When do you anticipate construction of the new facilities will begin?

Such as Yucca Mountain?

So that is at least 20 years faster or more to get the MOX out of South Carolina if you use dilute and disposal.

Well, they might, but they will have to come back and get you to approve it.

Senator Feinstein and I meet regularly with you and other officials for an update on that.

My impression is that the President's firmness on his NATO support helps send the message to Putin that destabilizing those countries is a stupid thing to do.

Thank you. Let me ask you about the new contract.

I think in most commercial settings that is true.

Do you believe that we would be able to place used nuclear fuel in a private consolidated storage site more quickly than we would be able to place it in Yucca Mountain?

But we need support from the nuclear industry, for example, as Senator Feinstein says, for the position which we think is correct, which is that we should move ahead on all fronts.

Do you have an estimate of how long it would take between here and the license for Yucca Mountain?

I would think, though, it is an opportunity, since you are already familiar with this kind of reactor, to review your application process and look for ways, while maintaining your gold standard safety requirements, of streamlining your…

In my view, nuclear power is our best source of inexpensive, reliable, carbon-free base load power, and it is crucially important for our national security and competitiveness.

You have $30 million in your budget for Yucca Mountain. What are the next steps on Yucca Mountain?

Do you have sufficient funds in your budget to do what you need to do if you--on both of these applications, should--this year?

There's no issue that Senator Feinstein and I are united more on than solving the nuclear waste stalemate.

I'm out of time, but let me conclude my question this way: You said a moment ago that you would stand by your estimate of about 3 years to review the application for a license for the private facilities in Texas and in New Mexico.

I want to express to Senator Feinstein once again what a privilege it is to have a chance to work with her as a partner in leading this committee.

This is an unacceptable stalemate, and it is a symptom of--and in my own view, and, obviously, Senator Feinstein's expressed herself, it makes no sense to me for us to take the view that if we can't move on one, we can't move on anything.

But, fundamentally, when you finish your work, if you approve the license, we then have a licensed facility ready to receive used nuclear fuel; is that correct?

I'd like to thank the Commission for working so closely with Senator Feinstein and me over the past few years to reduce the Commission's budget to more closely reflect its actual workload, while maintaining its gold standard of safety.

one of the problems we need to solve that we agree we need to solve is where to put used nuclear fuel.

If we can move ahead more quickly on an interim storage site authorized by the legislation that Senator Feinstein and Murkowski and I and Cantwell will introduce, or if we can move ahead more quickly with a properly licensed private site…

So that would mean that as soon as they have a license to do that, they can--if the department--then their relationship moves to the Department of Energy, right?

We are either going to have to persuade the Senate to move ahead with Yucca Mountain or the House to move ahead with interim storage.