deep boreholes have the potential to provide essentially complete isolation for the wastes indefinitely.

We continue to believe Yucca Mountain was--and is--the right answer for permanent nuclear waste disposal.

Science--not politics--should govern the process for selecting a permanent repository for nuclear waste.

As a Nation, we should be moving forward in accordance with the law established by Congress through the Nuclear Waste Policy Act unless and until that law is changed.

Responses by Dr. Mark Peters, Deputy Laboratory Director for Programs, Argonne National Laboratory

I am not talking about risk to our astronauts, because I have to believe that NASA will not put any of our astronauts on a commercial system until it is convinced that NASA's safety standards have been met.

I think that NASA owes Congress and the laudable companies that are before us today a much more thorough assessment of the situation ahead.

I am not opposed to this new approach, but in the time remaining I want to focus my remarks on the business case, as that is an area that I would like to see discussed at greater length.

To paraphrase my friend and former Chairman of this Committee, Bart Gordon, I don't want to find ourselves at some future time throwing additional sums in this program because the commercial launch companies are 'too important to fail.'

In this type of environment, there is a risk that during the period of contract performance NASA's requirements may change so significantly that contractors can successfully argue that the Agency is changing the contract's scope.

What obligation does your company have under space act agreements to report anomalies to NASA?