Nuclear waste legislation needs to do four things. First, it needs to provide for the storage of nuclear waste between 1998, when a quarter of the Nation's nuclear powerplants will have run out of storage space, and the date, 14 or more years distant, when the permanent repository will open and begin accepting the utilities' waste. Second, it needs to set the existing repository program on a sounder footing by endorsing the Department of Energy's plan for completing scientific studies at the site and setting forth the licensing standards by which the repository will be judged. Third, it needs to fill the gap in transportation planning by selecting an appropriate route to ship nuclear waste between existing railroads and Yucca Mountain. Fourth, it needs to ensure that the program is adequately funded. The bill before us meets all four of these tests.
David Cay Johnston: “Nuclear waste legislation needs to do four things. First, it needs to provide for the storage of nuclear waste between…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the requirements for effective nuclear waste legislation.
Share
More from David Cay Johnston
Thus, we hold that the Nuclear Waste Policy Act creates an obligation in DOE to start disposing of the spent nuclear fuel no later than January 31, 1998. Is there any disagreement with what I read in the decision?
Then how in the world can the Senator say they are transferring the duty of disposing of nuclear waste from the Federal Government or the taxpayers and giving that to the utilities?
The decision of the court of appeals makes clear that they have a vested right to the title passing as of the time that the nuclear repository is built and not until that time, but they have the duty to dispose of the waste January 31…
we strongly oppose the Grams-McCain amendment and strongly support the Appalachian Regional Commission at this level. Mr. President, this has been an effective program to fight poverty in Appalachia. Appalachia is still one of the most…





