DOE official outlines reprocessing, consolidated storage and repository timelines

Paul Murray, a Department of Energy official who identified himself as an engineer at DOE, told the Wyoming Legislature’s Minerals, Business and Economic Development Committee that the federal government distinguishes between the nuclear waste fund and the judgment fund and is preparing a 240‑day plan on spent nuclear fuel policy. "The nuclear waste fund is the money that the utilities collected from their customers and paid to DOE," he said. "The judgment fund is the money that is used by the federal government to pay people that sue the federal government."

Murray told the committee DOE is authorized by Congress to design one‑or‑more consolidated storage facilities sized initially for about 15,000 tons of spent nuclear fuel each, but that current law — the Nuclear Waste Policy Act — would need amendment for siting and construction. "These facilities take up about 2 square miles. They're initially sized to take 15,000 tons of spent nuclear fuel," he said.

Murray described reprocessing as the first step in a potential fuel‑cycle option and walked the committee through a pilot reprocessing concept sized at roughly 800 tons. He said a pilot plant would require a bank of used fuel, peak construction employment near 45,000 jobs and about 5,000 direct operating jobs for the plant, plus secondary jobs, based on adapted French plans. "I'm not advocating for reprocessing," Murray added. "But it is the first step in any future reprocessing plant."

On international practice, Murray said France currently reprocesses and the United Kingdom and others have had or are building reprocessing capacity. He told the committee France reports a roughly 30% reduction in repository volume after reprocessing and said DOE is engaging foreign programs to understand true cost and benefit. "France tells me that it actually reduces the size of the final repository. They say it reduces the repository by about 30%."

On timing and program scale, Murray said a full U.S. repository program would be multigenerational. He cited historical numbers for Yucca Mountain and said, because of scope and shipping, repository costs run into the hundreds of billions and a repository program could span more than a century from the start of work to closure. "We're talking hundreds of billions of dollars for this program spanning a 200 year time frame," he said.

Committee members asked whether fuel could be sent abroad for reprocessing (Murray: "Potentially" but shipping is expensive), whether reprocessing could be resumed in the U.S. (DOE is studying options and private industry is exploring potential plants) and whether private reprocessors could locate adjacent to DOE consolidated storage. Murray said DOE is considering whether reprocessing would be a DOE project or private industry service.

Murray also told the committee DOE plans to engage states and communities; he repeatedly said DOE is not trying to site facilities without collaboration and that a state choosing to host any long‑term site should have a negotiated arrangement rather than a one‑sided federal decision. "We can't have another Yucca Mountain experience again. We've got to have a collaborative based approach to site in it," he said.