Since the early 1980s, DOE has studied the Yucca Mountain site to  determine whether it is suitable for a high-level radioactive waste and  spent nuclear fuel repository. DOE’s Schedule to Submit a License Application to NRC by June 30, 2008, Was Developed in Consultation with Yucca Mountain Project Managers

In July 2006, DOE announced its intent to file a license application to NRC  no later than June 30, 2008. OCRWM’s director told  us that he consulted with DOE and contractor project managers to get a  reasonable estimate of an achievable date for submitting the license  application and asked OCRWM managers to develop a plan and schedule  for meeting the June 30, 2008, goal. DOE did not consult with external stakeholders in developing this  schedule because there was no legal or regulatory requirement or  compelling management reason to do so, according to senior OCRWM  officials. NRC Officials Are Uncertain Whether DOE Will File a High- Quality License Application That Will Facilitate Completion of a Timely Review

NRC officials believe it is likely that DOE will submit a license application  by June 30, 2008, but will not speculate about its quality due to a long- standing practice to maintain an objective and neutral position toward  proposed license applications until they are filed with NRC. Although NRC has no formal oversight role in the Yucca Mountain project  until DOE files a license application, NRC staff observe DOE audits of its  quality assurance activities to identify potential issues and problems that  may affect licensing. DOE Has Made Progress in Implementing Our Quality Assurance Recommendations and Resolving Challenges We Identified

DOE is implementing the recommendations and addressing the challenges  identified in our March 2006 report, but it is unclear whether the  department’s actions will prevent similar problems from recurring. In response, DOE has  stopped using its panel of performance indicators and replaced them with  monthly program review meetings—chaired by OCRWM’s director and  attended by top-level OCRWM, BSC, Sandia, and USGS managers—that  review the progress of four main OCRWM projects: (1) the drafting of the  license application; (2) the effort to select and load documents and  records into NRC’s Licensing Support Network; (3) work supplementing  DOE’s environmental impact statement to reflect the October 2005  changes in repository design, which shift from direct handling of waste to  the use of canisters; and (4) the development of a system to transport  waste from where it is generated, mainly nuclear power plants, to the  repository. DOE has revised its design control and requirements management  processes to address the problems that our March 2006 report identified. DOE has worked to fill and retain personnel in key  management positions that had been vacant for extended periods of time,  most notably the director of quality assurance and the OCRWM project  director. Finally, as we  have previously reported, DOE has a long history of quality assurance  problems and has experienced repeated difficulties in resolving these  problems. Agency Comments

We provided DOE and NRC with a draft of this report for their review and  comment. In their written responses, both DOE and NRC agreed with our  report. We also reviewed the DOE management plan for  creating the license application and other internal reports on the progress  in drafting the application. These meetings were held in  Rockville, Maryland; Las Vegas, Nevada; and Arlington, Virginia. To obtain NRC’s assessment of DOE’s readiness to file a high-quality  license application, we obtained NRC documents—such as the status of  key technical issues and briefing slides on NRC’s technical exchanges with  DOE.
Why GAO Did This Study

Nuclear power reactors generate highly radioactive waste. To permanently store this waste, the Department of Energy (DOE) has been working to submit a license application to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) for a nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain about 100 miles from Las Vegas, Nevada. Although the project has been beset with delays, in part because of persistent problems with its quality assurance program, DOE stated in July 2006 that it will submit a license application with NRC by June 30, 2008. NRC states that a high-quality application needs to be complete, technically adequate, transparent by clearly justifying underlying assumptions, and traceable back to original source materials. GAO examined (1) DOE's development of its schedule for submitting a license application and the stakeholders with whom it consulted, (2) NRC's assessment of DOE's readiness to submit a high-quality application, and (3) DOE's progress in addressing quality assurance recommendations and challenges identified in GAO's March 2006 report. GAO reviewed DOE's management plan for creating the license application, reviewed correspondence and attended prelicensing meetings between DOE and NRC, and interviewed DOE managers and NRC on-site representatives for the Yucca Mountain project. In commenting on a draft of the report, both DOE and NRC agreed with the report.

What GAO Found

The director of DOE's Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management set the June 30, 2008, date for filing the license application with NRC in consultation with the DOE and contractor managers for the Yucca Mountain project. DOE officials told us that external stakeholders were not consulted because there was neither a legal requirement nor a compelling management reason to do so. According to the director, the June 2008 schedule is achievable because DOE has already completed a large amount of work, including the completion of a draft license application in 2005 that DOE decided not to submit to NRC. NRC officials believe it is likely that DOE will submit a license application by June 30, 2008, but until NRC receives the application, officials will not speculate about whether it will be high quality. NRC has not seen a draft of the license application, and NRC's long-standing practice is to maintain an objective and neutral position toward a future application until it is filed. To help ensure that DOE understands its expectations, NRC has, among other things, held periodic prelicensing management and technical meetings with DOE. DOE has made progress in resolving the quality assurance recommendations and challenges identified in GAO's March 2006 report. For example, DOE has replaced the one-page summary of performance indicators that GAO had determined was ineffective with more frequent and rigorous project management meetings. DOE has addressed the management challenges GAO identified to varying degrees. For example, regarding management continuity, DOE has worked to fill and retain personnel in key management positions, such as the director of quality assurance. However, for various reasons--including the long history of recurring problems and likely project leadership changes in January 2009 when the current administration leaves office--it is unclear whether DOE's actions will prevent these problems from recurring.