(3)
Independent committee of experts— The independent committee of experts shall consist of subject matter experts from stakeholders, such as the Office of Nuclear Energy of the Department of Energy, the National Laboratories, academia, industry, and other relevant stakeholder groups, as determined by the Secretary—
(A)
to analyze the practicability, potential benefits, costs, and risks, including proliferation, of using dedicated recycling facilities to convert spent nuclear fuel, including spent high-assay low-enriched uranium fuel, into useable nuclear fuels, such as those for—
(i)
commercial light water reactors;
(ii)
advanced nuclear reactors; and
(iii)
medical, space-based, advanced-battery, and other non-reactor applications, as determined by the Secretary;
(B)
to—
(i)
analyze the practicability, potential benefits, costs, and risks of recycling spent nuclear fuel, which is taken from temporary storage sites throughout the United States, and using it as fuel or input for advanced reactors, existing reactors, or commercial applications;
(ii)
compare such practicability, potential benefits, costs, and risks of recycling spent nuclear fuel with the practicability, potential benefits, costs, and risks of the once-through fuel cycle, including temporary and permanent storage requirements; and
(iii)
analyze the practicability, potential benefits, costs, and risks of aqueous (such as PUREX and its derivatives) recycling processes with the practicability, potential benefits, costs, and risk of non-aqueous (such as pyro-electrochemistry) recycling processes;
(C)
to analyze the technical and economic feasibility of utilizing nuclear waste processing to extract certain isotopes needed for domestic and international use, including medical, industrial, space-based power source, and advanced-battery applications;
(D)
to analyze the practicability, potential benefits, costs, risks, and potential approaches for coupling or collocating recycling facilities with other pertinent facilities, such as advanced reactors (that can use the recycled fuel), interim storage, and fuel-fabrication facilities, including—
(i)
relevant analyses, such as capital and operating cost estimates, public-private partnerships to encourage investment, infrastructure requirements, timeline to full-scale commercial deployment, and distinguishing characteristics or requirements of such facilities;
(ii)
input from interested private technology developers and relevant assumptions regarding cost; and
(iii)
comparison with the practicability, potential benefits, costs, and risks of the once-through fuel cycle, including temporary and permanent storage requirements;
(E)
to identify parties, including individuals, communities, businesses, and local and Tribal governments, that are impacted economically, or through health, safety, or environmental risks, by the current practice of indefinite temporary storage of spent nuclear fuel, and assess potential risks and benefits for these parties should spent nuclear fuel be removed from their sites for the purposes of nuclear waste recycling;
(F)
to assess different approaches for siting and sizing nuclear waste recycling facilities, including a centralized national facility, regional facilities, on-site facilities where spent nuclear fuel is currently stored, and on-site facilities where newly recycled fuel can be used by an on-site reactor, and recommend one or more approaches that consider environmental, transportation, infrastructure, capital, and other risks;
(G)
to identify tracking and accountability methods for new recycled fuel and radioactive waste streams for byproducts of the recycling process;
(H)
to—
(i)
identify any regulatory gaps related to nuclear waste management and recycling, including accuracy and consistency of relevant definitions for radioactive waste (including “high-level radioactive waste”, “spent nuclear fuel”, “low-level radioactive waste”, “reprocessing”, “recycling”, and “vitrification”) and classifications of radioactive waste that exist in Federal law on the date of enactment of this Act;
(ii)
compare such definitions to those used by other nations that manage radioactive waste; and
(iii)
make recommendations for modernizing such definitions; and
(I)
to evaluate—
(i)
potential Federal and State-level policy changes to support development and deployment of recycling and waste-utilizing reactor technologies; and
(ii)
impacts of spent nuclear fuel recycling on requirements for domestic nuclear waste storage.