Siting Experience Documents Only
Country
Keywords
Two Citizen Task Forces and the Challenge of the Evolving Nuclear Waste Siting Process
Two Citizen Task Forces and the Challenge of the Evolving Nuclear Waste Siting Process
Siting any nuclear waste facility is problematic in today's climate of distrust toward nuclear agencies and fear of nuclear waste. This study compares and contrasts the siting and public participation processes as two citizen task forces dealt with their difficult responsibilities. Though one dealt with a high level waste (Monitored Retrievable Storage - MRS) proposal in Tennessee in 1985-6 and the other with a proposed low level waste facility in Illinois (1988 and still ongoing), the needs of citizen decision makers were very similar.
Maps for MOV.19981204.0007
Maps for MOV.19981204.0007
Plate NE-2B, Northeastern Region, Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York (Southeastern), Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Disqualified Areas Map, Crystalline Repository Project; Plate NE-3B, Northeastern Region, Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York (Southeastern), Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Equally Weighted Composite Map, Crystalline Repository Project; Plate NE-4B, Northeastern Region, Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York (Southeastern), Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Phase A, Summary Composite Map, Crystalline Repository Project; Plate NE-5B, Northeastern Region
Section 3.4 - Report of the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future - Report to the Secretary of Energy
Section 3.4 - Report of the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future - Report to the Secretary of Energy
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 strategy
Maps for MOV.19981204.0008
Maps for MOV.19981204.0008
Plate SE-1A Southeastern Region, Maryland, North Carolina, Virginia, Index Map, Crystalline Repository Project; Plate SE-2A, Southeastern Region, Maryland, North Carolina, Virginia, Disqualified Areas Map, Crystalline Repository Project; Plate SE-3A, Southeastern Region, Maryland, North Carolina, Virginia, Equally Weighted Composite Map, Crystalline Repository Project; Plate SE-4A, Southeastern Region, Maryland, North Carolina, Virginia, Phase A, Summary Composite Map, Crystalline Repository Project; Plate SE-5A, Southeastern Region, Maryland, North Carolina, Virginia, Phase B, Summary Comp
Maps for MOV.19981204.0009
Maps for MOV.19981204.0009
Plate SE-1B, Southeastern Region, Georgia, South Carolina, Index Map, Crystalline Repository Project; Plate SE-2B, Southeastern Region, Georgia, South Carolina, Disqualified Areas Map, Crystalline Repository Project; Plate SE-3B, Southeastern Region, Georgia, South Carolina, Equally Weighted Composite Map, Crystalline Repository Project; Plate SE-4B, Southeastern Region, Georgia, South Carolina, Phase A, Summary Composite Map, Crystalline Repository Project; Plate SE-5B, Southeastern Region, Georgia, South Carolina, Phase B, Summary Composite Map, Crystalline Repository Project; Plate SE-6B
Part 2 - Draft - Area Recommendation Report for the Crystalline Repository Project, Volume 1
Part 2 - Draft - Area Recommendation Report for the Crystalline Repository Project, Volume 1
This Draft Area Recommendation Report for the Crystalline Repository Project identifies portions of crystalline rock bodies as proposed potentially acceptable sites for consideration in the second high-level radioactive waste repository program. <br>The U.S.
Part 3 - Draft - Area Recommendation Report for the Crystalline Repository Project, Volume 1
Part 3 - Draft - Area Recommendation Report for the Crystalline Repository Project, Volume 1
This Draft Area Recommendation Report for the Crystalline Repository Project identifies portions of crystalline rock bodies as proposed potentially acceptable sites for consideration in the second high-level radioactive waste repository program. <br>The U.S.
Report of the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future - Report to the Secretary of Energy
Report of the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future - Report to the Secretary of Energy
The Blue Ribbon Commission on America_s Nuclear Future (BRC) was formed by the Secretary<br>of Energy at the request of the President to conduct a comprehensive review of policies for<br>managing the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle and recommend a new strategy. It was cochaired<br>by Rep. Lee H. Hamilton and Gen. Brent Scowcroft. Other Commissioners are Mr.<br>Mark H. Ayers, the Hon. Vicky A. Bailey, Dr. Albert Carnesale, Sen. Pete Domenici, Ms. Susan<br>Eisenhower, Sen. Chuck Hagel, Mr. Jonathan Lash, Dr. Allison M. Macfarlane, Dr.
Section 6 - Report of the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future - Report to the Secretary of Energy
Section 6 - Report of the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future - Report to the Secretary of Energy
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 strategy
Maps for MOV.19981204.0006
Maps for MOV.19981204.0006
Plate NE-1A, Northeastern Region, Maine, New Hampshire, New York (Northeastern), Vermont, Index Map, Crystalline Repository Project; Plate NE-2A, Northeastern Region, Maine, New Hampshire, New York (Northeastern), Vermont, Disqualified Areas Map, Crystalline Repository Project, Plate NE-3A, Northeastern Region, Maine, New Hampshire, New York (Northeastern), Vermont, Equally Weighted Composite Map, Crystalline Repository Project; Plate NE-4A, Northeastern Region, Maine, New Hampshire, New York (Northeastern), Vermont, Phase A, Summary Composite Map, Crystalline Repository Project, Plate NE-5
Long Term Governance for Radioactive Waste Management WP4
Long Term Governance for Radioactive Waste Management WP4
The purpose of COWAM2 Work Package 4 (WP4) on "e;long term governance"e; was to identify, discuss and analyse the institutional, ethical, economic and legal considerations raised by long term radioactive waste storage or disposal on the three interrelated issues of: (i) responsibility and ownership of radioactive waste over long term, (ii) continuity of local dialogue between stakeholders and monitoring of radioactive waste management facilities, and (iii) compensation and sustainable development.
Guidance on the Selection of PTA Tools: For Stakeholders involved in Radioactive Waste Governance WP1
Guidance on the Selection of PTA Tools: For Stakeholders involved in Radioactive Waste Governance WP1
This research on "e;Guidance on the selection of PTA tools for stakeholders involved in radioactive waste governance"e; was performed under the umbrella of COWAM2-'Work Package 1' (WP1). Through a dialogue on enhancing involvement at a local level, WP1 allows local stakeholders to examine the issues they face in building a democratic local governance process. WP1 also tests how Participatory Technology Assessment (PTA) methods can offer a consensual framework and a platform for deliberative co-decision among scientific and societal actors at the local level.
Maps for MOV.19981204.0005
Maps for MOV.19981204.0005
Plate NC-1B, North Central Region, Wisconsin, Upper Peninsula of Michigan, Index Map-Crystalline Repository Project; Plate NC-2B, North Central Region, Wisconsin, Upper Peninsula of Michigan, Disqualified Areas Map, Crystalline Repository Project; Plate NC-3B, North Central Region, Wisconsin, Upper Peninsula of Michigan, Equally Weighted Composite Map, Crystalline Repository Project; Plate NC-4B, North Central Region, Wisconsin, Upper Peninsula of Michigan, Phase A, Summary Composite Map, Crystalline Repository Project; Plate NC-5B, North Central Region, Wisconsin, Upper Peninsula of Michig
European-level Guidelines for the Inclusive Governance of Radioactive Waste Management
European-level Guidelines for the Inclusive Governance of Radioactive Waste Management
CIP (Community Waste Management In Practice) is a research action gathering a wide spectrum of stakeholders from five European countries, interested in how society should manage the radioactive wastes that result from nuclear power production and/or from medical, military or industrial applications.
Maps for MOV.19981204.0004
Maps for MOV.19981204.0004
Plate NC-1A, North Central Region, Minnesota, Index Map, Crystalline Repository Project; Plate NC-2A, North Central Region, Minnesota, Disqualified Areas Map, Crystalline Repository Project; Plate NC-3A, North Central Region, Minnesota, Equally Weighted Composite Map, Crystalline Repository Project; Plate NC-4A, North Central Region, Minnesota, Phase A, Summary Composite Map, Crystalline Repository Project; Plate NC-5A, North Central Region, Minnesota, Phase B, Summary Composite Map, Crystalline Repository Project; Plate NC-6A, North Central Region, Minnesota, Transportation Network Map, Cr
LONG TERM GOVERNANCE FOR RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT ANNEX OF THE FINAL REPORT OF COWAM2 - WORK PACKAGE 4
LONG TERM GOVERNANCE FOR RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT ANNEX OF THE FINAL REPORT OF COWAM2 - WORK PACKAGE 4
The purpose of COWAM2 Work Package 4 (WP4) on "e;long term governance"e; was to identify, discuss and analyse the institutional, ethical, economic and legal considerations raised by long term radioactive waste storage or disposal on the three interrelated issues of: (i) responsibility and ownership of radioactive waste over long term, (ii) continuity of local dialogue between stakeholders and monitoring of radioactive waste management facilities, and (iii) compensation and sustainable development.
Relations between DOE Facilities and their Host Communities: A Pilot Review
Relations between DOE Facilities and their Host Communities: A Pilot Review
This report is about how the Department of Energy (DOE) can improve its relationships with the<br/>communities in which its facilities are located. In March 2000, Secretary Richardson asked the<br/>Openness Advisory Panel (OAP) of the Secretary of Energy Advisory Board to review and<br/>assess DOE’s relationships with the communities surrounding its laboratories and facilities and<br/>to provide an independent assessment of how DOE is perceived as a neighbor, what it is doing<br/>well, and what it could do better.
Tools for Local Stakeholders in Radioactive Waste Governance: Challenges and Benefits of Selected PTA Techniques WP1
Tools for Local Stakeholders in Radioactive Waste Governance: Challenges and Benefits of Selected PTA Techniques WP1
The investigation consists of three parts and shall provide an input to the – empirical – PTA-2 study to be undertaken by SCK•CEN (called “lens”):<br>A. Compilation of – selected – existing PTA methods and procedures identifying requisites, practices, benefits, and challenges to answer the key questions in the context of WP1 about a PTA “toolbox”: “What can you apply, when can you apply, and what is needed to apply?” The multi-dimensional context of a possible “PTA situation” is analysed; suitable and nonsuitable methods, techniques and procedures are discussed.<br>B.
Final Report: Influence of Local Actors on National Decision-making Processes WP2
Final Report: Influence of Local Actors on National Decision-making Processes WP2
Work Package 2 (WP2) focused on the ways in which local stakeholders can influence national decision-making processes on radioactive waste management (RWM). The participants in WP2 were particularly interested in examining how local stakeholders could contribute to national debates. Their interest stemmed from the fact that participants from France, Spain and the United Kingdom — who made up the majority of the WP2 group — were engaged, as stakeholders, in the decision-making processes that were under way in each of those countries.
Identification of Sites within the Palo Duro Basin: Volume 1--Palo Duro Location A
Identification of Sites within the Palo Duro Basin: Volume 1--Palo Duro Location A
This three-volume document narrows to two sites for continued investigations for potential nuclear waste repository sites in the Palo Duro Basin of the Texas Panhandle. Volume 1 narrows a site previously identified in Deaf Smith County, Texas; Volume 2 narrows a site previously identified in Swisher County, Texas; and Volume 3 contains responses to comments received regarding the drafts of Volumes 1 and 2 (BMI/ONWI-531).<br/>These volumes discuss the methodology and logic used as well as the results that narrowed these sites.
Identification of Sites within the Palo Duro Basin: Volume 3--Responses to Comments
Identification of Sites within the Palo Duro Basin: Volume 3--Responses to Comments
This document responds to comments received by the U.S. Department<br/>of Energy (DOE) on the draft report entitled Identification of Sites Within the Palo Duro Basin: Volume I--Palo Duro Location A (in Deaf Smith County) and Volume II--Palo Duro Location B (in Swisher County), BMI/ONWI-531, February, 1984.
Identification of Sites within the Palo Duro Basin: Volume 2--Palo Duro Location B
Identification of Sites within the Palo Duro Basin: Volume 2--Palo Duro Location B
This three-volume document narrows to two sites for continued investigations for potential nuclear waste repository sites in the Palo Duro Basin of the Texas Panhandle. Volume 1 narrows a site previously identified in Deaf Smith County, Texas; Volume 2 narrows a site previously identified in Swisher County, Texas; and Volume 3 contains responses to comments received regarding the drafts of Volumes 1 and 2 (BMI/ONWI-531).<br/>These volumes discuss the methodology and logic used as well as the results that narrowed these sites.
Illuminating the Decision Path: The Yucca Mountain Site Recommendation
Illuminating the Decision Path: The Yucca Mountain Site Recommendation
On February 14, 2002, U.S.