This report evaluates the relative economics of alternative fuel cycles compared to the current
U.S. once-through fuel cycle, including concepts under consideration by the U.S. Department of
Energy’s (DOE) Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP). EPRI utilized a model developed
by the Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA), Steady-state analysis Model for Advanced Fuel Cycle
Schemes (SMAFS), to evaluate fuel cycle alternatives. The report also evaluates potential
financing options for a fuel recycling facility. Please note that this report contains preliminary

This report is in response to the directive of the House Appropriations Subcommittee for Energy and Water
Development that the Department of Energy (DOE) update a 1984 report of alternative means of financing and
managing (AMFM) the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management (OCRWM) in the DOE. The
President’s FY 2002 budget also stated: “DOE will submit to Congress an updated report regarding alternative
approaches to finance and manage the program by June 30, 2001[.] DOE will identify in this report models of

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

o Request: The current balance of the Nuclear Waste Fund (NWF).
o Response: The balance of the Nuclear Waste Fund $24.56 billion as of November 2010. (Source: U.S. DOE OCRWM Annual Financial Report for Years Ended September 30, 2010 and 2009)
o Request: The NWF fee projections of future fee receipts.

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 key challenge of this National Academy of Public Administration project is captured in the subtitle of this report, Balancing Risks, Costs, and Benefits Fairly Across Generations.

The objective of this safety requirements publication is to set down the protection objectives and criteria for geological disposal and to establish the requirements that must be met to ensure the safety of this disposal option, consistent with the established principles of safety for radioactive waste management.

The Blue Ribbon Commission on America’s Nuclear Future (BRC) asked us to study whether
occupational safety and health conditions in today's U.S. nuclear industry are reasonably safe,
and if those conditions have improved since the Three Mile Island event in 1979. The BRC also
asked us to look to the future, to try to anticipate worker safety and health risks that should be
addressed by the industry, its government regulators and private watchdogs.
Over the eight weeks allotted, we performed a limited review of the literature and spoke with

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.

The AMFM Panel has submitted its report "Managing Nuclear
Waste - A Better Idea" to the Secretary. The report contains six
general conclusions and one general recommendation in Chapter
XII. In addition, Chapter X contains 14 specific enhancements
("Key Components of Any Waste Management Structure") that are
recommended for implementation by the Office of Civilian Radioactive
Waste Management (OCRWM) or any alternative organization.
This paper lists and discusses the 6 general conclusions, the