The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) lacks the statutory authority to grant licenses to private entities for away-from-reactor storage facilities, such as those proposed by Interim Storage Partners (ISP) in Texas and Holtec International in New Mexico.

The Atomic Energy Act and the Nuclear Waste Policy Act designate the federal government, specifically the Department of Energy (DOE), as responsible for the long-term storage and disposal of nuclear waste, with a clear mandate that such storage be tied to a federally managed permanent repository.

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed this interpretation, ruling that the NRC overstepped its regulatory bounds by licensing private facilities without Congressional authorization, underscoring the legal and constitutional concerns surrounding these projects.

Transporting the nation’s nuclear waste to a centralized facility introduces substantial and unnecessary risks to public safety, the environment, and national security. Moving highly radioactive waste thousands of miles across the country requires navigating through densely populated areas, critical infrastructure, and environmentally sensitive regions.

Each mile traveled increases the potential for accidents, spills, or incidents that could lead to catastrophic consequences.

The logistics of transporting nuclear waste also elevate security concerns, creating potential targets for terrorism or sabotage.

Additionally, the infrastructure required to safely manage these transports—such as reinforced casks and specialized rail, road, or maritime routes—adds complexity and cost without proven long-term benefits.

With current storage at reactor sites demonstrating stability and safety, the dangers of mobilizing this hazardous material far outweigh the perceived advantages of centralizing it, particularly on America’s largest oil reserve.

The proposed centralized nuclear waste storage facilities in Texas and New Mexico face significant opposition from state and local governments, highlighting a critical lack of consent.

Both states have expressed strong resistance to becoming the nation’s nuclear waste repository, citing environmental, safety, and economic concerns.

Texas Governor Greg Abbott signed legislation explicitly prohibiting the storage or disposal of high-level nuclear waste within the state, while New Mexico Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham and other state officials have similarly opposed the Holtec International project, emphasizing the potential risks to the environment and local communities.

This lack of consent underscores a fundamental issue: imposing nuclear waste storage on states that have not agreed to host such facilities violates principles of federalism and the right of states to safeguard their own interests.

The issue of lack of congressional oversight in the licensing of centralized nuclear waste storage facilities raises significant legal and constitutional concerns.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has moved forward with granting licenses to private entities, such as Interim Storage Partners (ISP) in Texas and Holtec International in New Mexico, without explicit authorization from Congress.

The Atomic Energy Act and the Nuclear Waste Policy Act establish that the long-term storage and management of nuclear waste fall under the federal government's purview, specifically through a congressionally approved process involving a permanent repository.

By circumventing this process, the NRC not only oversteps its regulatory authority but also undermines the essential role of Congress in overseeing and approving major national policies related to nuclear waste management.

This lack of legislative oversight diminishes accountability, transparency, and the opportunity for public discourse on an issue with profound implications for environmental safety and national security.

The proposal to establish interim storage facilities in Texas and New Mexico creates a significant risk of these sites becoming de facto permanent storage for the nation’s nuclear waste.

Without a clear and viable plan for a long-term, federally managed permanent repository, the waste stored at these "temporary" facilities could remain there indefinitely.

This scenario not only breaks the promise of a true interim solution but also compounds the risks and costs associated with nuclear waste management.

Should a permanent repository eventually be developed, the waste would need to be transported yet again, doubling the dangers of accidents, security threats, and environmental impacts associated with moving highly radioactive material.

Instead of solving the problem, interim storage merely kicks the can down the road, leaving future generations to manage the consequences and costs of an unresolved nuclear waste strategy.