[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 35 (Friday, February 24, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3132-S3133]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. WELLSTONE:
  S. 473. A bill to establish as the nuclear energy policy of the 
United States that no new civilian nuclear power reactors shall be 
built until adequate waste emplacement capacity is available, and for 
other purposes; to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.


                 the nuclear energy policy act of 1995

 Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, today I address a subject that 
has received too little attention here. I'm talking about nuclear 
waste. Since the Senate's last major action on this issue, 8 years have 
passed, extremely little progress has been made, and more questions 
have been raised than resolved. I propose an approach designed to keep 
us from ending up embroiled in another nuclear waste crisis, and to 
that end today I introduce the Nuclear Energy Policy Act of 1995.
  The nuclear waste issue is coming to a boil throughout our country. 
We all know that--and hear every day about--the Department of Energy's 
difficulties in figuring out what to do with our high-level nuclear 
wastes.
  My own State of Minnesota has been at the forefront of this complex 
issue. The legislature last year decided to allow some dry-cask storage 
of high-level nuclear waste on the site of the Prairie Island nuclear 
plant. During the debate, people were confused by the advertisements 
and varying claims the different sides made about the permanency and 
safety of such a waste dump, and about alternatives to nuclear power 
electricity generation. And the Federal Government did not help 
Minnesotans make that decision. In fact, while the battle was raging in 
Minnesota, the Director of DOE's Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste 
Management was telling the Senate Energy and Natural Resources 
Committee that if Minnesota was to allow dry-casks at Prairie Island, 
he could not guarantee that the waste would ever leave. And Minnesotans 
were then and still are all too aware that if Yucca Mountain fails to 
qualify as a permanent repository, there is no Federal policy for what 
to do with the waste then.
  And we also have no policy concerning future nuclear power plants. We 
have no policy protecting us from a second nuclear waste crisis.
  Today I introduce a bill that provides that policy. It should have 
been the first law Congress passed upon entering the Atomic Age. It is 
nothing short of common sense.
  The bill I introduce today simply requires that we build no more 
nuclear power plants until we have some place to permanently store the 
waste they will generate. That's all there is to it.
  There is nothing radical about this idea. It is not a partisan idea--
just look at the list of original cosponsors: two Democrats and two 
Republicans. All this bill does is put the nuclear cart back behind the 
horse, where it belongs.
  It is true that no utility has yet stepped forward to site a new 
nuclear power plant, and that is exactly why now is the time to pass 
this law. Once utilities make a huge investment in siting, licensing, 
and building new plants, the pressure upon Congress to provide a waste-
disposal option for them becomes immense. Unfortunately, if Congress 
acts under such pressure, it might not come up with the best 
resolution. Let's ensure that for future plants, we deal with the waste 
issue in a deliberate way, free from pressure applied by utilities with 
vested interests.
  I want to make this point crystal clear: this bill would not impact 
any existing plants. It would apply only to plants that would be 
constructed after the date of enactment. It would, therefore, not apply 
to renewal of existing licenses.
  Here is the current commercial high-level nuclear waste situation in 
a nutshell: we have DOE, by Congressional mandate, putting all of its 
eggs in the Yucca Mountain basket. Even when Yucca Mountain is on-
line--if ever--it will be able to hold only the waste that has been and 
will be generated by our current generation of reactors.
  Where will the waste from a new generation of reactors be disposed 
of? This bill requires that we answer this question before that second 
generation is born.
  This bill does not judge the deep geologic repository approach that 
the DOE is currently pursuing. Nor does it make any mention of a 
monitored retrievable storage facility. It only says that we ought to 
always have enough permanent storage capacity to take care of the waste 
that will be generated by a new nuclear power plant.
  It is not enough to have a plan for adequate storage. It is also not 
enough to have begun construction on a storage facility. It is not even 
enough to have finished building but not yet licensed a storage 
facility. The permanent storage facility must be sited, built, and 
licensed for operation before construction may begin on a new plant 
under this bill.
  The bill is written that way because of the huge difference between 
the 
[[Page S3133]]  planning and building of a waste facility on the one 
hand, and its actually accepting waste on the other. With politically 
charged issues like nuclear waste, it is wise to make absolutely 
certain that there is water in the pool before jumping in, rather than 
just turning on the spigot, taking a deep breath, and diving.
  I urge Senators to support this important legislation. It is time to 
use a little common sense.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:
                                 S. 473

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Nuclear Energy Policy Act of 
     1995''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress finds that--
       (1) a national energy policy that allows the construction 
     and operation of new civilian nuclear power reactors may 
     serve to aggravate the problem of management of high-level 
     nuclear waste including spent nuclear fuel from the reactors;
       (2) the creation of the nuclear waste has a direct effect 
     on the amount of nuclear waste transported in interstate 
     commerce; and
       (3) it is not in the public interest, and it should not be 
     the policy of the United States, to allow the construction or 
     operation in the United States of any additional civilian 
     nuclear power reactor unless a facility for the permanent 
     emplacement of the waste exists with enough capacity for the 
     waste that the reactor is reasonably expected to generate in 
     its lifetime.

     SEC. 3. PURPOSE.

       The purpose of this Act is to ensure that the United States 
     does not aggravate the nuclear waste problem by permitting 
     the creation of a new generation of civilian nuclear power 
     reactors without adequate capacity in a permanent waste 
     emplacement facility by establishing as the nuclear energy 
     policy of the United States that no new civilian nuclear 
     power reactor shall be built until adequate waste emplacement 
     capacity is available.

     SEC. 4. NUCLEAR ENERGY POLICY OF THE UNITED STATES.

       (a) Adequate Emplacement Facility.--No civilian nuclear 
     power reactor shall be built after the date of enactment of 
     this Act until--
       (1) there is a facility licensed by the United States for 
     the permanent emplacement of high-level radioactive waste 
     (including spent nuclear fuel) from the reactor; and
       (2) there is an adequate volume of capacity within the 
     emplacement facility to accept all of the high-level 
     radioactive waste (including spent nuclear fuel) that will be 
     generated by the reactor during the reasonably foreseeable 
     operational lifetime of the reactor.
       (b) Generation of Spent Fuel.--At no time shall the 
     aggregate volume of high-level radioactive waste (including 
     spent nuclear fuel) that is generated, or reasonably expected 
     to be generated, by all civilian power reactors on which 
     federally authorized construction was begun after the date of 
     enactment of this Act exceed the total volume of capacity 
     available in facilities licensed by the United States for the 
     permanent emplacement of the high-level radioactive waste 
     (including spent nuclear fuel).

     SEC. 5. ENFORCEMENT.

       Any affected citizen may enforce this Act by bringing a 
     civil action in the United States district court for the 
     district in which the person resides or in the United States 
     District Court for the District of Columbia.
                                 ______

      By Mr. MACK (for himself and Mr. Graham):
  S. 474. A bill to provide a veterans bill of rights; to the Committee 
on Veterans' Affairs.


                the veterans bill of rights act of 1995

 Mr. MACK. Mr. President, today my colleague from Florida, 
Senator Bob Graham, and I are introducing legislation to ensure that 
all veterans have access to the same care and benefits provided by the 
U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs regardless of race, ethnicity, sex, 
religion, age, or geographic location.
  Under the Veterans Bill of Rights Act, veterans in all States will 
have equal access to such services as VA medical facilities, treatment, 
and personnel; VA home loan guaranty assistance, job training 
assistance, the administrative claims process, and equal treatment in 
the handling of claims for benefits.
  While equal access to these essential veterans benefits and services 
is implied, in reality, it is not always the case. My home State of 
Florida, for example, has the most 100 percent service-connected 
disabled veterans in the United States. It is also home to the second 
largest overall veterans population. Consequently, the demand for 
services from the Department of Veterans Affairs is far greater than 
other States. Florida's veterans population, however, has far less 
access to medical care and other benefits than nearly every other 
State. In fact, veterans in Florida are forced to wait months for 
appointments at VA medical centers and outpatient clinics while 
veterans in other States have no waiting lines. That's wrong, and it 
must be changed.
  Our Government made a contract with the men and women who bravely 
served our country in times of need. The contract guaranteed that the 
Federal Government would provide for them in return for their service. 
Many who honored this contract were injured or disabled. The Federal 
Government must live up to its' end of the contract by providing 
equitable treatment regardless of where the veteran lives.
  Veterans in many States, like those who reside and vacation in 
Florida, do not receive their fair share of benefits. The Veterans Bill 
of Rights corrects this inequity, and I strongly urge my colleagues to 
cosponsor this important legislation.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                 S. 474

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Veterans Bill of Rights 
     Act''.

     SEC. 2. ADMINISTRATION OF RIGHTS AND BENEFITS.

       The Secretary of Veterans Affairs shall take any action 
     necessary to ensure that any rights and benefits provided 
     under title 38, United States Code, to veterans who qualify 
     for the rights and benefits--
       (1) are made available to the veterans in any one State or 
     geographic location to the same extent as the rights and 
     benefits are made available to the veterans in any other 
     State or geographic location; and
       (2) are not denied to any veteran on the basis of race, 
     ethnicity, sex, religion, age, or geographic location.

     SEC. 3. DEFINITION.

       For purposes of this Act, the term ``State'' has the same 
     meaning given such term in section 101(20) of title 38, 
     United States Code.
     

                          ____________________