Native American Forum on Nuclear Issues
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has promulgated amendments to its public health and safety standards for radioactive material stored or disposed of in the potential repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada (40 CFR Part 197). Section 801 of the Energy Policy Act of 1992 [(EnPA, Public Law 102-486, 42 U.S.C. § 10141 n. (1994)] directed EPA to develop these standards.
The Central Savannah River Area Community Team (The CSRA Team) is pleased to submit this report in<br/>fulfillment of its requirements under DOE Financial Assistance Agreement DE-FG07-07ID14794.
Presented to the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future Subcommittee on Disposal
On September 30, 2008, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued the long-awaited revision to its 2001 Public Health and Safety Standard for the proposed Yucca Mountain deep geologic repository for high-level radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel. While the issuance of the standard allows the Nuclear<br/>Regulatory Commission (NRC) to issue its final conforming standards and move forward toward a final license decision for the facility, EPA’s standard raises several unprecedented regulatory issues and is likely to be further challenged in court.
In the November 1989 Report to Congress on Reassessment of the Civilian Radioactive Waste Management Program (DOE/RW-0247), the Secretary of Energy announced an initiative for developing a monitored retrievable storage (MRS) facility that is to start spent-fuel acceptance in 1998. This facility, which will be licensed by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), will receive spent fuel from commercial nuclear power plants and provide a limited amount of storage for this spent fuel.
Brochure - Dukovany Repository
Email from Steven Kraft to Alex Thrower
Map-U.S. Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installations
A method is presented for determining the relative favorability<br/>of geologically complex areas for isolating high-level<br/>radioactive wastes. In applying the method to the northeastern region<br/>of the United States, seismieity and tectonic activity were the<br/>screening criteria used to divide the region into three areas of<br/>increasing seismotectonic risk. The following criteria, specified by<br/>the U.S.
This report describes the first phase in evaluating the<br/>geology and hydrology of the Basin and Range Province for<br/>potential suitability of geohydrologic environments for isolation<br/>of high-level radioactive waste.
Programs to manage and ultimately dispose of high-level radioactive wastes are unique from scientific and technological as well as socio-political aspects. From a scientific and technological perspective, high-level radioactive wastes remain potentially hazardous for geological time periods—many millennia—and scientific and technological programs must be put in place that result in a system that provides high confidence that the wastes will be isolated from the accessible environment for these many thousands of years.
This appendix responds to the issues raised by Federal, State, and local governments, affected Indian Tribes, private citizens, and other organizations on the draft environmental assessment (EA) that was prepared pursuant to Section 112 of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 (the Act). In addition to presenting the issues raised in the comments and the responses, it describes where changes were made in the final EA.
Index of Comments on the Draft Environmental Assessment for the Hanford Site
In February 1983, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) identified a reference repository location at the Hanford Site in Washington as one of the nine potentially acceptable sites for a mined geologic repository for spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste. The site is in the Columbia Plateau, which is one of five distinct geohydrologic settings considered for the first repository.
In February 1983, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) identified a reference repository location at the Hanford Site in Washington as one of the nine potentially acceptable sites for a mined geologic repository for spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste. The site is in the Columbia Plateau, which is one of five distinct geohydrologic settings considered for the first repository.
This report has been produced at the request of Congress. The House Appropriations Committee Print that accompanied the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2008, requests that the U.S. Department of Energy (the Department):<br/>…develop a plan to take custody of spent fuel currently stored at decommissioned reactor sites to both reduce costs that are ultimately borne by the taxpayer and demonstrate that DOE can move forward in the near term with at least some element of nuclear waste policy.
The "Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982" (NWPA) (42 USC Sections 10101-10226) requires the environmental assessment to include a detailed statement of the basis for nominating a site as suitable for characterization. This detailed statement is to be an evaluation of site suitability under the DOE siting guidelines; the evaluation will be the basis for the comparison of sites reported in Chapter 7.
In February 1983, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) identified a<br/>location in Deaf Smith County, Texas, as one of nine potentially acceptable<br/>sites for a mined geologic repository for spent nuclear fuel and high-level<br/>radioactive waste. The potentially acceptable site was subsequently narrowed<br/>to an area of 9 square miles.
The Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future was formed by the Secretary of<br/>Energy at the direction of the President. The Commission was formed to conduct a<br/>comprehensive review of policies for managing the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle, including<br/>all alternatives for the storage, processing, and disposal of civilian and defense used nuclear fuel,<br/>high–level waste, and materials derived from nuclear activities.
This work was performed to suggest possible strategies for geoscientific classifications in the siting process of a high-level repository. To develop a feasible method for geoscientific classifications, a number of factors of a philosophical character, related to the purpose of the classifications, need to be accounted for. Many different approaches can be visualized, and this report was not intended to present a complete classification methodology.
REFLECTIONS ON THE INFLUENCE OF THE LOCAL ACTORS ON THE NATIONAL NUCLEAR WASTE MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK
