In response to the remand of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (Minnesota v. NRC, 602 F.2d 412 (1979)), and as a continuation of previous proceedings conducted in this area by NRC (44 Fed. Reg. 61,372), the Commission initiated a generic rulemaking proceeding on October 25, 1979.

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

The main question before the Transportation and Storage Subcommittee was whether the United States
should change its approach to storing and transporting spent nuclear fuel (SNF) and high-level
radioactive waste (HLW) while one or more permanent disposal facilities are established.
To answer this question and to develop specific recommendations and options for consideration by the
full Commission, the Subcommittee held multiple meetings and deliberative sessions, visited several

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?”

Since a 1985 decision by President Reagan that a separate permanent repository for disposal of
defense high level waste was not required1, DOE has planned for disposal of all high-level waste
and spent fuel from national defense activities and DOE’s own research activities in a repository
for commercial waste developed under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act (NWPA). The Commission
has heard recommendations from some commenters2 that this decision be revisited, or even

Following the proposals for nuclear fuel assurance of International Atomic Energy
Agency (IAEA) Director General Mohamed El Baradei, former Russian President Vladimir V.
Putin, and U.S. President George W. Bush, joint committees of the Russian Academy of
Sciences (RAS) and the U.S. National Academies (NAS) were formed to address these and other
fuel assurance concepts and their links to nonproliferation goals. The joint committees also
addressed many technology issues relating to the fuel assurance concepts. This report provides

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 purpose of this study is to analyze the costs and risks associated with transporting spent fuel by barge. The barge movements would be made in combination with rail movements to transport spent fuel from plants to a repository. For the purposes of this analysis, three candidate repository sites are analyzed: Yucca Mountain, Nevada, Deaf Smith, Texas, and Hanford, Washington. This report complements a report prepared by Sandia National Laboratories in 1984 that analyzes the costs and risks of transporting spent
fuel by rail and by truck to nine candidate repository sites.

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 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).

To organize its investigation of whether changes are needed in the nation’s current approach to storing and eventually transporting spent nuclear fuel (SNF) and high-level waste (HLW), the Subcommittee began by asking a series of related questions:
• What role should storage play in an integrated U.S. waste management system and strategy in the future?

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

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is responsible for issuing regulations for the
packaging of spent fuel (and other large quantities of radioactive material) for transport that
provide for public health and safety during transport (Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations
(10 CFR) Part 71, “Packaging and Transportation of Radioactive Waste,” dated
January 26, 2004). In September 1977, the NRC published NUREG-0170, “Final Environmental
Statement on the Transportation of Radioactive Material by Air and Other Modes,” which

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.

There has been a resurgence of interest in the possibility of processing the US spent nuclear fuel, instead of burying it in a geologic repository. Accordingly, key topical findings from three relevant EPRI evaluations made in the 1990-1995 timeframe are recapped and updated to accommodate a few developments over the subsequent ten years. Views recently expressed by other US entities are discussed.

The Industry Spent Fuel Storage Handbook (“the Handbook”) addresses the relevant aspects of at-reactor spent (or used) nuclear fuel (SNF) storage in the United States. With the prospect of SNF being stored at reactor sites for the foreseeable future, it is expected that all U.S. nuclear power plants will have to implement at-reactor dry storage by 2025 or shortly thereafter. The Handbook provides a broad overview of recent developments for storing SNF at U.S. reactor sites, focusing primarily on at-reactor dry storage of SNF.

The Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) convened a workshop of over 40 representatives of the nuclear industry, federal government, national laboratories, and suppliers of used-fuel dry-storage systems to discuss the potential issues associated with extended dry storage of used fuel, that is, storage considerably beyond the term of current and recently proposed U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) regulations. The workshop was held November 18-19, 2009, at EPRI's offices in Washington, DC.

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.

The effective termination of the Yucca Mountain program by the U.S. Administration in 2009
has left the U.S. program for management of used fuel and high level radioactive waste (HLW)
in a state of uncertainty. In concert with this major policy reset and in response to the resulting
policy vacuum, the President directed the Energy Secretary to establish the Blue Ribbon
Commission on America’s Nuclear Future (BRC) “…to conduct a comprehensive review of
policies for managing the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle and to provide recommendations for

U.S. efforts to site and construct a deep geologic repository for used fuel and high level
radioactive waste (HLW) proceeded in fits and starts over a three decade period from the late
1950s until 1982, when the U.S. Congress enacted the Nuclear Waste Policy Act (NWPA). This
legislation codified a national approach for developing a deep geologic repository. Amendment
of the NWPA in 1987 resulted in a number of dramatic changes in direction for the U.S.
program, most notably the selection of Yucca Mountain as the only site of the three remaining

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 HLW.