After more than 20 years of commercial nuclear power, the Federal Government has yet to develop a broadly supported policy for fulfilling its legal responsibility for the final isolation of high-level radioactive waste. OTA's study concludes that until such a policy is adopted in law, there is a substantial risk that the false starts, shifts of policy, and fluctuating support that have plagued the final isolation program in the past will continue.

The purpose of this report, and the information contained in the associated computerized data bases, is to establish the DOE/OCRWM reference characteristics of the radioactive waste materials that may be accepted by DOE for emplacement in the mined geologic disposal system as developed under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982. This report provides relevant technical data for use by DOE and its supporting contractors and is not intended to be a policy document.

In response to the remand of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (Minnesota v. NRC, 602 F.2d 412 (1979)), and as a continuation of previous proceedings conducted in this area by NRC (44 Fed. Reg. 61,372), the Commission initiated a generic rulemaking proceeding on October 25, 1979.

The Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management (OCRWM) is responsible for all spent fuels and high-level wastes (HLW) that will eventually be disposed of in a geologic repository. The purpose of this document, and the information contained in the associated computerized data bases and supporting technical reports, is to provide the technical characteristics of the radioactive waste materials that will (or may) be accepted by DOE for interim storage in an MRS or emplacement in a repository as developed under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act Amendment of 1987.

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 permanent disposal facilities are established.
To answer this question and to develop specific recommendations and options for consideration by the
full Commission, the Subcommittee held multiple meetings and deliberative sessions, visited several

Japan’s spent fuel management and fuel cycle programs are now at a critical stage. Its first commercial-scale reprocessing plant, at Rokkasho Village, will soon start full-scale operation.

Spent Fuel Project Office Interim Staff Guidance - 8

The Disposal Subcommittee of the Blue Ribbon Commission on America’s Nuclear Future (BRC) addressed a wide-ranging set of issues, all bearing directly on the central question: “How can the United States go about establishing one or more disposal sites for high-level nuclear wastes in a manner and within a timeframe that is technically, socially, economically, and politically acceptable?”

This evaluation investigates the potential benefits of separating the transuranic elements from spent reactor fuel before it is disposed of in geologic repositories. It addresses the question: Would the benefits to radioactive waste disposal justify both processing the spent fuel and deploying liquid metal reactors (LMRs) to transmute the separated transuranics?

http://www.epri.com/abstracts/Pages/ProductAbstract.aspx?ProductId=NP-7…

Since a 1985 decision by President Reagan that a separate permanent repository for disposal of
defense high level waste was not required1, DOE has planned for disposal of all high-level waste
and spent fuel from national defense activities and DOE’s own research activities in a repository
for commercial waste developed under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act (NWPA). The Commission
has heard recommendations from some commenters2 that this decision be revisited, or even

Spent Fuel Project Office, Interim Staff Guidance - 8, Revision 1

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

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

This report provides details of dry storage cask systems and contents in U.S. for commercial light water
reactor fuel. Section 2 contains details on the canisters used to store approximately 86% of assemblies in
dry storage in the U.S. Transport cask details for bare fuels, dual purpose casks and canister transport
casks are included in Section 3. Section 4 details the inventory of those shutdown sites without any
operating reactors. Information includes the cask type deployed, transport license and status as well as

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.

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

How to dispose of highly radioactive wastes from commercial nuclear power plants is a question that has remained unresolved in the face of rapidly changing technological, economic, and political requirements. In the three decades following World War II, 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.

With the passage of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 (NWPA), Congress for the first time established in law a comprehensive Federal policy for commercial high-level radioactive waste management, including interim storage and permanent disposal. NWPA provides sufficient authority for
developing and operating a high-level radioactive waste management system based on disposal in mined geologic repositories. Authorization

To organize its investigation of whether changes are needed in the nation’s current approach to storing and eventually transporting spent nuclear fuel (SNF) and high-level waste (HLW), the Subcommittee began by asking a series of related questions:
• What role should storage play in an integrated U.S. waste management system and strategy in the future?

This report puts forth a number of options and recommendations for how to engage
stakeholders and other members of the public in the storage and management of spent
nuclear fuel and high level waste in the United States. The options are generated from a
scientific review of existing publications proposing criteria for assessing past efforts to
engage publics and stakeholders in decision-making about risky technologies. A set of
nine principles are derived for evaluating cases of public and stakeholder engagement with

Pressurized water reactor (PWR) burnup credit validation is
demonstrated using the benchmarks for quantifying fuel reactivity
decrements, published as Benchmarks for Quantifying Fuel Reactivity
Depletion Uncertainty, Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI)
report 1022909. This demonstration uses the depletion module
TRITON (Transport Rigor Implemented with Time-Dependent
Operation for Neutronic Depletion) available in the SCALE 6.1
(Standardized Computer Analyses for Licensing Evaluations) code