Passed in 1982, the Nuclear Waste Policy Act (NWPA) was an effort to establish an explicit statutory basis for the Department of Energy (DOE) to dispose of the nation’s most highly radioactive nuclear waste. The NWPA requires DOE to remove spent nuclear fuel from commercial nuclear power plants, in exchange for a fee, and transport it to a permanent geologic repository or an interim storage facility before permanent disposal. Defense-related high-level<br>waste is to go into the same repository.

The Director, Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management (OCRWM), Department of Energy (DOE), has identified the Clinch River Breeder Reactor site, the DOE Oak Ridge Reservation and the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) Hartsville Nuclear Plant site as preferred and alternative sites, respectively, for development of site-specific designs as part of the proposal for construction of an integrated Monitored Retrievable Storage (MRS) Facility. The proposal, developed pursuant to Section 141(b) of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, will be submitted to Congress in January 1986.

Our basic position is that the outcomes of policy-making in radioactive waste management (RWM) should be driven by the will of the people through democratic processes. Achieving this inclusiveness requires good practices to increase local influence on what is essentially a national policy process. However inclusiveness poses significant practical problems; can society afford lengthy and costly consultation processes, often perceived as inefficient and ineffective?

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

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> &quot;based upon and consistent with &quot; 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 report examines the current policy, legal, and regulatory framework pertaining to used nuclear fuel and high level waste management in the United States. The goal is to identify potential changes that if made could add flexibility and possibly improve the chances of successfully implementing technical aspects of a nuclear waste policy. Experience suggests that the regulatory framework should be established prior to initiating future repository development.

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.

In an attempt to facilitate the resolution of contentious environmental problems, public agencies are increasingly using collaborative approaches wherein stakeholders participate in the decision-making process. A dilemma for the design of collaborative approaches is the technical complexity of many environmental problems. How can members of the public play a meaningful role in decisions that involve complicated scientific arguments?

Andras goal of Sustainability

Press Release - DOE Seeks Public-Private Sector Expressions of Interest for Global Nuclear Energy Partnership Initiative

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.

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).