Transporting spent nuclear fuel: A framework for decision-making

This study explores whether a consensual decision-making approach could be effective for resolving disputes involving the transportation of spent nuclear fuel. Interviews with the key parties to the dispute, a questionnaire, and a review of recorded testimony comprise the source materials. Using this information, the parties' underlying objectives were identified, along with the specific issues in dispute. The objectives of each of the parties were combined into a composite objectives hierarchy, and performance measures were defined for evaluating the consequences of transportation-system alternatives. Measurable multiattribute value functions were assessed for: state, local, and Indian Tribal officials; electric utilities; environmental and public interest groups; the transportation industry; the US Department of Transportation and Nuclear Regulatory Commission; and the US Department of Energy. A computer model was developed to provide estimates of health and safety and economic impacts of the alternatives. Transportation-system alternatives were developed, and evaluated using the value functions. Some efficient alternatives were identified that each party might prefer to its best alternative to a negotiated agreement. The demonstration of the possible existence of preferred alternatives suggests that it may be possible to make agreements that are to the advantage of all parties. Some transportation-system designs are developed that could be used as a concrete starting point for actual negotiations