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

1.32
* Resource commitments also increase with increasing size of the nuclear system. With
the once-through cycle, resource requirements for the alternative program range up to
2 to 3 times higher than for the proposed program. With the reprocessing cycle, re-
source requirements for the alternative program are about the same to slightly higher
than for the proposed program. For all cases, resource requirements are a small frac-
tion of current U.S. production rates.
* Waste management costs increase as the size of the nuclear system increases, the waste
management cost range is significantly higher for the alternative program than for the
proposed program. With the reprocessing cycle, the cost ranges are about the same for
both alternatives. The no-action alternative costs fall in the low end of the cost
range for the proposed program with the once-through cycle. When costs are compared
on the basis of levelized unit costs at a 7% discount rate, differences between the
alternative and proposed programs and differences between reprocessing and the once-
through cycle are slight.
* Societal risk from several events with low probability and high consequence in the
long term following geologic repository closure was determined to be small in compari-
son to other societal risks even if large errors in judgement of the probability of
occurrence were made. This conclusion appears valid even if no credit is taken for
effects of multiple engineered and geologic barriers that will be employed to further
assure containment and isolation.
With respect to the alternative waste disposal technologies considered in this State-
ment, the following conclusions can be drawn:
* A mined geologic repository is the preferred alternative based on evaluation of radio-
logical effects during the operational period, non-radiological effects on the human
environment, status of development, conformance with existing National and interna-
tional law, independence from future development of the nuclear industry and potential
for corrective or mitigating actions. The potential for and consequences of unplanned
events in the long term require further investigation. The only category in which an
alternative technology might offer an advantage would be the radiological effects
during the post-operational period for which space disposal appeared more preferable.
However, this long term advantage would be more than offset by near term disadvantages.
* Subseabed disposal appears promising enough to warrant further detailed examination.
The potential for and consequences of unplanned events in the long term also require
further investigation for this option. Studies of the anticipated environmental
(a) This disposal technology would not be capable of accommodating the full range of waste
types. An alternative technology, i.e., geologic disposal, would be required for large
quantities of solid waste. Thus, this alternative should be viewed as complementary to
geologic disposal.