Safety Evaluation Report Related to Disposal of High-Level Radioactive Wastes in a Geologic Repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada: Repository Safety after Permanent Closure (NUREG-1949, Volume 3)

On this page:

• Publication Information
• Abstract

Download complete document

• NUREG-1949, Volume 3 (PDF – 3.85 MB)

Publication Information

Manuscript Completed: October 2014
Date Published: October 2014

Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Washington, DC 20555-0001

Availability Notice

Abstract

Volume 3, Repository Safety After Permanent Closure, of this Safety Evaluation Report (SER) documents the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff's review and evaluation of the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Safety Analysis Report (SAR), Chapter 2: Repository Safety After Permanent Closure, provided in DOE's June 3, 2008, license application, as updated by DOE on February 19, 2009. In its application, DOE seeks authorization from the Commission to construct a repository at Yucca Mountain. The NRC staff also reviewed information DOE provided in response to the NRC staff's requests for additional information and other information that DOE provided related to the SAR. In particular, SER Volume 3 documents the results of the NRC staff's evaluation to determine whether the proposed repository design complies with the performance objectives and requirements that apply after the repository is permanently closed. The NRC staff finds, with reasonable expectation, that DOE has demonstrated compliance with the NRC regulatory requirements for postclosure safety, including, but not limited to, "Performance objectives for the geologic repository after permanent closure" in 10 CFR 63.113, "Requirements for performance assessment" in 10 CFR 63.114, "Requirements for multiple barriers" in 10 CFR 63.115, and "Postclosure Public Health and Environmental Standards" in 10 CFR Part 63, Subpart L. In particular, the NRC staff finds that the proposed repository at Yucca Mountain (1) is comprised of multiple barriers and (2) based on performance assessment evaluations that are in compliance with applicable regulatory requirements, meets the 10 CFR Part 63, Subpart L limits for individual protection, human intrusion, and separate standards for protection of groundwater.