This report accompanies the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982. Only page 44 is included in this PDF.

"This study analyzes what would be required to retain nuclear power as a significant option for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and meeting growing needs for electricity supply. Our analysis is guided by a global growth scenario that would expand current worldwide nuclear generating capacity almost threefold, to 1000 billion watts, by the year 2050. Such a deployment would avoid 1.8 billion tonnes of carbon emissions annually from coal plants, about 25% of the increment in carbon emissions otherwise expected in a business-as-usual scenario.

"In 2003 MIT published the interdisciplinary study The Future of Nuclear Power. The underlying motivation was that nuclear energy, which today provides about 70% of the “zero”-carbon electricity in the U.S., is an important option for the market place in a low-carbon world. Since that report, major changes in the U.S. and the world have taken place as described in our 2009 Update of the 2003 Future of Nuclear Power Report. Concerns about climate change have risen: many countries have adopted restrictions on greenhouse gas emissions to the atmosphere, and the U.S.

"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.

This document contains policy recommendations related to energy developed by the National Commission on Energy Policy, a project of the Bipartisan Policy Center, a Washington DC based think tank. Topics covered include Fossil Fuel resource security, climate change, energy efficiency, nuclear energy and renewables.

This document is the result of a three year study performed by a think tank group, the National Commission on Energy Policy. It provides energy policy recommendations that include recommendations regarding nuclear power.

This is a section of the Federal Budget for 2015.

From the Introduction: "Our strategy for development of the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management (OCRWM) transportation program is to collaborate with our stakeholders.

In July, 2016, the Electric Power Research Institute and industry partners performed a field test at the Maine Yankee Nuclear Site, located near Wiscasset, Maine. The primary goal of the field test was to evaluate the use of robots in surveying the surface of an in-service interim storage canister within an overpack; however, as part of the demonstration, dust and soluble salt samples were collected from horizontal surfaces within the interim storage system.

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.

The Strategy for the Management and Disposal of Used Nuclear Fuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste is a framework for moving toward a sustainable program to deploy an integrated system capable of transporting, storing, and disposing of used nuclear fuel1 and high-level radioactive waste from civilian nuclear power generation, defense, national security and other activities.

This report documents work performed under the Spent Fuel and Waste Disposition for the US Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Nuclear Energy (NE) Spent Fuel and Waste Science and Technology program. This work was performed to fulfill the Level 2 Milestone M2SF-17OR010201021, “Documentation of Non-destructive Tests on Sister Pins,” within work package SF-17OR01020102.

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.

The question of whether or not consolidated interim storage of commercial spent nuclear fuel (SNF) should be part of the federal waste management system as an intermediate step before permanent disposal has been debated for more than four decades. This paper summarizes an evaluation of the cost implications of incorporating a consolidated interim storage facility (ISF) into the waste management system (WMS). In this study, the order-of-magnitude estimates of total system costs were calculated and tabulated.

10 CFR 63.2 defines the geologic repository operations area (GROA) at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, as “a high-level radioactive waste facility that is part of a geologic repository, including both surface and subsurface areas, where waste handling activities are conducted.” A general description of the GROA and its location, the general nature of the activities to be performed at the GROA, and the basis for the exercise of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) licensing authority over a geologic repository are presented in Sections 1.1, 1.2, and 1.3, respectively.

This report, commissioned by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), provides a comprehensive set of cost data supporting a cost analysis for the relative economic comparison of options for use in the Advanced Fuel Cycle Initiative (AFCI) Program. The report describes the AFCI cost basis development process, reference information on AFCI cost modules, a procedure for estimating fuel cycle costs, economic evaluation guidelines, and a discussion on the integration of cost data into economic computer models.

The amount of spent fuel stored on-site at commercial nuclear reactors will continue to accumulate—increasing by about 2,000 metric tons per year and likely more than doubling to about 140,000 metric tons—before it can be moved off-site, because storage or disposal facilities may take decades to develop. In examining centralized storage or permanent disposal options, GAO found that new facilities may take from 15 to 40 years before they are ready to begin accepting spent fuel. Once an off-site facility is available, it will take several more decades to ship spent fuel to that facility.

This Plan outlines the Department of Energy’s (DOE) 2009 strategy and planning for developing and implementing the transportation system required to transport spent nuclear fuel (SNF) and high-level radioactive waste (HLW) from where the material is generated or stored to the proposed repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada. As such, it is a historical document that reflected the DOE's thinking and/or approach in 2009.

The Law of 30 December 1991 [1] confers to Andra the mission of assessing the feasibility of a repository of high-level and long-lived (HLLL) waste in a deep geological formation.

The U.S. Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board (Board) is tasked by the amendments to the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 to independently evaluate U. S. Department of Energy (DOE) technical activities for managing and disposing of used nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste. This report was prepared to inform DOE and Congress about the current state of the technical basis for extended dry storage1 of used fuel and its transportation following storage.

This document is the main report from the safety assessment project SR-Can. The SR-Can project is a preparatory stage for the SR-Site assessment, the report that will be used in support of SKB’s application for a final repository. The purposes of the safety assessment SR-Can are the following:
1. To make a first assessment of the safety of potential KBS-3 repositories at Forsmark and Laxemar to dispose of canisters as specified in the application for the encapsulation plant.