Publications

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Safety assessments estimate the long-term performance of geological disposal systems for radioactive waste using quantitative models. This paper reviews regulatory standards, selection of scenarios for analysis, the development of computational models and their linkage into a system analysis, and the iterative relationship between site characterization and safety assessment. Uncertainty must be acknowledged and can be accounted for using both conservative deterministic and probabilistic approaches. In addition to generating performance estimates for comparison to regulatory standards, safety assessments can also guide research and model development, evaluate design alternatives, enhance the scientific understanding of the system, and contribute to public acceptance.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

For more than three decades, the US Department of Energy has investigated the potential for permanent disposal of high-level radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel in a deep-mined repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada (USA). A detailed license application submitted to the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission in 2008 provides full documentation of the case for permanent disposal of nuclear waste in tuff. The aridity of the site and great depth to the water table provide a disposal environment and a design concept unique among deep-mined repositories currently or previously proposed worldwide.

An important issue for present and future generations is the final disposal of spent nuclear fuel. Over the past over forty years, the development of technologies to isolate both spent nuclear fuel (SNF) and other high-level nuclear waste (HLW) generated at nuclear power plants and from production of defense materials, and low- and intermediate-level nuclear waste (LILW) in underground rock and sediments has been found to be a challenging undertaking. Finding an appropriate solution for the disposal of nuclear waste is an important issue for protection of the environment and public health, and it is a prerequisite for the future of nuclear power. The purpose of a deep geological repository for nuclear waste is to provide to future generations, protection against any harmful release of radioactive material, even after the memory of the repository may have been lost, and regardless of the technical knowledge of future generations. The results of a wide variety of investigations on the development of technology for radioactive waste isolation from 19 countries were published in the First Worldwide Review in 1991 (Witherspoon, 1991). The results of investigations from 26 countries were published in the Second Worldwide Review in 1996 (Witherspoon, 1996). The results from 32 countries were summarized in the Third Worldwide Review in 2001 (Witherspoon and Bodvarsson, 2001). The last compilation had results from 24 countries assembled in the Fourth Worldwide Review (WWR) on radioactive waste isolation (Witherspoon and Bodvarsson, 2006). Since publication of the last report in 2006, radioactive waste disposal approaches have continued to evolve, and there have been major developments in a number of national geological disposal programs. Significant experience has been obtained both in preparing and reviewing cases for the operational and long-term safety of proposed and operating repositories. Disposal of radioactive waste is a complex issue, not only because of the nature of the waste, but also because of the detailed regulatory structure for dealing with radioactive waste, the variety of stakeholders involved, and (in some cases) the number of regulatory entities involved.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.