본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기
국회도서관 홈으로 정보검색 소장정보 검색

결과 내 검색

동의어 포함

목차보기

Title page 1

Contents 3

Highlights 2

Letter 5

Background 8

EM Mission, Structure, and Cleanup Sites 8

DOE Membership in International Organizations 9

Nuclear Waste Cleanup Efforts in Selected Countries 10

Several Countries Have Taken Actions That Accelerated Cleanup, Reduced Risks, and Resulted in Cost Savings 14

Two Countries Shifted Their Approaches to Focus on Directing Limited Resources to the Highest Risks 14

Four Countries Use Comprehensive National Inventories to Inform Nuclear Waste Management Efforts 24

Full-Scale Test Facilities Helped France and the UK Save Money and Minimize Disruptions to Their Cleanup Efforts 28

EM Is Missing Opportunities to Potentially Reduce Risks and Costs and Accelerate Cleanup 31

EM Uses Limited Formal and Informal Mechanisms to Engage with Some Countries 31

We and Others Have Highlighted Challenges EM Faces with Its Cleanup Mission That Other Countries Also Face 35

EM Is Missing Opportunities to Identify Potential Alternative Ways to Reduce Risks and Costs and Accelerate Cleanup 38

Conclusions 42

Recommendation for Executive Action 43

Agency Comments 43

Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology 46

Appendix II: Comments from the Department of Energy 50

Appendix III: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments 52

Tables 3

Table 1. International Atomic Energy Agency Categories of Radioactive Waste 11

Figures 3

Figure 1. Summary of the United Kingdom Nuclear Decommissioning Authority's (NDA) Approach to the Prioritization of Risk 15

Figure 2. The United Kingdom's (UK) Waste Hierarchy Used for the Management of Nuclear Waste 17

Figure 3. Nuclear Waste Being Transported through a Community in the United Kingdom (UK) for Recycling Instead of Disposal 18

Figure 4. Full-Scale In-Canister Test Facility at France's Marcoule Site 29

Figure 5. United Kingdom National Nuclear Laboratory's Vitrification Test Facility 30