chicago. For more  information on high-level radioactive waste transport risks, see NIRS's "Mobile Chernobyl/Fukushima Freeways" website section (such  as the HLRW barges on waterways -- the Great Lakes, rivers, sea coasts  -- sub-section, dated Sept. 28, 2004, which could now be dubbed  "Floating Fukushimas"!).
Scores of environmental groups across the country have consistently opposed centralized interim storage,  "de-linked" from progress on a permanent deep geological repository,  for just such reasons, for a long time. It clearly risks the "temporary"  parking lot dumps becoming de facto permanent, if and when the next deep geological repository is  cancelled, just as the Yucca Mountain dump was (wisely so, given the  geological unsuitability of the Nevada site, the environmental injustice  of dumping high-level radioactive waste on Western Shoshone Indian  treaty lands, etc.).
S. 1240 would create a radioactive waste shell game on the roads,    rails, and waterways of many/most states, all in an effort to remove a    major liability, cost, and PR headache from nuclear utilities' ledgers,    and transfer them squarely onto the backs of U.S. taxpayers.
The recent federal court decision, ending DOE's collection  of the   meager 1/10th of a cent per kilowatt-hour fee on nuclear  electricity   ratepayers' bills, means that once the money currently  remaining in the   Nuclear Waste Fund is spent, there will be no more.  Thus, those costs   will eventually fall entirely on federal taxpayers. These costs could  easily mount into the tens, and even hundreds, of billions of dollars  over time. No other industry, besides nuclear power, enjoys such public  subsidies.
The bill seeks to open a "pilot consolidated interim storage site" by    2021. HLRW from "orphaned" or "stranded" sites -- permanently closed    atomic reactors -- would be given priority in the shipping queue. The    supposed justification for this is to return decommissioned nuclear    power plant sites to productive, economic use. This ignores the fact    that those sites are still radioactively contaminated, despite so-called    "clean up." It also ignores community groups who oppose the immoral    idea of dumping their community's problems onto someone else.
The top targets for the "pilot" parking lot dump include: already    contaminated and/or radiologically-burdened U.S. Department of Energy    (DOE) sites, such as Savannah River Site (SRS), SC; Waste Isolation    Pilot Plant (WIPP), NM; and Idaho National Lab (INL); Native American    lands, such as the tiny Skull Valley Goshutes Indian Reservation in UT,    or a number of unnamed reservations which the Nuclear Energy Institute    has claimed, for several years, to be in secretive negotiations with;    and/or operating nuclear power plant sites, such as the co-located    Exelon Dresden nuclear power plant/GE-Hitachi independent spent fuel    storage pool, just southwest of Chicago, already "home" to 3,000 metric    tons of high-level radioactive waste.
The bill largely guts any notion of "consent-based" siting, by    allowing for potential interim storage sites to be characterized, and    even declared suitable, before "consent" is even sought from the    community. The momentum already built, coupled with lucrative, promised    incentives, would make it very difficult for communities of color, or    those in dire economic straits, to resist. The nuclear power    establishment in industry and government has repeatedly violated    environmental justice in this way for decades, and appears poised to do    so yet again!
S. 1240 also expresses a preference that the "pilot" interim storage    site become the full-scale interim storage site by 2025, and even then    the permanent deep geologic repository (DGR, or dumpsite) by 2048. No    limit to how much HLRW could be rushed to the interim storage  site(s),   nor how much HLRW could be dumped at the first DGR, could  mean that a   single site would become the "nuclear sacrifice area" for  the entire   country, as was previously attempted at Yucca Mountain,  Nevada. In fact,   there are no safeguards in the legislation that would  protect Yucca   from again being targeted. And, a supposedly "interim  storage" site   appears all-too-likely to become a de facto permanent   "disposal" site, whether that be by abandonment on the  surface, or   burial underground. This risk is made all the worse by the  bill's lack   of a requirement for any progress on permanent disposal  during the first   10 years of interim storage facility operations.
What S. 1240 also does not call for is Hardened On-Site Storage (HOSS),    which is what hundreds of environmental and public interest groups    representing all 50 states have called for, time and time again, for    well over a decade now. In addition, more and more groups are saying "STOP MAKING IT!", as at the recent U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC) nuke waste con game public comment meetings around the country.
To the contrary, Sen. Feinstein (D-CA) has attempted to justify her    legislative proposals as essential for paving the way for SMRs    (so-called Small Modular Reactors) to be built in the U.S. (to the tune    of billions of dollars of federal taxpayer expense, in the form of RDD    -- research, development, and demonstration -- subsidies, the    subcommittee chair for such appropriations forgot to mention).
As reported by Beyond Nuclear on Jan. 16, 2013:
U.S.     Senator Dianne Feinstein, Chair of the Energy and Water Development     Appropriations Subcommittee, has praised the Obama administration's   call   for centralized interim storage. Revealingly, she expressed her  support in the context of a pro-nuclear expansion agenda: "Delaying    the  creation of a long-term policy on nuclear waste would simply  make   the  problems more complex and dangerous -- particularly with the    development  of a generation of new small modular reactors."  (emphasis   added)
In fact, so too did President Obama's Blue Ribbon Commission on  America's Nuclear Future. If the name of the commission wasn't bad  enough, its behavior, beginning in 2010, and final report in 2012, made  clear that the top priority for "solving the high-level radioactive  waste problem" was to pave the way for a nuclear power expansion. Despite  claiming to be open and welcoming of public input, the Blue Ribbon  Commission summarily ignored the thousands of public comments submitted  over its two year existence. While the Blue Ribbon Commission was forced  to listen to oral comments made at its numerous meetings around the  country, it was later learned that written comments had not even been  read before the BRC submitted its final report to Congress. Even  worse, the website archive of those written comments, and even the  transcripts and recordings of the public meetings themselves, became  inaccessible on the BRC's abandoned website, making all that hard-won  information unobtainable by the public. The BRC website was restored  when the problem was called to DOE's attention by environmental  watchdogs, but under the telling name "Cyber Cemetery."
The Senate ENR Committee has behaved similarly. In early 2013, it  called for public input on its "Discussion Draft" of S. 1240. 2,500  comments were submitted, including by Beyond Nuclear, but were summarily  ignored. The final draft of S. 1240 was worse than the discussion  draft! Further changes for the worse can be expected in S. 1240, due to  the corrupting influence of nuclear industry lobbyists and their  campaign contributions.