42 U.S.C. § 10172
Selection of Yucca Mountain site
Effective on
Pub. L. 100–202 and Pub. L. 100–203 added identical sections.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 22
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1990–2025 · leading case: In Re Aiken Cnty., 645 F.3d 428 (D.C. Cir. 2011).
In Re Aiken Cnty., 645 F.3d 428 (D.C. Cir. 2011). “" 42 U.S.C. § 10172 (a)(1). After Congress specified Yucca Mountain as the sole potential location for the nation's nuclear waste repository, the DOE moved on to the site characterization, approval, review, and licensing phase of the process created by the NWPA.”
S. Nuclear Operating Co. v. United States, 77 Fed. Cl. 396 (Fed. Cl. 2007). “42 U.S.C. § 10172 . In the event Yucca Mountain proved unsuitable, DOE was directed to terminate site-specific activities and report to Congress.”
NRC v. Texas, 605 U.S. 665 (2025). “1330– 227 to 1330–228 (codified at 42 U. S. C. §10172 ). But Nevada’s objections and the (not coincidental) lack of appropriated funds slowed progress on the Yucca Mountain repository.”
Pac. Gas & Elec. Co. v. United States, 73 Fed. Cl. 333 (Fed. Cl. 2006). “See 42 U.S.C. § 10172 (a). The 1987 Amendments Act also established the OfSee of the Nuclear Waste Negotiator to attempt to find a State or Indian tribe willing to host a repository or [MRS] facility at a technically qualified site on reasonable terms and [to] negotiate with any…”
Yankee Atomic Elec. Co. v. United States, 73 Fed. Cl. 249 (Fed. Cl. 2006). “1330 at 227-31 (1987) (codified at 42 U.S.C. § 10172 ). In the event Yucca Mountain proved unsuitable, DOE was directed to terminate site-specific activities and report to Congress.”
Sys. Fuels, Inc. v. United States, 79 Fed. Cl. 37 (Fed. Cl. 2007). “1330 at 227-31 (1987) (codified at 42 U.S.C. § 10172 )). . The ACR issued in March 1995 for 1994 was the last ACR issued in the series that began in 1987.”
N. States Power Co. v. United States, 78 Fed. Cl. 449 (Fed. Cl. 2007). “42 U.S.C. § 10172 (a). The Amendments Act also authorized DOE to site, construct, and operate a single MRS facility, 42 U.”
Wisconsin Elec. Power Co. v. United States, 90 Fed. Cl. 714 (Fed. Cl. 2009). “42 U.S.C. § 10172 (a) & (b). The 1987 Amendments also authorized DOE to site, construct and operate one MRS, and established the Office of the Nuclear Waste Negotiator to attempt to find a state or Indian tribe host.”
Dominion Resources, Inc. v. United States, 84 Fed. Cl. 259 (Fed. Cl. 2008). “See 42 U.S.C. § 10172 . The Act also authorized the Secretary of Energy in the meantime to “site, construct and operate” one MRS facility.”
S. California Edison Co. v. United States, 93 Fed. Cl. 337 (Fed. Cl. 2010). “42 U.S.C. § 10172 (a)-(b). After a number of delays, however, DOE announced in 1994 that operations at the proposed repository in Yucca Mountain would commence no earlier than 2010.”
Cnty. of Esmeralda, State of Nevada v. U.S. Dep't of Energy, Cnty. of Inyo, State of California v. U.S. Dep't of Energy, 925 F.2d 1216 (9th Cir. 1991). “42 U.S.C. § 10172 . In association with the Department’s site evaluation, the Secretary of Energy must provide funds for participating in evaluation activities to affected units of local government, 42 U.”
S. California Edison Co. v. United States, 655 F.3d 1319 (Fed. Cir. 2011). “42 U.S.C. § 10172 (a)-(b). DOE has yet to accept spent fuel from SONGS.”
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.