The Reactor and Fuel Cycle Technology Subcommittee was formed to respond to the charge—set forth in the charter of the Blue Ribbon Commission—to evaluate existing fuel cycle technologies and R&D programs in terms of multiple criteria.

This “Technical Evaluation Report on the Content of the U.S. Department of Energy’s Yucca Mountain License Application; Postclosure Volume: Repository Safety After Permanent Closure” (TER Postclosure Volume) presents information on the NRC staff’s review of DOE’s Safety Analysis Report (SAR), provided on June 3, 2008, as updated by DOE on February 19, 2009. The NRC staff also reviewed information DOE provided in response to NRC staff’s requests for additional information and other information that DOE provided related to the SAR.

To establish a new organization to manage nuclear waste, provide a consensual process for siting nuclear waste facilities, ensure adequate funding for managing nuclear waste, and for other purposes.

After more than 20 years of commercial nuclear power, the Federal Government has yet to develop a broadly supported policy for fulfilling its legal responsibility for the final isolation of high-level radioactive waste. OTA's study concludes that until such a policy is adopted in law, there is a substantial risk that the false starts, shifts of policy, and fluctuating support that have plagued the final isolation program in the past will continue.

In the November 1989 Report to Congress on Reassessment of the Civilian
Radioactive Waste Management Program (DOE/RW-0247), the Secretary of Energy
announced an initiative for developing a monitored retrievable storage (MRS) facility
that is to start spent-fuel acceptance in 1998. This facility, which will be licensed by
the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), will receive spent fuel from
commercial nuclear power plants and provide a limited amount of storage for this

The success of the Civilian Radioactive Waste Management Program of the U.S.
Department of Energy (DOE) is critical to U.S. ability to manage and dispose of
nuclear waste safely--and to the reestablishment of confidence in the nuclear energy
option in the United States. The program must conform with all applicable standards
and, in fact, set the example for a national policy on the safe disposal of radioactive
waste.
The Secretary of Energy has recently completed an extensive review of the

By the end of this century, the United States plans to begin operating the first geologic repository for the permanent disposal of commercial spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive Waste. Public Law 97-425, the Nuclear waste Policy Act of 1982 (the Act), specifies the process for selecting a repository site, and constructing, operating, closing, and decommissioning the repository.

Dear Mr. President:
At your direction, the Secretary of Energy established the Blue Ribbon Commission on
America’s Nuclear Future to review policies for managing the back end of the nuclear
fuel cycle and recommend a new strategy. We are pleased to be serving as Co‐
Chairmen of the Commission, and we are writing to you to highlight an important action
we strongly believe should be reflected in your Fiscal Year 2013 baseline budget
projections.
In our draft report to the Secretary, issued in July of this year, the Commission

The Disposal Subcommittee of the Blue Ribbon Commission on America’s Nuclear Future (BRC) addressed a wide-ranging set of issues, all bearing directly on the central question: “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?”

The purpose of this calculation is to simulate the processing of an incoming waste stream into waste packages, simulating the required aging as applicable, and the emplacement of the waste packages into the Yucca Mountain repository.

The search for sites for radioactive waste management (RWM) facilities attracts attention from implementers, government bodies, local communities, and the public at large. Facility siting processes, in general, tend to be marred by conflicts, disagreements, and delays.

An Account of the Programs of Federal Agencies and Events That Have Led to the Selection of a Potential Site for a Geologic Repository for High-Level Radioactive Waste

How to dispose of highly radioactive wastes from commercial nuclear power plants is a question that has remained unresolved in the face rapidly changing technological, economic, and political requirements. In the three decades following WWII, two federal agencies -- the Atomic Energy Commission and the Energy Research and Development Administration -- tried unsuccessfully to develop a satisfactory plan for managing high level wastes.

The effective termination of the Yucca Mountain program by the U.S. Administration in 2009
has further delayed the construction and operation of a permanent disposal facility for used fuel
and high level radioactive waste (HLW) in the United States. In concert with this decision, the
President directed the Energy Secretary to establish the Blue Ribbon Commission on America’s
Nuclear Future to review and provide recommendations on options for managing used fuel and

The success of the Civilian Radioactive Waste Management Program of the U.S.
Department of Energy (DOE) is critical to U.S. ability to manage and dispose of
nuclear waste safely--and to the reestablishment of confidence in the nuclear energy
option in the United States. The program must conform with all applicable standards
and, in fact, set the example for a national policy on the safe disposal of radioactive
waste.
The Secretary of Energy has recently completed an extensive review of the

In June 2008, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) submitted a license application to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) for the construction of a geologic repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, for the disposal of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste. The license application was accepted for formal NRC review in September 2008. Throughout the more than 20-year history of the Yucca Mountain project, EPRI has performed independent assessments of key technical and scientific issues to facilitate an understanding of overall repository performance.

This report presents results from a parametric study of equilibrium fuel cycle costs for a closed fuel cycle with multi-recycling of plutonium in fast reactors (FRs) compared to an open, once-through fuel cycle using PWRs. The study examines the impact on fuel cycle costs from changes in the unit costs of uranium, advanced PUREX reprocessing of discharged uranium dioxide (UO2) fuel and fast-reactor mixed-oxide (FR-MOX) fuel, and FR-MOX fuel fabrication.

Since 1989, EPRI has been conducting independent assessments of the proposed deep geologic repository for the disposal of spent nuclear fuel (SNF) and high level radioactive waste (HLW) at Yucca Mountain, Nevada. EPRI pioneered application of the total system performance assessment (TSPA) approach for evaluating performance of geologic repository systems on a probabilistic basis. Along the way, EPRI developed the Integrated Multiple Assumptions and Release Code (IMARC) as its primary analytical tool for TSPA-based evaluations.

Since 1989, EPRI has been conducting independent assessments of the proposed deep geologic repository for the disposal of spent nuclear fuel and high level radioactive waste at Yucca Mountain, Nevada. EPRI pioneered application of the total system performance assessment (TSPA) approach for evaluating performance of geologic repository systems on a probabilistic basis. Along the way, EPRI developed the Integrated Multiple Assumptions and Release Code (IMARC) as its primary analytical tool for TSPA-based evaluations.

Within the context of long-term waste management and sustainable nuclear fuel supply, there continue to be discussions regarding whether the United States should consider recycling of light-water reactor (LWR) spent nuclear fuel (SNF) for the current fleet of U.S. LWRs. This report presents a parametric study of equilibrium fuel cycle costs for an open fuel cycle without plutonium recycling (once-through) and with plutonium recycling (single-recycling using mixed-oxide, or MOX, fuel), assuming an all-pressurized water reactor (PWR) fleet.