It is now becoming clear that relatively few U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) waste sites will be cleaned up to the point where they can be released for unrestricted use. "Long-term stewardship" (activities to protect human health and the environment from hazards that may remain at its sites after cessation of remediation) will be required for over 100 of the 144 waste sites under DOE control (U.S. Department of Energy, 1999). After stabilizing wastes that remain on site and containing them as well as is feasible, DOE intends to rely on stewardship for as long as hazards persistâ€"in many cases, indefinitely. Physical containment barriers, the management systems upon which their long-term reliability depends, and institutional controls intended to prevent exposure of people and the environment to the remaining site hazards, will have to be maintained at some DOE sites for an indefinite period of time. The Committee on Remediation of Buried and Tank Wastes finds that much regarding DOE's intended reliance on long-term stewardship is at this point problematic. The details of long-term stewardship planning are yet to be specified, the adequacy of funding is not assured, and there is no convincing evidence that institutional controls and other stewardship measures are reliable over the long term. Scientific understanding of the factors that govern the long-term behavior of residual contaminants in the environment is not adequate. Yet, the likelihood that institutional management measures will fail at some point is relatively high, underscoring the need to assure that decisions made in the near term are based on the best available science. Improving institutional capabilities can be expected to be every bit as difficult as improving scientific and technical ones, but without improved understanding of why and how institutions succeed and fail, the follow-through necessary to assure that long-term stewardship remains effective cannot reliably be counted on to occur. Long-Term Institutional Management of U.S. Department of Energy Legacy Waste Sites examines the capabilities and limitations of the scientific, technical, and human and institutional systems that compose the measures that DOE expects to put into place at potentially hazardous, residually contaminated sites.

The National Academies' National Research Council undertook this study in response to a request from the Under Secretary of Energy to provide strategic advice on how the Department of Energy could improve its Environmental Quality R&D portfolio. The committee recommends that DOE develop strategic goals and objectives for its EQ business line that explicitly incorporate a more comprehensive, long-term view of its EQ responsibilities. For example, these goals and objectives should emphasize long-term stewardship and the importance of limiting contamination and materials management problems, including the generation of wastes and contaminated media, in ongoing and future DOE operations.

This book demonstrates that the long-term safety of nuclear waste repositories, special waste disposal and carbon storage (CCS) is highly challenging and monitoring may contribute to substantiate evidence, support decision making and legitimise the programme. Deep geological disposal is a long-term safety issue and, in parallel, requires long-term institutional involvement of the technoscientific community, waste producers, public administrators, NGOs and the public. What, where and when to monitor is determined by its goal setting: It may be operational, confirmatory (in the near field) or environmental (far field). Strategic monitoring as proposed here contributes to process, implementation or policy and institutional surveillance. It not only addresses the controversial long-lasting “problem” (of nuclear, other toxic or CO2 waste) but investigates some ways to approach for “solutions” or solution spaces – not just technical but also institutional, societal and personal. It includes the tailored transfer of knowledge, concept and system understanding, experience and documentation to specific audiences above. It is an integrative tool of targeted yet adaptive management and may be applicable to other long-term sociotechnical fields.

In response to a request from Congress, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) asked the National Academies to evaluate its plans for managing radioactive wastes from spent nuclear fuel at sites in Idaho, South Carolina, and Washington. This interim report evaluates storage facilities at the Savannah River Site in South Carolina, with a particular focus on plans to seal the tanks with grouting. The report finds that tanks at the site do not necessarily need to be sealed shut as soon as the bulk of the waste has been removed. Postponing permanent closure buys more time for the development and application of emerging technologies to remove and better immobilize residual waste, without increasing risks to the environment or delaying final closure of the "tank farms." The report also recommends alternatives to address the lack of tank space at the site, as well as the need for focused R&D activities to reduce the amount and improve the immobilization of residual waste in the tanks and to test some of the assumptions used in evaulating long-term risks at the site.

The National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2017 contained a request for a National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine review and assessment of science and technology development efforts within the Department of Energy's Office of Environmental Management (DOE-EM). This technical report is the result of the review and presents findings and recommendations.

The Department of Energy's Office of Environmental Management is developing a technology roadmap to guide planning and possible future congressional appropriations for its technology development programs. It asked the National Research Council of the National Academies to provide technical and strategic advice to support the development and implementation of this roadmap, specifically by undertaking a study that identifies principal science and technology gaps and their priorities for the cleanup program based on previous National Academies reports, updated and extended to reflect current site conditions and EM priorities and input form key external groups, such as the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, Environmental Protection Agency, and state regulatory agencies. In response, this book provides a high-level synthesis of principal science and technology gaps identified in previous NRC reports in part 1. Part 2 summarizes a workshop meant to bring together the key external groups to discuss current site conditions and science and technology needs.

The Department of Energy's Office of Environmental Management's (EM) mission is the safe cleanup of sites associated with the government-led development of nuclear weapons and nuclear energy. While many of these legacy sites have completed cleanup, the largest and most complex sites have not been fully remediated. The cleanup of these sites is proceeding under legally enforceable agreements with timelines for hundreds of milestones. EM is reviewing alternative approaches to increase effectiveness and improve cost efficiencies of its cleanup activities, especially for sites that will have residual contamination when active cleanup is complete. This report is the summary of two workshops convened in October 2013 and January 2014 on best practices for risk-informed remedy selection, closure, and post-closure control of radioactive and chemically contaminated sites that present significant difficulty for remediation to unrestricted release. The workshop series aimed to explore best practices that promote effective, risk-informed decision making and future opportunities to improve remediation approaches and practices.In the Workshop #1 section of Best Practices for Risk-Informed Decision Making Regarding Contaminated Sites, the report examines holistic approaches for remediating sites with multiple contaminant sources and post-closure uses, and approaches for incorporating a sustainability framework into decision making regarding site remediation, closure, and post-closure control. In Workshop #2, the report focuses on post-closure controls, assessment of long-term performance of site remedies, and best practices for risk-based remediation decisions.