Every nuclear plant is a dump site but here are few example since you don’t follow your own industry...
http://www.yakima-herald.com/stories/2012/03/22/technical-problems-still-bedevil-hanford-plant
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2002/04/0402_0402_nuclearwaste.html
I’m glad you are making a living off of a taxpayer Federally mandated program but that will effect future generations when you are not around anymore to tout how wonderful nuke generation is.
Your use of the word ‘Dump Site’ shows naught but ignorance.
Every nuclear plant is NOT a ‘dump site’, not even close. You’ve never been to one, never worked inone, yet you feel you can opine from some position of ‘knowledge’. Fail.
Hanford is NOT a nuclear plant., It IS a Gov’t run (problematical issues there) research site. Are areas/facilities there needing clean up? Yep. Such is true of almost every Gov’t site, as the ‘rules’ don’t apply there.
That has not much to do with commercial nuclear power, nor the way it is run.
Whether or not that industry, is ‘subsidized’ is not germaine to the arguement. Do you eat food? Farming is subsidized, I am so glad you eat from a Federally subsidized program. You may step down from that soap box.
The effects on future generations would be less, as I pointed out, IF the industry had not been knee capped at every opportunity by those opposed to it (such as yourself).
Reprocessing would be recycling of still usable uranium. A long term repository (Yucca) would be a solution to the current issue of storing fuel in dry casks at each plant.