In this issue:
ASME TALLAHASSEE SECTION HOLDS POST FUKUSHIMA EVENT
Recently, members of the ASME Tallahassee section, in collaboration with Village Square of Florida, held an educational outreach event on the nation’s nuclear energy options post-Fukushima Daiichi disaster in Tallahassee, Florida. The event, which was free of charge and open to the public, was held in Miller Hall on campus at Florida State University. The intention of the event was to further educate the public about the current technologies associated with nuclear energy, the energy needs of the U.S. moving forward, and the potential global future of nuclear energy.
Panelists for the event included:
- Mary Bane, Special Advisor on Energy Policy, Governor’s Office, State of Florida;
- Mike Halpin, Air Resource Management, Florida Dept. of Environmental Protection;
- John Kelly, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Nuclear Reactor Technologies, U.S. Dept. of Energy, Office of Nuclear Energy; and,
- Steve Unikewicz, Principal Engineer, Alion Science and Technology; Chair, ASME Knowledge and Community Energy Committee.
After a brief introduction by ASME Tallahassee Section member and chief organizer Rick Meeker, Bane and Halpin led off the event by discussing the energy options for the state of Florida, Gov. Scott’s developing vision for Florida’s energy future, and the environmental priorities of Gov. Scott within the frame of enhanced Florida energy independence. Bane was appointed to be Gov. Scott’s energy advisor last month.
Deputy Assistant Secretary Kelly outlined the Obama Administration’s plans and goals, for nuclear energy, with an emphasis on emerging technologies like small modular reactors. Kelly also deferred much of the judgment regarding the Fukushima accident to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), which has had an ongoing dialogue with Japanese officials since March 11th when the events took place.
Unikewicz brought his industry experience, both as a person spending much of his professional life working within a plant, as well as a former member of the NRC, to the discussion. He spoke at length about the numerous measures of safety in place at all domestic reactors, as well as the technical aspects of nuclear energy.
Former Florida State Representative and Chief Operating Officer and Deputy Administrator of the U.S. National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) Jerry Paul also attended. Panelists took questions from the audience during and after their presentations. This event was videotaped and will be made available soon on WFSU local television.
To learn more about the WFSU television station, please visit: http://wfsu.org/
For more information about the Village Square, go to: http://tothevillagesquare.org/
For more information about the Tallahassee Section of ASME, please visit: http://sections.asme.org/tallahassee/
Robert Rains handle public policy-related energy issues for ASME. He can be reached at:
rainsr@asme.org
BLUE RIBBON COMMISSION OUTLINES LEGISLATIVE CHANGES NEEDED FOR STORING NUCLEAR WASTE
The Blue Ribbon Commission on America’s Nuclear Future (BRC) was formed by the Secretary of Energy at the request of the President to conduct a comprehensive review of policies for managing the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle and recommend a new plan. It is co-chaired by former Representative Lee H. Hamilton and General Brent Scowcroft.
In its draft report released on July 29th, the BRC described the current situation as follows: “America’s nuclear waste management program is at an impasse. The Obama Administration’s decision to halt work on a repository at Yucca Mountain in Nevada is but the latest indicator of a policy that has been troubled for decades and has now all but completely broken down. The approach laid out under the 1987 Amendments to the Nuclear Waste Policy Act (NWPA)—which tied the entire U.S. high-level waste management program to the fate of the Yucca Mountain site—has not worked to produce a timely solution for dealing with the nation’s most hazardous radioactive materials. The United States has traveled nearly 25 years down the current path only to come to a point where continuing to rely on the same approach seems destined to bring further controversy, litigation, and protracted delay.”
Fully implementing the Commission’s recommendations will require several changes to the NWPA or other legislation, including:
- Establishing a new facility siting process – The NWPA, as amended in 1987, now provides only for the evaluation and licensing of a single repository site at Yucca Mountain, Nevada. The Act should be amended to authorize a new consent-based process to be used for selecting and evaluating sites and licensing consolidated storage and disposal facilities in the future.
- Authorizing consolidated interim storage facilities – The NWPA allows for the construction of one consolidated interim storage facility with limited capacity, but only after a nuclear waste repository is licensed. One or more consolidated storage facilities will be required, independent of the schedule for opening a repository. The Act should be modified to allow for multiple storage facilities with adequate capacity to be sited, licensed, and constructed when needed.
- Establishing a new waste management organization – Responsibility for implementing the nation’s nuclear waste management program is currently assigned to the U.S. Department of Energy. Legislation will be needed to (1) move this responsibility to a new, independent, government-chartered corporation solely focused on managing spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive wastes and (2) to establish the appropriate oversight mechanisms.
- Ensuring access to dedicated funding – Current federal budget rules and laws make it impossible for the nuclear waste program to have assured access to the fees being collected from nuclear utilities and ratepayers to finance the commercial share of the waste program’s expenses. We have recommended a partial remedy that should be implemented promptly by the Administration, working with the relevant Congressional committees and the Congressional Budget Office. A long-term remedy requires legislation to provide access to the Nuclear Waste Fund and fees independent of the annual appropriations process.
- Promoting international engagement to support safe and secure waste management – Congress may need to provide policy direction and new legislation to implement some measures aimed at helping other countries manage radioactive wastes in a safe, secure, and proliferation-resistant manner.
The 180-page draft report is available at: http://brc.gov/sites/default/files/documents/brc_draft_report_29jul2011_0.pdf
The public comment period is now open until October 31, 2011, and the final report is due to be delivered to the Secretary of Energy on or before January 29, 2012.
Additional information may be viewed at: http://brc.gov/index.php?q=announcement/brc-releases-their-draft-full-commission-report
Robert Rains handle public policy-related energy issues for ASME. He can be reached at:
rainsr@asme.org
NRC COMMISSIONERS REJECT 90-DAY OVERHAUL SCHEDULE
In another setback for the NRC Chairman, a majority of Commissioners at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) voted to reject Gregory Jaczko’s proposal to act within 90 days on the recommendations of the NRC's Near Term Task Force reviewing Commission processes and regulations in the wake of the Fukushima nuclear meltdowns. Instead, Commissioners William Magwood, William Ostendorff, and Kristine Svinicki voted to direct the NRC staff to study the NRC staff’s own report before they will consider the recommendations made by the very same NRC staff. With a three-vote majority, it is clear that the NRC will not act quickly to vote on, much less adopt, the safety upgrades recommended by some of the Commission’s senior technical staff.
On March 11, a magnitude-9 earthquake and tsunami struck the Fukushima reactor complex on the country's northeastern coast, triggering explosions, radioactive leaks and multiple evacuations. Experts believe a 46-foot tidal wave topped the existing wall and knocked out power needed to protect the wrecked plant during an emergency.
Last month, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s (NRC) Near-Term Task Force issued a 96-page report, “Recommendations for Enhancing Reactor Safety in the 21st Century”, which was prepared in response to the Commission’s direction to conduct a systematic and methodical review of NRC processes and regulations in order to determine the next steps for enhancing the NRC’s regulatory system and its policy direction. In its report, the Task Force also addressed protecting against natural disasters and ensuring emergency preparedness.
The report suggested that the piecemeal regulatory approach, established over decades by the NRC, has addressed many safety concerns and issues, using the best information and techniques available at the time. But that there are still safety gaps and additional measures that could be taken to enhance safety. For more information, please see the July 18th, 2011 Edition of Capitol Update.
Commissioner Svinicki’s vote can be found at: http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/commission/cvr/2011/2011-0093vtr-kls.pdf
Commissioner Magwood’s vote can be found at: http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/commission/cvr/2011/2011-0093vtr-wdm.pdf
Commissioner Ostendorff’s vote can be found at: http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/commission/cvr/2011/2011-0093vtr-wco.pdf
The “Recommendations for Enhancing Reactor Safety in the 21st Century” report is available at http://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/ML1118/ML111861807.pdf
In a related development, on August 2nd the full Senate Environment and Public Works Committee and its Subcommittee on Clean Air and Nuclear Safety held a joint hearing entitled, "Review of the NRC’s Near-Term Task Force Recommendations for Enhancing Reactor Safety in the 21st Century." The entire membership of the NRC submitted written statements.
For additional information and to view an archived video of the hearing, go to: http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Hearings.Hearing&Hearing_id=67fcac65-802a-23ad-4b03-4d604c83ae11
Robert Rains handle public policy-related energy issues for ASME. He can be reached at:
rainsr@asme.org
REP HONDA INTRODUCES NANO ACT
IRepresentative Mike Honda (D-CA), who represents Silicon Valley as part of his district, has introduced the Nanotechnology Advancement and New Opportunities (NANO) Act.
The NANO Act is a comprehensive bill intended to promote the development and stewardship of nanotechnology in the United States. The legislation draws upon the work of the Blue Ribbon Task Force on Nanotechnology that Rep. Honda convened. The Blue Ribbon Task Force included nanotechnology experts with backgrounds in established industry, startup companies, consulting groups, non-profits, academia, government, medical research, and venture capital from around the state of California, a leader in the field of nanotechnology.
The NANO Act would require the Director of the National Nanotechnology Coordination Office to consult with relevant agencies like the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the National Institute of Environmental Health and Safety and the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health, on the potential risks posed by nanotechnology. The Director would then be tasked with drafting a report for Congress with a national strategy -- including funding levels and which agencies would be charged with implementing each provision.
The International Energy Agency (IEA) estimates that by 2030, new electronic gadgets will triple their energy consumption to 1,700 terawatt hours, the equivalent of the home electricity consumption of the US and Japan combined. According to the IEA, the international community will have to build over 15,000 wind turbines (or 200 nuclear power plants) to power all the TVs, iPods, PCs and other home electronics expected to be plugged in by 2030. The electric bill to power all household electronics will top $200 billion a year, compared with last year’s bill of $80 billion. Most of this increase in consumer electronics will occur in developing countries, where economic growth is outpacing developed nations and ownership rates of gadgets are lowest.
ASME also has a nanotechnology institute “dedicated to the advancement of nanotechnology welcoming engineers, scientists, finance and business professionals, government leaders, and students.”
To learn more about the institute, please visit: http://nano.asme.org/
More about the “NANO Act” can be found at: http://honda.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1098&Itemid=110
Robert Rains handle public policy-related energy issues for ASME. He can be reached at:
rainsr@asme.org
NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION LAUNCHES INNOVATION CORPS
The National Science Foundation (NSF) has established a new public-private partnership program to assess the readiness of emerging technology concepts for transitioning into new commercial products. The NSF Innovation Corps (I-Corps) program will bring together the technological, entrepreneurial, and business communities to bring discoveries ripe for innovation out of the university lab and into the market.
The knowledge gained from NSF-supported basic research frequently advances a particular field of science or engineering, but some results also show immediate potential for broader applicability and impact in the business world. These results may be translated into technologies with near-term benefits for the economy and society.
With the I-Corps grants, NSF will strategically identify these nascent technology concepts and leverage its investment in basic research for technology innovation. The I-Corps program will connect NSF-funded scientific research with the technological, entrepreneurial and business communities to help create a stronger national ecosystem for innovation that couples scientific discovery with technology development and societal needs.
Pending availability of funds, NSF plans to invest $1.25 million in the I-Corps program during FY 2011, and will initially support up to 100 projects at $50,000 per project. The initiative is envisioned as a 3-year program, aimed at leveraging and accelerating NSF discoveries for economic and societal benefits.
The I-CORPS website is available at: http://www.nsf.gov/news/special_reports/i-corps/
Additional information can be found at: http://www.nsf.gov/news/news_summ.jsp?cntn_id=121225&org=NSF&from=news
Paul Fakes handle public policy-related research and development (R&D) issues for ASME. He can be reached at:
fakesp@asme.org
NOMINATIONS FOR PRESIDENTIAL AWARDS FOR EXCELLENCE IN SCIENCE, MATHEMATICS AND ENGINEERING MENTORING (PAESMEM) SOUGHT
The National Science Foundation (NSF) is currently accepting nominations for the 2012 Presidential Awards for Excellence in Science, Mathematics and Engineering Mentoring (PAESMEM). The awards, established by the White House, seeks to identify outstanding mentoring efforts that enhance the participation and retention of individuals (including persons with disabilities, women and minorities) who might not otherwise have considered or had access to opportunities in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). The awardees serve as leaders in the national effort to develop fully the nation's human resources in STEM.
Individual and organizational nominees must have demonstrated outstanding mentoring and effective guidance to a significant number of persons who might not otherwise have considered or had access to opportunities in STEM (including persons with disabilities, women and minorities) and who are:
- Students at the K-12, undergraduate, or graduate education level; or,
- Early career scientists, mathematicians or engineers who have completed their degree in the past three years (this includes post-doctoral fellows, assistant professors and individuals in the private sector).
Review criteria include the following:
- Were the mentoring activities innovative within the context of the institution or level of persons being mentored?
- Did the nominee provide assessment to prove the mentoring activities were successful?
- Were data included that tracked the mentees beyond the mentoring activities?
- Were the mentoring activities sustainable or institutionalized?
- How well-qualified is the nominee (individual or team)?
- To what extent does the mentoring activity suggest and explore creative, original or potentially transformative concepts in mentoring?
- How well did the mentoring activity broaden the participation and retention of individuals (including persons with disabilities, women and minorities) who might not otherwise have considered or had access to opportunities in STEM?
- Were the results disseminated broadly to enhance understanding of mentoring practices?
- How well-conceived and organized was the mentoring activity?
- What were the benefits of these mentoring activities to society?
Detailed information on the nominations process is available at: http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2011/nsf11563/nsf11563.htm
Melissa Carl handles public policy-related science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education issues for ASME. She can be reached at:
carlm@asme.org
FORMER OSTP DIRECTOR JOHN H. MARBURGER III DIES
President George W. Bush's science adviser, Dr. John H. Marburger III, died July 28th at the age of 70. Marburger, a physicist and a Democrat, directed the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy during both Bush terms in office.
Dr. Marburger was the president of Stony Brook University from 1980 to 1994 and directed nearby Brookhaven National Laboratory from 1998 to 2001. After his White House tenure ended in 2009, Marburger returned to Stony Brook. He was named the school's vice president for research in 2010, but stepped down last month after a four-year battle with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.
President Obama's science adviser, John Holdren, said Marburger "leaves a legacy of exceptional public service and substantial contributions. He was the nation's longest-serving presidential science advisor, and his focus on basic research as a driver of economic growth was a common thread across congresses and administrations," Holdren said in a statement.
Holdren’s complete statement may be read at: http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/jhm-statement.pdf
Dr. Marburger also spoke at the 2008 Engineering Public Policy Symposium, an annual event sponsored by more than 30 engineering societies dedicated to raising awareness about the policy issues affecting engineers. At the event, Dr. Marburger spoke about the Administration's disappointment in the final FY 2008 appropriations for science and engineering, and its commitment to President's American Competitiveness Initiative (ACI), which authorized the gradual doubling of R&D funding for physical sciences and engineering at the National Science Foundation (NSF), the Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Science, and the National Institutes of Standards and Technology (NIST). For more information, please see the May 9th, 2008 Edition of Capitol Update.
Additional information about the Engineering Public Policy Symposium can be found at: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/advocacy-government-relations/congressional-briefings-events
Paul Fakes handle public policy-related research and development (R&D) issues for ASME. He can be reached at:
fakesp@asme.org
THE ARTICLES CONTAINED IN CAPITOL UPDATE ARE NOT POSITIONS OF ASME OR ANY OF
ITS SUB-ENTITIES, UNLESS SPECIFICALLY NOTED AS SUCH. THIS PUBLICATION IS DESIGNED
TO INFORM ASME MEMBERS ABOUT ISSUES OF CONCERN BEING DEBATED AND DISCUSSED IN
THE HALLS OF CONGRESS, IN THE STATES, AND IN THE FEDERAL AGENCIES.
ASME Government Relations
1828 L Street, NW, Suite 906
Washington, DC 20036