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

1-51-6
.omment
Number Comment
Number
comparison of alternative sites is made or whether, indeed, at a later
date the site selection will include consideration of different geological
options. Considerations of this type should be part of the "programmatic
It is unnecessary to present the "key characteristics" from both the IRG
draft report and the final report (see the FORWARD).
strategy" selection to be supported by the GEIS. The first statement should read (words that are underlined were
1.10 It seems inconsistent to identify some symbols, abbreviations and acronyms
omitted):
as footnotes and others in the glossary, e.g., Tables A-18, A-20,A-21,
A-27 and A-28. Some are inconsistently and arbitrarily identified within
the text, e.g., GWe, which is used throughout the draft, is defined in the
first paragraph of section 1.2 on page 1.7.
Near term program activities should be predicated on the tentative
assumption made for interim planning ourposes that the first
disposal facilities for HLW will be mined repositories. Several
geologic environments possessing a wide variety of emplacement
1.11 General
The Table of Contents (pp. vii to xi) is too brief for such a large document
media will be examined Once the NEPA process has been completed,
program activities can be tailored accordingly.
(over 700 pages plus appendices).
o The footnote on the second statement was deleted. It reads:
1.12 p. 1.1
Clarify the definition of "radioactive wastes" discussed in this document. The eariest date for operation of a lcensed repository, whose
Traditionally, HLW does not include TRU-intermediate and low-level wastes
from the reprocessing plant.
The site earliest was selected date by for this
operation
process, and using an identical schedule,
of a licensed
would be 1992. Actual operation, recognizing repository, reasonable possible whose
deviations from the ideal, could be up to 3 year later.
.
1.13 pp. 1.3, 4.22, 4.38
Clarification of the meaning of short-term and long-term as preclosure and This says that the actual operation of the repository will be at least
post-closure of the repository should be made when the terms are first 7 years and perhaps as many as 10 years later than the starting date for
used. The difference between short-term and near-term is not clear either. the first commercial repository (1985) assumed for this study.
On page 1.3, third and fourth paragraphs, the meaning of the "near-term"
and "nearer-term" nomenclatures is not clear. On page 4.38, near-term and 115
13
long-term consequences are mentioned. The explanation for near-term in The last sentence in the first paragraph under Site Selection mentions
this paragraph is the same as that given for short-term on page 4.22. sociopolitical factors as siting constraints to be addressed early in
Stage III. What criteria will be used for site screening based on such
1.14 p. 1.3 considerations?
In presenting the IRG's, "key characteristics of a near-term interim e
strategic planning base for high-level waste disposal" parts omitted from
the "key characteristics" seem significant and should be included.