On the recordDecember 8, 2011
Yes. I think I briefly tried to show this article from The Salt Lake Tribune, dated December 8, which talks about some of the reactor parts that are going to go out to Utah. What the article ends up saying is: The site will not, however, take the Illinois plant's used fuel rods. The United States currently has no site to dispose of spent fuel from commercial reactors, a form of high-level nuclear waste. So if we don't have a location, where is that high-level nuclear waste, the spent fuel, going to remain? MR. DOLD. It's going to remain, seriously, right in the middle of a high-population area and hundreds of feet away from the jewel of our ecosystem--in the Great Lakes, in Lake Michigan. It's the wrong place for it to be. Common sense would say to move it out to a place, to a location, just like Yucca Mountain; $14 billion of research and dollars have gone into the site. Let's put it 1,000 feet below the ground, 1,000 feet above the water table, in an arid environment. It's absolutely perfect for it. It's something that we should move forward on. It's in the best interest and safety of the American public to do something along these lines.
