Recommendation Group 7 worked on expertise, the site selection process and compensation
Comments contained in this document were received by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) on the Report of Early Site Suitability Evaluation (ESSE) of the Potential Repository Site at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, (Younker et al., 1992, SAIC 91/8000). Comments were received from the U.S. Department of Interior, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the State of Nevada, and several local affected governments in Nevada. No comments were received from members of the public.
EPA held a 90-day public comment period for the proposed radiation protection standards for Yucca Mountain (August 27, 1999 through November 26, 1999). Sixty-nine (69) sets of written comments were submitted to EPAÕs Air Docket regarding the proposed standards, although some commenters submitted more than one set of written comments. In addition, the Agency received oral testimony on the proposed standards from 28 speakers during public hearings that were held in Washington, DC; Las Vegas, NV; Amargosa Valley, NV; and Kansas City, MO.
GNEP Presentation to 2008 ECA Annual Conference
This final rule incorporates compliance criteria applicable at different times for protection of individuals and in circumstances involving human intrusion into the repository. Compliance will be judged against a standard of 150 microsieverts per year (_Sv/yr) (15 millirem per year (mrem/yr)) committed effective dose equivalent (CEDE) at times up to 10,000 years after disposal and against a standard of 1 millisievert per year (mSv/yr) (100 mrem/yr) CEDE at times after 10,000 years and up to 1 million years after disposal.
These guidelines were developed in accordance with the requirements of Section 112(a) of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 for use by the Secretary of Energy in evaluating the suitability of sites. The guidelines will be used for suitability evaluations and determinations made pursuant to Section 112(b). The guidelines set forth in this part are intended to complement the requirements set forth in the Act, 10 CFR part 60, and 40 CFR part 191. The DOE recognizes NRC jurisdiction for the resolution of differences between the guidelines and 10 CFR part 60.
Presented on September 2010 to the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future (Disposal Subcommittee)
This report examines the current policy, legal, and regulatory framework pertaining to used nuclear fuel and high level waste management in the United States. The goal is to identify potential changes that if made could add flexibility and possibly improve the chances of successfully implementing technical aspects of a nuclear waste policy. Experience suggests that the regulatory framework should be established prior to initiating future repository development.
On March 21, 2012, the Township of The North Shore expressed interest in learning more about the Nuclear Waste Management Organization (NWMO) site selection process to find an informed and willing community to host a deep geological repository for Canada’s used nuclear fuel (NWMO, 2010). This report summarizes the findings of an initial screening, conducted by Geofirma Engineering Ltd., to evaluate the potential suitability of the Township of The North Shore against five screening criteria using readily-available information.
The Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 (the Act), established a step-by-step process for the siting of the nation's first repository for high-level radioactive waste and spent fuel. The Act gave the Department of<br/>Energy (DOE) the primary responsibility for conducting this 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.
This is one of three CoRWM reports to Government in 2009. The reports are about: <br><br>_ interim storage of higher activity wastes (including waste conditioning, packaging and transport, and the management of materials that may be declared to be wastes) <br>_ the implementation of geological disposal of higher activity wastes (this report) <br>_ research and development for interim storage and geological disposal. <br><br>The reports cover the three strands of the Government_s Managing Radioactive Waste Safely programme.
We, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), are promulgating public health and safety standards for radioactive material stored or disposed of in the potential repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada. Section 801 of the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (EnPA, Pub. L. 102Ð486) directs us to develop these standards. Section 801 of the EnPA also requires us to contract with the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) to conduct a study to provide findings and recommendations on reasonable standards for protection of the public health and safety.
This paper is a response to a request from the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) for CoRWM’s advice on the 2011 review of options for accelerating the geological disposal programme carried out by the Radioactive Waste Management Directorate (RWMD) of the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA).
First Meeting of National Research Council Committee for Yucca Mountain Peer Review: Surface Characteristics, Preclosure Hydrology, and Erosion
The following graphics were developed by NF Marin Constantin (INR) for presentation and discussion at the 2nd NSG meeting in Romania (January 2008). 1. DMP for LILW Repository in Romania - Main Phases 2. Romanian History of Nuclear Power - Main Facts and Decisions 3. Cernavoda Area DMP: Dialogue Planning Including CIP Actions 4. Hypothetical Nuclear Industry Formulation of the DMP Stakes and Issues 5. Hypothetical Public Formulation of the DMP Stakes and Issues 6. How to Improve the Public Contribution to the DMP? Proposal for NSG Discussion
The Committee on Radioactive Waste Management was asked by Government in 2003 to make recommendations for the long-term management of the UK’s higher activity wastes that would both protect the public and the environment, and inspire public confidence. To do this, we have combined a technical assessment of options with ethical considerations, examination of overseas experience and a wide-ranging programme of engagement both with the public and with interested parties (stakeholders). I am happy to present our recommendations in the pages that follow.
CoRWM’s remit is to provide independent scrutiny and advice to Government on the long-term management, including storage and disposal, of radioactive wastes and materials that may be declared to be wastes. This is the first of three reports to be produced in 2009 that describes the results of the Committee’s scrutiny work in 2008 and the first part of 2009 and provides advice to Government.
