History of Yucca Mountain:
History Of The Nuclear Waste Program
In 1982, Congress established a national policy to solve the problem of nuclear waste disposal.This policy is a federal law called the Nuclear Waste Policy Act. Congress based this policy on what most scientists worldwide agreed is the best way to dispose of nuclear waste.
The Nuclear Waste Policy Act made the U.S. Department of Energy responsible for finding a site, building, and operating an underground disposal facility called a geologic repository.
On July 10, 2009, the NRC Staff responded to the NRC's Licensing Hearing Board’s July 2, 2009 order concerning scheduling. The Staff stated that it will not be able to issue its Safety Evaluation Report (SER) in accordance with the schedule in 10 C.F.R. Part 2, Appendix D. Rather, at present, the Staff intends to issue the SER serially. The Staff estimates that the SER will be issued as follows:
Sites Considered
In 1983, the U.S. Department of Energy selected nine locations in six states for consideration as potential repository sites. This was based on data collected for nearly 10 years. The nine sites were studied and results of these preliminary studies were reported in 1985.
Based on these reports, the president approved three sites for intensive scientific study called site characterization. The three sites were Hanford, Washington; Deaf Smith County, Texas; and Yucca Mountain, Nevada.
In 1987, Congress amended the Nuclear Waste Policy Act and directed U.S. Department of Energy to study only Yucca Mountain.
On July 9, 2002, the U.S. Senate cast the final legislative vote approving the development of a repository at Yucca Mountain.
On July 23, 2002, President Bush signed House Joint Resolution 87, allowing the DOE to take the next step in establishing a safe repository in which to store our nation's nuclear waste.
On June 3, 2008, the DOE submitted a license application to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission seeking authorization to build the repository.
The Yucca Mountain Project is currently focused on the NRC's licensing proceedings.
The Nuclear Waste Policy Act Timeline for Yucca Mountain 2010 and 2011
Timeline of events through December 2011 NRC Commission Decision Nov 2011 The NRC Commission denies NRC Staff appeal of CAB's decision instructing parties to preserve LSN document collections and send copies to NRC for maintenance. Due January 2012 Blue Ribbon Commission's final report to the Secretary of Energy. Blue Ribbon Commission calendar and activities to date. Sept 30, 2011 Suspension of Hearings – On Friday, September 30, 2011 the Nuclear Regulatory Commission filed an order suspending the licensing hearings – "Although we have been informed that the agency has current appropriated Fiscal Year 2011 Nuclear Waste Funds (NWFs) that could be carried over into the next fiscal year, there are no Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) positions (i.e., federal employee positions) requested in the President's Fiscal Year 2012 Budget for Yucca Mountain High-Level Waste activities. Therefore, because both future appropriated NWF dollars and FTEs for this proceeding are uncertain, and consistent with the Commission's Memorandum and Order of September 9, 2011, this proceeding is suspended. It is so ORDERED. Construction Authorization Board " September 2011 NRC Allows closure of Yucca Mountain - A divided Nuclear Regulatory Commission allowed the Obama administration to continue plans to close the controversial Yucca Mountain nuclear waste dump in Nevada. The commission split, 2-2, on whether to uphold or reject a decision by an independent nuclear licensing board. The board voted last year to block the Energy Department from withdrawing its application for Yucca Mountain, a remote site 90 miles from Las Vegas. The licensing board said the government failed to make a scientific case for why the application should be withdrawn. Despite the split vote, the NRC said in an order September 15, 2011 that the licensing board should continue steps to close out work on Yucca Mountain by the end of the month, citing "budgetary limitations." The Energy Department has not requested additional funding for Yucca Mountain, and NRC spending on Yucca expires at the end of the month.
Commissioners Order On June 30, 2010, the participants were invited to submit briefs as to whether the Commission should review, and reverse or uphold, the Board's decision denying the Department of Energy's motion to withdraw its construction authorization application with prejudice. Upon consideration of all filings in this matter, the Commission finds itself evenly divided on whether to take the affirmative action of overturning or upholding the Board's decision. Consistent with budgetary limitations, the Board has taken action to preserve information associated with this adjudication. In furtherance of this, we hereby exercise our inherent supervisory authority to direct the Board to, by the close of the current fiscal year, complete all necessary and appropriate case management activities, including disposal of all matters currently pending before it and comprehensively documenting the full history of the adjudicatory proceeding.August 2011 The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has published in the NUREG series the first of three technical evaluation reports (TERs) detailing the agency staff's review of the Department of Energy's license application for a high-level waste repository at Yucca Mountain in Nevada. Publication of the TER provides the staff's technical review of the postclosure information in the Yucca Mountain application. This TER does not include findings as to whether NRC's regulatory requirements have been satisfied. Technical Evaluation Report on the Content of the U.S. Department of Energy's Yucca Mountain Repository License Application; Postclosure Volume: Repository Safety After Permanent Closure," is part of the agency's orderly closeout of the Yucca Mountain license review process and is intended as a public record of the staff's scientific and technical work in preparing for and reviewing the application. It was developed using the draft Volume 3 of the staff's Safety Evaluation Report on the application. The TER was prepared as part of the agency's knowledge management activities during the closeout of the Yucca Mountain licensing review. The closeout, including publication of two additional TERs as NUREGs, is expected to be completed by Sept. 30, 2011. (http://www.nrc.gov/waste/hlw-disposal/yucca-lic-app.html). August 2011: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has published in the NUREG series the first of three technical evaluation reports (TERs) detailing the agency staff's review of the Department of Energy's license application for a high-level waste repository at Yucca Mountain in Nevada. Publication of the TER provides the staff's technical review of the postclosure information in the Yucca Mountain application. This TER does not include findings as to whether NRC's regulatory requirements have been satisfied.
"Technical Evaluation Report on the Content of the U.S. Department of Energy's Yucca Mountain Repository License Application; Postclosure Volume: Repository Safety After Permanent Closure," is part of the agency's orderly closeout of the Yucca Mountain license review process and is intended as a public record of the staff's scientific and technical work in preparing for and reviewing the application. It was developed using the draft Volume 3 of the staff's Safety Evaluation Report on the application.
The TER was prepared as part of the agency's knowledge management activities during the closeout of the Yucca Mountain licensing review. The closeout, including publication of two additional TERs as NUREGs, is expected to be completed by Sept. 30, 2011. (http://www.nrc.gov/waste/hlw-disposal/yucca-lic-app.html ).July 2011 United States Court of Appeals FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT Argued March 22, 2011 Decided July 1, 2011 AIKEN COUNTY, PETITIONER On Petitions for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief, Petitions for Extraordinary Relief, and Petitions for Review: Summary - A federal appeals court ruled on July 1st, 2011, that challenges to the Obama administration's decision to withdraw from developing the Yucca Mountain, Nev., nuclear waste repository were premature. June 1, 2011 Blue Ribbon Commission's subcommittee - The Reactor and Fuel Cycle Technology Subcommittee of the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future (BRC) was formed to examine issues related to the potential of existing and future reactor and fuel cycle technologies and related research and development (R&D) programs. Draft RFCT Report The Reactor and Fuel Cycle Technology Subcommittee Report to the Full Commission. June 1, 2011 Draft Disposal Report - Disposal Subcommittee Report to the Full Commission "How can the United States go about establishing one or more disposal sites for high-level nuclear wastes in a manner and within a timeframe that is technically, socially, economically, and politically acceptable?" April 2011 United States Government Accountability Office (GAO) - Report to Congressional Requesters - GAO suggests that Congress consider whether a more predictable funding mechanism would enhance future efforts and whether an independent organization would be more effective. GAO also recommends that DOE assess remaining risks of the shutdown; create a plan to resume licensing if necessary; and report on federal property and its disposition. NRC concurred with the facts in a draft of this report, but DOE strongly disagreed with the draft and the recommendations, questioning the veracity of GAO's information. GAO continues to believe its findings and recommendations are sound. COMMERCIAL NUCLEAR WASTE Effects of a Termination of the Yucca Mountain Repository Program and Lessons Learned. DOE NUCLEAR WASTE - Better Information Needed on Waste Storage at DOE Sites as a Result of Yucca Mountain Shutdown April 2011 A Staff Summary of Major Themes in Testimony and Comments Received by the Blue Ribbon Commission on America’s Nuclear Future to Date Februay 2011 Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board Meeting transcripts Redacted copies of preliminary drafts of Volumes 2 and Volume 3 of the SER. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission released draft staff reports on the proposed Yucca Mountain repository but omitted any conclusions about whether the site would be safe for storing radioactive waste. · Volume 3: Safety Evaluation Report Related to Disposal of High-Level Radioactive Wastes in a Geologic Repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada: Repository Safety After Permanent Closure · Volume 2 - Summarizes the results of the NRC staff's review of the Preclosure operations that the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) described and provided in its June 3, 2008, license application, as updated on February 19, 2009, seeking an authorization to begin construction of a repository at Yucca Mountain. February 17, 2011 On the NRC issued the following redacted copies of preliminary drafts of Volumes 2 and Volume 3 of the Safety Evaluation Report.
Safety Evaluation Report Related to Disposal of High-Level Radioactive Wastes in a Geologic Repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada Volume 1: General Information Safety Evaluation Report Related to Disposal of High-Level Radioactive Wastes in a Geologic Repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada Volume 3: Repository Safety After Permanent Closure Volume 2 - Summarizes the results of the NRC staff's review of the Preclosure operations that the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) described and provided in its June 3, 2008, license application, as updated on February 19, 2009, seeking an authorization to begin construction of a repository at Yucca Mountain.March 23, 2011 DOE Nuclear Waste: Better Information Needed on Waste Storage at DOE Sites as a Result of Yucca Mountain Shutdown GAO-11-230, Quick View Summary (HTML) Highlights Page (PDF) Full Report (PDF, 40 pages) Accessible Text Recommendations (HTML) April 2011 DOE NUCLEAR WASTE
Better Information Needed on Waste Storage at DOE Sites as a Result of Yucca
Mountain Shutdown
A Staff Summary of Major Themes in Testimony and Comments Received
by the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future to Date.May 12, 2011 May 12: GAO report - COMMERCIAL NUCLEAR WASTE-Effects of a Termination of the Yucca Mountain Repository Program and Lessons Learned. The US General Accounting Office. August 23, 2011 GAO report - COMMERCIAL NUCLEAR WASTE-Effects of a Termination of the Yucca Mountain Repository Program and Lessons Learned. The US General Accounting Office. - "Just two years ago, the GAO estimated that the legal liabilities due to federal inaction on nuclear waste would be "about $12.3 billion in damages through 2020." So, over the last two years, the GAO's estimated legal hit to taxpayers has jumped by more than $3 billion." Timeline of events through February 2010 February 1, 2010 The Administration's Fiscal Year 201 1 Budget was announced and stated that in 2010, the DOE will discontinue its applications to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) for a license to construct a high-level waste geological repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada. Budget of the U.S. Government, Fiscal Year 201 1: Terminations, Reductions, and Savings, at 62 (Feb. 1, 2010). The budget further states that "all funding for development of the Yucca Mountain facility will be eliminated" for fiscal year 2011. DOE remains committed, however, to fulfilling its obligation to take possession and dispose of the nation's spent nuclear fuel and high-level nuclear waste, and DOE has established the Blue Ribbon Commission to review alternatives for such disposition.
February 1,2010 DOE filed with the NRC High Level Waste Hearing (HLWH) a motion to stay the licensing proceeding, pending "the disposition by the Board of any DOE motion under Section 2.107 filed within the next 30 days." The motion explained that DOE intended to move to withdraw the pending licensing application pursuant to 10 C.F.R. 9 2.107 within 30 days and that a stay would avoid unnecessary expenditure of resources by the Board, NRC, and other parties to the proceeding. February 16,2010, The NRC Licensing Board granted the stay motion pending resolution of DOE'S then-expected motion to withdraw the license application. January 29, 2010 At the direction of the President, the Secretary of Energy established the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future, which will conduct a comprehensive review of, and consider alternatives for disposition of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste. Congress had already endorsed creation of this Commission by appropriating $5 million in October 2009 for a Blue Ribbon Commission to evaluate and recommend such alternatives. Charter of the Blue Ribbon Commission Charter of the recently established Blue Ribbon Commission (which must issue recommendations within 24 months), makes clear that the Commission will consider solutions not only for commercial spent nuclear fuel but also for DOE high level waste that may provide a quicker solution than construction of a repository at Yucca Mountain. Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future Charter IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT The following consolidated cases were filed with the US Court of Appeals for District of Columbia February 19, 2010 Petition for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief and Writ of Mandamus, filed seeking relief against the Department of Energy ("DOE"), Nuclear Regulatory Commission ("NRC"), and agency officials was filed in the US Court of Appeals and docketed as Aiken County, D.C. Cir. No. 10-1050
February 25, 2010 Petition for review, docketed as Ferguson v. Obama, D.C. Cir. No. 10- 1052, was filed in the Court of appeals against the DOE and President Obama purporting to seek review of the "final action of the President and Secretary of Energy to abandon and not to proceed with plans to apply for and pursue a license for, and to construct, a repository for high level radioactive waste at Yucca Mountain.”
February 26, 2010 South Carolina filed in the Fourth Circuit a "Petition for Review and Petition for Writ of Mandamus, Writ of Prohibition, Stay, and/or Declaratory and Injunctive Relief' naming as respondents the DOE, President Obama, the NRC, and agency officials; that case was transferred to the US Court of Appeals and docketed as South Carolina v. U.S. Dept of Energy, D.C. Cir. No. 1 0- 1 069.
March 24, 2010 Federal respondents filed a response to the petition
April 8, 2010, The three petitions were consolidated and the US Court of Appeals ordered a response to motions to expedite filed by Ferguson and State of South Carolina petitioners.
April 2 and April 7, 2010 Petitioners in Ferguson and State of South Carolina filed motions to expedite briefing and consideration of the petitions in the US Court of Appeals. US Court of Appeals – Letter to Annette Vietti-Cook Secretary of the Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission In the Matter of the U.S. Department of Energy (High-Level Waste Repository), Docket No. 63-001-HLW
April 14, 2010 (argument) Even if the NRC grants DOE's motion to withdraw, this would not give rise to a "genuine failure to act" claim because petitioners' are objecting to DOE's affirmative act of withdrawing the license application.
High Level Radioactive Waste Licensing Hearings March 3, 2010 DOE filed a motion to withdraw the license application and five parties, including South Carolina and Aiken County, two of the petitioners in this Court, thereafter filed petitions to intervene in the NRC proceeding to oppose DOE's motion to withdraw.
March 5, 2010 The NRC CAB issued a scheduling order providing a due date for answers to the then-pending petitions to intervene and stating that the Board will set a time for responses to DOE's motion to withdraw after" resolving the petitions to intervene.
April 6, 2010 However, the NRC Licensing Board changed course and announced that it will withhold a decision on the petitions to intervene and DOE's motion to withdraw pending Court ruling on -the petitions. The Board deemed it more expedient for the US Court of Appeals to provide it guidance by deciding in the first instance whether DOE has authority to withdraw the license applications. The NRC Licensing Board's April 6 order, however, is an interlocutory order of an administrative hearing tribunal within the NRC and does not necessarily reflect the views of the Commission itself.
April 12, 2010 Just before the filing of the instant response - DOE filed a request for review of the Board's interlocutory order by the NRC Commission (the body with the final authority over NRC adjudications).
April 23, 2010 The NRC Commission vacated the Hearing Board’s Suspension Order and remanded the matter to the NRC Hearing Board for prompt resolution of DOE’s motion to withdraw. “We direct the Board to establish a briefing schedule on DOE’s motion to withdraw and issue a decision on that motion no later than June 1, 2010. The Board should continue case management and resolve all remaining issues promptly.”
April 27, 2010 The CAB Board responded to the NRC Commission directions stating they recognize their obligation to comply with the Commission’s direction but also …..”insofar as
Possible.” Also, that the complexity of the issues, the desirability of holding oral argument, and a previously-established filing date concerning a related issue render a decision by June 1, 2010 infeasible. Instead, in accordance with the Commission’s direction to resolve all pending matters expeditiously and responsibly, the Board will decide DOE’s motion to withdraw as soon as possible after June 1 and, in no event, later than June 30.
May 17th, 2010 Intervener’s responses to the CAB order regarding the DOE’s request to withdraw the License Application.
June 3 and 4 Hearing in Las Vegas regarding arguments related to the DOE’s request to withdraw the License Application and conference hearing to discuss the archiving of the LSN documentation.
June 29, 2010 NRC CAB rules on DOE’s request to withdraw the License Application. "We conclude that Congress directed both that DOE file the application and that the NRC consider the application and issue a final merits-based decision," the judges said. "Unless Congress directs otherwise, DOE may not single-handedly derail the legislated decision-making process by withdrawing the application." US Energy Department Loses Ruling To Terminate Yucca Mountain Licensing
July 28, 2010 US Appeals Court puts consideration of Yucca Mountain case on hold until July 2010
A US appeals court said Wednesday it would wait until the Nuclear Regulatory Commission rules on the Yucca Mountain appeal before the commission before it hears oral arguments in a lawsuit over the planned termination of the nuclear waste repository project.
August 10, 2010 Responses filed by the NRC Commissioners regarding the decision on the motion of the State of Washington, South Carolina, Aiken County, SC and White Pine County, Nevada. William Magwood denied movants request to recuse and William C. Ostendorft also declined to recuse himself from the proceeding. Commissioner Apostolakis has recused himself from the proceeding.
August 23, 2010 October 4, 2010 The Nuclear Regulatory Commission decided to amend its “Waste Confidence Decision’’ to double the period when used nuclear fuel can be stored on site to 60 years instead of 30. The commission also directed agency staff to begin analyzing the prospect of storing spent fuel at plants for up to 300 years or beyond.
October 3, 2010 NRC Chairman Gregory Jaczko directed NRC staff to terminate the technical review of the Yucca Mountain application.
An appeal to allow the DOE to withdraw its Yucca Mountain application has been pending since July, after a lower board rejected DOE's request.
December 2010 Court of Appeals lifts stay and sets expedited briefing schedule.
Site Characterization Process
The Department of Energy's (DOE's) 1988 Site Characterization Plan for Yucca Mountain established the initial basis for the many engineering and scientific investigations of the site. It has been conducting site characterization to gather enough information about the Yucca Mountain site to evaluate the waste isolation capabilities. In 1991, the State of Nevada granted the DOE the permits necessary to proceed with certain site characterization activities. These activities included excavating test pits and trenches, drilling bore holes, and monitoring ground water.
In September 1994, the DOE began excavation of the exploratory studies facility using a tunnel boring machine. The initial design called for a continuous tunnel 7.6 meters (25 feet) in diameter. The tunnel was completed in April 1997. The tunnel begins at the North Portal and extends to the northwest approximately 2000 meters (1.24 miles). The tunnel then transitions into an approximately 60 degree turn to the south. The section from the North Portal to the 60 degree turn is known as the North Ramp. The turn from the North Ramp leads to a main tunnel 300 meters (984 feet) below the surface. The main tunnel has a north-south alignment and extends south approximately 3000 meters (1.86 miles). The main tunnel ends in a 90 degree turn. From this turn the tunnel travels east about 1300 meters (0.8 miles) and emerges at the South Portal. The tunnel machine has bored through a series of geologic features including a structural feature known as the Bow Ridge Fault. Within the tunnel are seven testing alcoves and four test niches that are being used to investigate the hydrologic, hydrochemical, and thermomechanical properties of the rocks underlying Yucca Mountain.
In December 1997, the DOE began excavation of a smaller exploratory tunnel (5.5 meters/18 feet) across the main tunnel. This smaller tunnel is known as the "east-west" or cross drift and runs almost perpendicular to the North Ramp. The crossdrift begins to the west of the Bow Ridge Fault and crosses over and above the north-south main tunnel. It is about 2600 meters (1.6 miles) long and ends near the Solitario Canyon Fault. The cross drift will also contain instrumentation for scientific tests and should provide additional data on the sub-surface geology of Yucca Mountain to the west of the main tunnel. The layout of both the Exploratory Studies Facility and the Cross Drift can be viewed.
The State's Position:
The State of Nevada leaders believe the current high-level nuclear waste dump program is fatally flawed, and because of this have found it necessary to oppose the use of Yucca Mountain as a nuclear waste repository for a variety of reasons:
Much evidence shows that Yucca Mountain is not safe for nuclear waste disposal in that it is geologically and hydrologically active and complex. Radioactive substances could leak from the dump and create serious long-term health risks to the citizens of Nevada. Large-scale radioactive releases could occur through a variety of possible scenarios caused by volcanos, earthquakes or hydrothermal activity at Yucca Mountain. Accidents happen. Nuclear waste transportation could result in accidents harmful to Nevada's and the nation's citizens and seriously hurt Nevada's image as an attractive place to visit, live, or locate a business. There are no back-up or alternative sites being evaluated along with Yucca Mountain; thus, there are no other sites for comparison. It is unrealistic to expect DOE to spend $6.5 to $8 billion "characterizing" Yucca Mountain and then simply walk away after serious flaws are found. Besides, State leaders are convinced that the DOE is attempting to build a dump rather than merely "studying" the site, as it claims.
 |
 |
| Home | • | Yucca Mountain | • | News | • | Related Links | • | Publications | • | Photos | • | Transportation | • | Links |
| Mineral County | • | Who Regulates | • | Archived News | • | FAQS | • | Newsletters | • | Public Surveys | • | Licensing | • | Contact |
