Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Nuclear Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lawmakers propose interim study on expanding spent-fuel storage rules and reactor security
Summary
Representative introduced expanding state statutes to allow advanced-nuclear manufacturers to store spent nuclear fuel on-site and asked the committee for multiple interim meetings; members also raised the need for a deeper review of security for new reactor projects in the state.
Get email alerts on the Nuclear Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Representative Larson told the Joint Minerals Committee he wants to continue conversations about expanding state statutes for storage of spent nuclear fuel to include advanced-nuclear manufacturing sites and asked the committee to schedule follow-up interim meetings to study the subject. “We’ve had a fairly robust conversation between the Senate and the House committees on this subject,” Larson said, asking the committee to keep the topic on its interim calendar.
Committee members asked for scope and timing. Representative Hiner asked Larson to estimate required time; Larson suggested spreading the topic across at least two meetings. Committee members and others suggested site visits to inform the discussion: Mitch Orr Hammond proposed a visit to the Idaho National Laboratory to observe storage approaches and answer technical questions, and another attendee offered assistance arranging that visit.
Later in the hearing a committee member requested a separate, deeper interim study focused on security protocols for new reactor projects in the state, naming TerraPower as an example of a project in the legislator’s district. The legislator said that study should examine whether state statute or regulations need amendments to empower site security responses and make clear what authorities and protocols should apply in the event of a serious security incident.
The committee did not adopt any formal motion or bill during the hearing. Members suggested multiple meetings and briefings would be required before drafting legislation, including technical briefings from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, operators, and security experts and at least one possible field visit. No statutory text or specific rule language was proposed at this session.

