WASHINGTON — The Department of Energy (DOE) on Saturday invited states to explore hosting a permanent nuclear waste repository as part of a plan to seed regional “nuclear campus” projects that could also include advanced reactors and fuel-cycle facilities. Officials say the consent-based approach is meant to break decades of gridlock over where to put spent fuel as the Trump administration pushes to expand nuclear power, Feb. 7, 2026.
The offer lays out an explicit trade: Communities that are willing to study a nuclear waste repository may also compete for projects DOE says can bring jobs, infrastructure upgrades and new investment — an argument that critics say risks turning a high-stakes safety decision into an economic bargain.
The pitch: a nuclear waste repository wrapped into a “nuclear campus” package
DOE’s public outline came in a Request for Information on Nuclear Lifecycle Innovation Campuses, released Jan. 28. The agency asked states to describe what they would consider hosting and what funding structures, incentives and federal partnerships would be required, with responses due April 1.
DOE said potential campus activities could span fuel fabrication, enrichment, reprocessing used nuclear fuel and “disposition of waste,” as well as power generation and co-located data centers. Energy Secretary Chris Wright said the campuses would give DOE the chance to “work directly with states on regional priorities.”
What makes the plan politically explosive is how directly it links growth to disposal. A Reuters report on DOE’s volunteer approach said states are being asked to step forward for a permanent geological disposal site — a nuclear waste repository — as part of a larger campus concept that could include reactors and fuel-cycle work. A DOE nuclear energy office spokesperson told Reuters the decisions could amount to tens of billions of dollars in investment and thousands of jobs, depending on what a state proposes.
Supporters say the bundling is pragmatic: If the country wants more nuclear power, it needs a credible path to permanent disposal. Critics say the strategy amounts to pressure dressed up as partnership. Former NRC and DOE official Lake Barrett told Reuters the pitch comes down to “big carrots being placed alongside a waste facility.”
Why a nuclear waste repository remains a political third rail
The United States has spent decades searching for a permanent home for commercial spent fuel. The Government Accountability Office’s nuclear waste disposal overview estimates the nation has more than 90,000 metric tons of spent nuclear fuel, and the inventory continues to grow by about 2,000 metric tons a year. GAO says DOE is responsible for disposing of that high-level waste in a permanent geologic repository — effectively, a nuclear waste repository — and notes the federal government has already paid billions of dollars in damages to utilities for failing to do so.
Until a nuclear waste repository exists, the default is storage where the waste is generated. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s dry cask storage backgrounder describes how spent fuel is first cooled in deep pools and later moved into sealed metal cylinders inside concrete or metal shells designed to contain radiation, manage heat and withstand extreme events. Even so, opponents in many states argue that “interim” storage can become de facto permanent when federal plans stall.
That distrust has history. A 2009 Reuters report on the Obama administration’s Yucca Mountain reversal described the White House’s move to terminate the Nevada repository effort and “explore alternatives,” underscoring how quickly national strategy can change with politics.
More recently, a 2021 Reuters report on the Biden-era consent-based push detailed DOE’s attempt to find willing hosts for interim storage — a precursor to today’s pitch, but without the same bundling of reactors, data centers and fuel-cycle projects.
Even if some states signal interest by April, the timeline for siting, licensing and building a nuclear waste repository is measured in years, not months. “A complete nuclear strategy must include safe, durable pathways for final disposition,” a DOE nuclear energy office spokesperson told Reuters — language that captures both the urgency of the administration’s nuclear ambitions and the challenge of persuading communities to host the country’s most enduring waste.
