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
Gentlemen,
In accordance with the charter of the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future and as the Secretary's designee, I approve your request to establish an ad hoc subcommittee to review and make a recommendation to the Commission regarding the co-mingling of defense and commercial waste.
This letter also serves to appoint Dr. Allison Macfarlane as the chair of the subcommittee and the membership of the subcommittee as identified in your letter to me dated October 31, 2011.
This report presents the analysis and conclusions with respect to disposal criticality for canisters containing aluminum-based fuels from research reactors. The analysis has been divided into three phases. Phase I, dealt with breached and flooded waste packages containing relatively intact canisters and intact internal (basket) structures; Phase II, the subject of this report, covers the degradation of the spent nuclear fuel (SNF) and structures internal to the codisposal waste package including high level waste (HLW), canisters, and criticality control material.
Construction workers were and are considered temporary workers at many construction sites. Since WWII, large numbers of construction workers were employed at US DOE nuclear weapons sites for periods ranging from a few days to over 30 years. These workers performed tasks during new construction and maintenance, repair, renovation, and demolition of existing facilities.
Presented at the NEI Used Fuel Management Conference, St. Petersburg, FL, May 7-9, 2013
Presented at the NEI Used Fuel Management Conference, St. Petersburg, FL, May 7-9, 2013
The means to prevent and control criticality must be addressed as part of the Preclosure Safety Analysis (PCSA) required for compliance with 10 CFR Part 63 [DIRS 180319], where the preclosure period covers the time prior to permanent closure activities. This technical report presents the nuclear criticality safety evaluation that documents the achievement of this objective.
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.
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 management of spent nuclear fuel (SNF) and defense high level waste (HLW) is a complex sociotechnical
systems challenge. Coordinated, reliable, and safe performance will be required over very long
periods of time within evolving social and technical contexts. To accomplish these goals, a waste
management system will involve a host of facilities for interim storage and longterm disposal, a
transportation infrastructure, and research and development centers. The complexity of SNF and HLW
The objective of this safety requirements publication is to set down the protection objectives and criteria for geological disposal and to establish the requirements that must be met to ensure the safety of this disposal option, consistent with the established principles of safety for radioactive waste management.
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
Every year, more than 300 million packages of hazardous material are shipped in the
United States (U.S.). Most of the hazardous material shipped – about 97 percent – is
flammable, explosive, corrosive or poisonous. About 1 percent – three million packages –
of the hazardous materials shipped annually contains radioactive material, most of them
from medical and industrial applications. [DOT 1998b]
Spent nuclear fuel comprises a very small fraction of the hazardous materials packages
Dear Secretary Chu:
At the direction of the President, you charged the Blue Ribbon Commission on America’s
Nuclear Future with reviewing policies for managing the back end of the nuclear fuel
cycle and recommending a new plan. We thank you for choosing us to serve as Co-
Chairmen of the Commission and for selecting the talented and dedicated set of
Commissioners with whom we serve.
We have sought to ensure that our review is comprehensive, open and inclusive. The
Commission and its subcommittees have heard from hundreds of individuals and
Presented at the NEI Used Fuel Management Conference, St. Petersburg, FL, May 7-9, 2013
There are more than 250 forms of U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)owned spent nuclear fuel (SNF). Due to the variety of the spent nuclear fuel, the National Spent Nuclear Fuel Program (NSNFP) has designated nine representative fuel groups for disposal criticality analyses based on fuel matrix, primary fissile isotope, and enrichment. For each fuel group, a fuel type that represents the characteristics of all fuels in that group has been selected for detailed analysis.
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.
This new report from the National Research Council’s Nuclear and Radiation Studies Board (NRSB) and the Transportation Research Board reviews the risks and technical and societal concerns for the transport of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste in the United States. Shipments are expected to increase as the U.S. Department of Energy opens a repository for spent fuel and high-level waste at Yucca Mountain, and the commercial nuclear industry considers constructing a facility in Utah for temporary storage of spent fuel from some of its nuclear waste plants.
Dear Representatives Upton and Shimkus,
At the direction of the President, the Secretary of Energy established the Blue Ribbon
Commission on America’s Nuclear Future and charged it with reviewing policies for
managing the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle. We are serving as the Co-Chairmen of
the Commission and have taken note of your recent comments about the Commission’s
work.
Your comments echo those we have heard from several members of Congress and from
people across the country who believe the United States should not abandon the
The Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 (NWPA), as amended, authorized the DOE to develop and manage a Federal system for the disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel (SNF) and High-Level Radioactive Waste (HLW). The Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste (OCRWM) was created to manage acceptance, transportation and disposal of SNF and HLW in a manner that protects public health, safety, and the environment; enhances national and energy security; and merits public confidence.
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.
The issue of interim storage of used (spent)1 fuel is dependent on a number of key factors, some
of which are not known at this time but are the subject of this study. The first is whether or not
the Yucca Mountain Project continues or is cancelled such that it may be able to receive spent
fuel from existing and decommissioned nuclear power stations. The second is whether the United
States will pursue a policy of reprocessing and recycling nuclear fuel. The reprocessing and
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
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