I wanted to--oh, good. Just a word to the distinguished chairman of the Energy Committee, both Senator Alexander and I mentioned that we had completed our joint effort at a nuclear waste policy act.

If the Sites numbers could get done, that would be very much appreciated, quickly.

This situation is unsustainable.

To help solve this stalemate, Senator Feinstein and I will again include a pilot program for nuclear waste storage in the Energy and Water Appropriations Bill.

I don't want to see us look back on this as we have looked back on one other project and say, well $600 million has been wasted.

Can you tell me how you plan to finish the chief's report by December 2015 as promised without Federal funding?

I am delighted that we have finally introduced a waste policy act bill for our country, which has no waste policy that we know of.

I think this increase really portends some danger for the nuclear program.

As Senator Alexander stated, the hearing record will remain open for 10 days.

As Senator Feinstein noted in her opening match for marks, it's showing an increase.

Would this be underground? What would the requirements be? My understanding is it is underground.

The lack of a completed chief's report has meant authorization of a potential project was missed in 2007 and 2014.

We are hopeful that you will see fit to have an early hearing so that we can possibly develop a nuclear waste policy for our country.

The real driver of our Federal debt is out of control mandatory spending on entitlement programs.

I look forward to reintroducing with Senator Feinstein, and Senator Murkowski, and perhaps others, legislation that would create temporary and permanent storage sites for nuclear waste.

Well, my number is wrong. I said $186 million. It's $195 million?

Well, let me just--let me just ask you another thing because I am just a lay person, sort of a simple soul.

Among the capabilities that the NIF brings to stockpile stewardship, which is its primary mission, is the ability to study materials compressed to extremely high pressures.

Did you approve those steam generators? Not you, but did the Commission?

Okay. And the rods now in spent fuels that you say are safe essentially forever, I guess, are you saying that they are safe for a millennium in spent fuels, and that you can predict that there will be no catastrophic earth movement, which…

Well, in one case I think there was a small--very small radioactive leak. This is why I am concerned about the underground SMRs.

I wanted to spend a few minutes on the National Ignition Facility at Livermore.

So if the Sites numbers could get done, that would be very much appreciated, quickly.

the idea of deliberately allowing the 99 reactors which produce 60 percent of our carbon free emissions, to allow that number to decline I think would be serious malpractice by all of us involved.

the fact remains that the NRC in its final rule digressed from 30 years of regulatory precedent