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

7.5
these low-growth conditions. The reprocessing cases are complicated by the added uncer-
tainty for reprocessing startup. For Case 3, reprocessing startup in the time period 1990
to 2010 was considered in combination with repository startup dates of 1990 to 2010 for the
proposed program and repository startup dates of 2010 to 2030 for the alternative program.
As in the once-through cycle cases, the 2010 repository startup provides both the last year
of the range under the proposed program and the first year of the range under the alterna-
tive program. To simplify the analysis, only mid-range dates were considered for Cases 4
and 5, that is, reprocessing startup in year 2000 in combination with repository startup in
year 2000 representing the proposed program and in year 2020 representing the alternative
program. However, the same potential range as in Case 3 should be inferred.
In selecting reprocessing startup dates, it was assumed that even if the current mora-
torium on reprocessing were lifted immediately, at least 10 years would be required to
complete the construction, licensing, and startup of a reprocessing facility. Since a con-
siderably longer time period could conceivably be required before reprocessing could be ini-
tiated, the 2010 startup date was selected to illustrate the effect of reprocessing after a
longer period of delay. The important factor here is not the reprocessing dates themselves,
but the effect that a range of reprocessing startup dates has on waste management impacts.