Presented at the NEI Used Fuel Management Conference, St. Petersburg, FL, May 7-9, 2013

This Memorandum analyzes issues related to the Standard Contract between the U.S. Department of Energy (“DOE”) and the “utilities.” Beginning with a discussion of specific provisions of the Standard Contract, this Memorandum then analyzes the status of lawsuits involving the Standard Contract, reviews issues related to on-site storage of spent fuel and HLW, and assesses the prospects for modifying the current waste-disposal regime through Federal legislation or amendments to the Standard Contract.

Confidence in the long-term safety of deep geological disposal, and the ways in which this
confidence can be obtained and communicated, are topics of great importance to the radioactive waste
management community.1
The technical aspects of confidence have been the subject of considerable debate, especially
the concept of model validation. It has, for example, been pointed out that it is impossible to describe
fully the evolution of an open system, such as a repository and its environment, that cannot be

This paper draws on my experience as a reviewer of the scientific programs and performance assessments of the geological repository for transuranic waste at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in New Mexico and the proposed repository for spent nuclear fuel and high-level waste at Yucca Mountain in Nevada. In addition, I have served on numerous committees of the National Research Council that have addressed many aspects of nuclear waste management.

This report presents the findings and conclusions of OTA's analysis of Federal policy
for the management of commercial high-level radioactive waste. It represents a major update
and expansion of the analysis presented to Congress in our summary report, Managing
Commercial High-Level Radioactive Waste, published in April of 1982 during the
debate leading to passage of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 (NWPA). This new
report is intended to contribute to the implementation of NWPA, and in particular to

On the historic evidence, but also for the distinctive qualities of the challenge, nuclear waste siting conflicts are assuredly among the most refractory in the large variety of NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard) facility siting disputes. Since the president brought the Yucca Mountain process to a halt in 2010 (or, more accurately, issued its death certificate), the search for a permanent waste fuel repository is at the starting line again.

Following the proposals for nuclear fuel assurance of International Atomic Energy
Agency (IAEA) Director General Mohamed ElBaradei, 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

This report puts forth a number of options and recommendations for how to engage
stakeholders and other members of the public in the storage and management of spent
nuclear fuel and high level waste in the United States. The options are generated from a
scientific review of existing publications proposing criteria for assessing past efforts to
engage publics and stakeholders in decision-making about risky technologies. A set of
nine principles are derived for evaluating cases of public and stakeholder engagement with

Presented at the NEI Used Fuel Management Conference, St. Petersburg, FL, May 7-9, 2013

In the course of producing electrical power in light water.reactors (LWRs), the uranium
fuel accumulates fission products until the fission process is no longer efficient for power
production. At that point the fuel is removed from the reactor and stored in water basins
to allow radioactivity to partially decay before further disposition. This fuel is referred
to as "spent fuel." Although spent fuel as At is discharged from a reactor is intensely
radioactive, it has been stored safely in moderate quantities for decades. Spent fuel could

Dear Co‐Chairs and Members of the Joint Select Committee: The Blue Ribbon Commission on America’s Nuclear Future was established by the Secretary of Energy at the direction of the President 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 believe should be reflected in your Committee’s baseline budget projections as you craft a bipartisan plan for reducing the national budget deficit.

This study examines concerns raised by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) in its planning for transition from active waste site management and remediation to what the department terms “long-term stewardship.” It examines the scientific, technical, and organizational capabilities and limitations that must be taken into account in planning for the long-term institutional management of the department’s numerous waste sites that are the legacy to this country’s nuclear weapons program. It also identifies characteristics and design criteria for effective longterm institutional management.

Background Medical screening programs at three Departments of Energy (DOE)
nuclear weapons facilities (Hanford Nuclear Reservation, Oak Ridge, and the Savannah
River Site) have included audiometric testing since approximately 1996. This report
summarizes hearing evaluations through March 31, 2003.
Methods Occupational examinations included a medical history, limited physical
examination, and tests for medical effects from specific hazards, including audiometric
testing. Hearing thresholds by frequency for DOE workers were compared to agestandardized

This report presents a formal analysis of the five sites nominated as
suitable for characterization for the first repository; the analysis is based
on the information contained or referenced in the environmental assessments
that accompany the site nominations (DOE, 1986a-e). It is intended to aid in
the site-recommendation decision by providing insights into the comparative
advantages and disadvantages of each site. Because no formal analysis can
account for all the factors important to a decision as complex as recommending

Presented at the NEI Used Fuel Management Conference, St. Petersburg, FL, May 7-9, 2013

The Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP) Program, a United States (U.S.) Department of
Energy (DOE) program, is intended to support a safe, secure, and sustainable expansion of
nuclear energy, both domestically and internationally. Domestically, the GNEP Program would
promote technologies that support economic, sustained
production of nuclear-generated electricity, while
reducing the impacts associated with spent nuclear fuel
disposal and reducing proliferation risks. DOE envisions
changing the U.S. nuclear energy fuel cycle1 from an

Slides - WM2014 Symposia, March 2-6, 2014, Phoenix, AZ

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

Presented at the NEI Used Fuel Management Conference, St. Petersburg, FL, May 7-9, 2013

Presented at the NEI Used Fuel Management Conference, St. Petersburg, FL, May 7-9, 2013

Presented at the NEI Used Fuel Management Conference, St. Petersburg, FL, May 7-9, 2013

Presented at the NEI Used Fuel Management Conference, St. Petersburg, FL, May 7-9, 2013

Presented at the NEI Used Fuel Management Conference, St. Petersburg, FL, May 7-9, 2013

Presented at the NEI Used Fuel Management Conference, St. Petersburg, FL, May 7-9, 2013

Background The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) established medical screening
programs at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation, Oak Ridge Reservation, the Savannah
River Site, and the Amchitka site starting in 1996.Workers participating in these programs
have been followed to determine their vital status and mortality experience through
December 31, 2004.
Methods A cohort of 8,976 former construction workers from Hanford, Savannah River,
Oak Ridge, and Amchitka was followed using the National Death Index through December