H.R. 9197

[Congressional Bills 119th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 9197 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

119th CONGRESS
2d Session
H. R. 9197

To require the Secretary of Energy to study new technologies and 
opportunities for recycling spent nuclear fuel.

_______________________________________________________________________

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

June 8, 2026

Mr. Moore of North Carolina (for himself and Mr. Peters) introduced the 
following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and 
Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

A BILL

To require the Secretary of Energy to study new technologies and 
opportunities for recycling spent nuclear fuel.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ``Advancing Research in Nuclear Fuel 
Recycling Act''.

SEC. 2. STUDY ON NEW TECHNOLOGIES TO RECYCLE SPENT NUCLEAR FUEL.

(a) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) National laboratory.--The term ``National Laboratory'' 
has the meaning given the term in section 2 of the Energy 
Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 15801).
(2) Nuclear waste.--The term ``nuclear waste'' means spent 
nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste (as defined in 
section 2 of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 (42 U.S.C. 
10101)).
(3) Recycling.--The term ``recycling'' means the recovery 
of valuable radionuclides, including fissile materials, from 
nuclear waste, and any subsequent processes, such as enrichment 
and fuel fabrication, necessary for reuse in nuclear reactors 
or other commercial applications.
(4) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
of Energy.
(5) Spent nuclear fuel.--The term ``spent nuclear fuel'' 
has the meaning given the term in section 2 of the Nuclear 
Waste Policy Act of 1982 (42 U.S.C. 10101).
(b) Study.--Not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of 
this Act, the Secretary, acting through the Assistant Secretary for 
Nuclear Energy, shall carry out a study--
(1) 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--
(A) commercial light water reactors;
(B) advanced nuclear reactors; and
(C) medical, space-based, advanced-battery, and 
other non-reactor applications, as determined by the 
Secretary;
(2)(A) to 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 nuclear 
reactors, existing reactors, or commercial applications;
(B) to 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
(C) to analyze the practicability, potential benefits, 
costs, and risks of aqueous (such as PUREX and the derivatives 
of PUREX) recycling processes with the practicability, 
potential benefits, costs, and risk of non-aqueous (such as 
pyro-electrochemistry) recycling processes;
(3) 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;
(4) to analyze the practicability, potential benefits, 
costs, risks, and potential approaches for coupling or 
collocating recycling facilities with other pertinent 
facilities, such as advanced nuclear reactors (that can use the 
recycled fuel), interim storage, and fuel-fabrication 
facilities, including through--
(A) 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;
(B) input from interested private technology 
developers and relevant assumptions regarding cost; and
(C) comparison with the practicability, potential 
benefits, costs, and risks of the once-through fuel 
cycle, including temporary and permanent storage 
requirements;
(5) 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 those parties should spent nuclear fuel 
be removed from their sites for the purposes of nuclear waste 
recycling;
(6) 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;
(7) to identify tracking and accountability methods for new 
recycled fuel and radioactive waste streams for byproducts of 
the recycling process;
(8)(A) to 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;
(B) to compare such definitions to those used by other 
nations that manage radioactive waste; and
(C) to make recommendations for modernizing such 
definitions; and
(9) to evaluate--
(A) potential Federal and State-level policy 
changes to support development and deployment of 
recycling and waste-utilizing reactor technologies; and
(B) impacts of spent nuclear fuel recycling on 
requirements for domestic nuclear waste storage.
(c) Report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of 
this Act, the Secretary, acting through the Assistant Secretary for 
Nuclear Energy, shall submit to the Committee on Energy and Natural 
Resources of the Senate, the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the 
House of Representatives, the Committee on Science, Space, and 
Technology of the House of Representatives, and the Committee on 
Natural Resources of the House of Representatives, a report that 
complies with each of the following:
(1) Describes the results of the study carried out under 
subsection (b).
(2) Is released to the public.
(3) Totals not more than 120 pages (excluding Front Matter, 
References, and Appendices) written and formatted to facilitate 
review by a nonspecialist readership, including the following 
sections:
(A) A Front Matter section that includes a cover 
page with identifying information, tables of contents, 
figures, and tables.
(B) An Executive Summary section.
(C) An Introductory section that includes a 
historical overview that also explains why recycling is 
not performed in the United States today, such as 
economic, political, or technological obstacles.
(D) Results and Findings sections that summarize 
the results and findings of the study carried out under 
subsection (b).
(E) A Key Remaining Challenges and Barriers section 
that identifies key technical and nontechnical (such as 
economic) challenges and barriers that need to be 
addressed to enable scale-up and commercial adoption of 
spent nuclear fuel recycling, with preference given to 
secure, proliferation resistant, environmentally safe, 
and economical recycling methods.
(F) A Policy Recommendations section that--
(i) lists policy recommendations to address 
remaining technical and nontechnical (such as 
economic) challenges and barriers to enable 
scale-up and commercial adoption of spent 
nuclear fuel recycling, including with 
government support;
(ii) contrasts the potential benefits and 
risks of each policy; and
(iii) compares benefits to current or past 
policies.
(G) An Other section in which other relevant 
information may be added.
(H) A References section.
(I) An Appendices section.
<all>