|
|
| Fig. 1: San Onofre Spent Fuel Pool. (Source: Wikimedia Commons) |
Since the 1950s, the US fleet of nuclear power plants has generated over 90,000 metric tons of waste called Spent Nuclear Fuel (SNF), with over 97% being stored directly onsite of the commercial reactors that produced it. [1,2] SNF waste sits adjacent to its point of creation due to the absence of a permanent geologic repository, with the Department of Energy (DOE) having no current plans to site one. The DOE is required to manage and dispose of High-Level Waste such as SNF, and because they have not permanently disposed of any amount, they partially breach contracts with the generators of the waste and must pay them each year that they continue holding onto it. As of September 30, 2023, the DOE has paid out approximately $10.6 billion in settlements to contract holders via the Judgment Fund. [3] Federal liability for SNF waste penalty payments is a key driver for the DOE's current Consolidated Interim Storage waste management plan.
High-Level Waste (HLW) is characterized as being thermally hot and highly radioactive, and thus requiring remote handling and shielding. HLW is the overarching classification used for waste yielded from a nuclear power plant. The more specific term for nuclear power plant waste is Spent Nuclear Fuel (SNF), which makes up the vast majority of HLW. [4] The growing amount of HLW is stored across more than 70 reactor sites in 35 US states, as well as at many research, naval, and test reactor locations. [1,2]
 |
| Fig. 2: Sandia National Laboratories Spent Nuclear Fuel Dry Casks. (Source: Wikimedia Commons) |
Nuclear fuel rods contain many hundred ceramic pellets of U-235 that are used to create electricity via fission in a nuclear power plant. Aside from electricity, when U-235 undergoes fission, it yields both lighter and heavier elements. Lighter fission products, like Cs-137 and Sr-90, are highly radioactive, have half-lives of around 30 years, and produce most of the resulting heat. In contrast, heavier elements such as Pu-239 are also formed, with a significantly longer half-life of 24,000 years. [4] When used fuel rods are removed from the reactor, they are placed in Spent Fuel Pools. These pools (shown in Fig. 1) are constructed with several feet of reinforced concrete with steel liners designed to contain the waste, shield against intense radiation, and allow the rods to cool down. Pool storage typically takes five to ten years, yet one-year durations have been approved, with storage pools often being filling to their operational capacity. [4,5] After pool storage, SNF is transferred into Dry Casks, which are stainless steel canisters (shown in Fig. 2), that are sometimes encased in concrete. Both methods are currently employed, with there being about one percent more HLW stored in casks than in pools using discharged assembly data. [2]
Yucca Mountain is the only permanent repository ever proposed to house SNF in the US. The DOE withdrew its license for the site in 2010 primarily due to lacking political acceptance by the people of Nevada. The DOE yielded that the site was not "workable," although moderate concern for volcanic and seismic activity is apparent in the Final Environmental Impact Statement. [6,7] The leading contemporary strategy of the DOE is to pursue a Consolidated Interim Storage Facility (CISF) (shown in Fig. 3), while employing a Consent-Based Siting Process to "negotiate an agreement with a host community" to temporarily house SNF waste while a permanent repository is agreed upon. [1] Although the DOE claims to prioritize consent and environmental justice in their process, licensed CISF plans have faced opposition from local communities in New Mexico and Texas. These plans were ultimately halted by New Mexico Senate Bill 53, and a ruling by the US Court of Appeals 5th Circuit which states that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission lacks the authority to issue CISF licenses. [8,9] The US Supreme Court has agreed to review the 5th Circuit CISF case consolidating (no pun intended) both states' disputes.
 |
| Fig. 3: Illustration of the Holtec Consolidated Interim Storage Facility. (Courtesy of the NRC) |
The Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 (NWPA) defines a comprehensive framework for managing nuclear waste in the United States, setting key guidelines that are historically important to understand the current predicament of the federal government. First, it assigned the DOE responsibility for managing HLW and SNF, as well as for planning and implementing a permanent disposal facility. Second, it established the Nuclear Waste Fund, which is "composed of payments made by the generators and owners of such waste and spent fuel, that will ensure that the costs of carrying out activities relating to the disposal of such waste and spent fuel will be borne by the persons responsible for generating such waste and spent fuel." [10] Third, it authorized the US Secretary of Energy to enter into contracts with generators and title owners of domestic HLW for payment into the Nuclear Waste Fund in exchange for the government beginning to dispose of said waste by January 31, 1988. [3,11] The Nuclear Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1987 designated Yucca Mountain as the sole repository for consideration, with all other candidate sites to be phased out. [10]
The US has no viable alternative to the abandoned Yucca Mountain repository; this fact is as true today as it was in 2013 when it was used to freeze the Nuclear Waste Fund via a ruling by the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. The ruling states that the Secretary of Energy must halt fee collection until a plan for a permanent facility as outlined in the NWPA is put in place. [12] The waste fund has a current balance of approximately $47.7 billion. [3]
 |
| Fig. 4: DOE Estimated Liability Costs for Storing Commercial Spent Nuclear Fuel. [11] (Image source: B. A. Kendall) |
The DOE has not begun disposing of any amount of SNF to date, thus they are in violation of the NWPA. Entities that have paid into the Nuclear Waste Fund find the US Federal Government in partial breach of contract and therefore liable for costs that result from the delay. As of September 30, 2023, the Judgment Fund, a federal fund that is used by internal agencies to pay for court fees and settlements, has paid approximately $10.6 billion in settlements and judgments to contract holders. [3] This paid amount is projected to increase each year (shown in Fig. 4) which explains recommendations to congress for CISF implementation. [11] This monetary increase is due to the rate of US SNF generation being more than 2,200 metric tons of heavy metal per year. [5]
US federal entities are not only failing to collect fees from SNF generators to facilitate disposal, but are also paying them significant sums to store the HLW due to the lack of a permanent geologic repository. Although CISF's might ease some financial liability, recent setbacks in Texas and New Mexico emphasize that it offers only a partial fix. Moving SNF twice, especially if a permanent repository is eventually sited far from a CISF, adds substantial logistical, environmental, and financial burdens, raising concerns regarding the viability of this interim approach.
The role of nuclear energy in the US remains uncertain as decarbonization efforts gain momentum. Historic and contemporary environmental justice issues overshadow the nuclear industry, which must be centered in decision making and research processes going forward. [13] High costs, lengthy timelines, and inherent nuclear proliferation risks each challenge nuclear power's place in a fully decarbonized energy future. [14] As the climate crisis and clean energy transition accelerate, the federal government risks compromising public safety and increasing financial burdens by lacking a clear path forward.
© Bryan A. Kendall. The author warrants that the work is the author's own and that Stanford University provided no input other than typesetting and referencing guidelines. The author grants permission to copy, distribute and display this work in unaltered form, with attribution to the author, for noncommercial purposes only. All other rights, including commercial rights, are reserved to the author.
[1] "Consent-Based Siting Process for Federal Consolidated Interim Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel," U.S. Department of Energy, April 2023.
[2] S. Peters, J. T. Carter, and K. Banerjee, "Spent Nuclear Fuel and Reprocessing Waste Inventory: Spent Fuel and Waste Disposition," Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, PNNL-33938, November 2022.
[3] "Agency Financial Report, Fiscal Year 2003,: U.S. Department of Energy, DOE/CF-0201, 2023.
[4] "Backgrounder: Radioactive Waste," U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, January 2024.
[5] G. Freeze et al., "Integration of the Back End of the Nuclear Fuel Cycle," Sandia National Laboratories, SAND2021-10444, August 2021.
[6] "Commercial Nuclear Waste: Effects of a Termination of the Yucca Mountain Repository Program and Lessons Learned," U.S. Government Accountability Office, GAO-11-229, April 2011.
[7] "Final Environmental Impact Statement for a Geologic Repository for the Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste at Yucca Mountain, Nye County, Nevada," U.S. Department of Energy, DOE/EIS-0250, February 2002.
[8] "5th Circuit Ruling Impacts Nuclear Waste Storage Facility," Lea County Tribune, 17 Nov 23.
[9] "State of Texas v. Nuclear Regulatory Commission," 95 F.4th 935 (5th Cir. 2013).
[10] "Nuclear Waste Policy Act, as Amended, With Appropriations Acts Appended," U.S. Department of Energy, March 2004.
[11] "Commercial Spent Nuclear Fuel: Congressional Action Needed to Break Impasse and Develop a Permanent Disposal Solution," U.S. Government Accountability Office, GAO-21-603, September 2021.
[12] "National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners v. U.S. Department of Energy," 736 F.3d 517 (D.C. Cir. 2013).
[13] B. A. Kendall and B. K. Arkhurst, "Applying Early-Stage Energy Justice Metrics to Nuclear Engineering," ASME ICEM2020-10901, International Conference on Environmental Remediation and Radioactive Waste Management, 3 Oct 23.
[14] M. Z. Jacobson, 100% Clean, Renewable Energy and Storage For Everything (Cambridge University Press, 2020).
.jpg){kind=link}