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

232
GEOLOGIC CONSIDERATIONS
5. Figure 7.2.4 could not have been developed from information found in Y/OWI/TM-44.
Response
(208-NRC)
The Keweenawan and Triassic locations have been corrected and are now referred to as
lavas/basalts. See Appendix B of the final Statement and references 5 and 15 of the
Appendix B reference list.
Draft p. 3.1.16
Issue
One commenter felt that, "General Statement" is too vague to be useful in the site
selection process--it is necessary to specify how long the waste must be kept isolated and
how complete the isolation must be. (113-EPA,)
Response
The text has been changed. The question of how long and how complete the isolation
must be is not addressed specifically. No exact performance data are specified in this gen-
eric approach. However, in the recent DOE Position Paper to the NRC rulemaking hearings on
nuclear waste storage disposal (DOE 1980a) the following National Waste Terminal Storage
Program Performance Objectives are provided.
"Waste containment within the immediate vicinity of initial placement should
be virtually complete during the period when radiation and thermal output are
dominated by fission product decay. Any loss of containment should be a
gradual process which results in a very small fractional waste inventory
release rates extending over very long release times, i.e., catastrophic losses
of containment should not occur."
"Disposal systems should provide reasonable assurances that wastes will be
isolated from the accessible environment for a period of at least 10,000
years with no prediction of significant decreases in isolation beyond that
time."
Draft p. 3.1.17
Issue
(113-EPA)
Response
Global plate boundaries should be excluded as locations for potential repository sites.
This statement was made in draft Section 3.1.31, on p. 3.1.47. The paragraph contain-
ing this statement has been moved (to Section 5.1 dealing with site selection) for emphasis
in the final document.