Editing Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository (section)

== Introduction ==
[[File:Yucca Mountain - Nuclear Waste Repository.jpg|thumb|upright=3.2|An [[infographic]] about the [[Yucca Mountain]] nuclear waste repository]]
[[Spent nuclear fuel]] is the radioactive by-product of [[electricity generation]] at commercial [[nuclear power]] plants, and high-level [[radioactive waste]] is the by-product of [[nuclear reprocessing|reprocessing]] spent fuel to produce fissile material for nuclear weapons.<ref>{{cite web |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080614182338/http://www.ocrwm.doe.gov/factsheets/doeymp0338.shtml |archive-date=June 14, 2008 |title=What are spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste? |date=July 2007 |publisher=Office of Civilian Radioactive (OCRWM), U.S. Department of Energy |access-date=August 26, 2008 |url=http://www.ocrwm.doe.gov/factsheets/doeymp0338.shtml}}</ref> In 1982, Congress established a national policy to solve the problem of nuclear waste disposal. This policy is a federal law called the [[Nuclear Waste Policy Act]],<ref>{{cite web |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080514020437/http://www.ocrwm.doe.gov/documents/nwpa/css/nwpa.htm |archive-date=May 14, 2008 |title=Nuclear Waste Policy Act, as amended |date=March 2004 |publisher=Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management (OCRWM), U.S. Department of Energy |access-date=May 16, 2008 |url=http://www.ocrwm.doe.gov/documents/nwpa/css/nwpa.htm}}</ref> which made the [[United States Department of Energy|U.S. Department of Energy]] (DOE) responsible for finding a site, building, and operating an underground disposal facility called a [[Deep geological repository|geologic repository]]. The recommendation to use a geologic repository dates to 1957, when the [[United States National Academy of Sciences|National Academy of Sciences]] recommended that the best way to protect the environment and public health and safety is to dispose of the waste in rock deep underground.<ref>Culler, Floyd L. 1957. ''Status report on the disposal of radioactive wastes''. Oak Ridge, Tennessee: Oak Ridge National Laboratory.</ref>{{page needed|date=December 2014}}

The DOE began studying Yucca Mountain in 1978 to determine whether it would be suitable for the nation's first long-term geologic repository for over {{convert|70000|MT}} (150 million pounds)<ref>"Faff and Fallout." ''The Economist'' August 1, 2015: 23. Print.</ref> of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste as of 2015{{when|date=December 2014}} stored at 121 sites around the nation. An estimated {{convert|10000|MT}} of the waste would be from U.S. military nuclear programs.<ref name="Michael J. Kolar">{{cite news |author=Kolar |first=Michael J. |date=August 15, 2001 |title=Midweek Perspectives: Waste that won't go away |url=http://www.post-gazette.com/forum/20010815kol0815enp5.asp |newspaper=[[Pittsburgh Post-Gazette]]}}</ref>

On December 19, 1984, the DOE selected ten locations in six states for consideration as potential repository sites, based on data collected for nearly ten years. The ten sites were studied and results of these preliminary studies were reported in 1985. Based on these reports, [[Ronald Reagan|President Ronald Reagan]] approved three sites for intensive scientific study called site characterization. The three sites were [[Hanford Site|Hanford, Washington]]; [[Deaf Smith County, Texas]]; and Yucca Mountain.<ref name="Michael J. Kolar"/>

In 1987, Congress amended the Nuclear Waste Policy Act and directed DOE to study only Yucca Mountain, which is adjacent to the former nuclear test site. The Act provided that if during site characterization Yucca Mountain was found unsuitable, studies would stop immediately. This option expired when Reagan actually recommended the site. On July 23, 2002, President [[George W. Bush]] signed House Joint Resolution 87<ref>{{cite web
 | url= https://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2002/07/20020723-2.html
 | title= President Signs Yucca Mountain Bill
 | date= July 23, 2002 | publisher= Office of the Press Secretary, White House
 | access-date= May 16, 2008}}</ref> ({{USPL|107|200}}), allowing the DOE to take the next step in establishing a safe repository in which to store nuclear waste. The DOE was to begin accepting spent fuel at the Yucca Mountain Repository by January 31, 1998, but did not do so because of a series of delays due to legal challenges, concerns over how to transport nuclear waste to the facility, and political pressure resulting in underfunding of the construction.

On July 18, 2006, the DOE proposed March 31, 2017, as the date to open the facility and begin accepting waste based on full funding. On September 8, 2006, Bush nominated Ward (Edward) Sproat, a nuclear industry executive formerly of PECO energy in Pennsylvania, to lead the Yucca Mountain Project. Following the 2006 midterm congressional elections, [[Harry Reid]], a longtime opponent of the repository, became the [[Senate Majority Leader]], putting him in a position to greatly affect the future of the project. Reid said he would continue to work to block completion of the project, and is quoted as having said, "Yucca Mountain is dead. It'll never happen."<ref>{{cite web |url= http://www.ocrwm.doe.gov/ym_repository/seis/index.shtml
 | archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20080508014559/http://www.ocrwm.doe.gov/ym_repository/seis/index.shtml |archive-date=May 8, 2008 | title= Analysis: Reid's Yucca and nuke waste plan
 | last= Lando | first= Ben | date= December 4, 2006 | publisher= United Press International
 | access-date= May 16, 2008}}</ref>

In the 2008 Omnibus Spending Bill, the Yucca Mountain Project's budget was reduced to $390 million. The project was able to reallocate resources and delay transportation expenditures to complete the License Application for submission on June 3, 2008. During his 2008 presidential campaign, [[Barack Obama]] promised to abandon the project.<ref>{{cite journal
 | title= US election: Questioning the candidates
 | date= September 24, 2008 |journal= [[Nature (journal)|Nature]]
 | doi= 10.1038/455446a
 | last1= Witze
 | first1= Alexandra
 | volume= 455
 | issue= 7212
 | pages= 446–449
 | pmid= 18818624
 | s2cid= 205041295
 | doi-access= free
 }}</ref> After his election, the [[Nuclear Regulatory Commission]] told Obama he did not have the ability to do so.<ref name=Shuler>{{cite news|url=http://www.citizen-times.com/article/20100709/NEWS/307090036/Shuler-Nuclear-waste-is-not-headed-to-WNC|title=Shuler: Nuclear waste is not headed to Asheville area|last=Ostendorff|first=Jon|work=[[Asheville Citizen-Times]]|date=July 9, 2010|access-date=2010-07-09}} {{Dead link|date=September 2010|bot=H3llBot}}</ref> On April 23, 2009, [[Lindsey Graham]] and eight other U.S. senators introduced legislation to provide "rebates" from a $30 billion federally managed fund into which nuclear power plants had been paying, so as to refund all collected funds if Congress canceled the project.<ref>{{cite news |title=Bill to liquidate the Nuclear Waste Fund |publisher=World Nuclear News |date= April 27, 2009| url=http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/WR_Bill_to_liquidate_the_nuclear_waste_fund_2704092.html |access-date=2010-06-09}}</ref>

In November 2013, in response to a lawsuit filed by the [[National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners]] and the [[Nuclear Energy Institute]], the [[United States courts of appeals|U.S. court of appeals]] ruled that nuclear utilities may stop paying into the nuclear waste recovery fund until either the DOE follows the Nuclear Waste Policy Act, which designates Yucca Mountain as the repository, or Congress changes the law.<ref>{{cite news |title=Court orders halt to nuclear waste fees|publisher= World Nuclear News |date=November 20, 2013| url=http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/WR-Court-orders-halt-to-nuclear-waste-fees-2011134.html | access-date=2013-11-20}}</ref> The fee ended May 16, 2014.

Lacking an operating repository, the federal government initially paid utility companies somewhere between $300 and $500 million per year in compensation for failing to comply with the contract it signed to take the spent nuclear fuel by 1998.{{citation needed|date=April 2021}} For the ten years after 2015, it is estimated to cost taxpayers $24 billion in payments from the Judgment Fund.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.cnbc.com/2016/07/05/how-the-department-of-energy-became-a-major-taxpayer-liability.html |title=How the Department of Energy became a major taxpayer liability |last=Fahey |first=Mark |date=2016-07-06 |website=www.cnbc.com |access-date=2020-02-19}}</ref> The Judgment Fund is not subject to budget rules and allows Congress to ignore the nuclear waste issue since payments therefrom do not have any impact on yearly spending for other programs.