Re: RADSAFE digest 3135

[Ernesto_Faillace@notes.ymp.gov]

While Yucca Mountain, if accepted, may eventually be closed permanently with all
of its "spent fuel" in place, current plans are not to "seal" it for several
decades after the last container is emplaced.  The "waste" packages are designed
to be retrieved during this post-emplacement, pre-closure period.  While the
explicit reason is to recover any leaking packages before permanent closure
makes this impossible (or very difficult/expensive to say the least), an
unspoken reason is that the packages cotaining spent fuel (NOT those containing
vitrified high level waste) would be retrievable if the US realizes the energy
value of this "waste" (as most other countries such as Japan, France and
Britain, who reprocess).  In any case, perhaps in a couple of centuries, Yucca
Mountain will become the world's largest high grade Uranium/Plutonium/Steel
mine....  After all, mining is probably still a big industry in Nevada.

My opions only and not those of my employer.

Ernesto Faillace
efaillace@earthlink.net




ruth_weiner <ruth_weiner@email.msn.com> on 05/01/2000 10:16:28 AM

Please respond to radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu

To:   Multiple recipients of list <radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu>
cc:    (bcc: Ernesto Faillace/YM/RWDOE)

Subject:  Re: RADSAFE digest 3135




The proposed high-level waste repository was never proposed to be temporary
( or "temporary") but permanent.  This is readily confirmed by the Nuclear
Waste Policy Act of 1982.  The decision to characterize only the Yucca
Mountain site was made by Congress in the 1987 amendments to the Nuclear
Waste Policy Act.  The suitability (or unsuitability) of the Yucca Mountain
site is to be decided by Congress subsequent to publication of the site
characterization report and its presentation to Congress.

The Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Yucca Mountain Site was
issued in July, 1999, and there have been a large number of public hearings
and extensive comments on this document.  The DEIS is available on the web
via www.ymp.gov or from the DOE home page.

What is proposed to be buried at Yucca Mountain is indeed not "trash" to
many people (including me).  I would myself favor processing (called
"reprocessing") the spent nuclear fuel to recover both fissile material and
useful radioisotopes.  While this would probably not reduce the waste
volume, it would, it seems to me, reduce the specific activity, particularly
if strontium and cesium were recovered.

Ruth Weiner
ruth_weiner@msn.com









************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html