What Happened?

The U.S. has accumulated roughly 90,000 metric tons of spent nuclear fuel with nowhere permanent to put it. A House subcommittee heard testimony Sept. 15 on the administration's plan to fix that by inviting states to volunteer as hosts for new facilities where spent fuel would be stored, recycled, and eventually disposed of, in exchange for economic development benefits. [](#ngr-6a43e9a1-5d87-4fd4-a67e-783d1e6bf09a)

The initiative, called Nuclear Lifecycle Innovation Campuses (NLIC), pairs fuel storage and recycling at sites chosen through federal-state partnerships. Idaho, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Utah, and West Virginia have all signed agreements to be considered as host sites.

Why Does it Matter to Me?

Nuclear power generates about 20 percent of the country's electricity and more than half of its carbon-free power. The spent fuel it leaves behind currently sits at more than 80 sites across the country, including roughly 14 locations where reactors have already shut down, and communities are stuck holding the waste with no resolution in sight.

Electric ratepayers have already paid more than $47 billion into a fund since 1983 to solve this problem. The federal government has paid utilities more than $10 billion in damages for failing to collect that fuel starting in 1998, as it was legally required to do.

Both Sides, Now

Pairing waste disposal with economic benefits is what finally got states to the table voluntarily. Maria Korsnick, president and CEO of the Nuclear Energy Institute, a trade group for the nuclear industry, told the subcommittee: "The question before us is not whether we can build. It's clear, we're starting."

Critics raise real obstacles. The plan relies on reprocessing technology the U.S. does not currently have the commercial capacity to deploy. France, Japan, and Russia operate reprocessing programs; the U.S. does not.

Rep. Kathy Castor (D-FL-14), the ranking Democrat on the subcommittee, pointed to a 15 percent net staffing decline at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission since January 2025, with more than 500 professionals departing and only about 65 replacements hired.

She also argued the subcommittee had held only one hearing in 21 weeks and said rising electricity costs, up 15 percent over 18 months, made new nuclear infrastructure the wrong priority. Any new disposal sites also require congressional approval before they can move forward.

What Happens Next?

Binding host agreements for the campus sites are expected by October, with a contractual methodology due by mid-December. A related bill, the Nuclear REFUEL Act, which would streamline licensing for reprocessing facilities, cleared committee in early September and could advance to a full House vote.

The administration has set a target of 400 gigawatts of nuclear capacity by 2050, up from roughly 100 gigawatts today. Reaching that goal depends on resolving a waste storage problem, and Congress holds the authority to approve or block any permanent solution.

---

This article was generated by AI pulling from data. Each article is edited by an editor for accuracy and clarity.

---

Spot something wrong? Report an issue with this article