Nuclear waste probed in Senate Committee | Mobile Augusta

An excerpt from the Augusta Chronicle on fate of highly radioactive waste:

The intent of the 2013 Nuclear Waste Administration Act is to implement recommendations from a blue-ribbon committee formed after the Obama administration halted a planned repository in Nevada’s Yucca Mountain.

The bill, which goes before the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources on July 30, outlines “consent-based” siting policies that require support of state and local governments before waste storage or processing facilities can be established.

The legislation recommends no specific locations for “consolidated interim storage” of spent nuclear fuel, but Savannah River Site in South Carolina has already been discussed as a possible venue.

In March, consultants hired by the SRS Community Reuse Organization, an economic development consortium, unveiled a $200,000 study concluding that the site’s H Canyon processing facilities and history of nuclear involvement make it suitable for such programs.

The SRS Citizens Advisory Board has become involved in similar discussions. Its waste management committee voted 12-10 for a position paper opposing the idea. That draft resolution is scheduled for a formal vote by the full board Tuesday.

Until a solution is found, spent fuel will continue to accumulate at commercial power plants, which now store about 75,000 tons of the material on-site in pools or above-ground casks.

Fair Distribution of water, STAKEHOLDERS INTERESTS, and Water Levels-WHAT IS BV7 and Why is IJC STALLING?

Excerpt from Senator Bob Runciman address talking about the status quo to maintain water levels and IJC recommendations. Is IJC kowtowing to interest of wealthy New Yorkers? Is status quo working? Link to full address included: “…They [INTERNATIONAL JOINT COMMISSION – IJC] came up with what is known as Plan BV7, a plan that respects the natural flows of the river, that satisfied, for the most part, boaters, tourism operators, residents and, in particular, environmentalists. A plan that would extend the tourism season in the Thousand Islands and wouldn’t drain the wetlands along the river’s banks. A plan that is much more environmentally sound than the 50-year-old approach now in use. Plan BV7 would not solve everyone’s problems, but it would balance their interests. Everyone would have enough water, most of the time. We’re not likely to do better. In 2011, we were told by the International Joint Commission that the new plan would be in place by the end of 2012 or early 2013. Last spring, they held public consultations, with the promise that public hearings – the final step before implementation – would follow last fall. Finally, after decades of delays, it seemed that change for the better was coming. But nothing has happened and a cloak of secrecy has descended over the entire process. What happened is anyone’s guess. But I suspect the IJC has decided to side with a few wealthy property owners who built on the floodplain in the Rochester area of New York state and believe the proposed plan could result in flooding of their property. Thousand Islanders fear that a few powerful interests could scuttle the good work and millions of dollars spent to develop a plan that the overwhelming majority of people support. Meanwhile, the optimism, the hope that finally the IJC was listening to the people is quickly fading. Today, I call on the International Joint Commission to move forward and fulfill the commitment it has made.

Watertown Daily Times | Canadian senator prods IJC to approve Bv7 water plan

Blurb on legislation to balance shoreline resident interests with tourist operators and shipping: Canadian Sen. Robert W. Runciman is urging the International Joint Commission to “quit stalling” and adopt the proposed Plan Bv7 water management plan. In a news release, Mr. Runciman said the current approach cuts short the boating season by almost a third and threatens wetlands in the Thousand Islands. The senator said Plan Bv7 is the best approach he’s seen to balance the interests of shoreline residents along Lake Ontario, tourist operators on the upper St. Lawrence River, Seaway shipping companies, the Montreal harbor and the environmental movement.