U.S. Code » Title 42 » Chapter CHAPTER 108— NUCLEAR WASTE POLICY

42 U.S.C. § 10107

Applicability to atomic energy defense activities

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 42 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a) Atomic energy defense activities

Subject to the provisions of subsection (c), the provisions of this chapter shall not apply with respect to any atomic energy defense activity or to any facility used in connection with any such activity.

(b) Evaluation by President(1) Not later than 2 years after January 7, 1983, the President shall evaluate the use of disposal capacity at one or more repositories to be developed under part A of subchapter I for the disposal of high-level radioactive waste resulting from atomic energy defense activities. Such evaluation shall take into consideration factors relating to cost efficiency, health and safety, regulation, transportation, public acceptability, and national security.(2) Unless the President finds, after conducting the evaluation required in paragraph (1), that the development of a repository for the disposal of high-level radioactive waste resulting from atomic energy defense activities only is required, taking into account all of the factors described in such subsection, the Secretary shall proceed promptly with arrangement for the use of one or more of the repositories to be developed under part A of subchapter I for the disposal of such waste. Such arrangements shall include the allocation of costs of developing, constructing, and operating this repository or repositories. The costs resulting from permanent disposal of high-level radioactive waste from atomic energy defense activities shall be paid by the Federal Government, into the special account established under section 10222 of this title.(3) Any repository for the disposal of high-level radioactive waste resulting from atomic energy defense activities only shall (A) be subject to licensing under section 5842 of this title; and (B) comply with all requirements of the Commission for the siting, development, construction, and operation of a repository.(c) Applicability to certain repositories

The provisions of this chapter shall apply with respect to any repository not used exclusively for the disposal of high-level radioactive waste or spent nuclear fuel resulting from atomic energy defense activities, research and development activities of the Secretary, or both.

(Pub. L. 97–425, § 8, Jan. 7, 1983, 96 Stat. 2205.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 1988–2004 · leading case: Nat. Resources Def. Council, Inc. Snake River All.,petitioners v. Spencer Abraham, Sec'y of Energy United States of Am., 244 F.3d 742 (9th Cir. 2001).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Nat. Resources Def. Council, Inc. Snake River All.,petitioners v. Spencer Abraham, Sec'y of Energy United States of Am., 244 F.3d 742 (9th Cir. 2001). · cites it 2× “42 U.S.C. § 10107 (b)(1). Because the President determined on April 30, 1985, that a separate facility was not necessary for defense high-level waste, NRDC notes that DOE only has authority for disposal of defense high-level wastes at Yucca Mountain.”
Nat. Resources Def. Council v. Abraham, 388 F.3d 701 (9th Cir. 2004). · cites it 2× “42 U.S.C. § 10107 (b)(1). Because the President determined on April 30, 1985, that a separate facility was not necessary for defense high-level waste, NRDC notes that DOE only has authority for disposal of defense high-level wastes [pursuant to NWPA].”
Nat'l Ass'n of Regulatory Util. Commissioners v. U.S. Dep't of Energy, 851 F.2d 1424 (D.C. Cir. 1988). “See 42 U.S.C. § 10107 (b)(1). Instead, it directed the President to evaluate the issue, taking account of “cost efficiency, health and safety, regulation, transportation, public acceptability, and national security.”
Nat'l Resources Def. Council v. Abraham, 271 F. Supp. 2d 1260 (D. Idaho 2003). · cites it 2× “See 42 U.S.C. § 10107 . If the President determined that no separate repository was needed for the defense waste, “the Secretary shall proceed promptly with arrangement for the use of one or more of the repositories to be developed .”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.