Our country faces a mounting challenge when it comes to nuclear energy: the safe, long-term disposal of spent fuel from commercial reactors and leftover waste from defense activity. It's a challenge with a decades-long history.

Consistent with the mandate issued by the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners v. United States Department of Energy, (Nos. 11-1066 and 11-1068; D.C. Cir. 2013), and notwithstanding the absence of the determination required to be made pursuant to the Nuclear Waste Policy
Act of 1982 (NWPA), as amended, 42 U.S.C. 10222(a)(4), I hereby propose, subject to any

GAO Storage Study Request

Letter from the Congress of the United States House of Representatives, Committee on Energy and Commerce.

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.

Guidance concerning regulatory requirements for criticality analysis of new and spent fuel storage at light-water reactor power plants used by the Reactor Systems Branch.

This memo sets forth the Office of Standard Contract Management's current estimate of the US Government's liability in connection with the Government's partial breach of the "standard contracts" that it executed pursuant to the NWPA of 1982. The Office of Standard Contract Management estimates that liability, as of today and based on the analysis and qualifications set forth below, to be $15.4 billion.
...

Dear Secretary Chu:
At the direction of the President, you charged the Blue Ribbon Commission on America’s
Nuclear Future with reviewing policies for managing the back end of the nuclear fuel
cycle and recommending a new plan. We thank you for choosing us to serve as Co-
Chairmen of the Commission and for selecting the talented and dedicated set of
Commissioners with whom we serve.
We have sought to ensure that our review is comprehensive, open and inclusive. The
Commission and its subcommittees have heard from hundreds of individuals and

Dear Representatives Upton and Shimkus,
At the direction of the President, the Secretary of Energy established the Blue Ribbon
Commission on America’s Nuclear Future and charged it with reviewing policies for
managing the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle. We are serving as the Co-Chairmen of
the Commission and have taken note of your recent comments about the Commission’s
work.
Your comments echo those we have heard from several members of Congress and from
people across the country who believe the United States should not abandon the

Dear Co-Chairs Hamilton and Scowcroft:
The Obama Administration believes that nuclear energy has an important role to playas America moves to a clean energy future. One of my goals as Secretary of Energy is to help restart America's nuclear industry, creating thousands of new jobs and new export opportunities for the United States while producing the carbon free energy we need to power America's economy.

At the request of the staff to the Blue Ribbon Commission on America’s Nuclear Future (“BRC”), we have reviewed the following questions:
1. Is there legal authority for DOE or any other entity to undertake to site a repository for “co-mingled” nuclear materials (i.e., civilian and defense spent nuclear fuel (SNF) and high-level radioactive waste (HLW)) at any site other than Yucca Mountain?