Utilities and ranking of the preclosure attributes of the proposed high-level radioactive waste repository are examined, in order to provide insights into the propriety of using this approach for this type of decision and an assessment of the adequacy of the analysis itself. The postclosure utilities obtained in the previous study were greater than 80% for all five sites considered, but showed a greater spread than those in the MUA. The preclosure multiattribute utilities also show a wider spread than in the MUA.

This paper is about the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) "Environmental Standards for the Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel, High-Level and Transuranic Wastes, " 40 CFR 191. These standards regulate the disposal of radioactive wastes in geologic repositories.

EPA held a 90-day public comment period for the proposed radiation protection standards for Yucca Mountain (August 27, 1999 through November 26, 1999). Sixty-nine (69) sets of written comments were submitted to EPAÕs Air Docket regarding the proposed standards, although some commenters submitted more than one set of written comments. In addition, the Agency received oral testimony on the proposed standards from 28 speakers during public hearings that were held in Washington, DC; Las Vegas, NV; Amargosa Valley, NV; and Kansas City, MO.

Presented on September 2010 to the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future (Disposal Subcommittee)

In the year 2000, the geological disposal program for high-level radioactive waste in Japan moved from the phase of generic research and development (R&D) into the phase of implementation. Following legislation entitled the “Specified Radioactive Waste Final Disposal Act”, the Nuclear Waste Management Organization of Japan (NUMO) was established as the implementing organization.

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 strategy. It was cochaired<br>by Rep. Lee H. Hamilton and Gen. Brent Scowcroft. Other Commissioners are Mr.<br>Mark H. Ayers, the Hon. Vicky A. Bailey, Dr. Albert Carnesale, Sen. Pete Domenici, Ms. Susan<br>Eisenhower, Sen. Chuck Hagel, Mr. Jonathan Lash, Dr. Allison M. Macfarlane, Dr.

The Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future (BRC) was formed by the Secretary of Energy at the request of the President to conduct a comprehensive review of policies for managing the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle and recommend a new strategy

Download Blue Ribbon Commission Report 2012

The Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future (BRC) was formed by the Secretary of Energy at the request of the President to conduct a comprehensive review of policies for managing the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle and recommend a new strategy

Waste management operation began in France in 1969. Created in 1979 as an agency within the CEA, ANDRA was established by the December 1991 Waste Act as an independent public body in charge of the long-term management of all radioactive waste, under the supervision of the Ministries in charge of Energy, Ecology, and Research. Its 3 basic missions were extended and their funding secured through the 2006 Planning Act (www.andra.fr).

Dealing with the problems posed by nuclear waste management is a major issue confronting continued use of the nuclear fuel cycle. Large amounts of radioactive wastes have already been generated as a result of past nuclear reactor operations, but these wastes are being temporarily kept in aboveground storage facilities awaiting a government policy decision on final disposition. Although research on various technologies to dispose of radioactive wastes is given high priority, a commercial waste disposal facility is not expected to be in operation before 1985.

Explanation of Radioactivity and Radioactive waste

Summary of Comments for the Blue Ribbon Commission on America&#39;s Nuclear Future by Professor Hank C. Jenkins-Smith, University of Oklahoma

This document does not present the views of the Committee on Radioactive Waste Management nor can it be taken to present the views of its author. It is a draft paper to inform Committee deliberations and both the author and the whole Committee may adopt different views and draw entirely different conclusions after further consideration and debate

This document does not present the views of the Committee on Radioactive Waste Management nor can it be taken to present the views of its author. It is a draft paper to inform Committee deliberations and both the author and the whole Committee may adopt different views and draw entirely different conclusions after further consideration and debate

Andras goal of Sustainability

The Blue Ribbon Commission on America&#39;s Nuclear Future was formed by the Secretary of<br/>Energy at the direction of the President. The Commission was formed to conduct a<br/>comprehensive review of policies for managing the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle, including<br/>all alternatives for the storage, processing, and disposal of civilian and defense used nuclear fuel,<br/>high–level waste, and materials derived from nuclear activities.

The scientific, technical, and sociopolitical challenges of finding a secure site for a geological repository for radioactive wastes have created a long and stony path for many countries. Japan carried out many years of research and development before taking its first steps in site selection.

This report describes the actions taken in Argentina on the safety of spent fuel management
(SF) and on the safety of radioactive waste management, in order to provide evidence of the
fulfillment of its obligations under the Joint Convention. To facilitate the reading and a better
understanding of this report a summary of those parts of the 1st Report that were considered
necessary have been included.

The present National Report describes the actions taken in Argentina on the safety of spent fuel
(SF) management and on the safety of radioactive waste (RW) management, in order to provide
evidence of the fulfilment of the obligations derived from the Joint Convention. To facilitate the
reading and a better understanding, it has been decided to include a summary of those parts of
the two prior National Reports that are considered necessary in order to comply with this
objective.