[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 147 (Tuesday, October 28, 1997)]
[House]
[Pages H9564-H9565]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




              DEFEAT THE NUCLEAR WASTE POLICY ACT OF 1997

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Packard). Under the Speaker's announced 
policy of January 21, 1997, the gentleman from Nevada [Mr. Gibbons] is 
recognized during morning hour debates for 5 minutes.
  Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Speaker, few problems, if any, have been more 
challenging in recent years than the disposal of nuclear waste. I 
believe that sound science and reason and the protection of this 
Nation's citizens should be drawn upon when we address nuclear waste 
storage.
  H.R. 1270, the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1997, will mandate upon 
the State of Nevada and this Nation, the transportation of high level 
waste, while failing, yes, failing, to address the issues of 
environmental protection, safety, and the general well-being of all 
Americans.
  The disposal of nuclear waste is a problem that will exist for 
thousands and thousands and thousands of years. Let us not be hasty 
when making policy decisions that may have serious repercussions well 
into the future.
  The policy of this Congress should not be a quick-fix approach to 
this serious problem. Members should not just wash their hands by 
protecting a subsidized industry, by transporting the most deadly 
material man has ever known, only to hide it in the ground.
  Members should understand and not sweep under the rug the dangers of 
this substance. We should address the problem itself, reprocessing, 
recycling, or changing the dangerous chemical properties of the waste. 
That is the direction that this body and the policy of this Nation 
should be headed.
  Many Members do not know what will be loaded onto the trains and 
trucks. Casks, filled with enough high level nuclear waste to 
contaminate entire communities, massive land resources, and entire 
water supplies. Each cask of nuclear waste holds 24 fuel assemblies.
  In terms of radioactivity, each fuel assembly contains 10 times the 
long-lived radioactivity released by the Hiroshima bomb. My 
constituents and colleagues, are your constituents aware of the danger 
of hauling over 70,000 tons of nuclear waste across this country? You 
should be, because the National Environmental Protection Act of 1969 
requires Federal agencies to consider alternatives, seek public comment 
and consider any and all environmental ramifications before proceeding 
with a major Federal action. However, NEPA and all other Federal and 
State laws are waived in this bill.
  A poll taken in December 1995 concluded that 70 percent of the 
American citizens are against transporting nuclear waste. Since that 
time, more studies have confirmed the opposition of a majority of 
Americans to transfer of this dangerous cargo across our Nation and 
through our communities.
  Thus far, over 400 private property, State's rights, environmental 
and fiscal watchdog groups have expressed their strong opposition to 
this bill. Likewise, American cities such as Los Angeles, Denver, St. 
Louis, and Philadelphia have spoken out against this act.
  To my colleagues who stand in favor of this drastic measure, if my 
voice were worth the $13 million the nuclear energy lobbyists have 
spent distorting the idea of temporary nuclear storage, we would be 
debating a bill to fund the implementation of recycling and 
reprocessing. And why not? It is happening right now in England and 
France. While families in these countries are safe from radioactivity 
and radioactive waste on their roads and railroads, we are debating a 
bill that will do just the opposite.
  Every day we come before this House on behalf of the American people 
to pass legislation that will protect them from things such as drugs, 
repeat criminal offenders on our streets, and

[[Page H9565]]

potentially threatening foreign nations. Yet many of my colleagues now 
want to flood our roads and flood our railroads with deadly nuclear 
waste.
  H.R. 120 proposes that high level nuclear waste be stored at an 
interim storage facility at Yucca Mountain, NV. Proponents contend this 
is the most suitable area for storage, as well as the safest. Well, 
just how safe does this sound to you? A study by the Geological Survey 
discovered 33 earthquake faults directly through the site. The area is 
seismically active. Since 1976, there have been 621 seismic events of a 
magnitude greater than 2.5 within a 50-mile radius of Yucca Mountain. 
For you in the new math, that is over 300 earthquakes a year.
  Another serious danger from this region's seismic activity involves 
the water table. Former senior DOE geologist, Jerry Szymanski, has 
found an earthquake could dramatically elevate the water table, 
flooding the repository with water and releasing radio nucleoids into 
our water supply. I urge all Members to vote ``no'' on the rule and 
final passage of H.R. 1270. I don't want to come back to this House and 
say I told you so.

                          ____________________