[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 62 (Tuesday, May 7, 1996)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E718]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




INTRODUCTION OF THE LOW-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE FEDERAL RESPONSIBILITY 
                              ACT OF 1996

                                 ______


                            HON. JERRY LEWIS

                             of california

                    in the house of representatives

                          Tuesday, May 7, 1996

  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce the 
Low-Level Radioactive Waste [LLRW] Federal Responsibility Act of 1996.
  This legislation would effectively repeal the 1980 Low-level 
Radioactive Waste Act which requires States to enter in compacts to 
dispose of LLRW. That legislation, which was endorsed by President 
Clinton during his tenure as Governor of Arkansas, and Interior 
Secretary Babbitt during his tenure as Governor of Arizona, has failed 
to produce solutions to one of the most pressing environmental needs 
facing our country today, the safe, permanent storage of low-level 
radioactive waste.
  There is no greater illustration of the failure of this statute than 
the 10-year effort to locate a storage site at Ward Valley, CA. While 
the Southwestern Disposal Compact, the National Academy of Science, 
State officials, and other notable scientific and medical authorities, 
have given the green light to transferring the Federal site to the 
State of California, the Clinton administration and California's junior 
Senator have sought to delay the land transfer out of political, rather 
than safety considerations. They have chosen emotional political 
demagoguery over sound science.
  The pressure to delay the construction of the Ward Valley site arises 
not from the most noted experts in the field of LLRW storage, but from 
a well-financed environmental lobby that has made Ward Valley a 
political symbol to demonstrate its control over the Clinton White 
House.
  The University of California--which has nine campuses across the 
State--is one of the largest generators of low-level radioactive waste. 
These campuses produce a combined 22,065 cubic feet of waste material 
annually. The majority of this material is presently stored on or near 
each campus. The two largest producers of waste are located in the 
urban centers of Los Angels and San Francisco. Other waste producers, 
including hospitals and biotech companies, currently store their waste 
in temporary storage facilities throughout the State. Needless to say, 
these temporary sites do not meet the test of providing safe, long-term 
permanent storage. In fact, a fire came very close to igniting waste in 
a highly populated suburb of Los Angeles during the 1994 Northridge 
earthquake.
  Let me make one point abundantly clear: California's junior Senator 
is placing in jeopardy the health and safety of the public she claims 
to care so much about. With the assistance of the Secretary of the 
Interior, she has orchestrated a campaign to delay the transfer of 
Federal land to the State. She has not proposed an alternative site. 
She ducks, weaves, bobs, and delays, but she does nothing to address 
this long-term problem that affects potentially every citizen in 
California. Rather than addressing solutions, she ignores the advice 
and counsel of those who know the subject best and actively pursues a 
political agenda for its own sake, attempting to frighten, distort, and 
confuse the public every step of the way.
  Presently, in the State of California, there is a very real need to a 
find a permanent storage facility for low-level radioactive waste 
presently being stored in over 2,000 location across the state. We can 
wait no longer. In lieu of that, the only responsible action is to 
determine locations for safe, interim storage sites. And where will 
they be built, Senator? Los Angeles? San Francisco? What alternatives 
do you suggest to responsibly address this problem? I believe 
California would be better served by less political rhetoric and 
demagoguery and greater emphasis on commonsense, pragmatic solutions.
  It is now painfully clear, based upon recent words and actions, that 
the Clinton administration, like California's junior Senator, believes 
that the Federal Government is best suited to act as caretaker of low-
level radioactive waste. After a great deal of thought and series of 
discussions with noted experts, I have decided to grant the 
administration its wish. The Low-Level Radioactive Waste Federal 
Responsibility Act of 1996 provides the Secretary of the Interior--one 
of the strongest advocates of waste storage and leading opponents of 
the Ward Valley site--the authority and sole responsibility of 
disposing of low-level waste. It is time for the Clinton administration 
to demonstrate through actions and not empty political rhetoric that it 
cares more about public health and safety than financial promises made 
to its Presidential campaign by the most extreme environmentalist.
  California is now close to realizing an environmental crisis that 
endangers the public health and safety of its citizens. In the 16 years 
since enactment of the Low-level Radioactive Waste Act, not one new 
compact facility has begun receiving waste. That approach, once favored 
by the President and the Secretary of the Interior, has failed. This 
legislation, which I am introducing today, grants the Secretary the 
sole responsibility to dispose of low-level radioactive waste. It is 
time for the Secretary to act. It is time to quit the emotional 
demagoguery of California's junior Senator which does nothing more than 
further endanger the citizens of our State.

                          ____________________