The site of a proposed repository for high-level radioactive waste from the nation's nuclear power plants is not at risk of ground water infiltration, concludes this important book. Yucca Mountain, located about 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas, has been proposed as the site for permanent underground disposal of high-level radioactive waste from the nation's civilian nuclear power plants. To resolve concerns raised by a Department of Energy (DOE) staff scientist concerning the potential for ground water to rise 1,000 feet to the level proposed for the repository, DOE requested this study to evaluate independently the past history and future potential of large upward excursions of the ground water beneath Yucca Mountain. Table of Contents <ul>
<li>Front Matter</li>
<li>Executive Summary</li>
<li>Introduction</li>
<li>Water Levels in the Vicinity of the Proposed Repository in the ast 100,000 Years</li>
<li>Might Increased Rainfall Cause Flooding of the Proposed Repository?</li>
<li>Can an Igneous Intrusion Raise the Water Table to the Proposed Repository Level?</li>
<li>Could a Nearby Earthquake Cause Flooding of the Proposed Repository?</li>
<li>Summary of Conclusions and Recommendations</li>
<li>Appendix A: A Review of the Isotopic Geochemistry of the Yucca Mountain, Nevada, Proposed Nuclear Waste Repository Site</li>
<li>Appendix B: Yucca Mountain: Ground-Water Flow</li>
<li>Appendix C: The Effects of Pluvial Climates in the Vicinity of Yucca Mountain: A Summary</li>
<li>Appendix D: Response of the Ground-Water System at Yucca Mountain to an Earthquake</li>
<li>Appendix E: Probabilities of Earthquakes Near Yucca Mountain, Nevada</li>
</ul>

Ground Water at Yucca Mountain: How High Can It Rise?

Science & Math

Division on Earth and Life Studies

Board on Radioactive Waste Management

Commission on Geosciences, Environment, and Resources

National, Research Council

Panel on Coupled Hydrologic/Tectonic/Hydrothermal Systems at Yucca Mountain

Earth Sciences

National Academies Press

An evaluation of the effectiveness of the OSTs new program and provides specific recommendations to improve it, if appropriate. Softcover.

Peer Review in Environmental Technology Development Programs (Compass Series)

Committee on the Department of Energy-Office of Science and Technology's Peer Review Program

Research Needs in Subsurface Science provides an overview of the subsurface contamination problems across the DOE complex and shows by examples from the six largest DOE sites (Hanford Site, Idaho Engineering and Environmental Laboratory, Nevada Test Site, Oak Ridge Reservation, Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site, and Savannah River Site) how advances in scientific and engineering knowledge can improve the effectiveness of the cleanup effort. This report analyzes the current Environmental Management (EM) Science Program portfolio of subsurface research projects to assess the extent to which the program is focused on DOE's contamination problems. This analysis employs an organizing scheme that provides a direct linkage between basic research in the EM Science Program and applied technology development in DOE's Subsurface Contaminants Focus Area. Research Needs in Subsurface Science also reviews related research programs in other DOE offices and other federal agencies (see Chapter 4) to determine the extent to which they are focused on DOE's subsurface contamination problems. On the basis of these analyses, this report singles out the highly significant subsurface contamination knowledge gaps and research needs that the EM Science Program must address if the DOE cleanup program is to succeed. Table of Contents <ul>
<li>Front Matter</li>
<li>Summary</li>
<li>1 Introduction and Task</li>
<li>2 Subsurface Contamination in the DOE Complex</li>
<li>3 Assessment of the EM Science Program Portfolio</li>
<li>4 Research Programs on Other Agencies of Government</li>
<li>5 Knowledge Gaps and Research Needs</li>
<li>6 Recommendations for a Long-Term Research Program</li>
<li>References</li>
<li>Appendix A Description of the Environmental Management Science Program</li>
<li>Appendix B List of Presentations</li>
<li>Appendix C Biographical Sketches of Committee Members</li>
<li>Appendix D Additional Resources</li>
<li>Appendix E Interim Report</li>
<li>Appendix F Acronym List</li>
<li>Color Plates</li>
</ul>

Research Needs in Subsurface Science

Water Science and Technology Board

U.S. Department of Energy's Environmental Management Science Program

Nature & Ecology

In the past decade, officials responsible for clean-up of contaminated groundwater have increasingly turned to natural attenuation-essentially allowing naturally occurring processes to reduce the toxic potential of contaminants-versus engineered solutions. This saves both money and headaches. To the people in surrounding communities, though, it can appear that clean-up officials are simply walking away from contaminated sites. When is natural attenuation the appropriate approach to a clean-up? This book presents the consensus of a diverse committee, informed by the views of researchers, regulators, and community activists. The committee reviews the likely effectiveness of natural attenuation with different classes of contaminants-and describes how to evaluate the "footprints" of natural attenuation at a site to determine whether natural processes will provide adequate clean-up. Included are recommendations for regulatory change. The committee emphasizes the importance of the public's belief and attitudes toward remediation and provides guidance on involving community stakeholders throughout the clean-up process. The book explores how contamination occurs, explaining concepts and terms, and includes case studies from the Hanford nuclear site, military bases, as well as other sites. It provides historical background and important data on clean-up processes and goes on to offer critical reviews of 14 published protocols for evaluating natural attenuation. Table of Contents <ul>
<li>Front Matter</li>
<li>Executive Summary</li>
<li>1 Introduction: Using Natural Processes in Groundwater Restoration</li>
<li>2 Community Concerns about Natural Attenuation</li>
<li>3 Scientific Basis for Natural Attenuation</li>
<li>4 Approaches for Evaluating Natural Attenuation</li>
<li>5 Protocols for Documenting Natural Attenuation</li>
<li>Appendix A Acronyms</li>
<li>Appendix B Presenters at the Committee's Information-Gathering Meetings</li>
<li>Appendix C Biographical Sketches of Committee Members and Staff</li>
<li>Index</li>
</ul>

Natural Attenuation for Ground Water Remediation

Council, National Research

Committee on Intrinsic Remediation

Remediation, Commission on Intrinsic

It is now becoming clear that relatively few U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) waste sites will be cleaned up to the point where they can be released for unrestricted use. "Long-term stewardship" (activities to protect human health and the environment from hazards that may remain at its sites after cessation of remediation) will be required for over 100 of the 144 waste sites under DOE control (U.S. Department of Energy, 1999). After stabilizing wastes that remain on site and containing them as well as is feasible, DOE intends to rely on stewardship for as long as hazards persist-in many cases, indefinitely. Physical containment barriers, the management systems upon which their long-term reliability depends, and institutional controls intended to prevent exposure of people and the environment to the remaining site hazards, will have to be maintained at some DOE sites for an indefinite period of time. The Committee on Remediation of Buried and Tank Wastes finds that much regarding DOE's intended reliance on long-term stewardship is at this point problematic. The details of long-term stewardship planning are yet to be specified, the adequacy of funding is not assured, and there is no convincing evidence that institutional controls and other stewardship measures are reliable over the long term. Scientific understanding of the factors that govern the long-term behavior of residual contaminants in the environment is not adequate. Yet, the likelihood that institutional management measures will fail at some point is relatively high, underscoring the need to assure that decisions made in the near term are based on the best available science. Improving institutional capabilities can be expected to be every bit as difficult as improving scientific and technical ones, but without improved understanding of why and how institutions succeed and fail, the follow-through necessary to assure that long-term stewardship remains effective cannot reliably be counted on to occur. Long-Term Institutional Management of U.S. Department of Energy Legacy Waste Sites examines the capabilities and limitations of the scientific, technical, and human and institutional systems that compose the measures that DOE expects to put into place at potentially hazardous, residually contaminated sites. Table of Contents <ul>
<li>Front Matter</li>
<li>Synopsis</li>
<li>Summary</li>
<li>1 Introduction</li>
<li>2 Conceptual Framework</li>
<li>3 Contaminant Reduction</li>
<li>4 Contaminant Isolation</li>
<li>5 Stewardship Activities</li>
<li>6 Contextual Factors</li>
<li>7 Fundamental Limits on Technical and Institutional Capabilities</li>
<li>8 Design Principles and Criteria for an Effective Long-Term Institutional Management System: Findings and Recommendations</li>
<li>References Cited</li>
<li>Appendix A Committee's Statement of Task</li>
<li>Appendix B Closure Plans for Major DOE Sites</li>
<li>Appendix C Committee Information Gathering Meetings</li>
<li>Appendix D Summary of Recent Stewardship Studies</li>
<li>Appendix E Existing Legal Structure for Closure of the Weapons Complex Sites</li>
<li>Appendix F Disposition of the Nevada Site</li>
<li>Appendix G Mathematical Models Used for Site Closure Decisions</li>
<li>Appendix H Biographical Sketches of Committee Members and Consultants</li>
<li>Appendix I Definitions of Terms Used in this Report</li>
</ul>

Long-Term Institutional Management of U.S. Department of Energy Legacy Waste Sites

Committee on the Remediation of Buried and Tank Wastes

The Second World War introduced the world to nuclear weapons and their consequences. Behind the scene of these nuclear weapons and an aspect of their consequences is radioactive waste. Radioactive waste has varying degrees of harmfulness and poses a problem when it comes to storage and disposal. Radioactive waste is usually kept below ground in varying containers, which depend on how radioactive the waste it. High-level radioactive waste (HLW) can be stored in underground carbon-steel tanks. However, radioactive waste must also be further immobilized to ensure our safety. There are several sites in the United States where high-level radioactive waste (HLW) are stored; including the Savannah River Site (SRS), established in 1950 to produce plutonium and tritium isotopes for defense purposes. In order to further immobilize the radioactive waste at this site an in-tank precipitation (ITP) process is utilized. Through this method, the sludge portion of the tank wastes is being removed and immobilized in borosilicate glass for eventual disposal in a geological repository. As a result, a highly alkaline salt, present in both liquid and solid forms, is produced. The salt contains cesium, strontium, actinides such as plutonium and neptunium, and other radionuclides. But is this the best method? The National Research Council (NRC) has empanelled a committee, at the request of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), to provide an independent technical review of alternatives to the discontinued in-tank precipitation (ITP) process for treating the HLW stored in tanks at the SRS. Alternatives for High-Level Waste Salt Processing at the Savannah RIver Site summarizes the finding of the committee which sought to answer 4 questions including: "Was an appropriately comprehensive set of cesium partitioning alternatives identified and are there other alternatives that should be explored?" and "Are there significant barriers to the implementation of any of the preferred alternatives, taking into account their state of development and their ability to be integrated into the existing SRS HLW system?" Table of Contents <ul>
<li>Front Matter</li>
<li>Summary</li>
<li>Introduction</li>
<li>Screening Procedure</li>
<li>Strontium and Actinide Removal</li>
<li>Tetraphenylborate: In-Tank Precipitation and Small-Tank Precipitation Options</li>
<li>Crystalline Silicotitanate Ion Exchange</li>
<li>Caustic Side Solvent-Extraction Process</li>
<li>Direct Grout Option</li>
<li>Barriers to Implementation of HLW Salt Processing Options</li>
<li>References</li>
<li>Appendix A: Biographical Sketches of Committee Members</li>
<li>Appendix B: Interim Report</li>
<li>Appendix C: Information Gathering Meetings</li>
<li>Appendix D: Incedental Waste</li>
<li>Appendix E: Long-Term Safety of the Direct Grout Option</li>
<li>Appendix F: Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Recommendation 96-1 to the Secretary Of Energy</li>
<li>Appendix G: Acronyms and Abbreviations</li>
</ul>

Alternatives for High-Level Waste Salt Processing at the Savannah River Site

Board on Chemical Sciences and Technology

Committee on Cesium Processing Alternatives for High-Level Waste at the Savannah River Site

Focused attention by world leaders is needed to address the substantial challenges posed by disposal of spent nuclear fuel from reactors and high-level radioactive waste from processing such fuel. The biggest challenges in achieving safe and secure storage and permanent waste disposal are societal, although technical challenges remain. Disposition of radioactive wastes in a deep geological repository is a sound approach as long as it progresses through a stepwise decision-making process that takes advantage of technical advances, public participation, and international cooperation. Written for concerned citizens as well as policymakers, this book was sponsored by the U.S. Department of Energy, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and waste management organizations in eight other countries. Table of Contents <ul>
<li>Front Matter</li>
<li>Executive Summary</li>
<li>1 Disposition of High-Level Waste and Spent Nuclear Fuel: An Overview of the Societal and Technical Challenges</li>
<li>2 Principal Findings and Conclusions</li>
<li>3 Principal Recommendations</li>
<li>4 National Programs</li>
<li>5 Societal Issues in Radioactive Waste Management</li>
<li>6 Scientific and Technical Issues in Radioactive Waste Management</li>
<li>7 Alternatives to Geological Disposition</li>
<li>8 Improving Decision Making and Implementation</li>
<li>9 International Cooperation</li>
<li>References</li>
<li>Appendix A Biographical Sketches of Committee Members</li>
<li>Appendix B Workshop Program</li>
<li>Appendix C List of Attendees</li>
<li>Appendix D Acronyms</li>
</ul>

Disposition of High Level Waste and Spent Nuclear Fuel : The Continuing Societal and Technical Challenges

Committee on Disposition of High-Level Radioactive Waste Through Geological Isolation

Biological Sciences

The United States Department of Energy (DOE) has approximately 400 million liters (100 million gallons) of liquid high-level waste (HLW) stored in underground tanks and approximately 4,000 cubic meters of solid HLW stored in bins. The current DOE estimate of the cost of converting these liquid and solid wastes into stable forms for shipment to a geological repository exceeds $50 billion to be spent over several decades (DOE, 2000). The Committee on Long-Term Research Needs for Radioactive High-Level Waste at Department of Energy Sites was appointed by the National Research Council (NRC) to advise the Environmental Management Science Program (EMSP) on a long-term research agenda addressing the above problems related to HLW stored in tanks and bins at DOE sites. Table of Contents <ul>
<li>Front Matter</li>
<li>Executive Summary</li>
<li>1. Introduction</li>
<li>2. Overview of HLW Challenges at DOE Sites</li>
<li>3. Characterization</li>
<li>4. Retrieval and Pretreatment</li>
<li>5. Immobilization</li>
<li>6. Tank Closure and Other Long-Term Issues</li>
<li>7. EMSP Research Portfolio: Technological Risk and Desired Attributes</li>
<li>8. Summary</li>
<li>References</li>
<li>Appendix A: Interim Report</li>
<li>Appendix B: Analysis of the EMSP Research Portfolio</li>
<li>Appendix C: Spent Nuclear Fuel Issues</li>
<li>Appendix D: EMSP Overview and HLW Research Program</li>
<li>Appendix E: Biographical Sketches of Committee Members</li>
<li>Appendix F: List of Presentations</li>
<li>Appendix G: Glossary</li>
<li>Appendix H: List of Acronyms</li>
</ul>

Research Needs for High-Level Waste Stored in Tanks and Bins at the U.S. Department of Energy Sites

Committee on Long-Term Research Needs for Radioactive High-Level Waste at Department of Energy Sites

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is nearing a decision on how to process 30 million gallons of high-level radioactive waste salt solutions at the Savannah River Site in South Carolina to remove strontium, actinides, and cesium for immobilization in glass and eventual shipment to a geologic repository. The department is sponsoring research and development (R&amp;D) work on four alternative processes and plans to use the results to make a downselection decision in a June 2001 time frame. The DOE requested that the National Research Council help inform this decision by addressing the following charge: 1. evaluate the adequacy of the criteria that will be used by the department to select from among the candidate processes under consideration; 2. evaluate the progress and results of the research and development work that is being undertaken on these candidate processes; and 3. assess whether the technical uncertainties have been sufficiently resolved to proceed with downsizing the list of candidate processes. Responses to the last two points are provided in this report. Research and Development on a Salt Processing Alternative for High-Level Waste at the Savannah River Site focuses exclusively on the technical issues related to the candidate processes for radionuclide removal from high-level waste salt solutions at SRS. The committee's interim report served as a response to the first point of this charge, and may be read in Appendix B. In that report, the committee found that DOE's proposed criteria are an acceptable basis for selecting among the candidate processes under consideration, but that the criteria should not be implemented in a way that relies on a single numerical "total score." Table of Contents <ul>
<li>Front Matter</li>
<li>Executive Summary</li>
<li>Introduction</li>
<li>Progress and Results of DOE</li>
<li>References</li>
<li>Appendix A: Letters of Request for this Study</li>
<li>Appendix B: Interim Report</li>
<li>Appendix C: Biographical Sketches of Committee Members</li>
<li>Appendix D: Information-Gathering Meetings</li>
<li>Appendix E: Acronyms and Abbreviations</li>
</ul>

Research and Development on a Salt Processing Alternative for High-Level Waste at the Savannah River Site

Committee on Radionuclide Separation Processes for High-Level Waste at the Savannah River Site

When the Cold War abruptly ended, DOE halted most nuclear materials production. In 1995, Congress chartered DOE's Environmental Management Science Program (EMSP) to bring the nation's scientific infrastructure to bear on EM's most difficult, long-term cleanup challenges. The EMSP provides grants to investigators in industry, national laboratories, and universities to undertake research that may help address these cleanup challenges. On several occasions the EMSP has asked the National Academies for advice on developing its research agenda. This report resulted from a 15-month study by an Academies committee on long-term research needs for deactivation and decommissioning (D&amp;D) at DOE sites. Table of Contents <ul>
<li>Front Matter</li>
<li>Executive Summary</li>
<li>1. Introduction, Background, and Task</li>
<li>2. D&amp;D Challenges in the DOE Complex</li>
<li>3. Current D&amp;D Science and Technology Programs</li>
<li>4. Research Recommendations</li>
<li>5. Programmatic Recommendations</li>
<li>References</li>
<li>Appendix A: Presentation to the Committee</li>
<li>Appendix B: Biographical Sketches of Committee Members</li>
<li>Appendix C: Interim Report</li>
<li>Appendix D: Illustrative Science Base and Scope for Remote Technology for Decontamination and Decommissioning of DOE Nuclear Facilities</li>
<li>Appendix E: Acronyms</li>
</ul>

Deactivating and Decommissioning

Committee on Long-Term Research Needs for Deactivation and Decommissioning at Department of Energy Sites

See the best price to sell, buy, or rent books by Board on Radioactive Waste Management. BookScouter helps to compare book prices from 25+ online bookstores and 30+ buyback vendors with a single search.

Books by Board on Radioactive Waste Management