Decommissioning: A New Era in the U.S. Nuclear Power Industry

This briefing, compiled from public interest groups, warns against the current trend of privatized nuclear decommissioning in the United States. It argues that private companies are prioritizing profit over safety by rapidly dismantling plants and moving high-level radioactive waste to 'consolidated interim storage' (CIS) sites without adequate containment technology or a permanent disposal solution.

• Private decommissioning companies, specifically Holtec and NorthStar, are acquiring closed nuclear plants to dismantle them quickly and cheaply. This approach allows them to claim the maximum amount of ratepayer-financed decommissioning funds as profit, often with minimal input from state governments or affected communities.
• There are significant safety concerns regarding the storage of spent nuclear fuel, particularly 'high burn-up' fuel (HBF), which constitutes about 40% of spent fuel at US reactors. HBF is more radioactive and thermally hotter than conventional fuel, requiring longer cooling periods in fuel pools. Current dry storage canisters, such as the thin-walled welded versions used by Holtec, are described as having defects and lacking the ability to be safely unloaded or repackaged if they fail.
• The push for 'consolidated interim storage' (CIS) sites in New Mexico and Texas is criticized as a 'dangerous expedient' because these sites may become de facto permanent storage without the protections of a geologic repository. Establishing CIS would trigger extensive transport of radioactive waste via truck, train, and barge across 43 states and the District of Columbia, potentially impacting 87% of Congressional districts.
• The document criticizes the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) for granting waivers and exemptions to decommissioning companies and avoiding the resolution of decommissioning dilemmas. It also dismisses the viability of the Yucca Mountain geologic repository, stating its geology—including fractured rock and seismic activity—cannot provide the necessary isolation for high-level waste.

APA

Environmental and Energy Study Institute (n.d.). Decommissioning: A New Era in the U.S. Nuclear Power Industry. https://www.eesi.org/files/Backgrounder_-_Decommissioning_-_A_New_Era_in_the_U.S_._Nuclear_Power_Industry_.pdf

Chicago

Environmental and Energy Study Institute. Decommissioning: A New Era in the U.S. Nuclear Power Industry. n.d. https://www.eesi.org/files/Backgrounder_-_Decommissioning_-_A_New_Era_in_the_U.S_._Nuclear_Power_Industry_.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |author=Environmental and Energy Study Institute |title=Decommissioning: A New Era in the U.S. Nuclear Power Industry |url=https://www.eesi.org/files/Backgrounder_-_Decommissioning_-_A_New_Era_in_the_U.S_._Nuclear_Power_Industry_.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{environmentalandenergystudyinstitutenddecommissioning, author = {{Environmental and Energy Study Institute}}, title = {{Decommissioning: A New Era in the U.S. Nuclear Power Industry}}, institution = {Environmental and Energy Study Institute}, url = {https://www.eesi.org/files/Backgrounder_-_Decommissioning_-_A_New_Era_in_the_U.S_._Nuclear_Power_Industry_.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }