[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 26 (Tuesday, March 4, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1883-S1884]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                             NUCLEAR WASTE

  Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I rise to inform the Senate of recent 
events which relate to the nomination of Federico Pena to be Secretary 
of the Department of Energy. I would like to state up front, the issue 
is not Mr. Pena's qualifications, the issue is whether or not Secretary 
Pena will have the ability to work with Congress to solve the nuclear 
waste problem. As you know, I have been working for the past 2 years to 
find a solution to the Nation's nuclear waste storage problem. 
Currently, civilian nuclear waste is piling up in 41 States at 80 
reactor sites and defense facilities around the country.
  We have waited many years for a solution--we cannot wait any longer. 
There is a critical need right now to find a safe central storage 
facility to eliminate the current threat to the environment and to the 
American people posed by existing storage.
  The administration's position has been that it would not support any 
nuclear waste legislation until Yucca Mountain has been found viable as 
a permanent repository. An event which was not scheduled to occur until 
late in 1998. This position completely ignored the fact that a Federal 
court had ruled that the Department of Energy was required to take 
title to the waste in January 1998.
  This administration's attitude toward nuclear waste storage is 
improper, irresponsible, and unacceptable. The American people deserve 
better.
  I looked forward to working with the new Energy Secretary in the 
post-election spirit of bipartisanship. Indeed, when Mr. Pena testified 
during his confirmation hearing on January 30 that he would work with 
Congress to find a solution for nuclear waste storage, I was 
encouraged.
  I was hoping to open a real dialog with the administration to explore 
possible compromise.
  However, before the committee voted on Mr. Pena, the summit between 
the President and congressional leaders took place on February 11. 
Because I was encouraged by Mr. Pena's statements at his confirmation 
hearing, I asked Senator Lott to raise the nuclear waste issue at that 
meeting. It was already an issue which had broad bipartisan support in 
Congress.
  I was extremely disappointed when I received a report of what 
happened when Senator Lott attempted to raise the issue. The Vice 
President said words to the effect: ``That waste is going to stay right 
where it is until we have a permanent place to put it.'' He went on to 
say that he thought the meeting was to discuss items on which 
compromise was possible and nuclear waste was not such an item.
  I found that to be a totally irresponsible position on the part of 
the Vice President. It also demonstrated a complete insensitivity to 
one of our most urgent environmental problems and ignored the 
contractual commitment. The Vice President had categorically ruled out 
safe, centralized interim storage. He said ``leave it where it is.''
  I had planned to go ahead with a markup of the reintroduced nuclear 
waste bill and the Pena nomination the very next day, February 12, but 
I canceled that business meeting in an attempt to see if the new 
Secretary would have authority to work with Congress on the impending 
nuclear waste crisis.
  Again the issue was not Mr. Pena's credentials, it was a question of 
would he have the power and authority as Secretary to work with 
Congress on the nuclear waste problem.
  During the following week, I requested a meeting with White House 
Chief of Staff, Erskine Bowles, to discuss this matter. That meeting 
occurred last Tuesday.

  I asked Mr. Bowles if there was any way the administration could 
start a dialog to find a responsible solution to our disagreement on 
the waste issue. Mr. Bowles said he would look into it and get back to 
me. The meeting was cordial and I had hoped productive.
  Mr. Bowles got back to me last Wednesday morning by telephone. It

[[Page S1884]]

was a short conversation. I was told that there would be no discussions 
at all on nuclear waste until after Mr. Pena was confirmed. Let me 
repeat that--no discussions at all on nuclear waste until after 
confirmation.
  This is the message from an administration which has had its head in 
the sand on this issue for 4 years. They have refused to discuss or 
take any kind of responsible position on this issue, yet they want me 
and the rest of the Senate to move forward on the nominee which will 
have responsibility over nuclear waste policy.
  A nominee, who when Secretary, would have absolutely no authority to 
even discuss areas of compromise.
  It's no wonder Secretary O'Leary waited until she was free from the 
administration to articulate her support for centralized interim 
storage. A CQ Monitor story last week reported ``O'Leary blamed * * * 
opposition [to interim storage] on White House officials connected with 
Vice President Al Gore. She said they see the issue more in political 
than technical terms.'' ``You'll get more clarity from someone like me 
outside the system,'' O'Leary said. Unfortunately, we cannot wait until 
the next Secretary leaves office before we hear his views on this 
subject.
  Safe nuclear waste storage should not be a political issue. It is a 
scientific issue and an environmental issue--and we need a solution 
now. Sadly, the administration has turned a blind eye and a deaf ear.
  In addition to threats to the environment and safety, 20 percent of 
our electric generating capacity is at risk--20 percent. Starting in 
January 1998, there is a substantial likelihood that American taxpayers 
will either be paying for or be deprived of billions of dollars a year 
as a result of this administration's inaction. That's right, Mr. 
President, estimates of the Federal Government's liability under a 
recent lawsuit brought by the States run between $40-$80 billion.
  Inaction is not an option. Inaction is irresponsible.
  Mr. President, I have not asked the administration to change its 
position prior to Mr. Pena's confirmation. I would like that, but I'm 
trying to be reasonable. I have identified areas where S. 104 can be 
modified to alleviate concerns. I am working with Democratic colleagues 
on the committee to address some of their concerns. I would like to 
have the same opportunity for dialog with the administration.
  Contrary to some White House leaks, that dialog has not been linked 
to any specific Alaska issue and it has not been about Mr. Pena's 
qualifications. It has been largely about the administration's lack of 
a plan to accept the waste by 1998. Americans have paid $12 billion 
into the fund.
  I look forward to working with a Secretary of Energy who can work 
with me and other Members of Congress on the nuclear waste problem. It 
is very hard to explore compromise if one side won't talk.
  It is also hard if one of the sides ducks the issue for years, and 
won't take a position until it is forced to.
  The Vice President says no talk and no interim storage. Period. He 
says ``Leave it where it is''--in 41 States. Other elements of the 
administration seem to want to be more cooperative.
  It took a meeting with Mr. Bowles, a lot of other conversations, and 
a couple delays in the confirmation vote to get them to focus on this 
important safety and environmental issue. The national news attention 
has also raised visibility.
  Now, they seem willing to face the issue. And they are beginning to 
sort out their real position. The current policy squabble inside the 
administration suggests it is finally facing up to this pressing issue.
  I received a letter from Mr. Bowles. It signals that the 
administration is willing to engage in constructive dialog; it comes 
close to finally articulating a policy; and it contradicts the Vice 
President's non-policy policy of leaving the waste where it is until 
the final repository is built.
  I am pleased to receive the letter. After 2 years, I think we finally 
may have a real dialog. The letter says Mr. Pena will have the 
portfolio to talk and work with Congress.
  I ask unanimous consent that Mr. Bowles' letter be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                              Chief of Staff to the President,

                               The White House, February 27, 1997.
     Hon. Frank Murkowski,
     Chairman, Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, 
         US Senate.
       Dear Senator Murkowski: The Administration is committed to 
     resolving the complex and important issue of nuclear waste 
     storage in a timely and sensible manner, consistent with 
     sound science and the protection of public health, safety, 
     and the environment. The Federal government's long-standing 
     commitment to permanent, geologic disposal should remain the 
     basic goal of high-level radioactive waste management policy.
       The Administration believes that a decision on the siting 
     of an interim storage facility should be based on objective, 
     science-based criteria and should be informed by the 
     viability assessment of Yucca Mountain, expected in 1998. 
     Therefore, as the President has stated, he would veto any 
     legislation that would designate an interim storage facility 
     at a specific site before the viability determination of a 
     permanent geological repository at Yucca Mountain has been 
     determined.
       Following confirmation, Secretary Pena has the portfolio in 
     the Administration to work cooperatively with the Committee 
     and others in Congress on nuclear waste disposal issues 
     within the confines of the President's policy as stated 
     above. Secretary Pena will also be meeting with 
     representatives of the nuclear industry and other 
     stakeholders to discuss DOE's response to a recent court 
     decision on the Department's contractual obligations 
     regarding nuclear waste.
           Sincerely,
                                                Erskine B. Bowles.

  Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, based on Mr. Bowles involvement and the 
good faith commitment by the administration to treat this as a policy 
and not a political issue, I am announcing the Committee on Energy and 
Natural Resources will vote on the nomination Thursday at 9:30 a.m.
  We look forward to resolving our differences with the administration 
and moving forward with legislation addressing the nuclear waste crisis 
by the end of this month.
  I look forward to working with Mr. Pena to stop the irresponsible 
policy of piling high-level radioactive waste at 80 locations in 41 
States, near our homes and schools.
  Taxpayers are being exposed to billions of dollars in liability and 
American ratepayers are being cheated out of the $12 billion they have 
paid into the nuclear waste fund.
  Let's get on with it.

                          ____________________