Management of Commercially Generated Radioactive Waste - U.S. ...

8
WASTE PROGRAM
* The multibarrier approach must/should be adhered to in any disposal option, and
waste forms and containers should receive equal attention to medium and disposal
site. (28, 152)
* The multibarrier approach appears to be a false concept, because not enough is
Response
known about the systems involved or the interactions. (42, 68, 98)
The Department of Energy's Statement of Position in the recent NRC rulemaking proceed-
ings on storage and disposal of nuclear waste (DOE 1980a) contained the following quotation:
"In order to meet the primary objective for a waste disposal system, namely to
isolate the wastes from the biosphere and to pose no significant threat to the
public health and safety, waste must be prevented from reaching the human environment
in quantities in excess of those permitted by radiation standards. . . The
multibarrier concept requires that the success of the system be protected against
deficient barrier performance or failure, by using a series of relatively independent
and diverse barriers that would not be subject to common made failure. Barrier
multiplicity is required both as a hedge against unexpected occurrences or
failures and to provide appropriate means for protecting against a wide variety
of potentially disruptive events. Acceptable system performance must not be contingent
on the performance of any non-independent barrier combinations."
DOE plans to continue to pursue the multibarrier approach to repository design recog-
nizing that development of detailed identification of system components will be dictated by
site-specific parameters.
Issue
Two commenters stated that the policy of not requiring the canister to provide contain-
tainment after emplacement was a negligent one in that it would be difficult to control the
wastes after emplacement. (9, 36)
Response
DOE anticipates that the canister will provide containment for a hundred years or more
following emplacement. The final Statement has been changed to reflect this (see Section
5.1.2). It is uncertain at this time whether NRC will require that the canister function
as a barrier to radionuclide migration for a specified period of time. See also response
above.
Issue
One commenter suggested that if the material presented in the Statement is valid (that
is, from a technical standpoint, no reason exists why the development of mined geologic
repositories cannot proceed) then a large information gap exists between DOE and the public
because a large segment of the public and many public officials believe this is the worst
problem facing the U.S. (7)