[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 150 (Monday, September 25, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Pages S14204-S14205]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. CRAIG (for himself, Mr. Abraham, Mr. Faircloth, Mr. 
        Hollings, Mr. Kempthorne, and Mr. Kyl):
  S. 1271. A bill to amend the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982; to the 
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.


                  the nuclear waste policy act of 1995

  Mr. CRAIG. Mr. President, today I am joining with other Senators, and 
the Presiding Officer in introducing legislation that will, I hope--
after many years of failure--finally provide for the timely storage and 
disposal of spent nuclear fuel and high-level nuclear waste from the 
Nation's defense program and commercial nuclear power plants.
  The Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1995 creates an integrated system 
that will ensure construction of an interim storage facility and 
permanent repository to manage the legacy of America's great defense 
force, including spent fuel from the Navy's nuclear-powered fleet of 
aircraft carriers and submarines, currently stored in my State of 
Idaho, as well as components from dismantled nuclear weapons and 
commercial spent fuel from about 73 sites in more than 34 States.
  Mr. President, transferring nuclear waste from the many defense and 
commercial nuclear sites to a single Federal facility beginning in 1998 
was the intent of Congress when it passed the Nuclear Waste Policy Act 
of 1982.
  Unbelievably, we are only 3 years from the date when the Energy 
Department is obligated to begin accepting this radioactive waste, and 
the DOE is still studying a site in Nevada to determine if it is a 
suitable location for a deep geologic repository for high-level 
radioactive waste. Because of endless bureaucratic delays that have 
plunged the program into tremendous loss of time, the Federal 
Government now says it will not have a repository operating until 2010, 
at the earliest, and probably several years thereafter.
  That is 12 years after the Federal Government is contractually 
obligated to take title to spent fuel from civilian power plants and 
more than 10 years after the people of Idaho were first promised that 
high-level waste stored at the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory 
would be moved to a permanent repository.
  Mr. President, you and I know INEL has now managed spent nuclear fuel 
from Navy warships for more than 30 years. More recently, it has also 
become the resting place for spent fuel and other radioactive 
components from the Three Mile Island incident. Like many nuclear 
facilities across the country, INEL has served the Federal Government 
and the citizens of America well. But now, the Federal Government must 
accept its responsibility under law to take nuclear waste to a facility 
licensed by an independent regulator where it can be managed safely and 
economically.
  Mr. President, the bill I am introducing with you authorizes 
construction of a federally-licensed facility on the Nevada test site 
near Yucca Mountain to store spent Navy fuel from Idaho National 
Engineering Laboratory and other defense facilities and spent fuel 
currently stored at commercial nuclear power plants from Maine to 
California. The bill instructs the Federal Government to begin 
operation of an interim storage facility in 1998 so that high-level 
radioactive materials can be transferred to the test site, where it can 
be more easily managed.
  Transferring nuclear materials from sites around the country to a 
single facility holds several advantages over the current system. 
First, because the interim storage facility provided in my 

[[Page S 14205]]
bill will be licensed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission ensuring 
safe storage of all materials. Second, a single site will be far more 
economical to maintain and keep secure. Finally, the storage site 
designated in my bill is close to Yucca Mountain, the likely site of a 
permanent repository for high-level waste.
  Mr. President, though some will surely disagree with our approach, I 
do not think it is unreasonable to assume that Yucca will eventually be 
judged as suitable for a permanent repository. Nor do I think that 
establishing a storage site near the mountain compromises the integrity 
of the scientific studies currently ongoing.
  It is important to recall that scientists and engineers at Yucca 
Mountain have conducted the most thorough and comprehensive geological 
survey ever undertaken on any piece of earth. After $5 billion in 
expenditures, the scientists have found no reason why the site would 
not be suitable for a permanent. nuclear waste repository. Moreover, 
the bill I am introducing today ensures that research at Yucca Mountain 
will continue during construction and operation of an interim storage 
facility.

  Mr. President, the bill I introduce today is similar to legislation 
(H.R. 1020) that passed the House Commerce Committees 30-4 on August 2. 
My bill includes the following provisions that reform the Federal 
Government's spent fuel management program in these critical areas:
  The bill reaffirms the Federal Government's responsibility to begin 
accepting waste from defense and commercial nuclear facilities in 1998.
  It authorizes construction of an interim storage facility in two 
phases with date-certain schedules. Phase one will allow acceptance of 
up to 20,000 metric tons of uranium, including defense program waste, 
and phase two permits up to 100,000 metric tons.
  It authorizes the Energy Department to develop a transportation 
system to safely move spent fuel from America's defense and commercial 
nuclear facilities to this single storage site.
  It authorizes continued development of a permanent repository program 
according to DOE's 1994 program approach.
  It requires the Energy Department to take title to spend nuclear fuel 
at plant sites and to operate a transportation system from a contract 
holder's designated site(s) to a Federal interim storage facility.
  The Federal Department of Energy must purchase transportable storage 
containers, taking advantage of technologies available in the 
marketplace. Defense spent fuel must be transferred to containers that 
can be used at a storage facility licensed by the Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission.
  Funding priorities for the Energy Department's program should be: 
First, interim storage and a related transportation system; second, 
construction of a railroad spur in Nevada from existing rail lines to 
the interim storage facility; and third, scientific study for a 
repository location.
  Mr. President, the principle difference between the House bill and my 
bill revolves around future funding for civilian spent fuel management. 
The House committee voted to change current law which has resulted in 
the Federal Government collecting more than $11 billion from utilities 
and their ratepayers over the last 13 years, while spending less than 
half of that amount for the purpose it was intended to be spent for; 
that is, building a nuclear waste repository. The rest of the money, 
more than $5 billion, has been used to finance our deficit spending 
habit.
  The House bill ensures that in future years appropriations in any 
given year will equal contributions from ratepayers. If Congress votes 
to reduce funding for the program, collections from utilities and 
ratepayers will be similarly reduced.
  My bill retains the current funding mechanism for the DOE program. I 
hope as we proceed in the Senate, however, that we will take a close 
look at the House funding provision or something similar to help ensure 
that Congress once and for all moves toward ending the practice of 
collecting funds for specific purposes and then using them to help 
balance our out of balance budget.
  Mr. President, this legislation will solve an important issue for the 
citizens of Idaho, and, frankly, for all Americans. The question of how 
best to manage spent nuclear fuel and other radioactive materials has 
been considered for most of my lifetime, certainly all of my career 
here in Washington. There is no question that centralized storage and 
disposal in a remote location is better than leaving nuclear waste 
scattered across the United States at multiple of sites. It is time to 
implement a centralized storage program and to develop the solution 
that protects public health and safety and the environment and future 
generations.
  A dozen years ago, the Federal Government signed contracts with 
utilities and agreed to take title to and dispose of used nuclear fuel 
by 1998. Now it is time for the Federal Government to live up to its 
commitment to these consumers and to the residents of States like mine 
who have played an essential role in managing the waste from the 
Nation's nuclear defense program.
  Mr. President, there is widespread support for these principles among 
State Governors, attorneys general, utility regulators and more than 
180 Members from both sides of the aisle in the House of 
Representatives, which is considering similar legislation. I urge my 
colleagues to support this legislation to manage the Nation's nuclear 
waste in an integrated, sensible fashion and to demonstrate to the 
American people that the Federal Government can honor its commitments.
  The United States has benefited from the many uses of nuclear 
materials, whether as a deterrent to global conflict or nuclear fuel 
that is used to generate electricity in the manners that were 
environmentally sound and did not create air pollution.
  Our generation has benefited enormously from these diverse uses. We 
have enjoyed peace, economic prosperity and a clearer environment. Now, 
our generation must finally take responsibility to properly manage 
spent fuel from the defense program and from more than 110 commercial 
nuclear powerplants.
  I am pleased that Senators Faircloth, Hollings, Kempthorne,--as I 
already mentioned--Kyl and Smith, are joining me as cosponsors. I will 
work to assure this bill moves through Congress in a timely fashion.
                                 ______