In February 1983, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) identified the Davis Canyon site in Utah as one of the nine potentially acceptable sites for a mined geologic repository for spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste. To determine their suitability, the Davis Canyon site and the eight other potentially acceptable sites have been evaluated in accordance with the DOE's General Guidelines for the Recommendation of Sites for the Nuclear Waste Repositories.

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.

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. Department of Energy (DOE) evaluated available geologic and environmental data for 235 crystalline rock bodies in the North Central, Northeastern, and Southeastern Regions to identify preliminary candidate areas.

The purpose of this study is to provide a preliminary geotechnical data base sufficient to initiate the development of Long-Term Risk Models (LTRM), for salt domes, basalt and crystalline rock, and identify technical issues requiring additional investigation.

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.

For more than half a century, since nuclear science helped us win World War II and ring in the Atomic Age, scientists have known that the Nation would need a secure, permanent facility in which to dispose of radioactive wastes. Twenty years ago, when Congress adopted the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 (NWPA or &quot;the Act&quot;), it recognized the overwhelming consensus in the scientific community that the best option for such a facility would be a deep underground repository.

On the historic evidence, but also for the distinctive qualities of the challenge, nuclear waste siting conflicts are assuredly among the most refractory in the large variety of NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard) facility siting disputes. Since the president brought the Yucca Mountain process to a halt in 2010 (or, more accurately, issued its death certificate), the search for a permanent waste fuel repository is at the starting line again.

The first world wide review of the geological problems in radioactive waste isolation was published by Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in 1991. This review was a compilation of reports that had been submitted to a workshop held in conjunction with the 28th International Geological Congress that took place July 9-19,1989 in Washington, D.C.

By the end of this century, the United States plans to begin operating the first geologic repository for the permanent disposal of commercial spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive Waste. Public Law 97-425, the Nuclear waste Policy Act of 1982 (the Act), specifies the process for selecting a repository site, and constructing, operating, closing, and decommissioning the repository.

The Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, as amended, established a statutory basis<br/>for managing the nation’s civilian (or commercially produced) spent nuclear<br/>fuel. The law established a process for siting, developing, licensing, and constructing<br/>an underground repository for the permanent disposal of that waste.<br/>Utilities were given the primary responsibility for storing spent fuel until it is<br/>accepted by the federal government for disposal at a repository, which originally<br/>was expected to begin operating in 1998.

The draft Area Recommendation Report (ARR) for the Crystalline<br/>Repository Project identifies portions of crystalline rock bodies as<br/>proposed potentially acceptable sites for the Nation&#39;s second repository<br/>for deep geologic burial of high-level radioactive waste and spent<br/>nuclear fuel. This overview provides a brief summary of that report.<br/>The U.S.

This report demonstrates how Canada continues to meet its obligations under the terms of the Joint Convention on the Safety of Spent Fuel Management and on the Safety of Radioactive Waste Management. A collaboration by government, industry and the regulatory body, this document focuses specifically on the progress of long-term management initiatives for spent fuel and radioactive waste in Canada, revisions and updates to Canada’s Third National Report and comments and issues raised at the Third Review Meeting.

The first world wide review of the geological problems in radioactive waste isolation was published by Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in 1991. This review was a compilation of reports that had been submitted to a workshop held in conjunction with the 28th International Geological Congress that took place July 9-19,1989 in Washington, D.C.

In 2001, as directed by the Energy Policy Act of 1992, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued public health and environmental radiation protection standards for the proposed repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada. Several parties sued the Agency on a myriad of aspects of the rule. The Court ruled in EPA’s favor in all aspects of the case but one, and returned the standards to the Agency in 2004. In 2005, EPA proposed amendments to the standards. Following public hearings and a public review period, the final amendments were issued in September 2008.

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 strate

Candidate study areas are screened from the Palo Duro and Dalhart Basin areas using data obtained from studies to date and criteria and specifications that consider: rock geometry; rock characteristics; human intrusion potential; surface characteristics; and environmental and socioeconomic conditions. Two preferred locations are recommended from among these areas for additional characterization to identify potential National Waste Terminal Storage (NWTS) salt repository sites.

A general strategy for the exploration of crystalline rock masses in the<br/>eastern United States for the identification of potential sites for high-level<br/>radioactive waste repositories has been generated by consideration of the<br/>Department of Energy (DOE) Siting Guidelines, available information on these<br/>crystalline rocks, and the capabilities and limitations of various exploration<br/>methods.

France isn’t only a country known for its cheese… it’s also a country of nuclear power. With its 58 nuclear reactors (63,000 megawatts), producing 79% of the country’s electricity, France is arguably the world’s leader in the production of nuclear energy. It is estimated that the relative contribution of nuclear energy to power production in France will decline to 70% in 2020 - the main reason for this being governmental investments into renewable energies.

This paper is a first consideration of the MRWS White Paper on the framework for geological disposal. It is based primarily on discussions in Working Group D on July 21 2008 but also draws on CoRWM’s informal comments on the draft White Paper, on CoRWM’s recommendations as reported in 2006 and on an overview of the responses to the consultation that preceded the White Paper. There have been few opportunities, as yet, to discuss the White Paper through the CoRWM PSE process.

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.

Frances Planning Act for Radioactive Materials and Waste