NRC Reconsiders Secrecy of Nuclear Fuel Exports
In response to a request from a public interest group, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) agreed (pdf) to disclose the amounts of highly enriched uranium (HEU) fuel sought for export by two foreign countries. But the NRC said it reserved the right to withhold similar information in the future.
The Nuclear Control Institute (NCI) had argued last February that NRC secrecy regarding HEU exports was impeding public deliberation on the subject, and that such deliberation had in the past contributed to a reduction in international traffic in the weapons-grade material.
NRC chairman Nils J. Diaz agreed in part.
“With respect to the two pending applications for export of HEU, the NRC has decided that the total quantity of material requested in the particular export applications may be released,” he wrote to NCI President Paul Leventhal and analyst Alan Kuperman in a letter dated April 26 and disclosed this week (pdf).
Chairman Diaz revealed that Belgium had applied for export of 85.5 kilograms of HEU reactor fuel, and that Canada was seeking 15.5 kilograms of HEU.
Unfortunately, the utility of the new disclosures for public deliberation over nuclear exports was undercut by the fact that Belgium’s application has already been approved. A copy of the May 3 export license, with the amount of fuel to be sent to Belgium still blacked out, is here (pdf).
“This new NRC policy of considering disclosure of requested export amounts upon request is an improvement over the blanket redaction policy,” said NCI’s Alan Kuperman, who is also an assistant professor at the University of Texas at Austin.
“But it will not restore a meaningful opportunity for public comment unless in each case the public promptly requests and the NRC promptly grants disclosure of the amount of the export license request, well in advance of the commission’s decision on that license request,” he told Secrecy News.
Kuperman praised outgoing NRC chairman Diaz for his constructive response, but he said that “we’ll be appealing for the routine release of these numbers.”
This report serves as a landscape assessment and toolbox from which local governments can negotiate an informed position when it comes to the levers available to them and includes a first-of-its kind analysis of eight executed community benefits agreements.
When a hurricane hits, it’s all hands on deck – that goes for federal data, too. Pulling back from our investments in timely, accurate, and accessible public data will only make us less prepared and put us all at greater risk.
This is bigger than a singular elimination of race and ethnicity questions. It could accelerate the second wave of widespread reductions to demographic data, leaving public health officials with even less information to deliver better health outcomes for all Americans.
Soft law was never meant to be a permanent solution. Treating it as one, and letting the sandcastle stand in for the skyscraper indefinitely, is how we end up with a decade of voluntary commitments and no enforceable accountability to show for it.