GAO

GAO Report on Nuclear Waste, Addressing Legal and Regulatory Barriers Could Accelerate Cleanup and Reduce Costs

GAO found that the Department of Energy oversees nuclear waste cleanup at U.S. sites, which could take until 2100 and cost up to $840 billion. However, inconsistent approaches due to a complex legal and regulatory framework have led to longer cleanup efforts and higher costs. GAO recommends clarifying roles and better decision-making with input from independent experts to potentially address risks decades sooner and avoid billions in additional costs.

State Actions Exceed DOE Authority

Some states have taken actions that exceed their authority to regulate hazardous waste, as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). These state actions, which focus on radiological aspects of nuclear waste at Department of Energy cleanup sites, are generally regulated under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954. This has led to disagreements between DOE and states over requirements for radioactive waste management, longer cleanup schedules, and higher costs for the federal government. Courts have recognized that DOE’s authority under the Atomic Energy Act preempts certain state actions regarding nuclear waste during cleanup efforts, but statutes and case law are unclear on what types of state actions are appropriate under the law due to mixed waste at DOE sites.

Unrealistic Assumptions Increase Cleanup Costs

The Government Accountability Office (GAO) found that the Department of Energy (DOE) sometimes makes cleanup decisions based on unrealistic assumptions about future land and groundwater use. This can lead to higher costs and longer schedules. For instance, DOE agreed to clean up large parts of some sites for future residential use even though no plans exist for such use. By contrast, when Congress designated a site as a national wildlife refuge, cleanup costs decreased significantly from $23 billion to about $10 billion. GAO recommends that DOE evaluate the benefits and costs associated with different land uses to make more realistic decisions.

Groundwater Cleanup Challenges

The government often assumes that groundwater beneath contaminated sites will be used for drinking water, but experts say this assumption may not always be realistic. Additionally, standards for certain contaminants in groundwater are based on outdated information from the 1960s and might make cleanup more expensive than necessary if updated to current science. Experts suggest creating an independent task force of experts to review high-priority cleanup decisions and areas of legal disagreement, which could help achieve cleaner sites at a lower cost.

Why GAO Looked Into It

GAO was asked to review the impact of the legal and regulatory framework on DOE’s nuclear waste cleanup mission by various organizations that have reported inconsistencies in decision-making processes. The problem prompting this review is DOE’s inability to complete its nuclear waste cleanup mission due to a complex legal and regulatory framework, which affects cost and schedule. GAO examined how state actions affect DOE’s management of radiological portions of nuclear waste at cleanup sites, how DOE’s efforts are influenced by future land and groundwater use assumptions under the applicable framework, and other aspects contributing to higher costs and longer schedules.

What GAO Recommends

GAO made 6 recommendations to Department of Energy and Environmental Protection Agency:

  • The DOE Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management should direct DOE cleanup sites to evaluate and document the expected costs and potential schedule associated with cleanup of a particular area based on multiple potential future land use assumptions when substantial cost or schedule benefits could potentially be achieved using a future land use assumption other than the one initially selected.
  • The Administrator of EPA should clarify or provide additional guidance on considering reasonably anticipated future land use as part of the environmental cleanup process at DOE cleanup sites.
  • The Secretary of Energy, in collaboration with EPA and other relevant federal agencies, as appropriate, should develop options that could allow DOE to clean up iodine-129 and other beta-emitting radionuclides in groundwater at DOE sites to levels that consider current scientific methods, and report those options to Congress along with plans to pursue them.
  • The Administrator of EPA, in collaboration with DOE and other relevant federal agencies, as appropriate, should develop options that could allow DOE to clean up iodine-129 and other beta-emitting radionuclides in groundwater at DOE sites to levels that consider current scientific methods, and report those options to Congress along with plans to pursue them.
  • The Secretary of Energy, in collaboration with EPA, should establish an interagency task force of experts focused on DOE’s nuclear waste cleanup to review high-priority site and project-level cleanup decisions, ongoing cleanup processes, and areas of legal or regulatory disagreement that are driving higher-than-expected costs and longer schedules and make recommendations for DOE and EPA to implement.
  • The Administrator of EPA, in collaboration with DOE, should establish an interagency task force of experts focused on DOE’s nuclear waste cleanup to review high-priority site and project-level cleanup decisions, ongoing cleanup processes, and areas of legal or regulatory disagreement that are driving higher-than-expected costs and longer schedules and make recommendations for DOE and EPA to implement.

The full report, Nuclear Waste: Addressing Legal and Regulatory Barriers Could Accelerate Cleanup and Reduce Costs, is on GAO’s site, publicly released Oct 16, 2026.