Recognizing that Idaho has a major strategic and economic interest in maintaining INL’s leadership role and in helping
the nuclear energy industry successfully meet these broader challenges, Idaho governor C.L. “Butch” Otter established
the Leadership in Nuclear Energy or “LINE” Commission in February 2012.

The Governor recognized that recent national developments in the nuclear energy sector will cause the State of Idaho to
face important choices in the future and that he needed to understand the best options available.

Approximately 54,000 tons of spent nuclear fuel are stored at operating nuclear power plants and several decommissioned power plants throughout the country. Spent fuel storage at these sites was never intended to be permanent. The current Federal plan is to place the fuel in a repository for permanent disposal in Nevada at Yucca Mountain.

The objective of this siting study work is to support DOE in evaluating integrated advanced nuclear plant and ISFSI deployment options in the future. This study looks at several nuclear power plant growth scenarios that consider the locations of existing and planned commercial nuclear power plants integrated with the establishment of consolidated interim spent fuel storage installations (ISFSIs).

The issue of interim storage of used (spent)1 fuel is dependent on a number of key factors, some
of which are not known at this time but are the subject of this study. The first is whether or not
the Yucca Mountain Project continues or is cancelled such that it may be able to receive spent
fuel from existing and decommissioned nuclear power stations. The second is whether the United
States will pursue a policy of reprocessing and recycling nuclear fuel. The reprocessing and

This report presents the results of a critical review of the technological challenges to the growth of nuclear energy, emerging advanced technologies that would have to be deployed, and fuel cycle strategies that could conceivably involve interim storage, plutonium recycling in thermal and fast reactors, reprocessed uranium recycling, and transmutation of minor actinide elements and fission products before eventual disposal of residual wastes.

As nuclear power plants began to run out of storage capacity in spent nuclear fuel (SNF) storage pools, many nuclear operating companies added higher density pool storage racks to increase pool capacity. Most nuclear power plant storage pools have been re-racked one or more times. As many spent fuel storage pools were re-racked to the maximum extent possible, nuclear operating companies began to employ interim dry storage technologies to store SNF in certified casks and canister-based systems outside of the storage pool in independent spent fuel storage installations (ISFSIs).

The United States makes decisions regarding the domestic uses of nuclear energy and the nuclear fuel cycle primarily based economic considerations, domestic political constraints, and environmental impact concerns. Such factors influence U.S. foreign policy decisions as well, but foreign policy decisions are often more strongly determined by national security considerations, including concerns about nuclear weapons proliferation and nuclear terrorism.

To advance nuclear energy to meet future energy needs, ten countries—Argentina, Brazil, Canada, France, Japan, the Republic of Korea, the Republic of South Africa, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, and the United States—have agreed on a framework for international cooperation in research for a future generation of nuclear energy systems, known as Generation IV. The figure below gives an overview of the generations of nuclear energy systems. The first generation was advanced in the 1950s and 60s in the early prototype reactors.

The Department of Energy (DOE) is studying a site at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, for a
permanent underground repository for highly radioactive spent fuel from nuclear reactors,
but delays have pushed back the facility’s opening date to 2010 at the earliest. In the
meantime, spent fuel is accumulating at U.S. nuclear plant sites at the rate of about 2,000
metric tons per year. Major options for managing those growing quantities of nuclear spent
fuel include continued storage at reactors, construction of a DOE interim storage site near

The Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, as amended, established a statutory basis
for managing the nation’s civilian (or commercially produced) spent nuclear
fuel. The law established a process for siting, developing, licensing, and constructing
an underground repository for the permanent disposal of that waste.
Utilities were given the primary responsibility for storing spent fuel until it is
accepted by the Department of Energy (DOE) for disposal at a repository —
originally expected to begin operating in 1998. Since then, however, the repository

Approximately 54,000 tons of spent nuclear fuel are stored at operating nuclear power plants and several decommissioned power plants throughout the country. Spent fuel storage at these sites was never intended to be permanent. The current Federal plan is to place the fuel in a repository for permanent disposal in Nevada at Yucca Mountain.

The almost limitless energy of the atom was first harnessed in the United States, as scientists proved the basic physics of nuclear fission in a rudimentary reactor built in the floor of a squash court at the University of Chicago in 1942, and then harnessed that proven energy source in the form of atomic weapons used to end World War II. Scientists who accomplished this feat moved quickly after World War II to harness that power for peaceful uses, focusing primarily on electricity generation for industry, commerce, and household use.

The purpose of this U.S. Department of Energy Nuclear Waste Fund Fee Adequacy Assessment
Report (Assessment) is to present an analysis of the adequacy of the fee being paid by nuclear
power utilities for the permanent disposal of their SNF and HLW by the United States
government.
This Assessment consists of six sections: Section 1 provides historical context and a comparison
to previous fee adequacy assessments; Section 2 describes the system, cost, income, and

The purpose of this study is to assist decision makers in evaluating the centralized interim
storage option. We explore the economics of centralized interim storage under a wide variety of
circumstances. We look at how a commitment to move forward with centralized interim storage
today could evolve over time. And, we evaluate the costs of reversing a commitment toward
centralized storage if it turns out that such a decision is later considered a mistake. We have not

This document summarizes DOE’s commercial nuclear energy RD&D program based on a R&D roadmap and on DOE/NE’s budget request for fiscal year 2011. The roadmap is written at a high level and is mostly qualitative in terms of activities, milestones and decisions to be made and does not contain budget information. The fiscal year 2011 budget request contains more specific and detailed information on activities, milestones, decisions, and budgets but only for fiscal year 2011 and the two preceding fiscal years.

The issue of interim storage of used (spent)1 fuel is dependent on a number of key factors, some
of which are not known at this time but are the subject of this study. The first is whether or not
the Yucca Mountain Project continues or is cancelled such that it may be able to receive spent
fuel from existing and decommissioned nuclear power stations. The second is whether the United
States will pursue a policy of reprocessing and recycling nuclear fuel. The reprocessing and

There has been a substantial resurgence of interest in nuclear power in the United States
over the past few years. One consequence has been a rapid growth in the research
budget of DOE’s Office of Nuclear Energy (NE). In light of this growth, the Office of
Management and Budget included within the FY2006 budget request a study by the
National Academy of Sciences to review the NE research programs and recommend
priorities among those programs. The programs to be evaluated were: Nuclear Power

The management of spent nuclear fuel (SNF) and defense high level waste (HLW) is a complex sociotechnical
systems challenge. Coordinated, reliable, and safe performance will be required over very long
periods of time within evolving social and technical contexts. To accomplish these goals, a waste
management system will involve a host of facilities for interim storage and longterm disposal, a
transportation infrastructure, and research and development centers. The complexity of SNF and HLW

About 20,000 metric tons of spent, or used, nuclear
fuel have accumulated since the beginning of commercial
nuclear power prbduction in the United States. At the end
of the currently licensed period of all existing nuclear power
plants and those under construction, the amount of spent
nuclear fuel is expected to total 87,000 metric tons.
Thus far, practically all of the spent nuclear fuel is
stored in water-filled pools at reactor sites. However, space
does not exist in the pools to store all the spent fuel expected

This report discusses the status of the commercial spent nuclear fuel (SNF) inventory in the United States, at both decommissioned and operating commercial nuclear power reactor sites; summarizes the contractual arrangement the government and utilities have under the Standard Contract for Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel and/or High-Level Radioactive Waste (10 CFR Part 961) (Standard Contract), related litigation, and the financial liabilities resulting from the Department’s delay in performance under these contracts; provides a history of interim storage policy as it relates to commercial SN

This paper, prepared to aid the Blue Ribbon Commission on America’s Nuclear Future in its
deliberations, includes a discussion of the issues that would be faced in the siting, permitting and
licensing of storage and disposal facilities for the “back end” of the commercial nuclear fuel
cycle and for the Department of Energy’s (DOE) high–level radioactive waste. It discusses the
authority that could be employed by non–federal levels of government in supporting or opposing