Nuclear Waste: An Integrated Disposal Plan Could Help DOE Complete Its Cleanup Mission and Save Billions
Fast Facts
The Department of Energy is responsible for disposing millions of cubic meters of radioactive waste from 15 cleanup sites across the country.
Disposal options vary depending on how the waste was generated and the risks it poses. For example, some facilities can accept low-level radioactive waste, but there may be more waste than these facilities can currently handle. And there are no disposal options for high-level radioactive waste.
We recommended DOE develop a comprehensive plan for waste disposal. Such a plan could save billions in costs and help DOE communicate with regulators who oversee disposal facilities.
Underground at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant
Highlights
What GAO Found
The Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Environmental Management (EM) is responsible for cleaning up and disposing of nuclear waste from 15 federal sites, known as the EM complex. EM primarily manages four types of nuclear waste: low-level radioactive waste (LLW), transuranic waste, high-level radioactive waste, and spent nuclear fuel. EM develops estimates of the amount of each type of waste that it expects to dispose of to complete its cleanup work. However, EM's estimates include significant uncertainties. For example, waste amounts could vary depending on the future cleanup approaches selected.
Department of Energy Nuclear Waste Types and Disposal Options
EM has multiple disposal options for LLW, including six DOE facilities and two commercial facilities. GAO's analysis found that EM's disposal needs exceed these facilities' current capacity and future expansion will be required. Further, transuranic waste currently has only one disposal option—the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in New Mexico—and additional future transuranic waste could nearly exceed the facility's capacity. High-level radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel have no existing disposal option and will require the siting of a new deep geologic repository.
EM headquarters delegates disposal decisions to individual cleanup site officials and supports them as needed. However, EM has not assessed opportunities to optimize complex-wide disposal decisions—GAO has previously found that EM could save billions of dollars by considering alternate disposal plans for certain waste. EM has also not developed an integrated waste disposal plan to address factors affecting EM's ability to complete its cleanup mission.
EM officials told GAO they have not assessed complex-wide strategic alternatives to current disposal plans because regulatory constraints limit alternatives. However, the use of models, such as optimization models, could reduce the costs of EM's cleanup mission by billions of dollars. By developing a complex-wide plan, EM will be better able to address interrelated issues across its 15 sites and identify opportunities to address regulatory constraints. Moreover, implementing its disposal plan will likely require EM to negotiate with multiple regulators to revise agreements at different sites. By leveraging modeling and integrated planning, EM would be better positioned to engage with regulators in a complex-wide forum to ensure that each waste stream is disposed of in a cost-effective manner that protects human health and the environment.
Why GAO Did This Study
To complete its cleanup mission, EM must dispose of over 11 million cubic meters of nuclear waste that pose a range of risks to human health and the environment. In addressing its nuclear waste disposal needs, EM chooses among disposal options with different costs and risks. Final approval of a disposal pathway can take years of careful planning and communication with regulators and a variety of federal, state, and other stakeholders.
Senate Report 117-130 includes a provision for GAO to report on EM's nuclear waste disposal planning efforts. This report addresses (1) available information about nuclear waste requiring disposal to complete EM's mission, (2) disposal options available to EM, and (3) how EM and cleanup sites plan for nuclear waste disposal.
GAO analyzed EM waste data, interviewed or requested information from all 15 EM sites, visited commercial nuclear waste disposal facilities, and developed a hypothetical model for optimizing transuranic waste disposal using EM data.
Recommendations
GAO is making five recommendations to EM, including that EM develop complex-wide analyses—such as optimization models—to identify optimal disposal pathways; develop a complex-wide disposal plan; and create a forum for EM and cleanup site and disposal facility regulators to address regulatory constraints to optimal disposal approaches. EM did not agree or disagree with the five recommendations and deferred its response for whether it will implement them to a later date.
Recommendations for Executive Action
| Agency Affected | Recommendation | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Department of Energy | The Senior Advisor for EM should improve the quality of its LLW estimates by (1) adding headquarters oversight procedures that ensure reported waste streams are comprehensive in representing remaining cleanup at DOE sites; and (2) assessing the quality of waste estimates in the BLDD using available information, such as the previous years' actual disposal data, and using the results of this assessment to inform additional improvements. (Recommendation 1) |
When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
|
| Department of Energy | The Senior Advisor for EM should update guidance for the BLDD to clarify site reporting responsibilities. Such clarifications include that LLW estimates should encompass waste beyond the current cleanup contract and how sites should report waste streams facing significant uncertainty about the scope of cleanup (e.g., related to final disposal decisions, barriers to disposal). (Recommendation 2) |
When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
|
| Department of Energy | The Senior Advisor for EM should develop complex-wide analyses, including optimization models, that identify optimal disposal pathways and schedules for its radioactive waste and analyze strategic alternatives to current disposal plans. (Recommendation 3) |
When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
|
| Department of Energy | The Senior Advisor for EM should develop a nationwide, integrated radioactive waste disposal plan that includes an assessment of strategic alternatives and modeling, and addresses complex-wide disposal issues, such as waste with no disposal pathway. EM should share this integrated plan with key stakeholders—such as state and federal regulators at cleanup sites and disposal facilities—and incorporate their feedback as appropriate. (Recommendation 4) |
When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
|
| Department of Energy | The Senior Advisor for EM should leverage the results of radioactive waste disposal optimization analyses and integrated planning to identify specific opportunities to optimize radioactive waste disposal by addressing regulatory constraints and create a forum for regulators from cleanup sites and disposal facilities to holistically negotiate implementing these opportunities. (Recommendation 5) |
When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
|