The Siting Record
The Siting Record
An Account of the Programs of Federal Agencies and Events That Have Led to the Selection of a Potential Site for a Geologic Repository for High-Level Radioactive Waste
An Account of the Programs of Federal Agencies and Events That Have Led to the Selection of a Potential Site for a Geologic Repository for High-Level Radioactive Waste
The Centralized Interim Storage Facility (CISF) is designed as a temporary, above-ground away-from-reactor spent fuel storage installation for up to 40,000 metric tons of uranium (MTU). The design is non-site-specific but incorporates conservative environmental and design factors (e.g., 360 mph tornado and 0.75 g seismic loading) intended to be capable of bounding subsequent site-specific factors. Spent fuel is received in dual-purpose canister systems and/or casks already approved for transportation and storage by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).
How to dispose of highly radioactive wastes from commercial nuclear power plants is a question that has remained unresolved in the face rapidly changing technological, economic, and political requirements. In the three decades following WWII, two federal agencies -- the Atomic Energy Commission and the Energy Research and Development Administration -- tried unsuccessfully to develop a satisfactory plan for managing high level wastes.
About 20,000 metric tons of spent, or used, nuclear
fuel have accumulated since the beginning of commercial
nuclear power prbduction in the United States. At the end
of the currently licensed period of all existing nuclear power
plants and those under construction, the amount of spent
nuclear fuel is expected to total 87,000 metric tons.
Thus far, practically all of the spent nuclear fuel is
stored in water-filled pools at reactor sites. However, space
does not exist in the pools to store all the spent fuel expected
In February, 2011 the Blue Ribbon Commission (BRC) on America’s Nuclear Future requested the Department of Energy
(DOE) to provide a white paper summarizing the quantities and characteristics of potential waste generated by various
nuclear fuel cycles. The BRC request expressed interest in two classes of radioactive wastes:
Existing waste that are or might be destined for a civilian deep geologic repository or equivalent.
Potential future waste, generated by alternative nuclear fuel cycles (e.g. wastes from reprocessing, mixed-oxide
The U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management (OCRWM) is responsible, under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, for the transportation of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste from point of origin to destination at a federal storage or disposal facility. Section 180(c), written into the Nuclear Waste Policy Act Amendments of 1987, requires OCRWM to prepare public safety officials along the routes for these shipments.
US policy for management of used nuclear fuel (UNF) and high level radioactive wastes (HLRW) is at a crossroads, and the success of new policy directions will depend in part on broad public acceptance and support. In this paper I provide an overview of the evidence concerning the beliefs and concerns of members of the American public regarding UNF and HLNW. I also characterize the evidence on American’s policy preferences for management of these materials.
Following the proposals for nuclear fuel assurance of International Atomic Energy
Agency (IAEA) Director General Mohamed El Baradei, former Russian President Vladimir V.
Putin, and U.S. President George W. Bush, joint committees of the Russian Academy of
Sciences (RAS) and the U.S. National Academies (NAS) were formed to address these and other
fuel assurance concepts and their links to nonproliferation goals. The joint committees also
addressed many technology issues relating to the fuel assurance concepts. This report provides
There has been a substantial resurgence of interest in nuclear power in the United States
over the past few years. One consequence has been a rapid growth in the research
budget of DOE’s Office of Nuclear Energy (NE). In light of this growth, the Office of
Management and Budget included within the FY2006 budget request a study by the
National Academy of Sciences to review the NE research programs and recommend
priorities among those programs. The programs to be evaluated were: Nuclear Power
The objective of this siting study work is to support DOE in evaluating integrated advanced nuclear plant and ISFSI deployment options in the future. This study looks at several nuclear power plant growth scenarios that consider the locations of existing and planned commercial nuclear power plants integrated with the establishment of consolidated interim spent fuel storage installations (ISFSIs).
The effective termination of the Yucca Mountain program by the U.S. Administration in 2009
has further delayed the construction and operation of a permanent disposal facility for used fuel
and high level radioactive waste (HLW) in the United States. In concert with this decision, the
President directed the Energy Secretary to establish the Blue Ribbon Commission on America’s
Nuclear Future to review and provide recommendations on options for managing used fuel and
This report evaluates the relative economics of alternative fuel cycles compared to the current
U.S. once-through fuel cycle, including concepts under consideration by the U.S. Department of
Energy’s (DOE) Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP). EPRI utilized a model developed
by the Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA), Steady-state analysis Model for Advanced Fuel Cycle
Schemes (SMAFS), to evaluate fuel cycle alternatives. The report also evaluates potential
financing options for a fuel recycling facility. Please note that this report contains preliminary
This report presents the results of a dynamic simulation analysis for deployment of advanced light water reactors (LWRs) and fast burner reactors, as proposed by the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP) program. Conditions for the analysis were selected for their potential to challenge the nuclear fuel simulation codes that were used, due to the large variations in nuclear fuel composition for the burner reactors before equilibrium conditions are approached. The analysis was performed in a U.S.
The main question before the Transportation and Storage Subcommittee was whether the United States should change its approach to storing and transporting spent nuclear fuel (SNF) and high-level radioactive waste (HLW) while one or more disposal facilities are established.
This report provides information on the inventory of commercial spent nuclear fuel, referred to herein as used nuclear fuel (UNF), as well as Government-owned UNF and high-level radioactive waste (HLW). Actual or estimated quantitative values for current inventories are provided along with inventory forecasts derived from examining a different future commercial nuclear power generation scenarios. The report also includes select information on the characteristics associated with the wastes examined (e.g. type, packaging, heat generation rate, decay curves).
The “Strategy for the Management and Disposal of Used Nuclear Fuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste” report was issued by the Department of Energy (DOE) in January 2013. The strategy includes a phased, adaptive, and consent based approach to siting and implementing a comprehensive management and disposal system. It also endorses a waste management system containing a pilot interim storage facility and a full-scale interim storage facility, which prioritizes the acceptance of fuel from shut-down reactors. Required features of the system and facilities are:
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Under a contract with the Department of Energy (DOE), the AREVA Team has evaluated the alternatives for developing a used nuclear fuel (UNF) Consolidated Storage Facility (CSF) for UNF from US reactor plants. The study, based upon specific criteria and requirements for the US, considered numerous credible storage options and selected the one that met the needs of the country. For this task, the AREVA Team comprises AREVA, URS, Duke Energy, Dominion, and Coghill Communications, Inc.
1.1 Purpose
This report has been prepared by the industry team of Shaw Environmental & Infrastructure,
Inc. (Shaw) and Longenecker & Associates (L&A) in response to the Department of Energy
(DOE) Statement of Work, “Development of Consolidated Storage Facility Design
Concepts,” indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity Task Order No. 11, as specified by the
DOE’s Office of Nuclear Energy.
This report summarizes the results of EPA's review of the AEC
draft environmental statement, "Management of Commercial High-Level
and Transuranium-Contaminated Radioactive Waste" (WASH-1539). The
means by which high-level and long-lived radioactive wastes are
managed constitutes one of the most important questions upon which
the public acceptability of nuclear power, with its social and economic
benefits, will be determined. While the generation of power by
nuclear means offers certain benefits from the environmental viewpoint,
The so-called nuclear renaissance has increased worldwide interest in nuclear power.
This potential growth also has increased, in some quarters, concern that nonproliferation
considerations are not being given sufficient attention. In particular, since the introduction of
many new power reactors will lead to requiring an increase in uranium enrichment services to
provide the reactor fuel, the proliferation risk of adding enrichment facilities in countries that do
The objective of this siting study work is to support DOE in evaluating integrated advanced nuclear plant and ISFSI deployment options in the future. This study looks at several nuclear power plant growth scenarios that consider the locations of existing and planned commercial nuclear power plants integrated with the establishment of consolidated interim spent fuel storage installations (ISFSIs).
This report proposes and documents a computational benchmark for the estimation of the
additional reactivity margin available in spent nuclear fuel (SNF) from fission products and minor
actinides in a burnup-credit storage/transport environment, relative to SNF compositions
containing only the major actinides. The benchmark problem/configuration is a generic burnupcredit
cask designed to hold 68 boiling water reactor (BWR) spent nuclear fuel assemblies. The
purpose of this computational benchmark is to provide a reference configuration for the
This report has been prepared to support technical discussion of and planning for future
research supporting implementation of burnup credit for boiling-water reactor (BWR) spent fuel
storage in spent fuel pools and storage and transport cask applications. The review and
discussion in this report are based on knowledge and experience gained from work performed
in the United States and other countries, including experience with burnup credit for
pressurized-water reactor (PWR) spent fuel. Relevant physics and analysis phenomena are