PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S6537)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Mar 6, 2007
Federal Accountability for Nuclear Waste Storage Act of 2007 - Amends the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 to require commercial nuclear power plant operators to transfer, within six years after enactment of this Act, spent nuclear fuel from spent nuclear fuel pools into spent nuclear fuel dry casks at an independent spent fuel storage facility generally licensed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and located at the power reactor site.
Directs the Secretary of Energy to: (1) make grants to compensate a contractor for expenses incurred in carrying out such transfer; and (2) accept the conveyance of title to a spent nuclear fuel dry cask (including its contents) from the contractor following certification of compliance by the NRC.
States that conveyance of title shall confer upon the Secretary full responsibility for the possession, stewardship, maintenance, monitoring, and ultimate disposition of all transferred spent nuclear fuel. Authorizes the Secretary to contract with the holder of an NRC operating license for power reactors located on or adjacent to the spent nuclear fuel dry cask for the performance of such tasks.
People & committees
Sen. Reid, Harry [D-NV] · D–NV
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S6537)
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works. (text of measure as introduced: CR S2719-2720)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Sep 8, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze S.784 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine S.784 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine S.784 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine S.784 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.