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 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 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 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

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

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

This report provides an evaluation of the cost implications of incorporating a consolidated interim storage facility (ISF) into the waste management system (WMS). Specifically, the impacts of the timing of opening an ISF relative to opening a repository were analyzed to understand the potential effects on total system costs.

The Centralized Interim Storage Facility (CISF) is designed as a temporary, above-ground away-from-reactor spent fuel storage installation for up to 40,000 metric tons of uranium (MTU). The design is non-site-specific but incorporates conservative environmental and design factors (e.g., 360 mph tornado and 0.75 g seismic loading) intended to be capable of bounding subsequent site-specific factors. Spent fuel is received in dual-purpose canister systems and/or casks already approved for transportation and storage by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).

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 disposal facilities are established.

In the 1990s the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) completed a number of system analyses investigating consolidated interim storage as a part of the waste management solution. These analyses are “dated” and do not reflect the present situation regarding at-reactor used nuclear fuel (UNF) management, alternatives for away from reactor management of used nuclear fuel, and alternatives for the ultimate disposal of UNF.

"Nuclear power has long been controversial; consequently, the debate about its reemergence requires a fresh assessment of the facts about the technology, its economics and regulatory oversight, and the risks and benefits of its expansion. In the past year, the Keystone Center assembled a group of 27 individuals (see the Endorsement page for a list of Participants) with extensive experience and unique perspectives to develop a joint understanding of the “facts” and for an objective interpretation of the most credible information in areas where uncertainty persists.

In July, 2014, the Electric Power Research Institute and industry partners sampled dust on the surface of an unused canister that had been stored in an overpack at the Hope Creek Nuclear Generating Station for approximately one year. The foreign material exclusion (FME) cover that had been on the top of the canister during storage, and a second recently-removed FME cover, were also sampled. This report summarizes the results of analyses of dust samples collected from the unused Hope Creek canister and the FME covers.

Potentially corrosive environments may form on the surface of spent nuclear fuel dry storage canisters by deliquescence of deposited dusts. To assess this, samples of dust were collected from in-service dry storage canisters at two near-marine sites, the Hope Creek and Diablo Canyon storage installations, and have been characterized with respect to mineralogy, chemistry, and texture. At both sites, terrestrially-derived silicate minerals, including quartz, feldspars, micas, and clays, comprise the largest fraction of the dust.

This report evaluates how the economic environment (i.e., discount rate, inflation rate, escalation rate) can impact previously estimated differences in lifecycle costs between an integrated waste management system with an interim storage facility (ISF) and a similar system without an ISF. The costs analyzed in this report are based on the document entitled Cost Implications of an Interim Storage Facility in the Waste Management System, a systems study comparing the “constant dollar” future lifecycle costs of spent nuclear fuel (SNF) management system scenarios.