In sum, we vacate 40 C.F.R. part 197 to the extent that it incorporates a 10,000-year compliance period because, contrary to EnPA section 801(a), that compliance period is not<br> "based upon and consistent with " the recommendations of the National Academy of Sciences. The remaining challenges to the EPA rule are without merit. We vacate the NRC rule insofar as it incorporates EPAÕs 10,000-year compliance period. In all other respects, we deny NevadaÕs petition for review challenging the NRC rule.
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.
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.
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.
This is the seventh CoRWM Annual Report. It summarises the outcomes of CoRWM’s scrutiny and advice work during the year. It also contains the Committee’s views on the current status of arrangements and plans for the long-term management of higher activity radioactive wastes in the UK. All the Committee Members have contributed to this Report and I am grateful to Marion Hill and the Secretariat for all their hard work in compiling it.
This is the eighth CoRWM Annual Report. It summarises CoRWM’s scrutiny and advice for the financial year ending on 31 March 2012. It also contains the Committee’s views on the status of arrangements and plans for the long-term management of higher activity radioactive wastes in the UK at June 2012.
The Committee on Radioactive Waste Management (CoRWM) has carried out an assessment of the generic Disposal System Safety Case (gDSSC) published by the Radioactive Waste Management Directorate (RWMD) of the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) in February 2011. The assessment covered the whole suite of gDSSC documents, and related RWMD reports on research and development (R&D) and site characterisation.
DOE hereby amends the policies under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 for evaluating the suitability of Yucca Mountain, Nevada, as a site for development of a nuclear waste repository. TodayÕs final rule focuses on the criteria and methodology to be used for evaluating relevant geological and other related aspects of the Yucca Mountain site.
Site suitability studies at LLL to date have considered repositories in bedded salt and shale.
After an exhaustive review process that encompassed EPAÕs proposed rule, as presented in the Federal Register Notice, as well as the reference materials cited in that Notice, Nevada concludes that EPAÕs proposed standard is inconsistent with the recommendations of the National Academy of Sciences (as required by the Energy Policy Act of 1992) and the July 9, 2004 ruling of the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.
Deep geologic repositories are being widely studied as the most favored method of disposal of nuclear waste. Scientists search for repository sites in salt, basalt, tuff and granite that are geologically and hydrologically suitable. The systematic evaluation of the safety and reliability of deep geologic disposal centers around the concept of interacting multiple barriers. The simplest element to describe of the geologic barrier is the physical isolation of the waste in a remote region at some depth within the rock unit.
The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has amended the policies under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 for evaluating the suitability of Yucca Mountain, Nevada, as a site for development of a nuclear waste repository. The final rule at Title 10, Part 963 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR Part 963) focuses on the criteria and methodology to be used for evaluating relevant geological and other related aspects of the Yucca Mountain site.
Over the past forty years, the development of the technology needed to isolate radioactive waste in underground rock systems has been found to be a formidable problem. This is especially the case in connection with high-level waste (HLW) after its removal from operations in nuclear power plants. There is also the additional problem of isolating low- and intermediate-level waste (LILW).
Isolation in a geologic setting has been the generally favored solution to the high-level radioactive waste (HLW) problem since a scientific basis for nuclear waste management began to be formulated over half a century ago. Although general features of suitable settings have been enumerated, quantitative measures of the safety of geologic isolation of HLW are challenging to devise and to implement.
Congress designated Yucca Mountain, NV, as the nation’s sole candidate site for a permanent high-level nuclear waste repository in 1987, following years of controversy over the site-selection process. Over the strenuous objections of the State of Nevada, the Department of Energy (DOE) submitted a license application for the proposed Yucca Mountain repository in June 2008 to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).
On January 13, 1993, Governor of the State of Utah, Mike Leavitt officially announced that he was opposing a MRS Facility in the State of Utah and informed San Juan County of his decision which will preclude the County from applying for a Phase IIa feasibility grant. A copy of the policy statement made by Governor Leavitt is attached for your information.
