Bill Overview
Title: 100 Year Canister Life Act
Description: This bill directs the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to issue regulations that require casks used in dry storage systems for spent nuclear fuel to be capable of operating safely for at least 100 years.
Sponsors: Rep. Levin, Mike [D-CA-49]
Target Audience
Population: People living near or working in nuclear waste storage sites globally
Estimated Size: 3000000
- The primary groups impacted are those living near existing nuclear waste storage facilities where spent nuclear fuel is stored in dry casks.
- Nuclear facilities exist in several countries around the world, including the USA, France, Russia, China, and Japan, among others.
- Furthermore, individuals living within a certain radius of these sites, potentially in the range of millions worldwide, could be affected by enhancements in safety measures.
- The industry professionals responsible for the manufacturing, monitoring, and regulation of these casks will be directly affected, as they will need additional training and resources to comply with the new requirements.
- The nuclear energy industry as a whole, which employs hundreds of thousands globally, could see operational impacts due to the new regulatory requirements.
Reasoning
- The policy is primarily aimed at enhancing the safety and longevity of nuclear waste storage systems.
- About 3 million Americans live near nuclear plants, but the policy targets only those directly affected by the enhanced safety - likely those in closer proximity or with occupational ties.
- Cost considerations mean the policy won’t affect everyone to the same extent; some may see no change in their daily life while others near storage sites may benefit from perceived increased safety.
- Industry professionals may face new training needs or job changes, which could have both positive (job security, specialization) and negative (job displacement, retraining) effects.
- The budget constraint necessitates focusing improvements where they can have the most significant safety and cost proportional impacts.
Simulated Interviews
nuclear engineer (Richland, WA)
Age: 54 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The new regulations will ensure better long-term safety.
- Compliance may require significant updates and effort.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 4 |
maintenance technician (Aiken, SC)
Age: 40 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm hopeful the policy will make my work environment safer.
- I am slightly concerned about job shifts if significant changes are demanded.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
retired (Cooper Township, MI)
Age: 63 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The safety of these casks has always been a concern of mine.
- The policy sounds reassuring for the long-term.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 2 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 2 |
safety inspector (Burlington, KS)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- New standards mean more rigorous inspections but greater peace of mind.
- The changes could increase the workload temporarily.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 4 |
nurse (Oswego, NY)
Age: 36 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope this will alleviate some of the long-standing fears in the community.
- These worries have been part of local discussions for years.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 3 |
geologist (Las Vegas, NV)
Age: 46 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Improving cask longevity is technically feasible and crucial.
- May require additional resources for implementation.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 4 |
logistics coordinator (St. Charles County, MO)
Age: 43 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Transporting spent fuel requires utmost safety; better casks are welcome.
- Changes may require new logistics arrangements.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 4 |
waste management consultant (Carlsbad, NM)
Age: 52 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy aligns with my work in ensuring long-term safety of nuclear waste sites.
- Will need to adapt consulting practices to new standards.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 5 |
server administrator (Augusta, GA)
Age: 31 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I feel the policy has minimal relevance to my daily life.
- It’s good to know the safety of nuclear waste is being considered.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
teacher (Limerick, PA)
Age: 65 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Community awareness of improvements could reduce worries.
- Communication from plant operators will be crucial for public assurance.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 3 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $500000000 (Low: $400000000, High: $700000000)
Year 2: $550000000 (Low: $450000000, High: $750000000)
Year 3: $600000000 (Low: $500000000, High: $800000000)
Year 5: $650000000 (Low: $550000000, High: $850000000)
Year 10: $700000000 (Low: $600000000, High: $900000000)
Year 100: $1000000000 (Low: $850000000, High: $1200000000)
Key Considerations
- Technological feasibility of developing casks with a lifespan of 100 years.
- Impact on energy prices if compliance costs are passed on to consumers.
- Long-term benefits of enhanced nuclear safety versus immediate cost burdens on facilities.
- Potential for international cooperation to share research and costs.