GAO Study on Radioactive Waste Management Scenarios

1. GAO Study on Radioactive Waste Management Scenarios Ric Cheston US Government Accountability Office (GAO) chestonr@gao.gov

2. Presentation Outline • Background on GAO • Previous GAO work related to Yucca Mountain and High Level Waste (HLW)/Spent Nuclear Fuel (SNF) • GAO’s ongoing study of radioactive waste management scenarios (scope and methodology)

3. GAO • An independent, nonpartisan agency who works for Congress • Work is done at the request of congressional committees or subcommittees, mandated by law, or undertaken under the authority of the Comptroller General • Advises Congress and executive agencies about ways to make government more efficient, effective, ethical, equitable and responsive

4. GAO Work on Yucca Mountain and SNF/HLW • Have been reporting on Yucca Mountain issues since the 1980’s • Selected recent reports: • GAO-07-1010 - Yucca Mountain: DOE Has Improved Its Quality Assurance Program, but Whether Its Application for a NRC License Will Be High Quality Is Unclear • GAO-06-313 - Yucca Mountain: Quality Assurance at DOE’s Planned Nuclear Waste Repository Needs Increased Management Action

5. GAO Work on Yucca Mountain and SNF/HLW • Additional Relevant Reports: • GAO-03-426 – Spent Nuclear Fuel: Options Exist to Further Enhance Security • GAO-02-191 – Nuclear Waste: Technical, Schedule, and Cost Uncertainties of the Yucca Mountain Repository Project • GAO reports are available at www.gao.gov

6. Background • In 1987, Congress designated Yucca Mountain as the nation’s sole candidate for a permanent high-level nuclear waste repository through NWPA amendment • Yucca Mountain was originally to open in 1998, but has been delayed until at least 2020 (if license application is approved and the project is adequately funded) • Waste currently resides in spent fuel pools and dry cask storage at nuclear plants and at DOE sites across the country • Several nuclear utilities have sued DOE for not taking custody of SNF as scheduled • Current law provides no alternative repository site to Yucca Mountain

7. Background • NWPA caps Yucca Mountain at 70,000 MT • In late 2008, DOE reported: • About 10 %, or 7,000 MT will be DOE/defense waste • DOE/defense waste currently ~13,000 MT • Commercial SNF will exceed 63,000 MT by 2010 and reaching ~130,000 MT by 2055 • DOE recommended that Congress lift the 70,000 MT cap on Yucca Mountain and reported that if not lifted, the nation will need a 2nd repository

8. Objectives • To the extent reliable data are available, provide information on the objectives and costs of: • the Yucca Mountain Repository, • storing radioactive waste at centralized interim storage facilities, then geologic disposal • storing radioactive waste on-site at nuclear power plants and DOE facilities, then geologic disposal • Provide information on challenges and likely sources of funding associated with each scenario

9. Overview of Methodology • Interview experts from DOE and other government agencies, industry, academia, and independent organizations to: • Obtain information on the objectives and challenges associated with each scenario • Gather initial assumptions and high-level cost data associated with the scenarios

10. Methodology • Develop preliminary methodology and obtain feedback from the NAS and NWTRB • Collect and analyze data on objectives and challenges • Identify and collect cost data from short list of cost experts • Develop cost projections, using economic models and Monte Carlo risk analysis

11. Methodology • Characterize the preliminary scenarios for objectives, challenges, and generic costs • Develop a “snowballed” list of experts • Solicit feedback from experts on preliminary scenarios and revise scenarios accordingly • Industry • Government • Academia • Special Interest Nearly 70 responses

12. Methodology • Team deciding how to address DOE/defense waste • Likely will report DOE/EM data separately rather than incorporate into economic models

13. Preliminary Scenarios • Yucca Mountain: • Utilize DOE’s assumptions and cost data • Scale DOE estimates to two waste volumes: 70,000 MT and 153,000 MT • Analyze impacts of license application delays

14. Preliminary Scenarios • Centralized Interim Storage and Disposal: • Construction and operation of two dry-cask, centralized interim storage facilities • Transport SNF and HLW from commercial reactor sites and DOE sites • Interim storage for approximately 100 years and then disposal in a geologic repository • Analyze two waste volumes: 70,000 MT and 153,000 MT

15. Preliminary Scenarios • Continued On-site Storage: • Long-term storage of SNF and HLW at commercial reactor and DOE sites • Dry-cask storage systems • Periodic repackaging • Analyze two waste volumes: 70,000 MT and 153,000 MT

16. Preliminary Scenarios • Difficult to quantify cost categories that will likely be discussed qualitatively: • Reprocessing • SNF from new reactors • License renewal costs • State and local taxes, fees, and penalties • Cost of lawsuits related to the Standard Contract

17. Next Steps • Final round of informal feedback on draft • Obtain formal comment from DOE on draft report • Issue report on the objectives, challenges, and costs associated with the three scenarios

18. GAO Study on Radioactive Waste Management Scenarios Questions?