System Fuels, Inc. v. United States, 818 F.3d 1302

System Fuels (four utilities) contracted with DOE under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act Standard Contract requiring DOE to take title to and begin disposing of spent nuclear fuel (SNF) by Jan. 31, 1998; DOE failed to do so (partial breach).
Plaintiffs built on-site ISFSIs and loaded SNF into canisters and then into dry storage casks (Holtec and VSC-24); DOE supplies and is responsible for transportation casks under the Standard Contract.
Earlier Court of Federal Claims awards covered damages through mid-2005/2006; these appeals concern new damages for continued breach (Sept. 2005–July 2011 for Grand Gulf; July 2006–June 2012 for Arkansas Nuclear One).
System Fuels sought damages for costs to load SNF into storage canisters and to load those canisters into storage casks; government conceded most damages but disputed entitlement to these loading costs.
The Court of Federal Claims denied (in differing ways) much or all of the requested loading-costs damages, reasoning that those costs either would have been partly incurred in a non-breach world or that repackaging costs were speculative.
The Federal Circuit reversed: because under the unamended Standard Contract and current regulations DOE will not accept the existing canistered/storage casks for transportation, the loading costs were storage costs caused by the breach and are recoverable now.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Entitlement to damages for costs of loading SNF into on-site storage canisters/casks	Loading costs are storage costs caused by DOE's breach; but-for breach these costs would be zero because DOE would have supplied and System Fuels would have loaded DOE transportation casks	Plaintiffs failed to prove the difference between storage-cask loading costs and loading DOE transportation casks; future repackaging/transportation costs make current recovery improper or speculative	Reversed: loading into storage casks is compensable storage expense caused by breach because DOE will not accept the canistered/storage casks under the unamended Standard Contract and current regulations

Energy Nw. v. United States, 641 F.3d 1300 (Fed. Cir. 2011) (background on Standard Contract and NWPA litigation)
Ind. Mich. Power Co. v. United States, 422 F.3d 1369 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (spent nuclear fuel breach precedents)
Me. Yankee Atomic Power Co. v. United States, 225 F.3d 1336 (Fed. Cir. 2000) (NWPA/contract performance context)
Bluebonnet Sav. Bank, F.S.B. v. United States, 266 F.3d 1348 (Fed. Cir. 2001) (causation and clear-error review principles)
Yankee Atomic Elec. Co. v. United States, 536 F.3d 1268 (Fed. Cir. 2008) (government cannot claim payment not yet due)
Carolina Power & Light Co. v. United States, 573 F.3d 1271 (Fed. Cir. 2009) (payment entitlement principles)