[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 148 (Wednesday, October 29, 1997)]
[House]
[Pages H9657-H9706]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                  THE NUCLEAR WASTE POLICY ACT OF 1997

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 283 and rule 
XXIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House 
on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill, H.R. 1270.

                              {time}  1648


                     In the Committee of the Whole

  Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the 
Whole House on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill 
(H.R. 1270) to amend the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, with Mr. 
McInnis in the chair.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered as having 
been read the first time.
  Under the rule, the gentleman from Virginia [Mr. Bliley] and the 
gentleman from Texas [Mr. Hall] each will control 30 minutes. The 
gentleman from Alaska [Mr. Young] and the gentleman from Massachusetts 
[Mr. Markey] each will control 10 minutes.
  The Chair understands that the gentleman from Colorado, [Mr. Dan 
Schaefer] will be recognized for the time of the gentleman from 
Virginia, [Mr. Bliley], and the Chair recognizes the gentleman from 
Colorado, [Mr. Dan Schaefer].
  Mr. DAN SCHAEFER of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time 
as I may consume.
  (Mr. DAN SCHAEFER of Colorado asked and was given permission to 
revise and extend his remarks.)
  Mr. DAN SCHAEFER of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, today the House of 
Representatives is considering H.R. 1270, legislation to repeal the 
Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 and replace it with the Nuclear Waste 
Policy Act of 1997. Mr. Chairman, H.R. 1270 was approved by the 
Committee on Commerce by a wide margin of 43 to 3, enjoys broad 
bipartisan support, and was carefully crafted over a 2\1/2\-year 
period.
  H.R. 1270 achieves the following four principal goals: number one, 
the acceptance of nuclear waste at an interim storage facility in the 
year 2002; number two, it continues progress toward permanent disposal 
of nuclear waste at a geological repository; number three, it improves 
safety by consolidating storage of nuclear waste; and, four, it 
enhances consumer protection by ending the diversion of consumers' fees 
for other Federal programs.
  Mr. Chairman, last year the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of 
Columbia Circuit held in the Indiana Michigan Power Company that DOE 
has a legal obligation to begin acceptance of nuclear waste in January 
of 1998. It is impossible for DOE to fulfill its legal duty to begin 
acceptance in 1998, and under current programs that the DOE has, it 
will not be able to begin acceptance until the year 2010.
  H.R. 1270 enables DOE to fulfill its legal obligation to begin 
acceptance at an interim storage facility in 2002, an earlier date that 
permits time for the NRC for licensing of this particular facility.
  The overriding goal of the nuclear waste program since 1983 has been 
providing for permanent disposal of nuclear waste in a geological 
repository. That goal is strengthened by H.R. 1270. Congress has always 
sought to avoid a competition for funding between an interim storage 
facility and a repository. H.R. 1270 avoids such competition by 
providing ample funds to pursue both programs. According to DOE, the 
funding provisions of H.R. 1270 provide sufficient funds to provide for 
interim storage while maintaining the progress towards development of a 
permanent repository.
  H.R. 1270 has protections designed to assure the interim storage 
facility cannot become a de facto permanent facility. There are 
statutory limits to the nuclear waste that can be stored in the interim 
facility, 40,000 metric tons, a small portion of the nuclear waste that 
will be generated, which is 115,000 metric tons.
  The commitment to the repository in H.R. 1270 is reflected in the 
funding

[[Page H9658]]

mechanism of the bill. H.R. 1270 provides for a fee that must average 1 
mill, one-tenth of a cent, between 1999 and the year 2010, but can 
fluctuate to match program needs. Without this flexibility in the fee 
mechanism, funding for the repository may not be assured.
  Maintaining the commitment to the repository is critical to the 
States that have significant amounts of defense nuclear waste at DOE 
nuclear facilities: Washington State, Idaho, South Carolina. Most of 
these defense wastes cannot be accommodated at an interim storage 
facility. They will have to be deposited in a repository of this 
nature. Continued progress on a repository is crucial for these 
particular States.
  During the hearings held by the Subcommittee on Energy and Power of 
the Committee on Commerce on nuclear waste legislation, the Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission testified that on-site storage of nuclear waste 
is safe, but centralized storage of nuclear waste offers even higher 
safety margins than what we have today.
  Right now, nuclear waste is spread all over the country in scores of 
sites in 35 States. Consolidating nuclear waste at one site will 
improve safety and provide for the enhanced protection and the public 
health and the public safety.
  Since enactment of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, consumers 
have contributed $13 billion, $13 billion, Mr. Chairman, towards the 
nuclear waste program. Only a portion of these sums, $6 billion, has 
been spent on the program itself. The rest has been effectively 
diverted to other Federal programs. This diversion has gotten so bad in 
recent years that only 15 cents, 15 cents of every dollar paid by 
consumers, has been spent on the nuclear waste program.
  We need to protect the consumers and stop the diversion of nuclear 
waste fees to fund other Federal programs. H.R. 1270 protects the 
consumers in two ways: changing the fee to an annually adjusted fee 
that matches the appropriations level, and thereby eliminating the 
diversion of funds to other programs; and capping the fee at 1 mill, 
one-tenth of a cent per kilowatt hour. Under H.R. 1270, every penny of 
the fees paid by the consumers in the future will be spent on this 
particular program.
  H.R. 1270 is consistent with the budget laws and does not violate 
pay-go requirements. It was not a simple matter to resolve the 
budgetary concerns related to the bill reported by the Committee on 
Commerce in 1995. The committee went through a great deal of effort to 
resolve budgetary concerns for one reason, a conviction that the 
diversion of fees paid by the consumers must be halted. The current fee 
is considered a mandatory receipt, and deleting this fee was deemed to 
reduce those receipts. The fee in H.R. 1270, since it is annually 
adjusted to match appropriation levels, is considered a discretionary 
fee.
  The committee developed an offset for the loss of the mandatory 
receipts resulting from the switch from the flat mill fee established 
by the 1982 Act to the annually adjusted fee in H.R. 1270. The offset 
the committee adopted was requiring the payment of one-time fees owed 
by 13 utilities by the end of fiscal year 2002. These fees were 
required to be paid by the 1982 Act upon acceptance of nuclear spent 
fuel generated by these individual utilities. Requiring the payment of 
outstanding one-time fees in fiscal year 2002 was necessary to assure 
that H.R. 1270 does not violate budgetary pay-go limitations. That was 
the only reason the committee adopted this provision.
  Opponents of H.R. 1270 have argued that the bill imposes tremendous 
burdens on taxpayers. Nothing could be further from the truth. The 
nuclear waste program has always been funded by consumers through fees 
on electric generation by nuclear power plants. Consumers will continue 
to fund the program through fees provided by H.R. 1270. The only cost, 
the only cost under H.R. 1270, is the cost of disposing of the defense 
waste. It is wholly appropriate that taxpayers fund this cost, since 
the benefits of our defense activities accrue to all taxpayers, not to 
just the consumers of utilities with nuclear power plants.

                              {time}  1700

  I understand the opponents of H.R. 1270 also assert that this bill 
preempts State and local transportation and safety requirements. That 
assertion also is completely false.
  State and local governments are preempted from establishing 
inconsistent transportation safety requirements by existing Federal 
transportation laws, not in H.R. 1270.
  Mr. Chairman, I would urge my colleagues to certainly support H.R. 
1270.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HALL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise today as cosponsor of H.R. 1270, the Nuclear 
Waste Act of 1997, a bipartisan bill that represents a lot of hard work 
on the part of members of the Committee on Commerce and the 
Subcommittee on Energy and Power to find what the gentleman from 
Colorado, Mr. Dan Schaefer, has deemed ``a temporary solution to a 
critical and immediate problem,'' and that is the storage of our 
nation's spent nuclear fuel.
  Mr. Chairman, I think it is certainly necessary. For one reason it is 
outrageous that the Department of Energy has failed in its quest, 
failed in the direction that this Congress has given them. This 
legislation is necessary because of that failure to find a permanent 
repository by the year 1998.
  So far DOE has fallen behind on its responsibility in that it 
predicts a disposal facility will not be operational until the fiscal 
year 2010, which is absolutely unacceptable. That is at the earliest, 
they say. In the meantime, ratepayers have paid in billions of dollars 
to the Nuclear Waste Fund, with only about 15 cents on the dollar 
actually used for radioactive waste disposal programs.
  This is unacceptable and, frankly, it is unconscionable. If my 
colleagues would just be logical about it, for a lot of years nuclear 
power has been a source of electricity supply across our country and we 
have known for many years that we have to find a long-term solution to 
the storage of nuclear waste that is the by-product of that industry. 
If they are going to use it, it has got to be stored. That is as 
logical as it can be.
  DOE had a commitment to construct a permanent repository by 1998, but 
they have not lived up to that commitment, and that is why we are here 
today. The lack of a storage facility is placing very unrealistic 
demands on our Nation's nuclear power plants. Failure to act now could 
lead to the premature closing of some of our nuclear power plants and 
force additional costs upon them for on-site storage.
  It is talk about nuclear as in energy, and there are some here who 
are just opposed to nuclear energy, period. The gentleman from Ohio is 
honest about that, and that is part of his speech and time that he will 
be using. But we see people out by nuclear plants that have signs that 
say ``No Nukes.'' I go to schools and I say, ``Children, how many of 
you are for nuclear energy?'' And they all hold up their hands that 
they are opposed to it. But when they hear the hard cold facts that we 
sent Japan searching for energy, in World War II looking for energy, 
and that there is no question that President Bush sent 400,000 of our 
kids over to that desert looking for energy, and when we point out to 
schoolchildren that, yes, energy or lack of energy causes wars and 
explain that to them, then we tell them if we solve the energy problem, 
which this is a thrust in that direction, that those signs that they 
hold up saying ``No Nukes'' can say ``No Wars.'' Then when asked the 
question again, the hands do not go up because it is properly explained 
to them.
  I think during the year, DOE has made some progress on the excavation 
of the main tunnel at the Yucca Mountain facility, but we have got to 
encourage them to accelerate construction of the permanent facility. In 
the meantime we cannot afford to do nothing. We cannot afford to wait 
another 12 years. It is important that we act now.
  This Congress just voted a few moments ago overwhelmingly not to let 
any amendment sent up, frivolous or otherwise, or sincere amendment or 
whatever, block the progress of this bill.
  Mr. Chairman, I thank my colleagues, the gentleman from Virginia,

[[Page H9659]]

Mr. Bliley, and the gentleman from Michigan, Mr. Dingell, ranking 
member, the gentleman from Colorado, Mr. Dan Schaefer, the gentleman 
from Michigan, Mr. Upton, all of the other members for their hard work, 
even some of those who were opposed to the bill who have sent up good 
suggestions, some of them that we have taken and all of them that we 
considered.
  But this thing started back in 1982. There was no Nuclear Policy Act. 
It said simply: ``Ratepayers, you give us the money and we will pick up 
your spent fuel.'' And we did that. They have given us $13 billion. We 
have only spent $6 billion. In 1987, Yucca Mountain was designated as 
the only place for the DOE to study for permanent repository and a vote 
in the House and Senate took place.
  I think in the appropriations bill in 1987, it may have been on 
December 21, 1987, the vote was for the fiscal 1998 budget 
reconciliation conference report, H.R. 3545. That vote then was 237 to 
181. And it is unfortunate that no one wants this area. It is not 
politically selected by anyone.
  Mr. Chairman, I am sorry for the gentleman from Nevada [Mr. Ensign]. 
The gentleman is doing what he ought to do. The gentleman is 
representing his district, representing his State. But this was 
considered at one time to be in Deaf Smith County, Texas. Had it been 
selected, I would understand that we would have to have an act, but I 
would probably be in the same position that these two gentleman are in 
who represent the State of Nevada.
  But the hard cold fact is that the Nevada test site has been 
dedicated to nuclear uses for over 50 years. We have had 975 nuclear 
explosions there in the desert. They have studied Deaf Smith County; 
they turned that back. Since then, we have studied Yucca Mountain for 
$6 billion dollars worth and still the repository will not be ready 
until 2010 or 2015. I say start it in 1998. That is what this bill 
says. ``Light up or light out.''
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time
  Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 4 minutes.
  Mr. Chairman, as George Gershwin might say, ``It's very clear, 
plutonium is here to stay. Not for a year, but forever and a day. The 
Rockies may crumble, Yucca may tumble, they're only made of clay. But 
plutonium is here to stay.''
  That is the problem, Mr. Chairman. It is here to stay; 10,000 years, 
20,000 years. Nobody knows how long. This bill presumes that it is very 
safe. ``Do not worry about it: We are picking Nevada,'' says the 
Congress. ``We do not have any geologic or scientific evidence that 
supports our decision, but we have decided that we are getting it off 
of all the sites that it has been generated at and we are moving it to 
Nevada.''
  Mr. Chairman, in this legislation, we are going to suspend a lot of 
protections which we give to Americans. We are going to decide here 
today that each American could be exposed to 100 millirems of 
radiation. Now, in Sweden the standard is 10. In Switzerland it is 10. 
In Canada it is 1. Even at the New Mexico waste isolation pilot 
project, it is 15 millirems. But here, we are going to say that 
for every 286 persons exposed, that one of them will contract a cancer. 
We are going to decide that today. We are going to establish a level 
that does not allow the EPA to set these standards. We will decide 
them. That is what this bill says, and that is wrong.

  What else does the bill do? It says that it will be transported 
through 40 States of the Union in trucks and railroad cars, totally 
indemnifying the trucking and railroad firms from any liability, even 
if they are engaged in willful misconduct, gross negligence. They are 
not liable.
  Now what disincentive as a result exists for these contractors to 
ensure that they have not hired drivers who drink excessively in the 
evening, take antidepressants and then jump behind the wheel and drive 
100 miles an hour through tunnels in highly populated population areas 
in our country? None. This bill allows that to happen. They are not 
liable.
  And who pays if there is an accident? Believe it or not, it is the 
ratepayers who will pick up the tab, the very people who may have been 
victimized by an accident created in their neighborhoods.
  And fourth, we have the Holy Roman Empire provision on NEPA. They 
used to say that the Holy Roman Empire was an oxymoron. It was not 
really holy, Roman, or an empire. Well, that is what we have got here 
with the Environmental Impact Statement that is built into this bill. 
It really does not evaluate the environment, it does not measure the 
impact it is going to have on a community, and it is not much of a 
statement. But at least we have got the words in there.
  Then we have the ``interim storage'' oxymoron. We have put a cap on 
how much money we are going to raise from now on from nuclear utilities 
for permanent and interim storage. We are going to spend most of it on 
the interim storage. We are going to build something that is above 
ground and interim, and we are going to pretend that we are going to 
come back and still have a permanent waste repository built in this 
country.
  A vote for this bill is a vote to kill a permanent repository in the 
United States permanently. This is an interim storage bill to just get 
it off the books from the utility executives of today, and forget about 
any permanent solution.
  Mr. Chairman, I hope that the Members who are listening to this 
debate vote for the amendments to protect the American public.
  Mr. DAN SCHAEFER of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5\1/2\ minutes to 
the gentleman from Louisiana [Mr. Cooksey].
  Mr. COOKSEY. Mr. Chairman, I would like to engage the gentleman from 
Colorado, Mr. Dan Schaefer, in a colloquy.
  Mr. Chairman, the ratepayers of Louisiana have paid more than $134 
million into the Nuclear Waste Fund only to see that money used for 
purposes other than those specified by the law which mandated the 
collections. For that reason, I would like to engage in a colloquy with 
the distinguished floor manager to propound a few questions on the bill 
before us, which I have cosponsored.
  As I understand the situation, one of the foremost improvements of 
the bill over current law are provisions which would ensure that monies 
collected from ratepayers will be used for the purposes for which they 
were intended under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act rather than being 
captured and used for other purposes because of discretionary spending 
limits imposed after the Nuclear Waste Policy Act was enacted.
  Mr. Chairman, I ask the gentleman, is this a fair representation?
  Mr. DAN SCHAEFER of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. COOKSEY. I yield to the gentleman from Colorado.
  Mr. DAN SCHAEFER of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman is 
certainly correct. As is more fully explained in the committee's 
report, the basic inequity arises from the fact that the current 1 mill 
fee assessed against nuclear generated electricity is treated as a 
mandatory receipt to the Federal Government, and all programmatic 
expenses are treated as discretionary spending.
  Now, as a result, spending for the waste program from the Nuclear 
Waste Fund is thus counted against various discretionary spending caps 
enacted after 1982 as a means of controlling overall Federal spending. 
As a result, while nearly $12 billion has been generated in fees and 
interest, only a little over $4.8 billion has been spent on the 
program.
  Mr. COOKSEY. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I further understand 
that any effort, other than the one proposed in the bill, to create a 
situation where revenues and expenditures stand on the same side of the 
ledger, allowing annual revenues to offset annual outlays, would result 
in a technical violation of the scoring rules of the Congressional 
Budget Office and the Committee on the Budget.
  The committee, therefore, had to find an accounting offset and the 
source of funds chosen for the offset was the onetime user fees owed by 
certain utilities under contracts entered into with the Department of 
Energy after enactment of the original 1982 statute. Is this an 
accurate presentation?
  Mr. DAN SCHAEFER of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman would

[[Page H9660]]

continue to yield, I would say to the gentleman, that is accurate. For 
example, under the solution to this problem chosen by the committee in 
the last Congress, the termination of the current mandatory 1 mill fee 
and the institution in its stead of a discretionary user fee, we were 
informed that we had violated the budget rules because the Treasury 
would no longer be receiving these revenues on the mandatory receipts 
side of the budget, even though the Treasury would be receiving user 
fee revenues on the discretionary side of the budget as an offset for 
appropriations to fund the waste program.
  Further, as the committee report indicates, 13 utilities availed 
themselves on the contractual option offered by the Department of 
Energy to pay fees assessed against spent nuclear fuel they generated 
prior to the effective date of the 1982 act.

                              {time}  1715

  By requiring these fees to be paid prior to the expiration of fiscal 
year 2002, the committee was able to generate a $2.7 billion revenue 
offset which, as the committee report indicates, was necessary in order 
to assure that the legislation does not violate the budgetary pay-as-
you-go limitations.
  Our understanding was confirmed in the letter of September 25, 1997, 
by CBO Director O'Neill to the gentleman from Virginia [Mr. Bliley] as 
well as the September 18, 1997, letter from the gentleman from Ohio 
[Mr. Kasich], chairman of the Committee on the Budget, to the gentleman 
from Virginia [Mr. Bliley].
  Mr. COOKSEY. Is it true, Mr. Chairman, that such one-time fee 
payments will be credited to the balance of the Nuclear Waste Fund and 
that the program will largely rely on annual user fees to fund both 
continuing progress on the repository at Yucca Mountain and the interim 
self-storage facility mandated by the bill?
  Mr. DAN SCHAEFER of Colorado. My colleague again is correct, Mr. 
Chairman. As the committee report states, it appears that the annual 
user fee that averages one mill per kilowatt hour will be sufficient to 
continue development of the repository and acceptance of spent nuclear 
fuel and high level radioactive waste at the interim storage facility. 
Information supplied to the committee by DOE indicates that in order to 
achieve these goals, a fee of one mill per kilowatt hour will be 
sufficient to maintain progress on the repository and develop an 
interim storage facility.
  Mr. COOKSEY. Mr. Chairman, is it not the case that contracts entered 
into between utilities and the Department of Energy prior to the 
effective date of this act will continue in force unless both parties 
agree to a modification?
  Mr. DAN SCHAEFER of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, that is correct. Section 
2 of H.R. 1270 provides that such contracts shall continue in effect 
under this act in accordance with their terms except to the extent that 
the contracts may have been modified by the parties to that contract.
  Mr. COOKSEY. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman.
  Mr. HALL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes and 30 seconds to 
the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Dingell], former long-time chairman of 
the Committee on Energy and Commerce and present ranking member of the 
Committee on Commerce.
  (Mr. DINGELL asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Chairman, there is a funny thing about nuclear waste 
and other kinds of waste, too. Everybody wants somebody to pick it up 
and they never want them to put it down anywhere.
  We have a massive problem in this Nation. How are we going to resolve 
the problem we have with regard to high level and low level nuclear 
waste? The answer is, we have got to begin somewhere.
  The bill before us is a good bill. Every Member of Congress who has 
dealt with or thought about this issue has been frustrated about the 
fact that we have not dealt with the problem. Money collected for the 
purpose of dealing with the question of storage has been dissipated by 
the budgeteers and by the Committee on Appropriations. This bill 
addresses that problem. It solves it.
  The bill goes further. The bill addresses the problem of where we are 
going to set up an interim storage place. That is important. I will 
assure my colleagues that it is interim because, in the process of 
considering this legislation, we have seen to it that there is not 
enough money for them to store enough of this waste that it can become 
a permanent storage facility. I am aware of the concerns of my 
colleagues on that matter because they are important.
  The bill does not impose any new protections on the carriers or the 
transporters of nuclear waste that have not been a part of the 
protection of every nuclear contractor since the beginning of the 
program for nuclear power in this country, same as under Price-
Anderson.
  I assure my colleagues that the Department of Transportation and the 
Department of Energy will see to it that this is moved safely. If 
Members look at the casks and the carriers and the rules, they will 
find that they afford an abundance of protections. I would think that 
probably the worst thing that would happen, if we have some kind of an 
accident involving one of these vehicles, we would find that they had 
cracked the pavement because that is how strongly constructed the 
carriage devices and how strongly constructed the containers are.
  We have to resolve the problem. The bill provides reasonable 
environmental protections for everybody who is concerned, the best that 
could be crafted. But it resolves an issue which is a matter of great 
concern to the Nation.
  I am troubled that my friends from Nevada are not pleased with this 
legislation. The hard fact of the matter is, the studies that have gone 
on so far have come up with about the best place. That is an area of 
which we have had not only extensive studies of geology and safety and 
terrain stability and water, but also an area in which there have been 
extensive use of nuclear explosives, I think unwisely, but nonetheless 
have done so. And the result will be that the best possible protection 
for everybody can be done and will be done under this legislation.
  I want to commend my dear friend, the ranking minority member, the 
gentleman from Texas [Mr. Hall], the distinguished gentleman from New 
York [Mr. Towns], the chairman of the subcommittee, the gentleman from 
Colorado [Mr. Dan Schaefer], the gentleman from Idaho [Mr. Crapo], the 
gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Hastert], the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. 
Upton] and, of course, the chairman of the full committee for the work 
which they have done to bring us to the point where we are today. This 
is a good bill. It is a step along a long and difficult route to 
resolve an important question which is troubling everybody and which is 
causing huge problems for the Nation.
  I urge my colleagues to support the legislation.
  Mr. Chairman, I have long been frustrated with the pace of DOE's 
efforts, and the lack of any meaningful progress, toward opening a 
permanent repository for nuclear waste. I have spoken previously about 
my keen disappointment that there appears to be no way to recover the 
billions--literally billions--of dollars in ratepayer contributions to 
the Nuclear Waste Fund which the Budget Committee has siphoned off and 
used for wholly unrelated purposes.
  I regret to say that, despite our best efforts here today, this 
Congress is not in a position to remedy all of the problems afflicting 
DOE's waste program. Nor can we guarantee that the repository will open 
on a date certain.
  However, the bill before us is a marked improvement over current law. 
It is a bipartisan bill that passed the committee by a vote of 43 to 3. 
At this time let me thank Chairman Tom Bliley for his hard work on this 
important issue. I also want to congratulate my colleagues--Chairman 
Schaefer, Ranking Member Hall, and Congressmen Towns, Crapo, Hastert, 
and Upton--for their contribution in working through some of the hard 
questions and introducing H.R. 1270. This bill incorporates the 
following important provisions:
  First, and foremost, the bill reforms the funding basis for the waste 
program, and ensures that every dollar contributed by ratepayers will 
be spent on the nuclear waste program--and nothing else. By 
transforming utility payments for nuclear waste into a user fee, the 
substitute puts an end to the diversion of these funds and ensures they 
will be applied exclusively for their intended purpose--the Yucca 
Mountain project.

[[Page H9661]]

  Second, the substitute authorizes an appropriate interim storage 
facility. This facility will open in 2002, and will accept waste at 
nearly twice the rate DOE projects under its acceptance schedule. This 
is the least we can do, given the tardiness of the current program.
  At the same time, however, it is essential that interim storage not 
become a de facto substitute for the permanent repository. In 
recognition of this, the substitute limits the capacity of the interim 
storage facility to about half of what the repository will accept--so 
that a healthy constituency remains for completing work on a permanent 
disposal facility.
  Third, we cannot escape the fact that building two facilities 
simultaneously costs more than building one. If we direct DOE to build 
interim storage at the same time it is building the repository, we also 
must ensure adequate funding for both facilities.
  Therefore, the bill permits an increase in the annual 1 mill per 
kilowatt-hour fee during peak construction years. However, ratepayers 
will pay no more in the long run because any such increase must be 
offset by lower fees in other years--so that the average annual fee 
over the next 12 years is no more than 1 mill. In order to provide 
additional assurance to ratepayers, utilities, State regulators that 
annual use fees will not spike dramatically, the bill imposes a 1.5 
mill annual cap.
  In summary, this bipartisan bill will make a number of important 
changes in the nuclear waste program that will protect our consumers 
and our environment. I urge its passage.
  Mr. DAN SCHAEFER of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the 
gentleman from Idaho [Mr. Crapo].
  Mr. CRAPO. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to speak in 
support of this important piece of legislation, the Nuclear Waste 
Policy Act of 1997. This is a very important issue to Idaho because, as 
I think most people now understand, Idaho has been the recipient of a 
significant amount of the spent nuclear fuel in the country to be 
stored on a supposedly temporary basis, but the progress toward 
permanent storage needs to be resolved and the interim storage facility 
issue needs to be resolved.
  Idaho currently has 260 metric tons of spent nuclear fuel and 10,000 
cubic meters of high level nuclear waste, and we must proceed with 
resolving this issue to protect the geologic areas of Idaho that are 
now jeopardized by the permanent, apparently permanent storage of the 
waste in those locations.
  The point I would like to make is that Idaho is not unique here. 
Perhaps it is Idaho that has had a significantly larger amount of the 
spent nuclear fuel shipped to it, even though it has not generated any. 
But this bill is very much proenvironment because it removes nuclear 
spent fuel and high level nuclear waste from over 100 sites to only one 
remote site.
  My friend from Massachusetts said that, in his argument against this 
bill, that we will see spent nuclear fuel transported through 40 
different States. I think a better way to point it out is that we will 
see spent nuclear fuel transported out of about 40 States and out of 
over 100 sites to only one remote site where the location has been 
designed to have the least amount of environmental impact.
  With regard to that transportation issue, the regulatory regime for 
radioactive material transport has worked well in this country. As the 
gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Dingell] just said, it will be transported 
safely.
  Over the past 30 years there were 2,500 shipments of spent nuclear 
fuel in the United States. Since 1957, there have been 667 shipments of 
Navy spent fuel over 1 million miles. And in the last 22 years, the 
Department of Energy has transported nuclear weapons and special 
materials nearly 100 million miles, and all of that has been done 
without radioactive release.
  There has been an attack saying that there will be insufficient 
environmental analysis. Again, the true facts are that H.R. 1270 
requires an environmental impact statement before every major Federal 
action in the Nuclear Waste Program. It is true that it says that 
alternate sites are not to be evaluated, but that is because this 
Congress is designating the evaluating site. And those who would say 
that a full environmental impact analysis is not being made are simply 
mischaracterizing the terms and provisions of this legislation.
  Mr. Chairman, this legislation is critical to this country. Last 
year, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia held, in 
an important case, that DOE had a legal obligation to begin accepting 
this material by January of 1998. That cannot be done unless this type 
of legislation is moved properly into place to provide for the interim 
storage of spent nuclear fuel. This is important, critical legislation 
to the country. I encourage its adoption by the House.
  Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Ohio [Mr. Kucinich].
  Mr. HALL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman 
from Ohio [Mr. Kucinich].
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Kucinich] is recognized 
for 4 minutes.
  Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Chairman, I would like to correct a few 
misconceptions that I have heard during this debate.
  First of all, the American people were never asked to build nuclear 
powerplants. The industry made the decision to go ahead. There was 
never a vote on it by the American people. The industry decided to 
build nuclear powerplants.
  When the nuclear power plants were built, there were no plans by the 
industry at that time to talk about how the waste would be dealt with.
  There are myths about the disposal of nuclear waste. First of all, we 
cannot dispose of nuclear waste. It lasts for thousands and thousands 
of years, something the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Markey] 
pointed out. I would like to add that we cannot move it either, because 
once it is on a site, that site is contaminated. We cannot transport it 
out of anywhere. Nuclear power sites essentially are scorched Earth. 
That land will never be used again for anything.
  Right now there are nearly 109 nuclear dump sites in America. When 
the waste is moved to Yucca Mountain, there will be 110 contaminated 
sites, not 109 less. When it will be moved from Yucca Mountain, then 
there will be 111 contaminated sites.
  Nuclear power promised power too cheap to meter. It delivered 
electricity too expensive to use. It promised safe electricity. Three 
Mile Island and Chernobyl put the lie to that.
  The nuclear power industry has caused utility rates to go up across 
this country. In my State of Ohio in the northern part of our State, 
utility rates are twice as high as they are in the southern part of the 
State. Everyone in this country who has nuclear power as a source of 
energy knows why their electric bills are so high.
  Now the ratepayers are being told that they will pay more under this 
bill. Utility rates will go up even higher, and why? To bail out an 
industry that has built plants that have been neither used nor useful. 
The nuclear power industry has been holding up utility deregulation 
until they can dump the responsibility for nuclear waste, re: that 
stranded investment, on to the residential ratepayers and the small 
businesses and the taxpayers. This bill is the first step.

                              {time}  1730

  The waste belongs to nuclear power plants. But by law, when this bill 
is passed, the Department of Energy takes title. And who is the 
Department of Energy? The taxpayers of the United States of America. It 
is then the waste belonging to the people, their responsibility. If 
there is an accident, the taxpayers will end up paying for it. The 
waste will last for thousands of years. The taxpayers will end up 
paying to monitor it. The taxpayers will end up having to pay to 
isolate it from the biosphere. The taxpayers. The taxpayers. The 
taxpayers will buy a nuclear pig-in-a-poke waste dump and be stuck with 
the bill for it forever.
  There is no known technology which can safely isolate the waste from 
the biosphere. The transportation of waste through populated 
communities, 50 million Americans will live within a half mile of the 
nuclear transportation routes, ensures that there will be a significant 
hazard to major populated areas.
  The safety issues have not been adequately met in this legislation. 
There were amendments that were never even able to get out of the 
Committee on Rules that would have protected major population areas. 
This bill will, I believe, begin the dawning of new civic activism in 
the United States from people who are fed up with a nuclear industry 
which has in some cases ruined our economy because of high electric 
rates, passed the bill on to the

[[Page H9662]]

ratepayers, and now wants to stick the American taxpayers with hundreds 
of billions of dollars of debt.
  Mr. DAN SCHAEFER of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire how much 
time we all have remaining?
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Colorado, Mr. Dan Schaefer has 11\1/
2\ minutes remaining; the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Hall has 18\1/2\ 
minutes remaining; the gentleman from Alaska, Mr. Young has 10 minutes 
remaining; and the gentleman from Massachusetts, Mr. Markey has 4 
minutes remaining.
  Mr. DAN SCHAEFER of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, might I ask the gentleman 
from Texas [Mr. Hall] if he has some more speakers here?
  Mr. HALL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman 
from Ohio [Mr. Sawyer].
  Mr. SAWYER. Mr. Chairman, 50 years ago in April 1947, a ship in the 
Texas City harbor bearing a cargo of now what stands before us all, 
after Oklahoma City, as an indelible memory of ammonium nitrate 
fertilizer was destined for war-torn Europe. That morning that ship 
caught fire a little after 9 a.m.
  The Texas City disaster, as it has come to be known, happened as the 
ship exploded. Within moments, the Monsanto Chemical Plant that was 
nearby was in flames as entire buildings collapsed, trapping people 
inside. Fires quickly spread to the refineries that made up the Texas 
City industrial complex, with the force of a small nuclear weapon, 
setting off a tidal wave, causing a disaster that resulted in nearly 
600 deaths in a town of about 16,000.
  We have come a very long way in 50 years. Fortunately, we have 
learned from our mistakes. We understand the dangers of densely 
populated areas, and we have gotten very good at taking the right 
precautions and anticipating as many scenarios as possible.
  But nothing is ever 100 percent foolproof, no matter how close we may 
come. If my colleagues believe that transporting the Nation's spent 
nuclear fuel to an interim storage facility makes sense, then they 
would have to agree, whether they agree with that principle or not, it 
should be done as safely as possible. If the unforeseeable or 
improbable does happen somehow, we all want the risks to human life or 
health to be as low as can possibly be.
  In the committee I offered an amendment that would have added 
language directing the Secretary to choose routes for spent nuclear 
fuel and high-level radioactive waste to minimize transportation 
through populated areas. There may be cases where it is safer to use 
routes that are nearer to areas of population because of superior rail 
lines or highways. However, where track or road quality and other 
factors are otherwise equal, it is clear the Secretary should take into 
account proximity to human beings.
  My intent is to enhance safety, not compromise it. I want to thank 
the chairman for working with me and my staff over the intervening 
weeks and for including my amendment as part of his own.
  In the light of the progress in the work of the committee, I support 
this bill. I share the concerns of many, but I believe that the 
chairman and ranking members of the full committee and subcommittees 
have made an extraordinary good-faith effort to address the concerns of 
Members like me who care about safety in densely-populated urban areas, 
as I believe virtually all of us do. And I think that right now, with 
the clock running, this represents a sound path toward a more permanent 
solution.
  Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Maryland [Mr. Cummings].
  Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Chairman, while I do not support this bill, I do 
believe that we must solve our nuclear waste problem. This bill is 
merely a temporary fix for a problem that has long-term implications. 
Our Nation is at a crossroads. We have benefited from nuclear 
technology. We are a Nation that has won wars and deterred others 
because of nuclear science. This technology is a cheap and efficient 
way to light our towns and cities. We have paid a price for this 
benefit.
  Over the last 50 years, our Nation has generated tens of thousands of 
tons of highly radioactive nuclear materials and waste. I cannot stress 
the importance of finding a permanent and viable solution to the 
disposal of these wastes.
  I have many fundamental problems with the bill before us that can be 
solved if the issue were given further consideration. This legislation 
allows for nuclear waste to be stored above ground in so-called interim 
storage facilities located in the State of Nevada. I am concerned that 
legal limitations to ensure that interim storage does not become 
permanent storage will be eroded.
  The bill does not adequately address public health and safety 
protections relating to transportation, interim storage, and permanent 
disposal of nuclear waste. My constituents in Baltimore, as customers 
of the Baltimore Gas and Electric Company, pay into their nuclear waste 
fund, which is designed to cover costs of both interim storage and the 
permanent repository. I worry that places a continuous burden on 
utility customers around the country because this bill does not create 
a permanent repository.
  I urge my colleagues to vote against this bill. We have much more 
work to do to ensure the protection of the public health, safety and 
environment.
  Mr. DAN SCHAEFER of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Knollenberg].
  Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Colorado 
[Mr. Dan Schaefer] for yielding me the time.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 1270. I also want to salute 
the original drafter of this bill, the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. 
Upton], for his work.
  I want to talk a little bit about safety. I want to also talk about 
Halloween for a moment, because it seems Halloween is not until Friday 
but the gloom and doom stories have already begun. The myths about a 
``mobile Chernobyl'' are about as credible as the legend of the 
headless horseman.
  I know that transportation is a problem. Some Members have spoken 
about that. Safety is a problem, as well. I want to speak to both of 
those issues quickly.
  Consider the record: 30 years of experience, 2,400 shipments of spent 
nuclear fuel, over 1.5 million miles logged in this country, does not 
include the 100 million miles that the gentleman from Idaho [Mr. Crapo] 
talked about on the nuclear weapons side, and all of this movement with 
zero radioactive releases and no harm to the environment or American 
citizens. The casks are engineered safe. They are tested, they are 
demonstrated, and they are certified safe by the NRC, the Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission, for transportation.
  I would like to focus on this chart. These are some of the tests that 
have taken place with respect to the casks. They include a 30-foot 
free-fall; a puncture test onto a steel rod, 6 inches, dropped from a 
height; a collision, get this, a collision with a speeding locomotive 
at 80 miles per hour; and fire at over 2,000 degrees Fahrenheit. I know 
the chart says 1475, but beyond that it has gone over 2,000. If that is 
not enough, these same casks were submerged underwater for 8 hours, all 
with no radiological releases. This technology is currently being used 
around the globe, so these casks are safe.
  Opponents argue that H.R. 1270 infringes on State and local 
jurisdictions. We already heard a little bit about that. But, rather, 
H.R. 1270 requires advance notification to State and local governments 
before spent fuel crosses their jurisdiction and the defers to the 
States on designating the best routes. Transportation is safe.
  I urge my colleagues to vote for this bill.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Colorado, [Mr. Dan Schaefer] has 
9\1/2\ minutes remaining. The gentleman from Texas [Mr. Hall] has 14\3/
4\ minutes remaining. The gentleman from Nevada [Mr. Ensign], who has 
been the designee of the gentleman from Alaska, has 10 minutes 
remaining. And the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Markey] has 20 
minutes remaining.
  Mr. ENSIGN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes.
  Mr. Chairman, we have heard several things from the proponents of the 
bill. I just want to say first of all, on the issue of urgency, a 1989 
MRS Commission review found no safety advantage to centralizing the 
storage of spent fuel, taking it from all of these sites to

[[Page H9663]]

one. In 1996, the Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board analyzed the 
issue of interim storage and concluded there is no urgent need, no 
urgent need, for centralized storage of commercial spent fuel. No need, 
no compelling necessity, no safety advantage to be achieved. That was 
1996.
  Now the Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board underwent a change in 
the composition of the chairmanship. So, in effect, there was an 
opportunity for a new board composed of new members to review whether 
or not they would agree with the position taken by the predecessors in 
1996.
  In testimony on February 5, 1997, Dr. Gerard L. Cohen, the chairman 
of the Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board, Dr. Cohen simply 
reaffirmed the position taken by his predecessors that there is no 
need, either for technical or safety reasons, to move spent fuel to a 
centralized storage facility for the next few years. He further 
maintains that to maintain credibility of the site selection process, 
any decision with respect to interim storage should be deferred until a 
technological site suitability decision can be made about Yucca 
Mountain.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HALL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the 
gentleman from New York [Mr. Towns], an original cosponsor of this 
legislation.
  Mr. TOWNS. Mr. Chairman, let us put the facts on the table. In 1982 
Congress passed the Nuclear Waste Policy Act, which placed 
responsibility for the management of spent nuclear fuel, beginning in 
1998 and for its ultimate disposal, with the Federal Government.
  Since 1982 Congress has watched as successive Departments of Energy 
have attempted to move Federal nuclear waste programs forward, without 
any success, for a variety of reasons. Progress in this crucial problem 
has been painstakingly slow. How long must we wait?
  Last year, this inaction resulted in a number of utilities suing the 
Department of Energy to fulfill their obligation to accept spent 
nuclear fuel beginning January 31, 1998. The U.S. Court of Appeals 
ruled in favor of the utilities on this issue. However, there is still 
no mechanism in place to establish an interim storage site that would 
enable the department to move forward with the acceptance of the waste.
  The establishment of an integrated spent fuel management system, as 
established by our bill, H.R. 1270, will permit the Secretary to 
realize safety, efficiency and the economic benefit of a comprehensive 
design. In short Mr. Chairman, a centralized interim storage facility 
would mean high-level waste would be consolidated at one site instead 
of 40 different sites throughout this country.
  Let me assure my colleague, the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. 
Markey], who painted a picture of trucks running 100 miles an hour 
through tunnels, let me assure him that they will be ticketed.
  Now, some have argued that the utilities are merely crying wolf, that 
an interim facility is not needed because utilities can expand their 
own site storage. Well, let me stress here today that an interim 
facility is absolutely critical. The Nation's 107 nuclear plants face 
storage emergencies today. As we consider this legislation, 10 plants 
no longer have room in their original facilities. Next year, 27 will 
run out of space. And by 2010, 80 will lack any capacity to store waste 
at all.
  Moreover, H.R. 1270 postpones construction of an interim storage 
facility until the year 2002.

                              {time}  1745

  This 4-year delay will give the Secretary of Energy an opportunity to 
submit a viability assessment of the Yucca Mountain repository to the 
President and this Congress. Since 1982, utilities have paid over $13 
billion into a nuclear waste fund. Yet the Federal Government has not 
lived up to its responsibility to establish a Federal storage facility. 
We must stop shucking and jiving. Let us not delay any longer our 
responsibility to store the Nation's nuclear waste. I urge my 
colleagues to vote aye and stop the procrastination. The time to move 
is now.
  Mr. DAN SCHAEFER of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the 
gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Smith].
  Mr. SMITH of Michigan. I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time. Mr. Chairman, I think it would be good for all of us to face up 
to the fact that today we are dealing with a solution of disposing of 
one of the wastes of an industrialized society.
  In 1971, during the beginning of the Arab oil embargo, the Secretary 
of Agriculture asked me to be Director of Energy for USDA. Almost every 
morning at 6:30 a.m., we went over to the White House with Bill Simon 
and we talked about the problem. At that time we were importing about 
50 percent of our energy needs. We came up with what we thought were 
wise ideas to deal with the problems. We started to subsidize the 
development of alternative fuels. We decided to start subsidizing such 
things as mass transportation to increase efficiency of energy in this 
country. And we started talking about the wisdom of expanding the 
production of nuclear energy. We also discussed what do we do with the 
waste generated by the production of energy by nuclear power. We talked 
about the possibility of burying it in the ocean. We actually talked 
about the possibility of putting it into outer space and keeping it in 
orbit.
  But instead there seemed to be no good solution, and nothing was 
accomplished. Over the years nuclear waste has continued to be stored 
outside the generating facilities where it occurs. None of the ways 
that we generate energy is benign. They all have serious problems. Most 
of our energy is generated by coal (56 percent). If the administration 
has their way at the Kyoto Conference, what we are going to do is imply 
that we should expand the generation of nuclear energy in order to 
decrease coal generated power.
  It is interesting to note that after our discussions in 1971 and 1972 
of where to go on expanding nuclear energy production to be more self-
sufficient in the United States, the following year, in 1973, a request 
by a utility company to build the last nuclear energy plant to be built 
was received. I would suggest that this country is never going to again 
develop another nuclear energy generating plant.
  The government promised the people of this country in 1982 that 
government would take the responsibility to get rid of the existing 
generated nuclear waste. In return utilities using nuclear power, 
through their customers would pay additional ``taxes'' and send it to 
Washington. Over the years those ratepayers have paid in an additional 
$13 billion.
  Now we are dealing with what the government promised to do. I 
compliment the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Upton] for bringing this 
legislation to us. We are moving ahead. Eventually we are going to find 
other sources of energy in this country. But until then we have got to 
be responsible to make sure Washington keeps their promise. We have got 
to be responsible to develop the best possible ways to deal with 
nuclear waste disposal. It is much more logical at this time to put 
this waste in a centralized location rather than spread it over 38 
States.
  Delays and cost overruns have created a national nuclear waste policy 
of stop-gap measures and ad hoc solutions instead of centralized, 
streamlined results. Today, highly radioactive waste sits scattered at 
over 80 different locations in 38 states.
  Fred Upton's bill will help establish an interim storage facility 
while work continues on the permanent solution--that way we can get 
nuclear waste away from vulnerable areas like the shores of Lake 
Michigan and the Chesapeake Bay.
  Mr. HALL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman 
from Colorado [Ms. DeGette], a valued member of the Committee on 
Commerce.
  Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Chairman, I would like to be clear. Many of us 
understand that we need a sensible policy for getting rid of nuclear 
waste that threatens many of our metropolitan areas. In my City of 
Denver, we are right downwind of some nuclear waste at Rocky Flats that 
will need to be disposed of. But we should not send this waste to 
uncertified sites and we should not send this waste along urban 
corridors that are going to be destructive for transportation purposes.
  The National Waste Technical Review Board, a nonpartisan body created 
by Congress to evaluate the technical and scientific validity of the 
Department of Energy's program to manage

[[Page H9664]]

the permanent disposal of the Nation's civilian spent fuel and high-
level radioactive waste issued its report to Congress in March. The 
Board believes that the viability assessment, which will be completed 
by September 30, 1998, will not provide adequate information for 
establishing Yucca Mountain as a repository site.
  Mr. Chairman, the gallery is not in order and it is difficult for me 
to proceed.


                      Announcement by the Chairman

  The CHAIRMAN. The Chair would remind the guests in the gallery, you 
are guests and we ask that you respect the rules of the gallery, and 
that is to keep silent during the proceedings.
  The Chair apologizes to the gentlewoman. The gentlewoman may proceed.
  Ms. DeGETTE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
  Specifically, the board's report states that a decision to locate the 
Nation's primary centralized storage facility for spent fuel at or near 
Yucca Mountain should be deferred until the suitability of the site as 
a repository location has been determined.
  The suitability of Yucca Mountain as a permanent site will not even 
be determined until the year 2001. Why then are we going to send this 
high-level nuclear waste from the East Coast, from around the country, 
across 40 States of this country, including places like the Mousetrap, 
which as Members can see through this map, runs right through the 
center of downtown Denver, and the location in which 8 years ago a 
torpedo fell off a truck completely shutting down the city for 8 hours? 
Why would we send this waste to an uncertified site only to have it be 
sent somewhere else? And why would we send it through corridors like 
downtown metropolitan areas where millions of citizens could be at 
risk?
  It makes no sense. I do not understand where we are rushing to 
transport this nuclear waste until the site is certified. In addition, 
there is no national standard requiring emergency response training for 
communities along transportation routes so if there is an accident in 
the Mousetrap the local law enforcement officers know what to do. There 
is no requirement that these officials even be notified of the 
transport.
  For all of these reasons, this is a premature bill, it is a bad 
response to a very real problem that we have in this country. I urge my 
colleagues to oppose passage of this bill until we find a permanent 
site for this nuclear waste and until we find a reasonable 
transportation solution.
  Mr. ENSIGN. Mr. Chairman, I include for the Record this letter from 
the President of the United States indicating that he would veto H.R. 
1270.
  The text of the letter is as follows:

                   Statement of Administration Policy

       If H.R. 1270, as reported by the Commerce Committee, were 
     presented in its current form, the President would veto the 
     bill. H.R. 1270 would undermine the credibility of the 
     Nation's nuclear waste disposal program by designating a 
     specified site for an interim storage facility before the 
     viability of that site as a permanent geological repository 
     has been assessed.
       The Administration is committed to resolving the complex 
     and important issue of nuclear waste storage in a timely and 
     sensible manner. The Federal government's long-standing 
     commitment to permanent, geological disposal should remain 
     the basic goal of high-level radioactive waste management 
     policy. This Administration has instituted planning and 
     management initiatives to accelerate progress on determining 
     the suitability of Yucca Mountain, Nevada, as a permanent 
     geologic disposal site.
       H.R. 1270, however, would establish Nevada as the site of 
     an interim nuclear waste storage facility before the 
     viability assessment of Yucca Mountain as a permanent 
     geologic repository is completed. Moreover, even if Yucca 
     Mountain is determined not to be viable for a permanent 
     repository, the bill would provide no plausible opportunity 
     to designate a viable alternative as an interim storage site. 
     Any potential siting decision concerning such a facility 
     ultimately should be based on objective, science-based 
     criteria and guided by the likelihood of the success of the 
     Yucca Mountain site.
       In addition, the Administration strongly objects to the 
     bill's weakening of existing environmental standards by 
     preempting all Federal, State, and local laws inconsistent 
     with the environmental requirements of this bill and the 
     Atomic Energy Act. This preemption would effectively replace 
     the Environmental Protection Agency's authority to set 
     acceptable radiation release standards with a statutory 
     standard. In addition, the bill would undermine the purposes 
     of the National Environmental Policy Act by, among other 
     things, creating significant loopholes in the environmental 
     assessment process.
       Finally, the completion of a permanent geological 
     repository is essential not only for commercial spent fuel 
     disposal, but also for the cleanup of the Department of 
     Energy's nuclear weapons complex and the disposal of its 
     weapons-grade materials. In addition, these actions are 
     necessary to further U.S. international nuclear 
     nonproliferation objectives. H.R. 1270 would, in the near 
     term, put interim storage activities in competition with 
     actions needed to complete the permanent geologic repository. 
     Consequently, the bill's enactment could delay the 
     appropriate disposition of our surplus weapons-grade 
     materials.

  Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Nevada [Mr. 
Gibbons], who sits on the Committee on Resources, the major 
environmental committee, who voted this bill out unfavorably.
  Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the gentleman for yielding 
me this time, and I do want to address some of the myths that I have 
heard expressed here today about H.R. 1270. First of all, I want to 
address the issue of the ostrich policy, of sticking your head in the 
sand and hoping that nobody else sees the problem.
  When I was a child, this reminds me of what my mother told me about 3 
monkeys. Hear no evil, see no evil and speak no evil. It is odd that 
those people who are in support of this bill are exactly those ones who 
have nuclear waste in their backyard that want to get it out. They are 
the ones that have benefited from this issue. Now they want to get rid 
of it and they want to get rid of it by the most expedient method 
possible, getting it wherever it is into the State of Nevada.
  Let me address the issue about the interim storage site versus the 
permanent storage site. They are not one and the same. They are miles 
apart. The interim storage site is a nuclear test site. Yes, indeed we 
did detonate some nuclear weapons there years ago. We regret we did 
that. We regret that the State of Nevada almost paid the whole price 
for the nuclear industry. But the permanent site is miles away. It is 
not even co-located. We are making two sites in Nevada, not one.
  Second, we are not talking about some magic cosmic mode of 
transportation. We are not just picking this stuff up and then setting 
it down, as I heard someone say earlier. What we are doing is shipping 
this through communities, 43 States, hundreds of communities, numerous 
schools with children at play. Let me say when we look at this map 
here, this is where we are sending it through this country. These are 
the rail and highway systems through which we are bringing most of it 
from east of the Mississippi River, west to Nevada, right there.
  Transportation is probably the biggest issue we have got here today. 
The likelihood of an accident is more than just a remote possibility. 
It is a reality. When we look at this accident, this is a train 
accident, a recent train accident. I hope people vote against this.
  Let me talk about some of the standards that I have heard here today. 
We have dropped one of these casks from a standard height of 30 feet. 
Mr. Chairman, it is 450 feet off Hoover Dam to the bottom. That is a 
little more than 30 feet. This cask would not stand up to the drop of 
450 feet into the bottom of the Colorado River at the base of this dam. 
I guarantee my colleagues that this cask would be in that water more 
than 8 hours. Fires with metal containing titanium or other metals burn 
at a temperature of in excess of 3,000 degrees. That is a little more 
than the fire that they have exposed these casks to. This is a kind of 
accident that could occur, that will occur if we allow this stuff, this 
nuclear waste, the most dangerous stuff known to man, to be transported 
across our community, through our States, next to schools. It is a 
danger to every American. We ought to oppose this bill. We ought to 
reject it outright, and we ought to change the policy from burial.
  Mr. HALL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman 
from Tennessee [Mr. Gordon], a member of the committee.
  Mr. GORDON. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in favor of H.R. 1270. Many 
Americans have a temporary nuclear storage site close to home. My own 
State of Tennessee has a legacy of high level nuclear waste that is 
stored onsite. The nuclear weapons that were

[[Page H9665]]

built in Oak Ridge helped this entire Nation win World War II and the 
Cold War. Now we have the opportunity through the Nuclear Waste Policy 
Act of 1997 to establish a central storage facility in an 
underpopulated area that would be easier, safer and more economical to 
monitor.

                              {time}  1800

  I understand the concerns of my colleagues who oppose this bill. I 
know that no one wants a nuclear storage site in their backyard, but 
there is no magic wand that will make this waste go away. It is here, 
we have no choice but to deal with it. We need a solution to this 
growing problem, and the repository at the Yucca Mountain offers the 
best opportunity.
  The Southern Governor's Association took steps in this direction 
earlier this month by passing a resolution in favor of H.R. 1270. 
Additionally, we cannot ignore the fact that consumers have paid into 
the Nuclear Waste Fund to store this waste. TVA alone has expended over 
$20 million in additional funds because DOE has failed to take this 
waste.
  We must assure the public of the safety of any repository. The 
nuclear industry has been storing fuel in 34 States for more than three 
decades. Though the industry is now safely managing used fuel, long-
term on-site storage was never intended.
  A central storage facility to keep much of this waste is necessary, 
and the Yucca Mountain fits the requirement for safe storage of spent 
nuclear fuel.
  Mr. Chairman, H.R. 1270 meets the public's need for a safe 
alternative for temporary used fuel storage at one site until a 
permanent storage facility is completed. This is a long overdue 
solution to a difficult issue.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Chair would announce that the order of closing will 
be the gentleman from Massachusetts, Mr. Markey, first; the gentleman 
from Nevada, Mr. Ensign, second; the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Hall, 
third; and the gentleman from Colorado, Mr. Dan Schaefer, fourth.
  Mr. DAN SCHAEFER of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to 
the distinguished gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Hastert].
  Mr. HASTERT. Mr. Chairman, we are looking at an issue that certainly 
covers a lot of folks' interests, and certainly the people who oppose 
this piece of legislation certainly have a backyard interest of their 
own.
  Mr. Chairman, 15 years ago, that is how long ago Congress originally 
passed the Nuclear Waste Policy Act. In 1992, Congress envisioned that 
the Department of Energy would be accepting spent fuel by 1998. That is 
less than two months away.
  Fifteen years ago, Ronald Reagan was two years into his first term, 
Tip O'Neill was Chairman, typewriters, not computers were the norm, and 
the Soviet Union was still considered the evil empire.
  But perhaps most telling was the fact that 1992 was still a full two 
years before the Chicago Cubs would make it to post-season play. If you 
are a Cubs fan, you will know how long that really was.
  Mr. Chairman, unfortunately though, after billions of dollars and a 
decade and a half, we are only a few steps closer to opening a 
permanent repository than we were in 1982. This bill replaces the 
sluggish action that has plagued DOE's Nuclear Waste Program with 
specific achievable deadlines and ensures that another 15 years will 
not pass before the Federal Government lives up to its responsibility 
of accepting spent fuel.
  Mr. Chairman, we have spent billions of dollars looking into this 
issue. We have assessed from ratepayers, not taxpayers, but ratepayers. 
Every time somebody pays their utility bill, we are reaching into their 
pocket and we have taken billions of their dollars. What has the 
Federal Government been able to deliver for that billions of dollars? 
Absolutely nothing.
  The ratepayers, our constituents, Mr. Chairman, know that it is time 
for this Congress to take the bull by the horns and deliver the promise 
that it made in 1982.
  Mr. Chairman, we need to pass this bill. We need to fulfill the 
promise to the American people that this country will have a safe and 
sound nuclear waste policy. We cannot allow another 15 years to go by. 
Regardless of what we hear on the floor today, we need to find an 
environmentally sound and permanent solution to the management of spent 
nuclear waste.
  Mr. Chairman, I include the following for the Record.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
  H.R. 1270 (passed E+P subcmte. 21-3)     S. 104 (passed Senate 65-34)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                             TRANSPORTATION
 
--No rail access directly to Yucca Mtn.  --No immediate rail access to
 But contemplates the possibility of      Yucca Mtn. No later than one
 future rail access.                      year after enactment of the
--Use heavy-haul from main rail line at   bill, DOT will promulgate
 Caliente, NV to Yucca Mtn.               routing rule for nuclear waste
--Construction and operation of           by rail to Yucca.
 railroad requires NEPA review.          --Heavy haul capability must be
--Advanced state notification             ready 18 mos. After NRC issues
 requirement.                             a license for an Interim
--State has preferred routes for          Storage Facility (ISF).
 transporting nuke waste.                --Each state has preferred
--Follows current HazMat regulations on   transportation routes.
 transport of hazardous waste.           --Gov's must be notified when
--Heavy-haul must be ready by 1/31/2002   fuel comes into state.
--No provision for transportation        --Nationwide transportation
 training requirements (this is major     educ. program.
 in the Senate's bill).                  --Major training requirements
--Tech. assis. to states in case of       for indivs. involved in
 emergency.                               transportation. (This
                                          provision was important to
                                          gain the support of Dem.
                                          Members and the labor unions.)
 
                       MILL FEE AND ONE-TIME FEES
 
--Beginning FY99 & opening of perm.      --Capped at 1 mill. (See below
 repos. the annual mill fee must avg.     for pros and cons).
 to 1 mill. & can't exceed 1.5 mills.
 After perm. repos. is functional, mill
 fee capped at 1 mill.
--One-Time Fees paid in 2002...........
 
                              DEFENSE WASTE
 
--DOE must accept fuel from defense      --DOE must accept fuel from
 activities (Crapo).                      defense activities (Craig).
 
                      DEFENSE WASTE FACILITY (ISF)
 
--To be located at Yucca Mountain......  --To be located at Yucca
--Functional 1/31/2002.................   Mountain
--Construc. begins when Sec'y applies    --Functional 6/30/2003.
 for NRC license.
 
                        INTERIM STORAGE CAPACITY
 
--Phase I: 10,000 MTU and licensed for   --No phases for the development
 20 years. License must be filed within   of the ISE.
 12 months of enactment.                 --The capacity will be
--Phase II: capacity increased to 40K     determined at the time of
 with an initial term of 100 years.       license appl. and based on
--No specific date for start of phase     emplacement schedule and
 II to begin operation.                   expected date of perm.
                                          repository operation
                                         --The capacity is expandable.
                                         --Licensed for 40 year term.
 
                          PERMANENT REPOSITORY
 
--Sec'y must apply to NRC for            --Requires DOE to continue with
 construction authorization no later      site characterization at
 than 12/31/02.                           Yucca.
--Perm. Repos. will be functional 1/17/  --Requires DOE Sec. to apply to
 10.                                      NRC for construction auth. no
--If Sec. determines Yucca is not         later than 10/31/01.
 suitable, he must contact Congress w/   --Functional 2015.
 in 6 mos. with recommendations for a
 new site.
 
                                PAYGO FIX
 
--The House has a 5 year budget window   --The Senate has a 10 year
 which must be addressed.                 budget window which must be
--The House addresses its PAYGO           addressed.
 shortfall by switching to a user fee    --The Senate addressed their
 in FY99 and collecting the outstanding   PAYGO shortfall by continuing
 one-time fees in 2002.                   the mandatory receipt of $600
--The fee is paid into the Treasury,      million during FY98. In FY99,
 not the Nuclear Waste Fund.              it switches to a user fee
                                          until FY01 where the
                                          government collects only what
                                          it will spend on Yucca. In
                                          FY02, they collect the payment
                                          of one time fees. This
                                          scenario will cover the first
                                          5 years. In FY02, they revert
                                          back to the mandatory $600
                                          million receipts to pay for
                                          the next 5 years. (This user
                                          fee is suspended during this
                                          period and utilities are
                                          forced to pay the full amount
                                          to cover the PAYGO problem).
                                          In 2007, the user fee is
                                          reestablished. The fee is paid
                                          to the Treasury, not the
                                          Nuclear Waste Fund.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page H9666]]

  Mr. HALL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman 
from Arkansas [Mr. Berry].
  Mr. BERRY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 1270. Currently, a 
part of every electricity consumer's bill goes directly into the 
Nuclear Waste Fund. This fund was set up by the Congress in 1982 and 
requires the Department of Energy to set up a nuclear storage facility 
and begin accepting nuclear waste by 1998.
  However, out of the over $12 billion that have already been paid into 
the fund, only $4.8 billion have been spent on waste storage research 
and funding for storage facilities.
  Since the Department of Energy has not constructed a waste storage 
facility, the other $7 billion has been diverted into unrelated uses 
such as deficit reduction. This is the same type of problem we have 
with the Highway Trust Fund. Citizens constantly pay into this fund, 
but they see nothing in return.
  If the Department of Energy had performed its required actions, we 
would not be debating this bill. An interim storage facility would 
already be in place and a permanent facility would be in the near 
future.
  If the Department of Energy had performed its required actions, then 
this money would have been used for its intended purpose, for managing 
the efficient disposal of nuclear waste.
  Arkansans and other electricity consumers are already paying twice 
for nuclear waste, one payment into the Nuclear Waste Fund and another 
payment to maintain on-site storage facilities across the United 
States. This double payment can and will be halted with the passage of 
this bill.
  Mr. Chairman, on behalf of all electricity consumers, I urge my 
colleagues to vote for H.R. 1270.
  Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from California [Mr. Miller].
  (Mr. MILLER of California asked and was given permission to revise 
and extend his remarks.)
  Mr. MILLER of California. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the 
legislation.
   Mr. Chairman, when Congress enacted the Nuclear Waste Policy Act in 
1982, and then amended it in 1987, we made certain agreements among 
ourselves, the utility companies and the American people.
  One, we decided that the federal government would assume the 
responsibility for permanent disposal of high level nuclear waste.
  Two, we would limit our consideration of possible locations for such 
permanent disposal to Yucca Mountain in Nevada.
  Three, the nuclear utilities would pay a fee to the US government to 
run the program and fund the construction of the permanent facility.
  And, four, the utility companies would keep their nuclear waste until 
we knew with certainty that the Yucca Mountain repository would be 
built.
  The bill before us today, H.R. 1270, fundamentally changes that 
covenant.
  On October 8, the Resources Committee without one public hearing, 
reported unfavorably this extensive and complicated bill, H.R. 1270.
  Today, we are considering a bill that will overturn the decision we 
made to focus on construction of a safe, permanent facility and instead 
mandate the immediate construction of a temporary storage site at Yucca 
Mountain in Nevada.
  In so doing, the bill will prejudice the ongoing viability studies, 
and make it more difficult for us to learn whether Yucca Mountain is 
the right place to permanently store high level nuclear waste.
  Additionally, no one has done any scientific studies to determine 
whether the site specified in HR 1270 is safe for interim storage of 
high level nuclear waste.
  The bill will preempt all federal and state laws that the Secretary 
of Energy deems to be inconsistent, or that present an obstacle, to 
implementation of this new law.
  During the 1980's, Congress built a strong national policy on nuclear 
waste. We decided that the federal government would take responsibility 
for the permanent disposal of high level nuclear waste. We decided to 
find the appropriate location for that disposal and to build the 
permanent facility before moving tens of thousands of high level 
nuclear waste now located at nuclear reactors across the country to the 
permanent disposal site. High level nuclear waste can be moved safely; 
but, there is no reason to move it more than is necessary.
  Yes, there have been problems with the Department of Energy's 
implementation of this plan. But, they appear to be on the right track 
now. The science we need to make an informed and objective decision is 
nearly complete. HR 1270 would prejudice the determination on whether 
Yucca Mountain can and should contain the permanent repository for the 
nation's high level nuclear waste by creating a de facto repository at 
the Nevada Test Site.
  HR 1270 affirmatively preempts the National Environmental Policy Act. 
It legislates the selection and construction of an interim storage 
facility on public lands without any scientific or environmental 
analysis to support the premise.
  Current law prohibits the construction of an interim storage facility 
in Nevada, and limits the size of any other temporary facility to 
10,000 tons of waste. HR 1270 mandates that DOE build the interim 
facility in Nevada and allows up to 40,000 tons of high level nuclear 
waste to be immediately stored there--with no environmental compliance.
  President Clinton will veto this bill if it reaches his desk. Senator 
Harry Reid and his Nevada colleagues are unanimously opposed to this 
bill. I urge my colleagues to oppose H.R. 1270.
  Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. HALL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield one minute to the gentleman 
from Massachusetts [Mr. Markey].
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Markey] is 
recognized for four minutes.
  Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Chairman, I will include for the record letters from 
Erskine Bowles, the Chief of Staff to the President; Franklin Raines, 
the Director of OMB; and a formal statement of administration policy 
expressing opposition to the bill and the recommendation of the 
President's advisors that the bill be vetoed.
  Mr. Chairman, we are at a very bad point right now. There was at 
least at the beginning of the discussion of the disposal of all nuclear 
wastes in the United States some integrity in the process back in 1982. 
We set out to find the site, east of the Mississippi, west of the 
Mississippi, wherever it may be.
  But in 1987, we came back here to Congress, and many people were very 
upset about what was going on. They might have been pro nuclear, but 
they did not want the waste in their district. So we passed another 
bill in 1987. What did we say?
  Well, the Chairman of the House then came from Texas. He said, ``I 
don't want it in Texas.'' That was one of the sites. The second site 
was in Washington State. The majority leader came from Washington 
State. He said, ``I don't want it in Washington State.'' It was out. 
The third State was the salt domes in Louisiana. The Chairman of the 
Committee on Energy came from Louisiana. He said, ``I don't want it in 
Louisiana,'' and it was out. The fourth site was in North Carolina. The 
ranking Republican on the Committee on Commerce came from North 
Carolina. North Carolina was out. The fifth site was the solid granite 
of New Hampshire, and Ronald Reagan and George Bush said, ``That is out 
in 1988. We are not burying all the nuclear waste in America in New 
Hampshire.''
  So we kept searching, playing this game of thermonuclear hearts, 
trying to stick the queen of spades with somebody. So we looked around, 
and what did we find? We found the State of Nevada, two Congressmen, 
two Senators. ``You get all the nuclear waste. We are picking you.''
  Even that had some integrity. At least they were going to have to 
determine whether or not the site was suitable for all the nuclear 
waste.
  But, today, we come back again. We are not happy with that. There are 
still five years until the year 2002, from deciding whether or not, in 
fact, Yucca Mountain is the right place for all the nuclear waste, but 
we cannot wait.
  So what are we doing here today? We are going to decide to take all 
of the nuclear waste in America, put it on trucks, put it in railroad 
cars, and ship it to Nevada, and put it in an above-ground mausoleum 
that is going to be finished in 2002, just in time to have the site 
characterization process by scientists and geologists tell us that 
Yucca Mountain is not the right place for a permanent repository.
  As a result, we will have to begin the process all over again to find 
the right site, and eventually we will have to pack all the nuclear 
waste up again, put it back in vans and trucks and railroad cars, and 
send it to another place in America.
  Why are we doing this? We are doing this not because there is some 
emergency at any nuclear facility in America. In fact, we are told that 
it is 100

[[Page H9667]]

percent safe at every facility right now. We are doing this because the 
nuclear industry does not want a permanent repository. They do not want 
to have to pay for it.
  They promised the American people that nuclear power was going to be 
too cheap to meter, and that they were going to be able to bury the 
waste permanently. We now know it is the most expensive way of 
generating electricity. Wall Street killed nuclear power it wasn't some 
ponytailed, granola-chomping protest force outside a nuclear power 
plant.
  Secondly, they do not know where to bury the nuclear waste and they 
do not have any intention of paying for it, and they want us to pretend 
here today that we are going to do something about it and stick the 
queen of spades with the State of Nevada.
  Well, Mr. Chairman, this is a completely irresponsible position to 
take. It is intergenerationally irresponsible for this generation to 
stick the next generation with the job and the cost of burying all this 
waste.
  This is a bad bill. It is bad environmental policy. It is bad fiscal 
policy, and it is bad policy intergenerationally. I urge a no vote on 
this bill as strongly as I can of any bill that has ever come out on 
this House floor.
  Mr. Chairman, I include the letters referred to earlier for the 
Record.

                                              The White House,

                                     Washington, October 28, 1997.
     Hon. Newt Gingrich,
     Speaker of the House of Representatives,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. Speaker: It is my understanding that the House of 
     Representatives soon will consider H.R. 1270. I am writing to 
     reiterate the Administration's objection to this legislation. 
     If the bill were presented to him in its current form, the 
     President would veto it.
       As I have stated previously, 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--
     reflected in the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982--should 
     remain the basic goal of high-level radioactive waste 
     management policy.
       Any decision on the siting of an interim storage facility 
     should be based on objective, science-based criteria, and be 
     fully protective of public health and safety and the 
     environment. This bill is unacceptable to the Administration 
     because it falls far short of those goals. Additionally, H.R. 
     1270 does not contain provisions to offset potential deficit 
     increases in its early years; consequently, if the bill were 
     enacted, any deficit effects could contribute to a sequester 
     of mandatory spending in each of FY 1999 through 2001.
       Secretary Pena and the entire Administration remain 
     committed to working cooperatively with the Congress and with 
     all involved stakeholders on nuclear waste disposal issues 
     within the confines of the President's policy. The Department 
     is on an aggressive schedule to resolve the key unresolved 
     scientific and technical questions about Yucca Mountain.
           Sincerely,
                                                Erskine B. Bowles,
     Chief of Staff to the President.
                                  ____

         Executive Office of the President, Office of Management 
           and Budget,
                               Washington, DC, September 18, 1997.
     Hon. Thomas J. Bliley, Jr.
     Chairman, Committee on Commerce, House of Representatives, 
         Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. Chairman: I am writing to advise you of the 
     Administration's views on H.R. 1270, the proposed Nuclear 
     Waste Policy Act of 1997. The Administration shares your 
     commitment to resolving the complex and important issue of 
     nuclear waste management 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.
       Congress established a process to ensure that sound 
     technical judgment plays the primary role in determining 
     whether a particular site can host a permanent nuclear waste 
     repository. Designating the Nevada Test Site as the interim 
     waste storage site at this point undermines the ongoing 
     evaluation of Yucca Mountain as a permanent disposal site as 
     required by the Nuclear Waste Policy Act Amendments of 1987. 
     In addition, the bill runs the risk of reducing resources 
     needed for this effort. More importantly, it could undermine 
     the credibility of the Nation's nuclear waste disposal 
     program by prejudicing the Yucca Mountain permanent 
     repository decision.
       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. Therefore, the 
     President has stated that he would veto any legislation that 
     would designate an interim storage facility at a specific 
     site before the viability of a permanent geologic repository 
     at Yucca Mountain has been determined.
       In addition, the bill presents a number of environmental 
     problems, including the removal of the Environmental 
     Protection Agency from its responsibility for developing a 
     radiation exposure standard and preempting the National 
     Environmental Policy Act and other applicable Federal, State 
     and local laws.
       The Administration understands the concerns of the utility 
     industry, public utility commissions, and others about the 
     inability of the Department of Energy to accept spent nuclear 
     fuel by January 31, 1998. Secretary Pena has made every 
     effort since his confirmation to work cooperatively with the 
     affected parties to find satisfactory ways of mitigating the 
     impacts of this delay and will continue to do so.
       Thank you for your consideration of these views.
           Sincerely,
                                               Franklin D. Raines,
     Director.
                                  ____

         Executive Office of the President, Office of Management 
           and Budget,
                                 Washington, DC, October 24, 1997.

                   Statement of Administration Policy


              H.R. 1270--Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1997

       If H.R. 1270, as reported by the Commerce Committee, were 
     presented in its current form, the President would veto the 
     bill. H.R. 1270 would undermine the credibility of the 
     Nation's nuclear waste disposal program by designating a 
     specified site for an interim storage facility before the 
     viability of that site as a permanent geological repository 
     has been assessed.
       The Administration is committed to resolving the complex 
     and important issue of nuclear waste storage in a timely and 
     sensible manner. The Federal government's long-standing 
     commitment to permanent, geological disposal should remain 
     the basic goal of high-level radioactive waste management 
     policy. This Administration has instituted planning and 
     management initiatives to accelerate progress on determining 
     the suitability of Yucca Mountain, Nevada, as a permanent 
     geologic disposal site.
       H.R. 1270, however, would establish Nevada as the site of 
     an interim nuclear waste storage facility before the 
     viability assessment of Yucca Mountain as a permanent 
     geologic repository is completed. Moreover, even if Yucca 
     Mountain is determined not to be viable for a permanent 
     repository, the bill would provide no plausible opportunity 
     to designate a viable alternative as an interim storage site. 
     Any potential siting decision concerning such a facility 
     ultimately should be based on objective, science-based 
     criteria and guided by the likelihood of the success of the 
     Yucca Mountain site.
       In addition, the Administration strongly objects to the 
     bill's weakening of existing environmental standards by 
     preempting all Federal, State, and local laws inconsistent 
     with the environmental requirements of this bill and the 
     Atomic Energy Act. This preemption would effectively replace 
     the Environmental Protection Agency's authority to set 
     acceptable radiation release standards with a statutory 
     standard. In addition, the bill would undermine the purposes 
     of the National Environmental Policy Act by, among other 
     things, creating significant loopholes in the environmental 
     assessment process.
       Finally, the completion of a permanent geological 
     repository is essential not only for commercial spent fuel 
     disposal, but also for the cleanup of the Department of 
     Energy's nuclear weapons complex and the disposal of its 
     weapons-grade materials. In addition, these actions are 
     necessary to further U.S. international nuclear 
     nonproliferation objectives. H.R. 1270 would, in the near-
     term, put interim storage activities in competition with 
     actions needed to complete the permanent geologic repository. 
     Consequently, the bill's enactment could delay the 
     appropriate disposition of our surplus weapons-grade 
     materials.


                         PAY-AS-YOU-GO SCORING

       H.R. 1270 would affect outlays; therefore, it is subject to 
     the pay-as-you-go requirements of the Omnibus Budget 
     Reconciliation Act of 1990. Preliminary estimates indicate 
     that H.R. 1270 would reduce offsetting receipts by $630 
     million in each of FYs 1999 through 2001, a total of $1,890 
     million, and increase such receipts by $2,070 million FY 
     2002. H.R. 1270 does not contain provisions to offset 
     potential deficit increases in its early years; consequently, 
     if the bill were enacted, any deficit could contribute to a 
     sequester of mandatory spending in each of FYs 1999 through 
     2001.

  The CHAIRMAN. The Chair would advise Members that the order of 
closing is the gentleman from Nevada, Mr. Ensign, the gentleman from 
Texas, Mr. Hall, and the gentleman from Colorado, Mr. Dan Schaefer.
  The gentleman from Nevada, Mr. Ensign, has 5\1/2\ minutes remaining, 
the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Hall, has 3\1/2\ minutes remaining, and 
the gentleman from Colorado, Mr. Dan Schaefer, has 4 minutes remaining.
  Mr. ENSIGN. Mr. Chairman, before yielding to the gentleman from 
Nevada, I would like to just ask jokingly

[[Page H9668]]

for unanimous consent to build a statue for the gentleman from 
Massachusetts [Mr. Markey] in the State of Nevada, as he has fought so 
hard for our State.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Nevada [Mr. 
Gibbons].
  Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time.
  Mr. Chairman, I do appreciate having the gentleman from Massachusetts 
[Mr. Markey] being a straight man for this whole event today.
  Let me say that with regard to those people who believe that the 
ratepayers have paid into the fund enough money, let me say that this 
stuff is going to be around for thousands and thousands of years. I 
hope they are ready to keep paying, and paying, and paying, because 
they are going to have to pick up the responsibility if the taxpayers 
do not for the continued storage of this material at Yucca Mountain.
  Let me talk about the suitability of Yucca Mountain, if I may, real 
briefly. First of all, I am a geologist and I truly understand some of 
the problems we have got with suitability. If we keep lowering the 
standards, sure, we can make it suitable for storage. The problem is 
that we are taking away the safety standards of this site.
  Earthquakes, 33 known earthquake faults lie directly through this 
site in the Yucca Mountain area, and over the last several years, there 
have been over 600 earthquakes in the surrounding 5\1/2\ miles that 
have impacted this.
  Earthquakes that raise the water table, that would surround and, in 
fact, could flood the repository, putting the canisters in harm of 
polluting the water table.
  This groundwater contamination has been proven already. We have 
already got a study by the National Science Foundation that shows that 
plutonium has migrated almost 1 mile, 1 mile, into the ground through 
the rocks and is now approaching the water table, dangerously close to 
the supply of water for Southern California, Southern Nevada, et 
cetera.

                              {time}  1815

  There is volcanic activity simply 20 kilometers away from the site. 
There are dormant volcanoes that could erupt at any time. From a 
geologic standpoint, they are active, not dormant. They are merely 
sitting there waiting for their opportunity to explode and damage the 
Yucca Mountain site. Let me say also, there is concern there by 
scientists about the spontaneous atomic explosion that might occur. 
Some scientists have expressed that.
  Let me say that this bill is the wrong approach and Yucca Mountain is 
the wrong site.
  Mr. ENSIGN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Nevada [Mr. Ensign] is recognized 
for 3\1/2\ minutes.
  Mr. ENSIGN. Mr. Chairman, nearly 14 years ago a Senator from 
Louisiana, who was the chief proponent in the Senate, said, ``Mr. 
President, this bill deals comprehensively with the problem of civilian 
nuclear waste. It is an urgent problem,'' does this sound familiar, 
``urgent problem. Mr. President, for this Nation it is urgent, first 
because we are running out of reactor space and reactors for the 
storage of fuel, and if we do not build what we call away-from-reactor 
storage space and begin that soon, we could begin shutting down 
civilian nuclear reactors in this country as soon as 1983.''
  That was 14 years ago. Not a single nuclear reactor in America has 
been closed or been forced to close because of the issue of running out 
of space. Some have closed because of overriding safety concerns about 
operation and maintenance, but none because they have run out of space 
to store nuclear waste.
  Mr. Chairman, Congress has decided this issue, not the scientists. 
This would be similar, what Congress is doing in this bill, is saying 
with Yucca Mountain and with the temporary storage site at the Nevada 
test site, ``I do not care what any of the scientists say, it is going 
to be the site, and it is going to be suitable, and we are going to 
lower the standards until it is suitable.''
  This would be like Congress saying to the medical community, ``There 
is a disease out there that we want you to find a cure for. By the way, 
here is what the cure is going to be. Regardless of what the science 
shows, here is what the cure is going to be. I do not care what any of 
the rest of the science says, if there are other alternatives to treat 
this disease.''
  I know we are all experts here, we are all scientists, and that is 
why we are making these decisions. We are taking away that decision on 
nuclear waste, just as we would be taking it away from the medical 
community, say on breast cancer, by telling them it is going to be the 
answer out there, and not letting the scientists and the experts in the 
medical community make this decision.
  The other myth is that we are taking this from all these other States 
and going to put it in one site. The fact is that nuclear waste is 
going to remain in these other States, in these 41 States. Because even 
as we are shipping nuclear waste, and there will be nuclear waste going 
to Nevada, Members will still end up with nuclear waste at all of these 
other reactors around the country.
  It has even been said to me that this is a national security 
interest, that nuclear waste at these facilities is dangerous to a 
terrorist. If that is the case, we should never have built the nuclear 
power plants in the first place. The other thing is that Yucca Mountain 
and the temporary storage facility is not going to solve a national 
security interest problem, because there is still going to be nuclear 
waste at these facilities.
  The other thing is that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has said 
that dry cask storage is good for 100 years. When they were designing 
the casks to transport this waste they designed a perfect solution. It 
is the cheapest solution. It only costs about $300 million to actually 
store this waste on-site in dry casks for up to 100 years. To transport 
this waste it costs about $2.3 billion. For all of us budget hawks 
around here, we should be thinking about how much does it cost to 
transport versus store.
  I would urge a strong ``no'' vote. Do not vote with the nuclear power 
interests.
  Mr. HALL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 15 seconds.
  Mr. Chairman, I just want to compliment the gentlemen from Nevada, 
Mr. Ensign and Mr. Gibbons. And of course there is not a better guy in 
the world than Harry Reid, who has worked hard on this; the gentleman 
from Nevada, Mr. Ensign, only in his third year, and the other 
gentleman from Nevada, Mr. Gibbons, in the first year. The die was cast 
long before they got here. They have done an heroic and admirable job 
with what they had. I respect them for that.
  The Committee on Commerce, the committee of jurisdiction, voted 43 to 
3 to carry out the intent of Congress.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the gentlewoman from 
Florida [Mrs. Thurman].
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentlewoman from Florida [Mrs. Thurman] is 
recognized for 3\1/4\ minutes.
  Mrs. THURMAN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the 
time.
  Mr. Chairman, despite some of the statements to the contrary, the 
bill before us today is about protecting our environment. It is about 
safeguarding our natural resources, for now and for years to come.
  Moreover, it is about dealing with the realities of our society. We 
depend on nuclear energy and we must address the potential dangers 
associated with it. This bill would do just that.
  There is no question about the importance nuclear power plays in our 
lives. Nuclear power is a source of energy in our country, producing 20 
percent of the Nation's electricity. Although nuclear energy produces a 
small amount of used fuel, it produces no air pollution. Unfortunately, 
most of the spent fuel is stored in above-ground pools at the plant 
sites, where it still remains dangerously radioactive for thousands of 
years. The reality of the situation is that 75 nuclear power plants 
currently store used fuel. By next year, 27 of them will exhaust 
existing space to store this waste. I believe it is in our best 
interests to ensure that one safe storage facility is developed to meet 
these very real and pending needs.
  Let us safely and efficiently manage this spent fuel. Let us pass 
H.R. 1270,

[[Page H9669]]

and require the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the Department of 
Energy to prepare environmental impact statements. Let us ensure 
radiation standards for the public, and let us make certain that the 
NRC maintains its strict enforcement of container design essential to 
the safe transportation of spent nuclear waste across State lines.
  The bill is also about our commitment to nuclear waste disposal. 
Fifteen years ago Federal officials pledged to protect all of us from 
nuclear waste. Instead, Congress tapped the nuclear waste fund for 
other projects. We have already invested over $13 billion to the 
nuclear waste fund. My constituents alone have paid over $650 million. 
It is time that fees dedicated to this fund were spent for their 
intended purposes.
  Almost all of us already have a de facto nuclear storage site closer 
to home than we care to think. We have the opportunity today to 
establish a storage facility that would be easier to monitor, more 
economical, and located at a remote location, far away from our homes 
and schools.
  Members should do what they know is right. Support passage of the 
Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1997.
  Mr. DAN SCHAEFER of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 30 
seconds.
  Mr. Chairman, I want to reflect on what the gentleman from Texas [Mr. 
Hall] had to say about the two Members from Nevada. They have been 
great on this issue. We know it is not an easy one to try and go forth 
on, and I just want to say that they have been very much gentlemen in 
this, and have been ferocious fighters. I have to say that we respect 
them tremendously.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to close to the 
gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Upton], the author of the bill.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Upton] is recognized 
for 3\1/2\ minutes.
  (Mr. UPTON asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. UPTON. Mr. Chairman, I rise to thank a number of people here 
tonight. I thank the chairman of our committee, the gentleman from 
Virginia, [Mr. Bliley], and the gentleman from Colorado [Mr. Dan 
Schaefer]. Without their leadership, we would not see this bill to the 
floor this evening.
  I also want to thank, on the other side of the aisle, the gentleman 
from Michigan [Mr. Dingell], the ranking member, and the gentleman from 
Texas [Mr. Hall], who have been terrific. I, too, share in thanking the 
two gentlemen from Nevada, who have been very good debaters, they have 
been very persistent, they have made us do our homework for sure, and 
they have been very tough. I appreciate that, as well.
  I also thank the gentleman from New York [Mr. Towns], my coauthor, 
the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Hastert], the gentleman from Idaho 
[Mr. Crapo], and the 165 Members of the House that have cosponsored the 
bill. We have heard tonight that it passed our committee 43 to 3. We 
passed it by about the same margin in the last Congress, as well.
  Nuclear power, the decision for nuclear power, was made many decades 
ago. Part of that strategy was always that the Federal Government would 
be responsible for the permanent storage of the high-level nuclear 
waste. That was part of the equation. That is what this bill does. It 
in essence moves it to one safe place.
  Today we have about 100 different nuclear reactor sites around the 
country. Every single one of them is in a sensitive environmental area, 
whether it be on the Great Lakes, whether it be on the Chesapeake Bay. 
Whether it be rivers, streams, or oceans, they are all very sensitive. 
Our ratepayers have put in some $12 billion into the Nuclear Waste 
Trust Fund, of which about $6 billion has been spent in Yucca Mountain.
  Yes, we have detractors, certainly our two colleagues from Nevada, 
and the opponents of nuclear power as well. But that nuclear decision 
was made before I was in high school. About 20 percent of our power 
today comes from nuclear energy, and if we turned off that power 
tonight, we would still have to deal with the issue of what to do with 
the high-level nuclear waste. That is what this bill does.
  Today in this country we have 10 sites that have run out of room. 
They have reracked their rods, they have built these lead-lined cement 
cannisters that are literally stacked in the dunes of Lake Michigan and 
other places around the country, because they have run out of room. 
They did not have anyplace to put it. Next year we are going to have 27 
more reactors run out of room. It is time for this Congress to act, to 
send it to one safe place.
  Yucca Mountain, Mr. Chairman, I have been there. It is adjacent to 
where we have conducted underground, uncontained nuclear testing for 
almost 50 years. When this bill gets enacted, and it will, nuclear 
waste will be in a contained spot. It will be monitored. It is going to 
be in a place that will be deemed safe by the scientists.
  The record shows we have had some 2,400 shipments across the country 
to the existing nuclear facilities today, and 1,300 tons of nuclear 
material in fact was shipped without a single release, not a single 
release of nuclear material in all of those shipments. They did not 
mine that nuclear stuff in the dunes of Lake Michigan, they had to ship 
it there. When they shipped it there, the record was perfect.
  This is a bipartisan bill. It has been that from the beginning. I 
thank the Republicans and Democrats, and ask them to vote in favor of 
this bill.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 1270, the Nuclear Waste 
Policy Act of 1997. I introduced H.R. 1270 earlier this year with 
Representatives Towns, Hastert, Crapo and 55 other original cosponsors. 
It is designed to address our national problem with high-level nuclear 
waste by providing workable solutions for managing spent nuclear fuel. 
The total number of cosponsors has already reached 165 Members of the 
House. Similar legislation passed the Senate in April by a vote of 65-
34.
  As a by-product of nuclear power, high-level nuclear waste currently 
rests in spent fuel pools and canisters at locations across the 
country. They are not, however, at a secure, central location like our 
Government agreed to build.
  Behind chainlink fences along the Chesapeake, on cement pads a 
stone's throw from the Great Lakes, near our neighborhoods and our 
schools, nuclear waste is now a problem forced upon States, counties, 
and townships due to the Federal Government's blatant shirking of their 
responsibility--a failure that has cost taxpayers over $12 billion.
  In my district in southwest Michigan, nuclear waste currently sits in 
a dry cask on a cement pad 100 yards from Lake Michigan. The site is 
less than 5 miles from an elementary school with 800 students. Now, I 
will say right away that the site is safe and secure--But it was not 
meant for long-term storage. I would rather have nuclear waste 
permanently stored at an isolated and remote location than at over 80 
sites around the country.
  I have a message to those Members who are concerned about the 
transportation of spent nuclear fuel; it's been transported for 30 
years and according the Nuclear Regulatory Commission,

       The safety record for spent nuclear fuel shipments in the 
     U.S. and in other industrialized nations is enviable. Of the 
     thousands of shipments completed over the last 30 years, none 
     has resulted in an identifiable injury through release of 
     radioactive materials.

  NRC statistics show that over 1,300 tons of spent fuel was shipped in 
the United States from 1979 through 1995. This was accomplished through 
a mix of shipments on highways and rail.
  For a little background, in 1982 Congress passed and the President 
signed the Nuclear Waste Policy Act. It was later amended in 1987 but 
its goal remained simple and steamlined--the Federal Government agreed 
to accept responsibility for the proper management and disposal of 
defense and civilian nuclear waste. From funds collected through a tax 
on our electricity bills, the Government was going to build a high 
level repository and begin accepting waste from utility companies by 
January 31, 1998.
  A lot has happened since the 1980's. But by the same token a lot 
hasn't happened--namely progress toward completing this project. The 
Department of Energy has spent time in court, time at the research lab, 
and time boring a massive hole in the side of Yucca Mountain in 
Nevada--the site selected to potentially house a permanent repository. 
Our most recent estimates, however, show this facility won't be ready 
to receive waste until well into the next century.
  Today and tomorrow, Congress will debate a bill that provides a short 
term solution to this long term problem. The legislation directs the 
Department of Energy to continue working on

[[Page H9670]]

the permanent site while also temporarily stacking the waste outside 
what is expected to be the final resting place. Our Government should 
pursue a policy that puts nuclear waste behind one fence, in one 
location, where we can concentrate all of our resources on making sure 
it is safe.
  Nuclear waste transcends political ideologies. As a nation, we must 
work together to develop a single national strategy. As a Congress, we 
must work together to get this solution in place.
  With each passing year and each passing month, the price of nuclear 
waste continues to mount. Ratepayers keep paying taxes on their 
electricity bills to support the bottomless Nuclear Waste Fund. Without 
a solution in place, the burden of disposal falls back on the local 
utility companies, and, in turn, back squarely on the shoulders of the 
American consumer as they are double taxed.
  Earlier this year, the Department of Energy was again assailed in the 
courts. 46 State agencies and 33 power companies from 36 States filed 
suit to force the administration to stick to the original deadline 
which is less than 3 months away. Obviously, we won't meet the deadline 
but H.R. 1270 offers some solutions because rightly so, everyone 
is growing tired of these costly delays. In light of these 
developments, I would urge the Department and the administration to 
work with us as this legislation moves through the congressional 
process, rather than throw up roadblocks.

  Critics claim that Yucca Mountain is not an appropriate location for 
nuclear waste. Yucca is located within the Nevada Test Site, an area 
the size of Connecticut that since the Truman administration has been 
home to atmospheric nuclear test blasts and countless active and 
abandoned nuclear labs. Its remote, arid location is, in fact, ideally 
suited to store nuclear waste.
  The real danger exists only in allowing our Government to break its 
word and expect us to look the other way. But it is difficult to look 
the other way on this issue when at seemingly every other turn, another 
community is being forced to deal with nuclear waste close to home. My 
colleagues and I were sent to Congress to fix the Nation's problems. 
Through lessons we've learned from events like the savings and loan 
debacle, we know that inaction only makes the situation worse.
  Simply put, nuclear waste is one of the single greatest environmental 
issues that exist today. In turn, one would assume that it should be 
the single greatest concern of an administration which has campaigned 
on its support and defense of the environment.
  We can deal effectively with this by placing nuclear waste in a 
suitable location in the interim. That threat can be greatly reduced 
still by putting in place a permanent facility. The Department of 
Energy must be held accountable to the U.S. Congress, and more 
importantly, to the U.S. taxpayers.
  Key groups have come out in support of H.R. 1270 such as the National 
Association of Counties, Citizens Against Government Waste. Many 
Governors have written as well to express the need for action on this 
issue.
  I would hope that in the same spirit and bipartisanship that we 
showed in reaching a balanced budget agreement, we can also move 
forward in passing nuclear waste legislation this year.
  Mr. PACKARD. Mr. Chairman, over 15 years ago, Congress recognized the 
need to build a permanent repository to handle our nation's spent 
nuclear fuel and passed laws directing the Department of Energy to take 
the lead in this effort. Despite collecting billions of dollars from 
ratepayers across the nation, the Department of Energy has yet to open 
even a temporary site where spent nuclear fuel can be safely stored 
until a permanent facility is built.
  Mr. Chairman, it is time for Congress to protect America from harmful 
nuclear waste by storing it safely. I urge my colleagues to support the 
Nuclear Waste Policy Act. Passing this important legislation will move 
us one step closer to eliminating the threat of nuclear contamination 
in communities across the nation.
  Mr. Chairman, some would have us believe that the nuclear waste 
should remain where it is. But right now, there are over 30,000 tons of 
radioactive waste stored outside nuclear reactors at over 80 facilities 
in 41 states. Some sites are dangerously close to fault lines, 
volcanoes and other areas prone to natural disaster. And almost every 
one of these sites is within a few miles, sometimes a few yards of 
somebody's backyard.
  Our government has a responsibility to protect its citizens. Until 
now, the Department of Energy has not fulfilled its obligation. Mr. 
Chairman, the Nuclear Waste Policy Act will protect America from 
harmful nuclear waste by moving it to a safe site. I urge my colleagues 
on both sides of the aisle to support it.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I want to clarify the intent of certain 
provisions of H.R. 1270, the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1997, that are 
within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Transportation and 
Infrastructure.
  A savings clause, section 207, has been included in the manager's 
amendment which clarifies that H.R. 1270 does not affect the 
application of existing laws governing transportation of hazardous 
materials, rail and motor carrier safety and federal-aid highway 
construction. Under the savings clause, the provisions in Chapter 51 of 
Title 49, U.S. Code (governing transportation of hazardous materials), 
Part A of Subtitle V of Title 49, U.S. Code (governing rail safety), 
Part B of Subtitle VI of Title 49, U.S. Code (governing motor carrier 
safety) and Title 23, U.S. Code (governing the Federal-Aid Highway 
program) remain in effect. This savings clause is necessary for a 
number of reasons. First, the bill funds technical assistance and 
training on the transportation of nuclear waste to the site and 
requires the Secretary of Transportation to promulgate new regulations 
governing transportation of nuclear waste, if he finds that existing 
regulations are not adequate. Because the existing law and regulations 
governing transportation of hazardous materials apply to the 
transportation of nuclear waste, section 207 clarifies that H.R. 1270 
does not supplant existing law or regulations. Rather, H.R. 1270 will 
allow the Secretary of Transportation to exercise his discretion to 
promulgate regulations only to the extent existing regulations are not 
adequate.
  Second, while the bill makes the employee protection provisions in 
the rail and motor carrier safety laws applicable to individuals 
engaged in the interstate transportation of nuclear waste, it does not 
specify the applicability of other rail or motor carrier safety 
provisions. Section 207 is, therefore, necessary to clarify that all of 
the rail and motor carrier safety provisions and not simply the 
employee protection provisions are applicable. Third, the bill 
authorizes the Secretary of Energy to fund road improvements leading to 
the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste site. Because Title 23 governs 
construction of Federal-aid highways, section 207 clarifies that Title 
23 requirements are applicable to federal-aid roads constructed with 
funds provided under H.R. 1270.
  A provision also was added to the manager's amendment which provides 
that the Secretary is not required to promulgate new training standards 
for the transportation of hazardous materials if there already are 
existing federal regulations that establish adequate training 
standards. This provision clarifies an ambiguity in section 203(g) of 
the bill as reported regarding whether the Secretary of Transportation 
could decide not to promulgate additional regulations in response to 
this legislation based on a finding that existing Department of 
Transportation regulations are adequate.
  A provision also was added to the manager's amendment which provides 
that the Secretary of Transportation may specify an appropriate level 
of knowledge, skills, and prior training for individuals required to be 
trained in the transportation of hazardous materials instead of a 
required minimum number of hours of training. The bill as reported 
required Department of Transportation regulations to specify a minimum 
number of hours of training for employees and management personnel.
  Finally, a provision was added on the selection of rail routes for 
the transportation of nuclear waste. I am concerned that this provision 
is less clear than it should be as to the need to consult with the 
affected rail carriers. I believe that such consultation is a practical 
necessity anyway, and so I am not objecting to the amendment. It is my 
hope that this point will be clarified during the conference on the 
bill.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 1270, the 
Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1997. This legislation is needed for one 
simple reason, Congress must ensure that the Federal government follows 
through with its commitment to store nuclear fuel at a central location 
in the United States.
  Without a functioning, centrally located site, this spent nuclear 
fuel is piling up at sites all around the nation. While spent fuel can 
be stored permanently in this fashion, utilities are simply running out 
of room and will soon need more space. And furthermore, having multiple 
sites raises the safety question.
  American ratepayers thought they had a firm contract with the Federal 
government under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act Amendments of 1987 to 
start accepting waste in 1998. However, the Department of Energy is 
nowhere close to keeping its end of the agreement and is at best a 
decade behind schedule. Forty-six state agencies and thirty-three power 
companies from thirty-six states have shown their frustration with DOE 
by filing suit to force DOE to adher to the original deadline.
  This bill moves the stalled process along. It provides for an interim 
storage facility which will be used until the permanent site at Yucca 
Mountain is properly tested and ready to accept waste. The sense of 
Congress is that our government should pursue a policy that puts 
nuclear waste safely behind one fence, in one location, in one state.
  As a member of the Energy and Water Appropriations Subcommittee on 
Appropriations

[[Page H9671]]

which has oversight over the Nuclear Waste Fund, I visited the Yucca 
Mountain site in March 1997. As I looked out across the vast Nevada 
desert where the military once exploded atomic bombs, I felt that one 
central location for storage was the best solution for addressing our 
high level waste storage problem.
  With each passing year and each passing month, the price of storing 
nuclear waste continues to mount. Ratepayers keep paying taxes on their 
electricity bills to support the bottomless Nuclear Waste Fund. Without 
a solution in place, the burden of disposal falls back on the shoulders 
of the American consumer. Moreover, inaction may create perhaps the 
largest environmental threat that exists today with more than one 
hundred sites around the nation instead of one central facility.
  We can minimize that threat by placing nuclear waste in a suitable 
location in the interim, and then moving it to an underground permanent 
repository in Nevada. This bill provides the leadership we need to 
accomplish these goals.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support this bill.
  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Chairman, this Member rises in support of H.R. 
1270, the Nuclear Waste Policy Act. Quite simply, the issue of nuclear 
waste disposal has been delayed far too long. It must be addressed in a 
responsible manner.
  As one of only six Members representing a district with multiple 
nuclear power plants, this Member certainly recognizes the importance 
of developing a safe, comprehensive, and long-term approach to the 
storage of spent nuclear fuel. Maintaining the status quo, with its 
reliance on on-site storage, is clearly not an acceptable long-term 
solution. In general, this Member believes that H.R. 1270, as approved 
by the Commerce Committee, represents a responsible approach.
  The bill being considered directs the Department of Energy to begin 
storing high-level nuclear waste at the Yucca Mountain site in Nevada 
until a permanent disposal site is developed. H.R. 1270 also makes 
improvements in safety and transportation issues related to the 
disposal of nuclear waste/
  This legislation is necessary because the Department of Energy has 
not made acceptable progress on developing a permanent repository for 
spent nuclear fuel. It is estimated that by 2010, 80 nuclear reactors--
including both in Nebraska--will have reached on-site storage capacity.
  As a result, if no changes are made, it is likely that consumers 
would be required to continue contributing to the Nuclear Waste Fund 
while also paying to develop additional on-site storage space. This 
would clearly not be reasonable or equitable. This issue is critically 
important to Nebraska and its nuclear energy consumers, who have 
already paid more than $150 million into the Nuclear Waste Fund.
  This Member urges his colleagues to support H.R. 1270.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my 
profound disapproval at the proposed agreement reached by 
Representative Lamar Smith and Representative Lincoln Diaz-Balart. This 
agreement unfairly distinguishes between Central Americans who entered 
the United States before December 1995 and Guantanamo Haitians who 
entered the United States during 1991 and 1992.
  My disagreement with this proposed legislation is based on the 
exclusion of the Guantanamo Haitians from the proposed amnesty. It is 
very shocking to find that this proposed law grants relief to Central 
Americans, without regard to the plight of those 11,000 Haitians who 
were admitted to the United States after being processed in Guantanamo 
in 1991.
  One of the arguments used to favor the Central Americans is that they 
are in the United States for political reasons. I believe this is a 
similar situation with Guantanamo Haitians who fled Haiti by boat to 
escape a violent military dictatorship, headed by General Cedras and 
Michel Francois. Many of them were reportedly killed by this military 
regime. Those who escaped were intercepted at sea, and were brought to 
Guantanamo for screening. They were determined to have credible claims 
for political asylum. Thus, they were permitted to enter the United 
States based on their credible claims.
  Besides the Guantanamo Haitians, many other Haitians escaped to the 
United States in search of peace and freedom. However, they were sent 
back to Haiti because they were considered ``economic refugees''. 
Today, even the Guantanamo Haitians, those who were determined to be 
political refugees, may be deported.
  Mr. Speaker, there is no legitimate reason to discriminate between 
the Haitian asylum seekers from the Central American asylum seekers. In 
my district, which includes a large Haitian constituency, great concern 
has been expressed that Congress will enact legislation to grandfather 
Central Americans under the old suspension of deportation provisions to 
the exclusion of Haitians who are similarly situated.
  This proposed legislation is flawed and has a double standard 
favoring Latinos. I believe that equity require that the law treat 
similarly situated persons alike. Thus, I would be opposed to any 
legislation which denies any group equal protection under the law.
  Extending to Haitians the same benefits that we extend to Central 
Americans is the only just thing to do. Therefore, I cannot support 
this proposed agreement.
  The CHAIRMAN. All time for general debate has expired.
  Pursuant to the rule, the amendment in the nature of a substitute 
recommended by the Committee on Commerce printed in the bill shall be 
considered as an original bill for the purposes of amendment under the 
5-minute rule, and shall be considered as read.
  The text of the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute is 
as follows:

                               H.R. 1270

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

     SECTION 1. AMENDMENT OF NUCLEAR WASTE POLICY ACT OF 1982.

       The Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 is amended to read as 
     follows:

     ``SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE AND TABLE OF CONTENTS.

       ``(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the `Nuclear 
     Waste Policy Act of 1997'.
       ``(b) Table of Contents.--

``Sec. 1. Short title and table of contents.
``Sec. 2. Definitions.
``Sec. 3. Findings and purposes.

                         ``TITLE I--OBLIGATIONS

``Sec. 101. Obligations of the Secretary of Energy.

                ``TITLE II--INTEGRATED MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

``Sec. 201. Intermodal transfer.
``Sec. 202. Transportation planning.
``Sec. 203. Transportation requirements.
``Sec. 204. Interim storage.
``Sec. 205. Permanent disposal.
``Sec. 206. Land withdrawal.
``Sec. 207. Private storage facilities.

                      ``TITLE III--LOCAL RELATIONS

``Sec. 301. On-site representative.
``Sec. 302. Benefits agreements.
``Sec. 303. Content of agreements.
``Sec. 304. Acceptance of benefits.
``Sec. 305. Restriction on use of funds.
``Sec. 306. Initial land conveyances.
``Sec. 307. Payments equal to taxes.

                  ``TITLE IV--FUNDING AND ORGANIZATION

``Sec. 401. Program funding.
``Sec. 402. Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management.
``Sec. 403. Defense contribution.

            ``TITLE V--GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS

``Sec. 501. Compliance with other laws.
``Sec. 502. Water rights.
``Sec. 503. Judicial review of agency actions.
``Sec. 504. Licensing of facility expansions and transshipments.
``Sec. 505. Siting a second repository.
``Sec. 506. Financial arrangements for low-level radioactive waste site 
              closure.
``Sec. 507. Nuclear Regulatory Commission training authorization.
``Sec. 508. Acceptance schedule.
``Sec. 509. Subseabed or ocean water disposal.

            ``TITLE VI--NUCLEAR WASTE TECHNICAL REVIEW BOARD

``Sec. 601. Definitions.
``Sec. 602. Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board.
``Sec. 603. Functions.
``Sec. 604. Investigatory powers.
``Sec. 605. Compensation of members.
``Sec. 606. Staff.
``Sec. 607. Support services.
``Sec. 608. Report.
``Sec. 609. Authorization of appropriations.
``Sec. 610. Termination of the board.

                     ``TITLE VII--MANAGEMENT REFORM

``Sec. 701. Management reform initiatives.
``Sec. 702. Reporting.

     ``SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.

       ``For purposes of this Act:
       ``(1) Accept, acceptance.--The terms `accept' and 
     `acceptance' mean the Secretary's act of taking possession of 
     spent nuclear fuel or high-level radioactive waste.
       ``(2) Acceptance schedule.--The term `acceptance schedule' 
     means the schedule established in section 508 for acceptance 
     of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste.
       ``(3) Affected Indian tribe.--The term `affected Indian 
     tribe' means any Indian tribe--
       ``(A) within whose reservation boundaries the interim 
     storage facility or a repository for spent nuclear fuel or 
     high-level radioactive waste, or both, is proposed to be 
     located; or
       ``(B) whose federally defined possessory or usage rights to 
     other lands outside of the reservation's boundaries arising 
     out of congressionally ratified treaties may be substantially 
     and adversely affected by the locating of such a facility if 
     the Secretary of the Interior finds, upon the petition of the 
     appropriate governmental officials of the tribe, that such 
     effects are both substantial and adverse to the tribe.
       ``(4) Affected unit of local government.--The term 
     `affected unit of local government' means the unit of local 
     government with jurisdiction over the site of a repository or 
     interim

[[Page H9672]]

     storage facility. Such term may, at the discretion of the 
     Secretary, include other units of local government that are 
     contiguous with such unit.
       ``(5) Atomic energy defense activity.--The term `atomic 
     energy defense activity' means any activity of the Secretary 
     performed in whole or in part in carrying out any of the 
     following functions:
       ``(A) Naval reactors development.
       ``(B) Weapons activities including defense inertial 
     confinement fusion.
       ``(C) Verification and control technology.
       ``(D) Defense nuclear materials production.
       ``(E) Defense nuclear waste and materials byproducts 
     management.
       ``(F) Defense nuclear materials security and safeguards and 
     security investigations.
       ``(G) Defense research and development.
       ``(6) Civilian nuclear power reactor.--The term `civilian 
     nuclear power reactor' means a civilian nuclear power plant 
     required to be licensed under section 103 or 104 b. of the 
     Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2133, 2134(b)).
       ``(7) Commission.--The term `Commission' means the Nuclear 
     Regulatory Commission.
       ``(8) Department.--The term `Department' means the 
     Department of Energy.
       ``(9) Disposal.--The term `disposal' means the emplacement 
     in a repository of spent nuclear fuel, high-level radioactive 
     waste, or other highly radioactive material with no 
     foreseeable intent of recovery, whether or not such 
     emplacement permits recovery of such material for any future 
     purpose.
       ``(10) Disposal system.--The term `disposal system' means 
     all natural barriers and engineered barriers, and engineered 
     systems and components, that prevent the release of 
     radionuclides from the repository.
       ``(11) Engineered barriers.--The terms `engineered 
     barriers' and `engineered systems and components,' mean man 
     made components of a disposal system. Such terms include the 
     spent nuclear fuel or high-level radioactive waste form, 
     spent nuclear fuel package or high-level radioactive waste 
     package, and other materials placed over and around such 
     packages.
       ``(12) High-level radioactive waste.--The term `high-level 
     radioactive waste' means--
       ``(A) the highly radioactive material resulting from the 
     reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel, including liquid waste 
     produced directly in reprocessing and any solid material 
     derived from such liquid waste that contains fission products 
     in sufficient concentrations;
       ``(B) the highly radioactive material resulting from atomic 
     energy defense activities; and
       ``(C) any other highly radioactive material that the 
     Commission, consistent with existing law, determines by rule 
     requires permanent isolation.
       ``(13) Federal agency.--The term `Federal agency' means any 
     Executive agency, as defined in section 105 of title 5, 
     United States Code.
       ``(14) Indian tribe.--The term `Indian tribe' means any 
     Indian tribe, band, nation, or other organized group or 
     community of Indians recognized as eligible for the services 
     provided to Indians by the Secretary of the Interior because 
     of their status as Indians including any Alaska Native 
     village, as defined in section 3(c) of the Alaska Native 
     Claims Settlement Act (43 U.S.C. 1602(c)).
       ``(15) Integrated management system.--The term `integrated 
     management system' means the system developed by the 
     Secretary for the acceptance, transportation, storage, and 
     disposal of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive 
     waste.
       ``(16) Interim storage facility.--The term `interim storage 
     facility' means a facility designed and constructed for the 
     receipt, handling, possession, safeguarding, and storage of 
     spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste in 
     accordance with title II of this Act.
       ``(17) Interim storage facility site.--The term `interim 
     storage facility site' means the specific site within Area 25 
     of the Nevada Test Site that is designated by the Secretary 
     and withdrawn and reserved in accordance with this Act for 
     the location of the interim storage facility.
       ``(18) Low-level radioactive waste.--The term `low-level 
     radioactive waste' means radioactive material that--
       ``(A) is not spent nuclear fuel, high-level radioactive 
     waste, transuranic waste, or byproduct material as defined in 
     section 11 e.(2) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 
     2014(e)(2)); and
       ``(B) the Commission, consistent with existing law, 
     classifies as low-level radioactive waste.
       ``(19) Metric tons uranium.--The terms `metric tons 
     uranium' and `MTU' mean the amount of uranium in the original 
     unirradiated fuel element whether or not the spent nuclear 
     fuel has been reprocessed.
       ``(20) Nuclear waste fund.--The term `Nuclear Waste Fund' 
     means the nuclear waste fund established in the United States 
     Treasury prior to the date of enactment of this Act under 
     section 302(c) of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982.
       ``(21) Office.--The term `Office' means the Office of 
     Civilian Radioactive Waste Management established within the 
     Department prior to the date of enactment of this Act under 
     the provisions of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982.
       ``(22) Package.--The term `package' means the primary 
     container that holds, and is in direct contact with, 
     solidified high-level radioactive waste, spent nuclear fuel, 
     or other radioactive materials and any overpack that are 
     emplaced at a repository.
       ``(23) Program approach.--The term `program approach' means 
     the Civilian Radioactive Waste Management Program Plan, dated 
     May 1996, as modified by this Act, and as amended from time 
     to time by the Secretary in accordance with this Act.
       ``(24) Repository.--The term `repository' means a system 
     designed and constructed under title II of this Act for the 
     permanent geologic disposal of spent nuclear fuel and high-
     level radioactive waste, including both surface and 
     subsurface areas at which spent nuclear fuel and high-level 
     radioactive waste receipt, handling, possession, 
     safeguarding, and storage are conducted.
       ``(25) Secretary.--The term `Secretary' means the Secretary 
     of Energy.
       ``(26) Site characterization.--The term `site 
     characterization' means activities, whether in a laboratory 
     or in the field, undertaken to establish the geologic 
     condition and the ranges of the parameters of a candidate 
     site relevant to the location of a repository, including 
     borings, surface excavations, excavations of exploratory 
     facilities, limited subsurface lateral excavations and 
     borings, and in situ testing needed to evaluate the 
     licensability of a candidate site for the location of a 
     repository, but not including preliminary borings and 
     geophysical testing needed to assess whether site 
     characterization should be undertaken.
       ``(27) Spent nuclear fuel.--The term `spent nuclear fuel' 
     means fuel that has been withdrawn from a nuclear reactor 
     following irradiation, the constituent elements of which have 
     not been separated by reprocessing.
       ``(28) Storage.--The term `storage' means retention of 
     spent nuclear fuel or high-level radioactive waste with the 
     intent to recover such waste or fuel for subsequent use, 
     processing, or disposal.
       ``(29) Withdrawal.--The term `withdrawal' has the same 
     definition as that set forth in the Federal Land Policy and 
     Management Act (43 U.S.C. 1702 et seq.).
       ``(30) Yucca mountain site.--The term `Yucca Mountain site' 
     means the area in the State of Nevada that is withdrawn and 
     reserved in accordance with this Act for the location of a 
     repository.

     ``SEC. 3. FINDINGS AND PURPOSES.

       ``(a) Findings.--The Congress finds that--
       ``(1) while spent nuclear fuel can be safely stored at 
     reactor sites, the expeditious movement to and storage of 
     such spent nuclear fuel at a centralized Federal facility 
     will enhance the nation's environmental protection;
       ``(2) while the Federal Government has the responsibility 
     to provide for the centralized interim storage and permanent 
     disposal of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive 
     waste to protect the public health and safety and the 
     environment, the costs of such storage and disposal should be 
     the responsibility of the generators and owners of such waste 
     and fuel, including the Federal Government;
       ``(3) in the interests of protecting the public health and 
     safety, enhancing the nation's environmental protection, 
     promoting the nation's energy security, and ensuring the 
     Secretary's ability to commence acceptance of spent nuclear 
     fuel and high-level radioactive waste no later than January 
     31, 2002, it is necessary for Congress to authorize the 
     interim storage facility;
       ``(4) deficit-control measures designed to limit 
     appropriation of general revenues have limited the 
     availability of the Nuclear Waste Fund for its intended 
     purposes; and
       ``(5) the Federal Government has the responsibility to 
     provide for the permanent disposal of waste generated from 
     United States atomic energy defense activities.
       ``(b) Purposes.--The purposes of this Act are--
       ``(1) to direct the Secretary to develop an integrated 
     management system in accordance with this Act so that the 
     Department can accept spent nuclear fuel or high-level 
     radioactive waste for interim storage commencing no later 
     than January 31, 2002, and for permanent disposal at a 
     repository commencing no later than January 17, 2010;
       ``(2) to provide for the siting, construction, and 
     operation of a repository for permanent geologic disposal of 
     spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste in order 
     to adequately protect the public and the environment;
       ``(3) to take those actions necessary to ensure that the 
     consumers of nuclear energy, who are funding the Secretary's 
     activities under this Act, receive the services to which they 
     are entitled and realize the benefits of enhanced protection 
     of public health and safety, and the environment, that will 
     ensue from the Secretary's compliance with the obligations 
     imposed by this Act; and
       ``(4) to provide a schedule and process for the expeditious 
     and safe development and commencement of operation of an 
     integrated management system and any necessary modifications 
     to the transportation infrastructure to ensure that the 
     Secretary can commence acceptance of spent nuclear fuel and 
     high-level radioactive waste no later than January 31, 2002.
                         ``TITLE I--OBLIGATIONS

     ``SEC. 101. OBLIGATIONS OF THE SECRETARY OF ENERGY.

       ``(a) Disposal.--The Secretary shall develop and operate a 
     repository for the permanent geologic disposal of spent 
     nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste.
       ``(b) Acceptance.--The Secretary shall accept spent nuclear 
     fuel and high-level radioactive waste for storage at the 
     interim storage facility pursuant to section 204 in 
     accordance with the acceptance schedule, beginning not later 
     than January 31, 2002.
       ``(c) Transportation.--The Secretary shall provide for the 
     transportation of spent nuclear fuel and high-level 
     radioactive waste accepted by the Secretary.
       ``(d) Integrated Management System.--The Secretary shall 
     expeditiously pursue the development of each component of the 
     integrated management system, and in so doing shall seek to 
     utilize effective private sector management and contracting 
     practices.

[[Page H9673]]

                ``TITLE II--INTEGRATED MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

     ``SEC. 201. INTERMODAL TRANSFER.

       ``(a) Transportation.--The Secretary shall utilize heavy-
     haul truck transport to move spent nuclear fuel and high-
     level radioactive waste from the mainline rail line at 
     Caliente, Nevada, to the interim storage facility site. If 
     direct rail access becomes available to the interim storage 
     facility site, the Secretary may use rail transportation to 
     meet the requirements of this title.
       ``(b) Capability Date.--The Secretary shall develop the 
     capability to commence rail to truck intermodal transfer at 
     Caliente, Nevada, no later than January 31, 2002.
       ``(c) Acquisitions.--The Secretary shall acquire lands and 
     rights-of-way necessary to commence intermodal transfer at 
     Caliente, Nevada.
       ``(d) Replacements.--The Secretary shall acquire and 
     develop on behalf of, and dedicate to, the City of Caliente, 
     Nevada, parcels of land and rights-of-way as required to 
     facilitate replacement of land and city wastewater disposal 
     activities necessary to commence intermodal transfer pursuant 
     to this Act. Replacement of land and city wastewater disposal 
     activities shall occur no later than January 31, 2002.
       ``(e) Notice and Map.--Within 6 months of the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall--
       ``(1) publish in the Federal Register a notice containing a 
     legal description of the sites and rights-of-way to be 
     acquired under this section; and
       ``(2) file copies of a map of such sites and rights-of-way 
     with the Congress, the Secretary of the Interior, the State 
     of Nevada, the Archivist of the United States, the Board of 
     Lincoln County Commissioners, the Board of Nye County 
     Commissioners, and the Caliente City Council.

     Such map and legal description shall have the same force and 
     effect as if they were included in this Act. The Secretary 
     may correct clerical and typographical errors in legal 
     descriptions and make minor adjustments in the boundaries.
       ``(f) Improvements.--The Secretary shall make improvements 
     to existing roadways selected for heavy-haul truck transport 
     between Caliente, Nevada, and the interim storage facility 
     site as necessary to facilitate year-round safe transport of 
     spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste.
       ``(g) Heavy-Haul Transportation Route.--
       ``(1) Designation of route.--The route for the heavy-haul 
     truck transport of spent nuclear fuel and high-level 
     radioactive waste shall be as designated in the map dated 
     July 21, 1997 (referred to as `Heavy-Haul Route') and on file 
     with the Secretary.
       ``(2) Truck transportation.--The Secretary, in consultation 
     with the State of Nevada and appropriate counties and local 
     jurisdictions, shall establish reasonable terms and 
     conditions pursuant to which the Secretary may utilize heavy-
     haul truck transport to move spent nuclear fuel and high-
     level radioactive waste from Caliente, Nevada, to the interim 
     storage facility site.
       ``(3) Improvements and maintenance.--Notwithstanding any 
     other law--
       ``(A) the Secretary shall be responsible for any 
     incremental costs related to improving or upgrading Federal, 
     State, and local roads within the heavy-haul transportation 
     route utilized, and performing any maintenance activities on 
     such roads, as necessary, to facilitate year-round safe 
     transport of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive 
     waste; and
       ``(B) any such improvement, upgrading, or maintenance 
     activity shall be funded solely by appropriations made 
     pursuant to sections 401 and 403 of this Act.
       ``(h) Local Government Involvement.--The Commission shall 
     enter into a Memorandum of Understanding with the City of 
     Caliente and Lincoln County, Nevada, to provide advice to the 
     Commission regarding intermodal transfer and to facilitate 
     on-site representation. Reasonable expenses of such 
     representation shall be paid by the Secretary.

     ``SEC. 202. TRANSPORTATION PLANNING.

       ``(a) Transportation Readiness.--The Secretary shall take 
     those actions that are necessary and appropriate to ensure 
     that the Secretary is able to accept and transport spent 
     nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste beginning not 
     later than January 31, 2002. As soon as is practicable 
     following the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall 
     analyze each specific reactor facility in the order of 
     priority established in the acceptance schedule, and develop 
     a logistical plan to assure the Secretary's ability to 
     transport spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive 
     waste.
       ``(b) Transportation Planning.--In conjunction with the 
     development of the logistical plan in accordance with 
     subsection (a), the Secretary shall update and modify, as 
     necessary, the Secretary's transportation institutional plans 
     to ensure that institutional issues are addressed and 
     resolved on a schedule to support the commencement of 
     transportation of spent nuclear fuel and high-level 
     radioactive waste to the interim storage facility no later 
     than January 31, 2002. Among other things, such planning 
     shall provide a schedule and process for addressing and 
     implementing, as necessary, transportation routing plans, 
     transportation contracting plans, transportation training in 
     accordance with section 203, and transportation tracking 
     programs.

     ``SEC. 203. TRANSPORTATION REQUIREMENTS.

       ``(a) Package Certification.--No spent nuclear fuel or 
     high-level radioactive waste may be transported by or for the 
     Secretary under this Act except in packages that have been 
     certified for such purposes by the Commission.
       ``(b) State Notification.--The Secretary shall abide by 
     regulations of the Commission regarding advance notification 
     of State and local governments prior to transportation of 
     spent nuclear fuel or high-level radioactive waste under this 
     Act.
       ``(c) Technical Assistance.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall provide technical 
     assistance and funds to States, affected units of local 
     government, and Indian tribes through whose jurisdiction the 
     Secretary plans to transport substantial amounts of spent 
     nuclear fuel or high-level radioactive waste for training for 
     public safety officials of appropriate units of local 
     government. Training shall cover procedures required for safe 
     routine transportation of these materials, as well as 
     procedures for dealing with emergency response situations. 
     The Secretary's duty to provide technical and financial 
     assistance under this subsection shall be limited to amounts 
     specified in annual appropriations.
       ``(2) Employee organizations.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Secretary shall provide technical 
     assistance and funds for training directly to nonprofit 
     employee organizations and joint labor-management 
     organizations that demonstrate experience in implementing and 
     operating worker health and safety training and education 
     programs and demonstrate the ability to reach and involve in 
     training programs target populations of workers who are or 
     will be directly engaged in the transportation of spent 
     nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste or emergency 
     response or post-emergency response with respect to such 
     transportation.
       ``(B) Training.--Training under this paragraph--
       ``(i) shall cover procedures required for safe routine 
     transportation of materials and procedures for dealing with 
     emergency response situations;
       ``(ii) shall be consistent with any training standards 
     established by the Secretary of Transportation; and
       ``(iii) shall include--

       ``(I) a training program applicable to persons responsible 
     for responding to emergency situations occurring during the 
     removal and transportation of spent nuclear fuel and high-
     level radioactive waste;
       ``(II) instruction of public safety officers in procedures 
     for the command and control of the response to any incident 
     involving the waste; and
       ``(III) instruction of radiological protection and 
     emergency medical personnel in procedures for responding to 
     an incident involving spent nuclear fuel or high-level 
     radioactive waste being transported.

       ``(3) Grants.--To implement this subsection, grants shall 
     be made under section 401(c).
       ``(4) Minimizing duplication of effort and expenses.--The 
     Secretaries of Transportation, Labor, and Energy, Directors 
     of the Federal Emergency Management Agency and National 
     Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, the Nuclear 
     Regulatory Commission, and Administrator of the Environmental 
     Protection Agency shall review periodically, with the head of 
     each department, agency, or instrumentality of the 
     Government, all emergency response and preparedness training 
     programs of that department, agency, or instrumentality to 
     minimize duplication of effort and expense of the department, 
     agency, or instrumentality in carrying out the programs and 
     shall take necessary action to minimize duplication.
       ``(d) Use of Private Carriers.--The Secretary, in providing 
     for the transportation of spent nuclear fuel and high-level 
     radioactive waste under this Act, shall by contract use 
     private industry to the fullest extent possible in each 
     aspect of such transportation. The Secretary shall use direct 
     Federal services for such transportation only upon a 
     determination by the Secretary of Transportation, in 
     consultation with the Secretary, that private industry is 
     unable or unwilling to provide such transportation services 
     at a reasonable cost.
       ``(e) Transfer of Title.--Acceptance by the Secretary of 
     any spent nuclear fuel or high-level radioactive waste shall 
     constitute a transfer of title to the Secretary.
       ``(f) Employee Protection.--Any person engaged in the 
     interstate commerce of spent nuclear fuel or high-level 
     radioactive waste under contract to the Secretary pursuant to 
     this Act shall be subject to and comply fully with the 
     employee protection provisions of section 20109 of title 49, 
     United States Code (in the case of employees of railroad 
     carriers), and section 31105 of title 49, United States Code 
     (in the case of employees operating commercial motor 
     vehicles), or the Commission (in the case of all other 
     employees).
       ``(g) Training Standard.--
       ``(1) Regulation.--No later than 12 months after the date 
     of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Transportation, 
     pursuant to authority under other provisions of law, in 
     consultation with the Secretary of Labor and the Commission, 
     shall promulgate a regulation establishing training standards 
     applicable to workers directly involved in the removal and 
     transportation of spent nuclear fuel and high-level 
     radioactive waste. The regulation shall specify minimum 
     training standards applicable to workers, including 
     managerial personnel. The regulation shall require that the 
     employer possess evidence of satisfaction of the applicable 
     training standard before any individual may be employed in 
     the removal and transportation of spent nuclear fuel and 
     high-level radioactive waste.
       ``(2) Secretary of Transportation.--If the Secretary of 
     Transportation determines, in promulgating the regulation 
     required by paragraph (1), that regulations promulgated by 
     the Commission establish adequate training standards for 
     workers, then the Secretary of Transportation can refrain 
     from promulgating additional regulations with respect to 
     worker training in such activities. The Secretary of 
     Transportation and the Commission shall use their Memorandum 
     of Understanding to ensure coordination of

[[Page H9674]]

     worker training standards and to avoid duplicative 
     regulation.
       ``(3) Training standards content.--The training standards 
     required to be promulgated under paragraph (1) shall, among 
     other things deemed necessary and appropriate by the 
     Secretary of Transportation, include the following 
     provisions--
       ``(A) a specified minimum number of hours of initial off 
     site instruction and actual field experience under the direct 
     supervision of a trained, experienced supervisor;
       ``(B) a requirement that onsite managerial personnel 
     receive the same training as workers, and a minimum number of 
     additional hours of specialized training pertinent to their 
     managerial responsibilities; and
       ``(C) a training program applicable to persons responsible 
     for responding to and cleaning up emergency situations 
     occurring during the removal and transportation of spent 
     nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste.
       ``(4) Authorization.--There is authorized to be 
     appropriated to the Secretary of Transportation, from general 
     revenues, such sums as may be necessary to perform his duties 
     under this subsection.

     ``SEC. 204. INTERIM STORAGE.

       ``(a) Authorization.--The Secretary shall design, 
     construct, and operate a facility for the interim storage of 
     spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste at the 
     interim storage facility site. The interim storage facility 
     shall be subject to licensing pursuant to the Atomic Energy 
     Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2011 et seq.) in accordance with the 
     Commission's regulations governing the licensing of 
     independent spent fuel storage installations and shall 
     commence operation in phases by January 31, 2002. The interim 
     storage facility shall store spent nuclear fuel and high-
     level radioactive waste until the Secretary is able to 
     transfer such fuel and waste to the repository.
       ``(b) Design.--The design of the interim storage facility 
     shall provide for the use of storage technologies licensed or 
     certified by the Commission for use at the interim storage 
     facility as necessary to ensure compatibility between the 
     interim storage facility and contract holders' spent nuclear 
     fuel and facilities, and to facilitate the Secretary's 
     ability to meet the Secretary's obligations under this Act.
       ``(c) Licensing.--
       ``(1) Phases.--The interim storage facility shall be 
     licensed by the Commission in two phases in order to commence 
     operations no later than January 31, 2002.
       ``(2) First phase.--No later than 12 months after the date 
     of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to the 
     Commission an application for a license for the first phase 
     of the interim storage facility. The license issued for the 
     first phase of the interim storage facility shall have a term 
     of 20 years. The interim storage facility licensed in the 
     first phase shall have a capacity of not more than 10,000 
     MTU. The Commission shall issue a final decision granting or 
     denying the application for the first phase license no later 
     than 36 months from the date of the submittal of the 
     application for such license.
       ``(3) Second phase.--The Secretary shall submit to the 
     Commission an application for a license for the second phase 
     interim storage facility. The license for the second phase 
     facility shall authorize a storage capacity of 40,000 MTU. 
     The license for the second phase shall have an initial term 
     of up to 100 years, and shall be renewable for additional 
     terms upon application of the Secretary.
       ``(d) Additional Authority.--
       ``(1) Construction.--For the purpose of complying with 
     subsection (a), the Secretary may commence site preparation 
     for the interim storage facility as soon as practicable after 
     the date of enactment of this Act and shall commence 
     construction of the first phase of the interim storage 
     facility subsequent to submittal of the license application 
     except that the Commission shall issue an order suspending 
     such construction at any time if the Commission determines 
     that such construction poses an unreasonable risk to public 
     health and safety or the environment. The Commission shall 
     terminate all or part of such order upon a determination that 
     the Secretary has taken appropriate action to eliminate such 
     risk.
       ``(2) Facility use.--Notwithstanding any otherwise 
     applicable licensing requirement, the Secretary may utilize 
     any facility owned by the Federal Government on the date of 
     enactment of this Act and within the boundaries of the 
     interim storage facility site, in connection with an imminent 
     and substantial endangerment to public health and safety at 
     the interim storage facility prior to commencement of 
     operations during the second phase.
       ``(e) National Environmental Policy Act of 1969.--
       ``(1) Preliminary decisionmaking activities.--The 
     Secretary's activities under this section, including the 
     selection of a site for the interim storage facility, the 
     preparation and submittal of any license application, and the 
     construction and operation of any facility shall be 
     considered preliminary decisionmaking activities for purposes 
     of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 
     4321 et seq.). No such activity shall require the preparation 
     of an environmental impact statement under section 102(2)(C) 
     of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 
     4332(2)(C)) or require any environmental review under 
     subparagraph (E) or (F) of such Act.
       ``(2) Environmental impact statement.--
       ``(A) Final decision.--A final decision of the Commission 
     to grant or deny a license application for the first or 
     second phase of the interim storage facility shall be 
     accompanied by an Environmental Impact Statement prepared 
     under section 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy 
     Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)). In preparing such 
     Environmental Impact Statement, the Commission--
       ``(i) shall assume that 40,000 MTU will be stored at the 
     facility; and
       ``(ii) shall analyze the impacts of the transportation of 
     spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste to the 
     interim storage facility in a generic manner.
       ``(B) Considerations.--Such Environmental Impact Statement 
     shall not consider--
       ``(i) the need for the interim storage facility, including 
     any individual component thereof;
       ``(ii) the time of the initial availability of the interim 
     storage facility;
       ``(iii) any alternatives to the storage of spent nuclear 
     fuel and high-level radioactive waste at the interim storage 
     facility;
       ``(iv) any alternatives to the site of the facility as 
     designated by the Secretary in accordance with subsection 
     (a);
       ``(v) any alternatives to the design criteria for such 
     facility or any individual component thereof, as specified by 
     the Secretary in the license application; or
       ``(vi) the environmental impacts of the storage of spent 
     nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste at the interim 
     storage facility beyond the initial term of the license or 
     the term of the renewal period for which a license renewal 
     application is made.
       ``(f) Judicial Review.--Judicial review of the Commission's 
     environmental impact statement under the National 
     Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) 
     shall be consolidated with judicial review of the 
     Commission's licensing decision. No court shall have 
     jurisdiction to enjoin the construction or operation of the 
     interim storage facility prior to its final decision on 
     review of the Commission's licensing action.
       ``(g) Waste Confidence.--The Secretary's obligation to 
     construct and operate the interim storage facility in 
     accordance with this section and the Secretary's obligation 
     to develop an integrated management system in accordance with 
     the provisions of this Act, shall provide sufficient and 
     independent grounds for any further findings by the 
     Commission of reasonable assurance that spent nuclear fuel 
     and high-level radioactive waste will be disposed of safely 
     and on a timely basis for purposes of the Commission's 
     decision to grant or amend any license to operate any 
     civilian nuclear power reactor under the Atomic Energy Act of 
     1954 (42 U.S.C. 2011 et seq.).
       ``(h) Savings Clause.--Nothing in this Act shall affect the 
     Commission's procedures for the licensing of any technology 
     for the dry storage of spent nuclear fuel at the site of any 
     civilian nuclear power reactor as adopted by the Commission 
     under section 218 of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, as 
     in effect prior to the date of the enactment of this Act. The 
     establishment of such procedures shall not preclude the 
     licensing, under any applicable procedures or rules of the 
     Commission in effect prior to such establishment, of any 
     technology for the storage of civilian spent nuclear fuel at 
     the site of any civilian nuclear power reactor.

     ``SEC. 205. PERMANENT DISPOSAL.

       ``(a) Site Characterization.--
       ``(1) Guidelines.--The guidelines promulgated by the 
     Secretary and published at 10 CFR part 960 are annulled and 
     revoked and the Secretary shall make no assumptions or 
     conclusions about the licensability of the Yucca Mountain 
     site as a repository by reference to such guidelines.
       ``(2) Site characterization activities.--The Secretary 
     shall carry out appropriate site characterization activities 
     at the Yucca Mountain site in accordance with the Secretary's 
     program approach to site characterization if the Secretary 
     modifies or eliminates those site characterization activities 
     designed to demonstrate the suitability of the site under the 
     guidelines referenced in paragraph (1).
       ``(3) Date.--No later than December 31, 2002, the Secretary 
     shall apply to the Commission for authorization to construct 
     a repository that will commence operations no later than 
     January 17, 2010. If, at any time prior to the filing of such 
     application, the Secretary determines that the Yucca Mountain 
     site cannot satisfy the Commission's regulations applicable 
     to the licensing of a geologic repository, the Secretary 
     shall terminate site characterization activities at the site, 
     notify Congress and the State of Nevada of the Secretary's 
     determination and the reasons therefor, and recommend to 
     Congress not later than 6 months after such determination 
     further actions, including the enactment of legislation, that 
     may be needed to manage the Nation's spent nuclear fuel and 
     high-level radioactive waste.
       ``(4) Maximizing capacity.--In developing an application 
     for authorization to construct the repository, the Secretary 
     shall seek to maximize the capacity of the repository.
       ``(b) Licensing.--Within one year of the date of enactment 
     of this Act, the Commission shall amend its regulations 
     governing the disposal of spent nuclear fuel and high-level 
     radioactive waste in geologic repositories to the extent 
     necessary to comply with this Act. Subject to subsection (c), 
     such regulations shall provide for the licensing of the 
     repository according to the following procedures:
       ``(1) Construction authorization.--The Commission shall 
     grant the Secretary a construction authorization for the 
     repository upon determining that there is reasonable 
     assurance that spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive 
     waste can be disposed of in the repository--
       ``(A) in conformity with the Secretary's application, the 
     provisions of this Act, and the regulations of the 
     Commission;
       ``(B) with adequate protection of the health and safety of 
     the public; and
       ``(C) consistent with the common defense and security.

[[Page H9675]]

       ``(2) License.--Following substantial completion of 
     construction and the filing of any additional information 
     needed to complete the license application, the Commission 
     shall issue a license to dispose of spent nuclear fuel and 
     high-level radioactive waste in the repository if the 
     Commission determines that the repository has been 
     constructed and will operate--
       ``(A) in conformity with the Secretary's application, the 
     provisions of this Act, and the regulations of the 
     Commission;
       ``(B) with adequate protection of the health and safety of 
     the public; and
       ``(C) consistent with the common defense and security.
       ``(3) Closure.--After emplacing spent nuclear fuel and 
     high-level radioactive waste in the repository and collecting 
     sufficient confirmatory data on repository performance to 
     reasonably confirm the basis for repository closure 
     consistent with the Commission's regulations applicable to 
     the licensing of a repository, as modified in accordance with 
     this Act, the Secretary shall apply to the Commission to 
     amend the license to permit permanent closure of the 
     repository. The Commission shall grant such license amendment 
     upon finding that there is reasonable assurance that the 
     repository can be permanently closed--
       ``(A) in conformity with the Secretary's application to 
     amend the license, the provisions of this Act, and the 
     regulations of the Commission;
       ``(B) with adequate protection of the health and safety of 
     the public; and
       ``(C) consistent with the common defense and security.
       ``(4) Post-closure.--The Secretary shall take those actions 
     necessary and appropriate at the Yucca Mountain site to 
     prevent any activity at the site subsequent to repository 
     closure that poses an unreasonable risk of--
       ``(A) breaching the repository's engineered or geologic 
     barriers: or
       ``(B) increasing the exposure of individual members of the 
     public to radiation beyond the release standard established 
     in subsection (d)(1).
       ``(c) Modification of Repository Licensing Procedure.--The 
     Commission's regulations shall provide for the modification 
     of the repository licensing procedure, as appropriate, in the 
     event that the Secretary seeks a license to permit the 
     emplacement in the repository, on a retrievable basis, of 
     only that quantity of spent nuclear fuel or high-level 
     radioactive waste that is necessary to provide the Secretary 
     with sufficient confirmatory data on repository performance 
     to reasonably confirm the basis for repository closure 
     consistent with applicable regulations.
       ``(d) Licensing Standards.--Notwithstanding any other 
     provision of law, the Administrator of the Environmental 
     Protection Agency shall not promulgate, by rule or otherwise, 
     standards for protection of the public from releases of 
     radioactive materials or radioactivity from the repository 
     and any such standards existing on the date of enactment of 
     this Act shall not be incorporated in the Commission's 
     licensing regulations. The Commission's repository licensing 
     determinations for the protection of the public shall be 
     based solely on a finding whether the repository can be 
     operated in conformance with the overall system performance 
     standard established in paragraph (1)(A) and applied in 
     accordance with the provisions of paragraph (1)(B). The 
     Commission shall amend its regulations in accordance with 
     subsection (b) to incorporate each of the following licensing 
     standards:
       ``(1) Release standard.--
       ``(A) Establishment of overall system performance 
     standard.--The standard for protection of the public from 
     release of radioactive material or radioactivity from the 
     repository shall prohibit releases that would expose an 
     average member of the general population in the vicinity of 
     the Yucca Mountain site to an annual dose in excess of 100 
     millirems unless the Commission, in consultation with the 
     Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, 
     determines by rule that such standard would not provide for 
     adequate protection of the health and safety of the public 
     and establishes by rule another standard which will provide 
     for adequate protection of the health and safety of the 
     public. Such standard shall constitute an overall system 
     performance standard.
       ``(B) Application of overall system performance standard.--
     The Commission shall issue the license if it finds reasonable 
     assurance that--
       ``(i) for the first 1,000 years following the commencement 
     of repository operations, the overall system performance 
     standard will be met based on a deterministic or 
     probabilistic evaluation of the overall performance of the 
     disposal system; and
       ``(ii) for the period commencing after the first 1,000 
     years of operation of the repository and terminating at 
     10,000 years after the commencement of operation of the 
     repository, there is likely to be compliance with the overall 
     system performance standard based on regulatory insight 
     gained through the use of a probabilistic integrated 
     performance model that uses best estimate assumptions, data, 
     and methods.
       ``(2) Human intrusion.--The Commission shall assume that, 
     following repository closure, the inclusion of engineered 
     barriers and the Secretary's post-closure actions at the 
     Yucca Mountain site, in accordance with subsection (b)(3), 
     shall be sufficient to--
       ``(A) prevent any human activity at the site that poses an 
     unreasonable risk of breaching the repository's engineered or 
     geologic barriers; and
       ``(B) prevent any increase in the exposure of individual 
     members of the public to radiation beyond allowable limits as 
     specified in paragraph (1).
       ``(e) National Environmental Policy Act.--
       ``(1) Submission of statement.--Construction and operation 
     of the repository shall be considered a major Federal action 
     significantly affecting the quality of the human environment 
     for purposes of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 
     (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.). The Secretary shall submit an 
     environmental impact statement on the construction and 
     operation of the repository to the Commission with the 
     application for construction authorization.
       ``(2) Considerations.--For purposes of complying with the 
     requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 
     and this section, the Secretary shall not consider in the 
     environmental impact statement the need for the repository, 
     alternative sites for the repository, the time of the initial 
     availability of the repository, or any alternatives to the 
     isolation of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive 
     waste in a repository.
       ``(3) Adoption by commission.--The Secretary's 
     environmental impact statement and any supplements thereto 
     shall, to the extent practicable, be adopted by the 
     Commission in connection with the issuance by the Commission 
     of a construction authorization under subsection (b)(1), a 
     license under subsection (b)(2), or a license amendment under 
     subsection (b)(3). To the extent such statement or supplement 
     is adopted by the Commission, such adoption shall be deemed 
     to also satisfy the responsibilities of the Commission under 
     the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, and no further 
     consideration shall be required, except that nothing in this 
     subsection shall affect any independent responsibilities of 
     the Commission to protect the public health and safety under 
     the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2011 et seq.). In 
     any such statement prepared with respect to the repository, 
     the Commission shall not consider the need for a repository, 
     the time of initial availability of the repository, alternate 
     sites to the Yucca Mountain site, or nongeologic alternatives 
     to such site.
       ``(f) Judicial Review.--No court shall have jurisdiction to 
     enjoin issuance of the Commission repository licensing 
     regulations prior to its final decision on review of such 
     regulations.

     ``SEC. 206. LAND WITHDRAWAL.

       ``(a) Withdrawal and Reservation.--
       ``(1) Withdrawal.--Subject to valid existing rights, the 
     interim storage facility site and the Yucca Mountain site, as 
     described in subsection (b), are withdrawn from all forms of 
     entry, appropriation, and disposal under the public land 
     laws, including the mineral leasing laws, the geothermal 
     leasing laws, the material sale laws, and the mining laws.
       ``(2) Jurisdiction.--Jurisdiction of any land within the 
     interim storage facility site and the Yucca Mountain site 
     managed by the Secretary of the Interior or any other Federal 
     officer is transferred to the Secretary.
       ``(3) Reservation.--The interim storage facility site and 
     the Yucca Mountain site are reserved for the use of the 
     Secretary for the construction and operation, respectively, 
     of the interim storage facility and the repository and 
     activities associated with the purposes of this title.
       ``(b) Land Description.--
       ``(1) Boundaries.--The boundaries depicted on the map 
     entitled `Interim Storage Facility Site Withdrawal Map,' 
     dated July 28, 1995, and on file with the Secretary, are 
     established as the boundaries of the interim storage facility 
     site.
       ``(2) Boundaries.--The boundaries depicted on the map 
     entitled `Yucca Mountain Site Withdrawal Map,' dated July 28, 
     1995, and on file with the Secretary, are established as the 
     boundaries of the Yucca Mountain site.
       ``(3) Notice and maps.--Within 6 months of the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall--
       ``(A) publish in the Federal Register a notice containing a 
     legal description of the interim storage facility site; and
       ``(B) file copies of the maps described in paragraph (1), 
     and the legal description of the interim storage facility 
     site with the Congress, the Secretary of the Interior, the 
     Governor of Nevada, and the Archivist of the United States.
       ``(4) Notice and maps.--Concurrent with the Secretary's 
     application to the Commission for authority to construct the 
     repository, the Secretary shall--
       ``(A) publish in the Federal Register a notice containing a 
     legal description of the Yucca Mountain site; and
       ``(B) file copies of the maps described in paragraph (2), 
     and the legal description of the Yucca Mountain site with the 
     Congress, the Secretary of the Interior, the Governor of 
     Nevada, and the Archivist of the United States.
       ``(5) Construction.--The maps and legal descriptions of the 
     interim storage facility site and the Yucca Mountain site 
     referred to in this subsection shall have the same force and 
     effect as if they were included in this Act. The Secretary 
     may correct clerical and typographical errors in the maps and 
     legal descriptions and make minor adjustments in the 
     boundaries of the sites.

     ``SEC. 207. PRIVATE STORAGE FACILITIES.

       ``(a) Commission Action.--Upon application by one or more 
     private entities for a license for an independent spent fuel 
     storage installation not located at the site of a civilian 
     nuclear power reactor, the Commission shall review such 
     license application and issue a license for one or more such 
     facilities at the earliest practicable date, to the extent 
     permitted by the applicable provisions of law and regulation.
       ``(b) Secretary's Actions.--The Secretary shall encourage 
     efforts to develop private facilities for the storage of 
     spent nuclear fuel by providing any requested information and 
     assistance, as appropriate, to the developers of such 
     facilities and to State and local governments and Indian 
     tribes within whose jurisdictions such facilities may be 
     located, and shall cooperate with the developers of such 
     facilities to facilitate compatibility between such 
     facilities and the integrated management system.

[[Page H9676]]

       ``(c) Obligation.--The Secretary shall satisfy the 
     Secretary's obligations under this Act notwithstanding the 
     development of private facilities for the storage of spent 
     nuclear fuel or high-level radioactive waste.
                      ``TITLE III--LOCAL RELATIONS

     ``SEC. 301. ON-SITE REPRESENTATIVE.

       ``The Secretary shall offer to Nye County, Nevada, an 
     opportunity to designate a representative to conduct on-site 
     oversight activities at the Yucca Mountain site. Reasonable 
     expenses of such representatives shall be paid by the 
     Secretary.

     ``SEC. 302. BENEFITS AGREEMENTS.

       ``(a) In General.--
       ``(1) Separate agreements.--The Secretary shall offer to 
     enter into separate agreements with Nye County, Nevada, and 
     Lincoln County, Nevada, concerning the integrated management 
     system.
       ``(2) Agreement content.--Any agreement shall contain such 
     terms and conditions, including such financial and 
     institutional arrangements, as the Secretary and agreement 
     entity determine to be reasonable and appropriate and shall 
     contain such provisions as are necessary to preserve any 
     right to participation or compensation of Nye County, Nevada, 
     and Lincoln County, Nevada.
       ``(b) Amendment.--An agreement entered into under 
     subsection (a) may be amended only with the mutual consent of 
     the parties to the amendment and terminated only in 
     accordance with subsection (c).
       ``(c) Termination.--The Secretary shall terminate an 
     agreement under subsection (a) if any element of the 
     integrated management system may not be completed.
       ``(d) Limitation.--Only 1 agreement each for Nye County, 
     Nevada, and Lincoln County, Nevada, may be in effect at any 
     one time.
       ``(e) Judicial Review.--Decisions of the Secretary under 
     this section are not subject to judicial review.

     ``SEC. 303. CONTENT OF AGREEMENTS.

       ``(a) In General.--
       ``(1) Schedule.--The Secretary, subject to appropriations, 
     shall make payments to the party of a benefits agreement 
     under section 302(a) in accordance with the following 
     schedule:


                           ``BENEFITS SCHEDULE
                          [Amounts in millions]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                            Event                                County
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(A) Annual payments prior to first receipt of fuel...........       $2.5
(B) Upon first spent fuel receipt............................       $5
(C) Annual payments after first spent fuel receipt until            $5
 closure of facility.........................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------


       ``(2) Definitions.--For purposes of this section, the 
     term--
       ``(A) `spent fuel' means high-level radioactive waste or 
     spent nuclear fuel; and
       ``(B) `first spent fuel receipt' does not include receipt 
     of spent fuel or high-level radioactive waste for purposes of 
     testing or operational demonstration.
       ``(3) Annual payments.--Annual payments prior to first 
     spent fuel receipt under line (A) of the benefit schedule 
     shall be made on the date of execution of the benefits 
     agreement and thereafter on the anniversary date of such 
     execution. Annual payments after the first spent fuel receipt 
     until closure of the facility under line (C) of the benefit 
     schedule shall be made on the anniversary date of such first 
     spent fuel receipt.
       ``(4) Reduction.--If the first spent fuel payment under 
     line (B) is made within 6 months after the last annual 
     payment prior to the receipt of spent fuel under line (A) of 
     the benefit schedule, such first spent fuel payment under 
     line (B) of the benefit schedule shall be reduced by an 
     amount equal to \1/12\ of such annual payment under line (A) 
     of the benefit schedule for each full month less than 6 that 
     has not elapsed since the last annual payment under line (A) 
     of the benefit schedule.
       ``(b) Contents.--A benefits agreement under section 302 
     shall provide that--
       ``(1) the parties to the agreement shall share with one 
     another information relevant to the licensing process for the 
     interim storage facility or repository, as it becomes 
     available; and
       ``(2) the affected unit of local government that is party 
     to such agreement may comment on the development of the 
     integrated management system and on documents required under 
     law or regulations governing the effects of the system on the 
     public health and safety.
       ``(c) Construction.--The signature of the Secretary on a 
     valid benefits agreement under section 302 shall constitute a 
     commitment by the United States to make payments in 
     accordance with such agreement.

     ``SEC. 304. ACCEPTANCE OF BENEFITS.

       ``(a) Consent.--The acceptance or use of any of the 
     benefits provided under this title by any affected unit of 
     local government shall not be deemed to be an expression of 
     consent, express, or denied, either under the Constitution of 
     the State of Nevada or any law thereof, to the siting of the 
     interim storage facility or repository in the State of 
     Nevada, any provision of such Constitution or laws to the 
     contrary notwithstanding.
       ``(b) Arguments.--Neither the United States nor any other 
     entity may assert any argument based on legal or equitable 
     estoppel, or acquiescence, or waiver, or consensual 
     involvement, in response to any decision by the State of 
     Nevada, to oppose the siting in Nevada of the interim storage 
     facility or repository premised upon or related to the 
     acceptance or use of benefits under this title.
       ``(c) Liability.--No liability of any nature shall accrue 
     to be asserted against the State of Nevada, its Governor, any 
     official thereof, or any official of any governmental unit 
     thereof, premised solely upon the acceptance or use of 
     benefits under this title.

     ``SEC. 305. RESTRICTION ON USE OF FUNDS.

       ``None of the funding provided under section 303 may be 
     used--
       ``(1) directly or indirectly to influence legislative 
     action on any matter pending before Congress or a State 
     legislature or for any lobbying activity as provided in 
     section 1913 of title 18, United States Code;
       ``(2) for litigation purposes; and
       ``(3) to support multistate efforts or other coalition-
     building activities inconsistent with the purposes of this 
     Act.

     ``SEC. 306. INITIAL LAND CONVEYANCES.

       ``(a) Conveyance of Public Lands.--Within 120 days after 
     October 1, 1998, the Secretary of the Interior, or other 
     agency with jurisdiction over the public lands described in 
     subsection (b), shall convey the public lands described in 
     subsection (b) to the appropriate county, unless the county 
     notifies the Secretary of the Interior or the head of such 
     other appropriate agency in writing within 60 days of such 
     date of enactment that it elects not to take title to all or 
     any part of the property, except that any lands conveyed to 
     the County of Nye, County of Lincoln, or the City of Caliente 
     under this subsection that are subject to a Federal grazing 
     permit or a similar federally granted privilege shall be 
     conveyed between 60 and 120 days of the earliest time the 
     Federal agency administering or granting the privilege would 
     be able to legally terminate such privilege under the 
     statutes and regulations existing on October 1, 1998, unless 
     the Federal agency, county or city, and the affected holder 
     of the privilege negotiate an agreement that allows for an 
     earlier conveyance, but in no case to occur earlier than 
     October 1, 1998.
       ``(b) Special Conveyances.--Subject to valid existing 
     rights and notwithstanding any other law, the Secretary of 
     the Interior or the head of the other appropriate agency 
     shall convey:
       ``(1) To the County of Nye, Nevada, the following public 
     lands depicted on the maps dated October 11, 1995, and on 
     file with the Secretary:
       ``Map 1: Proposed Pahrump Industrial Park Site
       ``Map 2: Proposed Lathrop Wells (Gate 510) Industrial Park 
     Site
       ``Map 3: Pahrump Landfill Sites
       ``Map 4: Amargosa Valley Regional Landfill Site
       ``Map 5: Amargosa Valley Municipal Landfill Site
       ``Map 6: Beatty Landfill/Transfer station Site
       ``Map 7: Round Mountain Landfill Site
       ``Map 8: Tonopah Landfill Site
       ``Map 9: Gabbs Landfill Site.
       ``(2) To the County of Lincoln, Nevada, the following 
     public lands depicted on the maps dated October 11, 1995, and 
     on file with the Secretary:
       ``Map 2: Lincoln County, Parcel M, Industrial Park Site, 
     Jointly with the City of Caliente
       ``Map 3: Lincoln County, Parcels F and G, Mixed Use, 
     Industrial Sites
       ``Map 4: Lincoln County, Parcels H and I, Mixed Use and 
     Airport Expansion Sites
       ``Map 5: Lincoln County, Parcels J and K, Mixed Use, 
     Airport and Landfill Expansion Sites
       ``Map 6: Lincoln County, Parcels E and L, Mixed Use, 
     Airport and Industrial Expansion Sites.
       ``(3) To the City of Caliente, Nevada, the following public 
     lands depicted on the maps dated October 11, 1995, and on 
     file with the Secretary:
       ``Map 1: City of Caliente, Parcels A, B, C and D, Community 
     Growth, Landfill Expansion and Community Recreation Sites
       ``Map 2: City of Caliente, Parcel M, Industrial Park Site, 
     jointly with Lincoln County.
       ``(c) National Environmental Policy Act of 1969.--The 
     activities of the Secretary and the head of any other Federal 
     agency in connection with subsections (a) and (b) shall be 
     considered preliminary decision making activities. No such 
     activity shall require the preparation of an environmental 
     impact statement under section 102(2)(C) of the National 
     Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)) or 
     any environmental review under subparagraph (E) or (F) of 
     section 102(2) of such Act.

     ``SEC. 307. PAYMENTS EQUAL TO TAXES.

       ``(a) Taxable Amounts.--In addition to financial assistance 
     provided under this title, the Secretary is authorized to 
     grant to any affected Indian tribe or affected unit of local 
     government an amount each fiscal year equal to the amount 
     such affected Indian tribe or affected unit of local 
     government, respectively, would receive if authorized to tax 
     integrated management system activities, as such affected 
     Indian tribe or affected unit of local government taxes the 
     non-Federal real property and industrial activities occurring 
     within such affected unit of local government.
       ``(b) Termination.--Such grants shall continue until such 
     time as all such activities, development, and operations are 
     terminated at such site.
       ``(c) Assistance to Indian Tribes and Units of Local 
     Government.--
       ``(1) Period.--Any affected Indian tribe or affected unit 
     of local government may not receive any grant under 
     subsection (a) after the expiration of the 1-year period 
     following the date on which the Secretary notifies the 
     affected Indian tribe or affected unit of local government of 
     the termination of the operation of the integrated management 
     system.
       ``(2) Activities.--Any affected Indian tribe or affected 
     unit of local government may not

[[Page H9677]]

     receive any further assistance under this section if the 
     integrated management system activities at such site are 
     terminated by the Secretary or if such activities are 
     permanently enjoined by any court.
                  ``TITLE IV--FUNDING AND ORGANIZATION

     ``SEC. 401. PROGRAM FUNDING.

       ``(a) Contracts.--
       ``(1) Authority of secretary.--In the performance of the 
     Secretary's functions under this Act, the Secretary is 
     authorized to enter into contracts with any person who 
     generates or holds title to spent nuclear fuel or high-level 
     radioactive waste of domestic origin for the acceptance of 
     title and possession, transportation, interim storage, and 
     disposal of such spent fuel or waste upon the payment of fees 
     in accordance with paragraphs (2) and (3). Except as provided 
     in paragraph (3), fees assessed pursuant to this paragraph 
     shall be paid to the Treasury of the United States and shall 
     be available for use by the Secretary pursuant to this 
     section until expended.
       ``(2) Annual fees.--
       ``(A) Electricity.--
       ``(i) In general.--Under a contract entered into under 
     paragraph (1) there shall be a fee for electricity generated 
     by civilian nuclear power reactors and sold on or after the 
     date of enactment of this Act. The aggregate amount of such 
     fees collected during each fiscal year shall be no greater 
     than the annual level of appropriations for expenditures on 
     the integrated management system for that fiscal year, 
     minus--

       ``(I) any unobligated balance of fees collected during the 
     previous fiscal year; and
       ``(II) such appropriations required to be funded by the 
     Federal Government pursuant to section 403.

       ``(ii) Fee level.--The Secretary shall determine the level 
     of the annual fee for each civilian nuclear power reactor 
     based on the amount of electricity generated and sold, except 
     that for the period commencing with fiscal year 1999 and 
     continuing through the fiscal year in which disposal at the 
     repository commences--

       ``(I) the average annual fee collected under this 
     subparagraph shall not exceed 1.0 mill per-kilowatt hour 
     generated and sold; and
       ``(II) the fee in any fiscal year in such period shall not 
     exceed 1.5 mill per kilowatt hour generated and sold.

     Thereafter, the annual fee collected under this subparagraph 
     shall not exceed 1.0 mill per-kilowatt hour generated and 
     sold. Fees assessed pursuant to this subparagraph shall be 
     paid to the Treasury of the United States and shall be 
     available for use by the Secretary pursuant to this section 
     until expended.
       ``(B) Expenditures if shortfall.--If, during any fiscal 
     year, the aggregate amount of fees assessed pursuant to 
     subparagraph (A) is less than the annual level of 
     appropriations for expenditures on those activities specified 
     in subsection (d) for that fiscal year, minus--
       ``(i) any unobligated balance collected pursuant to this 
     section during the previous fiscal year, and
       ``(ii) such appropriations required to be funded by the 
     Federal Government pursuant to section 403,

     the Secretary may make expenditures from the Nuclear Waste 
     Fund up to the level of appropriations.
       ``(C) Rules.--The Secretary shall, by rule, establish 
     procedures necessary to implement this paragraph.
       ``(3) One-time fees.--The one-time fees collected under 
     contracts executed under section 302(a) of the Nuclear Waste 
     Policy Act of 1982 before the date of enactment of this Act 
     on spent nuclear fuel, or high-level radioactive waste 
     derived from spent nuclear fuel, which fuel was used to 
     generate electricity in a civilian nuclear power reactor 
     before April 7, 1983, shall be paid to the Nuclear Waste 
     Fund. The Secretary shall collect all such fees before the 
     expiration of fiscal year 2002. The Commission shall suspend 
     the license of any licensee who fails or refuses to pay the 
     full amount of the fee referred to in this paragraph and the 
     license shall remain suspended until the full amount of the 
     fee referred to in this paragraph is paid. In paying such a 
     fee, the person delivering such spent nuclear fuel or high-
     level radioactive wastes, to the Secretary shall have no 
     further financial obligation under this paragraph to the 
     Federal Government for the long-term storage and permanent 
     disposal of such spent nuclear fuel or high-level radioactive 
     waste.
       ``(b) Advance Contracting Requirement.--
       ``(1) In general.--
       ``(A) License issuance and renewal.--The Commission shall 
     not issue or renew a license to any person to use a 
     utilization or production facility under the authority of 
     section 103 or 104 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 
     U.S.C. 2133, 2134) unless--
       ``(i) such person has entered into a contract under 
     subsection (a) with the Secretary; or
       ``(ii) the Secretary affirms in writing that such person is 
     actively and in good faith negotiating with the Secretary for 
     a contract under subsection (a).
       ``(B) Precondition.--The Commission, as it deems necessary 
     or appropriate, may require as a precondition to the issuance 
     or renewal of a license under section 103 or 104 of the 
     Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2133, 2134) that the 
     applicant for such license shall have entered into an 
     agreement with the Secretary for the disposal of spent 
     nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste that may result 
     from the use of such license.
       ``(2) Disposal in repository.--Except as provided in 
     paragraph (1), no spent nuclear fuel or high-level 
     radioactive waste generated or owned by any person (other 
     than a department of the United States referred to in section 
     101 or 102 of title 5, United States Code) may be disposed of 
     by the Secretary in the repository unless the generator or 
     owner of such spent fuel or waste has entered into a contract 
     under subsection (a) with the Secretary by not later than the 
     date on which such generator or owner commences generation 
     of, or takes title to, such spent fuel or waste.
       ``(3) Assignment.--The rights and duties of a party to a 
     contract entered into under this section may be assignable 
     with transfer of title to the spent nuclear fuel or high-
     level radioactive waste involved.
       ``(4) Disposal condition.--No spent nuclear fuel or high-
     level radioactive waste generated or owned by any department 
     of the United States referred to in section 101 or 102 of 
     title 5, United States Code, may be stored or disposed of by 
     the Secretary at the interim storage facility or repository 
     in the integrated management system developed under this Act 
     unless, in each fiscal year, such department funds its 
     appropriate portion of the costs of such storage and disposal 
     as specified in section 403.
       ``(c) Nuclear Waste Fund.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Nuclear Waste Fund established in 
     the Treasury of the United States under section 302(c) of the 
     Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 shall continue in effect 
     under this Act and shall consist of--
       ``(A) all receipts, proceeds, and recoveries realized by 
     the Secretary before the date of enactment of this Act;
       ``(B) any appropriations made by the Congress before the 
     date of enactment of this Act to the Nuclear Waste Fund;
       ``(C) all interest paid on amounts invested by the 
     Secretary of the Treasury under paragraph (3)(B); and
       ``(D) the one-time fees collected pursuant to subsection 
     (a)(3).
       ``(2) Use.--The Nuclear Waste Fund shall be used only for 
     purposes of the integrated management system.
       ``(3) Administration of nuclear waste fund.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Secretary of the Treasury shall hold 
     the Nuclear Waste Fund and, after consultation with the 
     Secretary, annually report to the Congress on the financial 
     condition and operations of the Nuclear Waste Fund during the 
     preceding fiscal year.
       ``(B) Amounts in excess of current needs.--If the Secretary 
     determines that the Nuclear Waste Fund contains at any time 
     amounts in excess of current needs, the Secretary may request 
     the Secretary of the Treasury to invest such amounts, or any 
     portion of such amounts as the Secretary determines to be 
     appropriate, in obligations of the United States--
       ``(i) having maturities determined by the Secretary of the 
     Treasury to be appropriate to the needs of the Nuclear Waste 
     Fund; and
       ``(ii) bearing interest at rates determined to be 
     appropriate by the Secretary of the Treasury, taking into 
     consideration the current average market yield on outstanding 
     marketable obligations of the United States with remaining 
     periods to maturity comparable to the maturities of such 
     investments, except that the interest rate on such 
     investments shall not exceed the average interest rate 
     applicable to existing borrowings.
       ``(C) Exemption.--Receipts, proceeds, and recoveries 
     realized by the Secretary under this section, and 
     expenditures of amounts from the Nuclear Waste Fund, shall be 
     exempt from annual apportionment under the provisions of 
     subchapter II of chapter 15 of title 31, United States Code.
       ``(d) Use of Appropriated Funds.--During each fiscal year, 
     the Secretary may make expenditures of funds collected after 
     the date of enactment of this Act under this section and 
     section 403, up to the level of appropriations for that 
     fiscal year pursuant to subsection (f) only for purposes of 
     the integrated management system.
       ``(e) Prohibition on Use of Appropriations and Nuclear 
     Waste Fund.--The Secretary shall not make expenditures of 
     funds collected pursuant to this section or section 403 to 
     design or construct packages for the transportation, storage, 
     or disposal of spent nuclear fuel from civilian nuclear power 
     reactors.
       ``(f) Appropriations.--
       ``(1) Budget.--The Secretary shall submit the budget for 
     implementation of the Secretary's responsibilities under this 
     Act to the Office of Management and Budget triennially along 
     with the budget of the Department of Energy submitted at such 
     time in accordance with chapter 11 of title 31, United States 
     Code. The budget shall consist of the estimates made by the 
     Secretary of expenditures under this Act and other relevant 
     financial matters for the succeeding 3 fiscal years, and 
     shall be included in the budget of the United States 
     Government.
       ``(2) Appropriations.--Appropriations shall be subject to 
     triennial authorization. During each fiscal year, the 
     Secretary may make expenditures, up to the level of 
     appropriations, out of the funds collected pursuant to this 
     section and section 403, if the Secretary transmits the 
     amounts appropriated for implementation of this Act to the 
     Commission and the Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board in 
     appropriate proportion to the collection of such funds.
       ``(g) Effective Date.--This section shall take effect 
     October 1, 1998, and section 302 of

[[Page H9678]]

     the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 (42 U.S.C. 10222) shall 
     continue in effect until October 1, 1998.

     ``SEC. 402. OFFICE OF CIVILIAN RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT.

       ``(a) Continuation of Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste 
     Management.--The Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste 
     Management established under section 304(a) of the Nuclear 
     Waste Policy Act of 1982 as constituted prior to the date of 
     enactment of this Act, shall continue in effect subsequent to 
     the date of enactment of this Act.
       ``(b) Functions of Director.--The Director of the Office 
     shall be responsible for carrying out the functions of the 
     Secretary under this Act, subject to the general supervision 
     of the Secretary. The Director of the Office shall be 
     directly responsible to the Secretary.
       ``(c) Audits.--
       ``(1) Standard.--The Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste 
     Management, its contractors, and subcontractors at all tiers, 
     shall conduct, or have conducted, audits and examinations of 
     their operations in accordance with the usual and customary 
     practices of private corporations engaged in large nuclear 
     construction projects consistent with its role in the 
     program.
       ``(2) Time.--The management practices and performances of 
     the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management shall be 
     audited every 5 years by an independent management consulting 
     firm with significant experience in similar audits of private 
     corporations engaged in large nuclear construction projects. 
     The first such audit shall be conducted 5 years after the 
     date of enactment of this Act.
       ``(3) Comptroller general.--The Comptroller General of the 
     United States shall annually make an audit of the Office, in 
     accordance with such regulations as the Comptroller General 
     may prescribe. The Comptroller General shall have access to 
     such books, records, accounts, and other materials of the 
     Office as the Comptroller General determines to be necessary 
     for the preparation of such audit. The Comptroller General 
     shall submit to the Congress a report on the results of each 
     audit conducted under this section.
       ``(4) Time.--No audit contemplated by this subsection shall 
     take longer than 30 days to conduct. An audit report shall be 
     issued in final form no longer than 60 days after the audit 
     is commenced.
       ``(5) Public documents.--All audit reports shall be public 
     documents and available to any individual upon request.

     ``SEC. 403. DEFENSE CONTRIBUTION.

       ``(a) Allocation.--No later than one year from the date of 
     enactment of this Act, acting pursuant to section 553 of 
     title 5, United States Code, the Secretary shall issue a 
     final rule establishing the appropriate portion of the costs 
     of managing spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive 
     waste under this Act allocable to the interim storage or 
     permanent disposal of spent nuclear fuel, high-level 
     radioactive waste from atomic energy defense activities, and 
     spent nuclear fuel from foreign research reactors. The share 
     of costs allocable to the management of spent nuclear fuel, 
     high-level radioactive waste from atomic energy defense 
     activities, and spent nuclear fuel from foreign research 
     reactors shall include--
       ``(1) an appropriate portion of the costs associated with 
     research and development activities with respect to 
     development of the interim storage facility and repository; 
     and
       ``(2) interest on the principal amounts due calculated by 
     reference to the appropriate Treasury bill rate as if the 
     payments were made at a point in time consistent with the 
     payment dates for spent nuclear fuel and high-level 
     radioactive waste under the contracts.
       ``(b) Appropriation Request.--In addition to any request 
     for an appropriation from the Nuclear Waste Fund, the 
     Secretary shall request annual appropriations from general 
     revenues in amounts sufficient to pay the costs of the 
     management of materials described in subsection (a).
       ``(c) Report.--In conjunction with the annual report 
     submitted to Congress under section 702, the Secretary shall 
     advise the Congress annually of the amount of spent nuclear 
     fuel and high-level radioactive waste from atomic energy 
     defense activities, and spent nuclear fuel from foreign 
     research reactors requiring management in the integrated 
     management system.
       ``(d) Authorization.--There is authorized to be 
     appropriated to the Secretary, from general revenues, for 
     carrying out the purposes of this Act, such sums as may be 
     necessary to pay the costs of the management of spent nuclear 
     fuel and high-level radioactive waste from atomic energy 
     defense activities as established under subsection (a).
            ``TITLE V--GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS

     ``SEC. 501. COMPLIANCE WITH OTHER LAWS.

       ``If the requirements of any law are inconsistent with or 
     duplicative of the requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 
     1954 (42 U.S.C. 2011 et seq.) and this Act, the Secretary 
     shall comply only with the requirements of the Atomic Energy 
     Act of 1954 and this Act in implementing the integrated 
     management system. Any requirement of a State or political 
     subdivision of a State is preempted if--
       ``(1) complying with such requirement and a requirement of 
     this Act is impossible; or
       ``(2) such requirement, as applied or enforced, is an 
     obstacle to accomplishing or carrying out this Act or a 
     regulation under this Act.

     ``SEC. 502. WATER RIGHTS.

       ``(a) No Federal Reservation.--Nothing in this Act or any 
     other Act of Congress shall constitute or be construed to 
     constitute either an express or implied Federal reservation 
     of water or water rights for any purpose arising under this 
     Act.
       ``(b) Acquisition and Exercise of Water Rights Under Nevada 
     Law.--The United States may acquire and exercise such water 
     rights as it deems necessary to carry out its 
     responsibilities under this Act pursuant to the substantive 
     and procedural requirements of the State of Nevada. Nothing 
     in this Act shall be construed to authorize the use of 
     eminent domain by the United States to acquire water rights.
       ``(c) Exercise of Water Rights Generally Under Nevada 
     Laws.--Nothing in this Act shall be construed to limit the 
     exercise of water rights as provided under Nevada State laws.

     ``SEC. 503. JUDICIAL REVIEW OF AGENCY ACTIONS.

       ``(a) Jurisdiction of United States Courts of Appeals.--
       ``(1) Original and exclusive jurisdiction.--Except for 
     review in the Supreme Court of the United States, and except 
     as otherwise provided in this Act, the United States courts 
     of appeals shall have original and exclusive jurisdiction 
     over any civil action--
       ``(A) for review of any final decision or action of the 
     Secretary, the President, or the Commission under this Act;
       ``(B) alleging the failure of the Secretary, the President, 
     or the Commission to make any decision, or take any action, 
     required under this Act;
       ``(C) challenging the constitutionality of any decision 
     made, or action taken, under any provision of this Act; or
       ``(D) for review of any environmental impact statement 
     prepared or environmental assessment made pursuant to the 
     National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et 
     seq.) with respect to any action under this Act or alleging a 
     failure to prepare such statement with respect to any such 
     action.
       ``(2) Venue.--The venue of any proceeding under this 
     section shall be in the judicial circuit in which the 
     petitioner involved resides or has its principal office, or 
     in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of 
     Columbia.
       ``(b) Deadline for Commencing Action.--A civil action for 
     judicial review described under subsection (a)(1) may be 
     brought no later than 180 days after the date of the decision 
     or action or failure to act involved, as the case may be, 
     except that if a party shows that the party did not know of 
     the decision or action complained of or of the failure to 
     act, and that a reasonable person acting under the 
     circumstances would not have known of such decision, action, 
     or failure to act, such party may bring a civil action no 
     later than 180 days after the date such party acquired actual 
     or constructive knowledge of such decision, action, or 
     failure to act.
       ``(c) Application of Other Law.--The provisions of this 
     section relating to any matter shall apply in lieu of the 
     provisions of any other Act relating to the same matter.

     ``SEC. 504. LICENSING OF FACILITY EXPANSIONS AND 
                   TRANSSHIPMENTS.

       ``(a) Oral Argument.--In any Commission hearing under 
     section 189 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2239) 
     on an application for a license, or for an amendment to an 
     existing license, filed after January 7, 1983, to expand the 
     spent nuclear fuel storage capacity at the site of a civilian 
     nuclear power reactor, through the use of high-density fuel 
     storage racks, fuel rod compaction, the transshipment of 
     spent nuclear fuel to another civilian nuclear power reactor 
     within the same utility system, the construction of 
     additional spent nuclear fuel pool capacity or dry storage 
     capacity, or by other means, the Commission shall, at the 
     request of any party, provide an opportunity for oral 
     argument with respect to any matter which the Commission 
     determines to be in controversy among the parties. The oral 
     argument shall be preceded by such discovery procedures as 
     the rules of the Commission shall provide. The Commission 
     shall require each party, including the Commission staff, to 
     submit in written form, at the time of the oral argument, a 
     summary of the facts, data, and arguments upon which such 
     party proposes to rely that are known at such time to such 
     party. Only facts and data in the form of sworn testimony or 
     written submission may be relied upon by the parties during 
     oral argument. Of the materials that may be submitted by the 
     parties during oral argument, the Commission shall only 
     consider those facts and data that are submitted in the form 
     of sworn testimony or written submission.
       ``(b) Adjudicatory Hearing.--
       ``(1) Designation.--At the conclusion of any oral argument 
     under subsection (a), the Commission shall designate any 
     disputed question of fact, together with any remaining 
     questions of law, for resolution in an adjudicatory hearing 
     only if it determines that--
       ``(A) there is a genuine and substantial dispute of fact 
     which can only be resolved with sufficient accuracy by the 
     introduction of evidence in an adjudicatory hearing; and
       ``(B) the decision of the Commission is likely to depend in 
     whole or in part on the resolution of such dispute.
       ``(2) Determination.--In making a determination under this 
     subsection, the Commission--

[[Page H9679]]

       ``(A) shall designate in writing the specific facts that 
     are in genuine and substantial dispute, the reason why the 
     decision of the agency is likely to depend on the resolution 
     of such facts, and the reason why an adjudicatory hearing is 
     likely to resolve the dispute; and
       ``(B) shall not consider--
       ``(i) any issue relating to the design, construction, or 
     operation of any civilian nuclear power reactor already 
     licensed to operate at such site, or any civilian nuclear 
     power reactor to which a construction permit has been granted 
     at such site, unless the Commission determines that any such 
     issue substantially affects the design, construction, or 
     operation of the facility or activity for which such license 
     application, authorization, or amendment is being considered; 
     or
       ``(ii) any siting or design issue fully considered and 
     decided by the Commission in connection with the issuance of 
     a construction permit or operating license for a civilian 
     nuclear power reactor at such site, unless--

       ``(I) such issue results from any revision of siting or 
     design criteria by the Commission following such decision; 
     and
       ``(II) the Commission determines that such issue 
     substantially affects the design, construction, or operation 
     of the facility or activity for which such license 
     application, authorization, or amendment is being considered.

       ``(3) Application.--The provisions of paragraph (2)(B) 
     shall apply only with respect to licenses, authorizations, or 
     amendments to licenses or authorizations, applied for under 
     the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2011 et seq.) before 
     December 31, 2005.
       ``(4) Construction.--The provisions of this section shall 
     not apply to the first application for a license or license 
     amendment received by the Commission to expand onsite spent 
     fuel storage capacity by the use of a new technology not 
     previously approved for use at any nuclear power plant by the 
     Commission.
       ``(c) Judicial Review.--No court shall hold unlawful or set 
     aside a decision of the Commission in any proceeding 
     described in subsection (a) because of a failure by the 
     Commission to use a particular procedure pursuant to this 
     section unless--
       ``(1) an objection to the procedure used was presented to 
     the Commission in a timely fashion or there are extraordinary 
     circumstances that excuse the failure to present a timely 
     objection; and
       ``(2) the court finds that such failure has precluded a 
     fair consideration and informed resolution of a significant 
     issue of the proceeding taken as a whole.

     ``SEC. 505. SITING A SECOND REPOSITORY.

       ``(a) Congressional Action Required.--The Secretary may not 
     conduct site-specific activities with respect to a second 
     repository unless Congress has specifically authorized and 
     appropriated funds for such activities.
       ``(b) Report.--The Secretary shall report to the President 
     and to Congress on or after January 1, 2007, but not later 
     than January 1, 2010, on the need for a second repository.

     ``SEC. 506. FINANCIAL ARRANGEMENTS FOR LOW-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE 
                   WASTE SITE CLOSURE.

       ``(a) Financial Arrangements.--
       ``(1) Standards and instructions.--The Commission shall 
     establish by rule, regulation, or order, after public notice, 
     and in accordance with section 181 of the Atomic Energy Act 
     of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2231), such standards and instructions as 
     the Commission may deem necessary or desirable to ensure in 
     the case of each license for the disposal of low-level 
     radioactive waste that an adequate bond, surety, or other 
     financial arrangement (as determined by the Commission) will 
     be provided by a licensee to permit completion of all 
     requirements established by the Commission for the 
     decontamination, decommissioning, site closure, and 
     reclamation of sites, structures, and equipment used in 
     conjunction with such low-level radioactive waste. Such 
     financial arrangements shall be provided and approved by the 
     Commission, or, in the case of sites within the boundaries of 
     any agreement State under section 274 of the Atomic Energy 
     Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2021), by the appropriate State or 
     State entity, prior to issuance of licenses for low-level 
     radioactive waste disposal or, in the case of licenses in 
     effect on January 7, 1983, prior to termination of such 
     licenses.
       ``(2) Bonding, surety, or other financial arrangements.--If 
     the Commission determines that any long-term maintenance or 
     monitoring, or both, will be necessary at a site described in 
     paragraph (1), the Commission shall ensure before termination 
     of the license involved that the licensee has made available 
     such bonding, surety, or other financial arrangements as may 
     be necessary to ensure that any necessary long-term 
     maintenance or monitoring needed for such site will be 
     carried out by the person having title and custody for such 
     site following license termination.
       ``(b) Title and Custody.--
       ``(1) Authority of secretary.--The Secretary shall have 
     authority to assume title and custody of low-level 
     radioactive waste and the land on which such waste is 
     disposed of, upon request of the owner of such waste and land 
     and following termination of the license issued by the 
     Commission for such disposal, if the Commission determines 
     that--
       ``(A) the requirements of the Commission for site closure, 
     decommissioning, and decontamination have been met by the 
     licensee involved and that such licensee is in compliance 
     with the provisions of subsection (a);
       ``(B) such title and custody will be transferred to the 
     Secretary without cost to the Federal Government; and
       ``(C) Federal ownership and management of such site is 
     necessary or desirable in order to protect the public health 
     and safety, and the environment.
       ``(2) Protection.--If the Secretary assumes title and 
     custody of any such waste and land under this subsection, the 
     Secretary shall maintain such waste and land in a manner that 
     will protect the public health and safety, and the 
     environment.
       ``(c) Special Sites.--If the low-level radioactive waste 
     involved is the result of a licensed activity to recover 
     zirconium, hafnium, and rare earths from source material, the 
     Secretary, upon request of the owner of the site involved, 
     shall assume title and custody of such waste and the land on 
     which it is disposed when such site has been decontaminated 
     and stabilized in accordance with the requirements 
     established by the Commission and when such owner has made 
     adequate financial arrangements approved by the Commission 
     for the long-term maintenance and monitoring of such site.

     ``SEC. 507. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION TRAINING 
                   AUTHORIZATION.

       ``The Commission is authorized and directed to promulgate 
     regulations, or other appropriate regulatory guidance, for 
     the training and qualifications of civilian nuclear 
     powerplant operators, supervisors, technicians, and other 
     appropriate operating personnel. Such regulations or guidance 
     shall establish simulator training requirements for 
     applicants for civilian nuclear powerplant operator licenses 
     and for operator requalification programs; requirements 
     governing Commission administration of requalification 
     examinations; requirements for operating tests at civilian 
     nuclear powerplant simulators, and instructional requirements 
     for civilian nuclear powerplant licensee personnel training 
     programs.

     ``SEC. 508. ACCEPTANCE SCHEDULE.

       ``The acceptance schedule shall be implemented in 
     accordance with the following:
       ``(1) Priority ranking.--Acceptance priority ranking shall 
     be determined by the Department's `Acceptance Priority 
     Ranking' report.
       ``(2) Acceptance rate.--Except as provided in paragraph 
     (5), the Secretary's acceptance rate for spent nuclear fuel 
     shall be no less than the following: 1,200 MTU in 2002 and 
     1,200 MTU in 2003, 2,000 MTU in 2004 and 2,000 MTU in 2005, 
     2,700 MTU in 2006, and 3,000 MTU thereafter.
       ``(3) Other acceptances.--In each year, once the Secretary 
     has achieved the annual acceptance rate for spent nuclear 
     fuel from civilian nuclear power reactors established 
     pursuant to the contracts executed under the Nuclear Waste 
     Policy Act of 1982 (as set forth in the Secretary's annual 
     capacity report dated March 1995 (DOE/RW-0457)), the 
     Secretary--
       ``(A) shall accept from spent nuclear fuel from foreign 
     research reactors and spent nuclear fuel from naval reactors 
     and high-level radioactive waste from atomic energy defense 
     activities,an amount of spent nuclear fuel and high-level 
     radioactive waste which is--
       ``(i) at least 25 percent of the difference between such 
     annual acceptance rate and the annual rate specified in 
     paragraph (2), or
       ``(ii) 5 percent of the total amount of spent nuclear fuel 
     and high-level radioactive waste actually accepted,

     whichever is higher. If such amount is less than the rate 
     prescribed in the preceding sentence, the Secretary shall 
     accept spent nuclear fuel or high-level radioactive waste of 
     domestic origin from civilian nuclear power reactors which 
     have permanently ceased operation; and
       ``(B) may, additionally, accept any other spent nuclear 
     fuel or high-level radioactive waste.
       ``(4) Exception.--If the annual rate under the acceptance 
     schedule is not achieved, the acceptance rate of the 
     Secretary of the materials described in paragraph (3)(A) 
     shall be the greater of the acceptance rate prescribed by 
     paragraph (3) and calculated on the basis of the amount of 
     spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste actually 
     received or 5 percent of the total amount of spent nuclear 
     fuel and high-level radioactive waste actually accepted.
       ``(5) Adjustment.--If the Secretary is unable to begin 
     acceptance by January 31, 2002 at the rate specified in 
     paragraph (2) or if the cumulative amount accepted in any 
     year thereafter is less than that which would have been 
     accepted under the rate specified in paragraph (2), the 
     acceptance schedule shall, to the extent practicable, be 
     adjusted upward such that within 5 years of the start of 
     acceptance by the Secretary--
       ``(A) the total quantity accepted by the Secretary is 
     consistent with the total quantity that the Secretary would 
     have accepted if the Secretary had begun acceptance in 2002; 
     and
       ``(B) thereafter the acceptance rate is equivalent to the 
     rate that would be in place pursuant to paragraph (2) if the 
     Secretary had commenced acceptance in 2002.
       ``(6) Effect on schedule.--The acceptance schedule shall 
     not be affected or modified in any way as a result of the 
     Secretary's acceptance of any material other than contract 
     holders' spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste.

[[Page H9680]]

     ``SEC. 509. SUBSEABED OR OCEAN WATER DISPOSAL.

       ``Notwithstanding any other provision of law--
       ``(1) the subseabed or ocean water disposal of spent 
     nuclear fuel or high-level radioactive waste is prohibited; 
     and
       ``(2) no funds shall be obligated for any activity relating 
     to the subseabed or ocean water disposal of spent nuclear 
     fuel or high-level radioactive waste.
            ``TITLE VI--NUCLEAR WASTE TECHNICAL REVIEW BOARD

     ``SEC. 601. DEFINITIONS.

       ``For purposes of this title--
       ``(1) Chairman.--The term `Chairman' means the Chairman of 
     the Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board.
       ``(2) Board.--The term `Board' means the Nuclear Waste 
     Technical Review Board continued under section 602.

     ``SEC. 602. NUCLEAR WASTE TECHNICAL REVIEW BOARD.

       ``(a) Continuation of Nuclear Waste Technical Review 
     Board.--The Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board, established 
     under section 502(a) of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 
     as constituted prior to the date of enactment of this Act, 
     shall continue in effect subsequent to the date of enactment 
     of this Act.
       ``(b) Members.--
       ``(1) Number.--The Board shall consist of 11 members who 
     shall be appointed by the President not later than 90 days 
     after December 22, 1987, from among persons nominated by the 
     National Academy of Sciences in accordance with paragraph 
     (3).
       ``(2) Chair.--The President shall designate a member of the 
     Board to serve as Chairman.
       ``(3) National academy of sciences.--
       ``(A) Nominations.--The National Academy of Sciences shall, 
     not later than 90 days after December 22, 1987, nominate not 
     less than 22 persons for appointment to the Board from among 
     persons who meet the qualifications described in subparagraph 
     (C).
       ``(B) Vacancies.--The National Academy of Sciences shall 
     nominate not less than 2 persons to fill any vacancy on the 
     Board from among persons who meet the qualifications 
     described in subparagraph (C).
       ``(C) Nominees.--
       ``(i) Each person nominated for appointment to the Board 
     shall be--

       ``(I) eminent in a field of science or engineering, 
     including environmental sciences; and
       ``(II) selected solely on the basis of established records 
     of distinguished service.

       ``(ii) The membership of the Board shall be representatives 
     of the broad range of scientific and engineering disciplines 
     related to activities under this title.
       ``(iii) No person shall be nominated for appointment to the 
     Board who is an employee of--

       ``(I) the Department of Energy;
       ``(II) a national laboratory under contract with the 
     Department of Energy; or
       ``(III) an entity performing spent nuclear fuel or high-
     level radioactive waste activities under contract with the 
     Department of Energy.

       ``(4) Vacancies.--Any vacancy on the Board shall be filled 
     by the nomination and appointment process described in 
     paragraphs (1) and (3).
       ``(5) Terms.--Members of the Board shall be appointed for 
     terms of 4 years, each such term to commence 120 days after 
     December 22, 1987, except that of the 11 members first 
     appointed to the Board, 5 shall serve for 2 years and 6 shall 
     serve for 4 years, to be designated by the President at the 
     time of appointment, except that a member of the Board whose 
     term has expired may continue to serve as a member of the 
     Board until such member's successor has taken office.

     ``SEC. 603. FUNCTIONS.

       ``The Board shall evaluate the technical and scientific 
     validity of activities undertaken by the Secretary after 
     December 22, 1987, including--
       ``(1) site characterization activities; and
       ``(2) activities relating to the packaging or 
     transportation of spent nuclear fuel or high-level 
     radioactive waste.

     ``SEC. 604. INVESTIGATORY POWERS.

       ``(a) Hearings.--Upon request of the Chairman or a majority 
     of the members of the Board, the Board may hold such 
     hearings, sit and act at such times and places, take such 
     testimony, and receive such evidence, as the Board considers 
     appropriate. Any member of the Board may administer oaths or 
     affirmations to witnesses appearing before the Board.
       ``(b) Production of Documents.--
       ``(1) Response to inquiries.--Upon the request of the 
     Chairman or a majority of the members of the Board, and 
     subject to existing law, the Secretary (or any contractor of 
     the Secretary) shall provide the Board with such records, 
     files, papers, data, or information as may be necessary to 
     respond to any inquiry of the Board under this title.
       ``(2) Extent.--Subject to existing law, information 
     obtainable under paragraph (1) shall not be limited to final 
     work products of the Secretary, but shall include drafts of 
     such products and documentation of work in progress.

     ``SEC. 605. COMPENSATION OF MEMBERS.

       ``(a) In General.--Each member of the Board shall, subject 
     to appropriations, be paid at the rate of pay payable for 
     level III of the Executive Schedule for each day (including 
     travel time) such member is engaged in the work of the Board.
       ``(b) Travel Expenses.--Each member of the Board may 
     receive travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of 
     subsistence, in the same manner as is permitted under 
     sections 5702 and 5703 of title 5, United States Code.

     ``SEC. 606. STAFF.

       ``(a) Clerical Staff.--
       ``(1) Authority of chairman.--Subject to paragraph (2), the 
     Chairman may, subject to appropriations, appoint and fix the 
     compensation of such clerical staff as may be necessary to 
     discharge the responsibilities of the Board.
       ``(2) Provisions of title 5.--Clerical staff shall be 
     appointed subject to the provisions of title 5, United States 
     Code, governing appointments in the competitive service, and 
     shall be paid in accordance with the provisions of chapter 51 
     and subchapter III of chapter 3 of such title relating to 
     classification and General Schedule pay rates.
       ``(b) Professional Staff.--
       ``(1) Authority of chairman.--Subject to paragraphs (2) and 
     (3), the Chairman may, subject to appropriations, appoint and 
     fix the compensation of such professional staff as may be 
     necessary to discharge the responsibilities of the Board.
       ``(2) Number.--Not more than 10 professional staff members 
     may be appointed under this subsection.
       ``(3) Title 5.--Professional staff members may be appointed 
     without regard to the provisions of title 5, United States 
     Code, governing appointments in the competitive service, and 
     may be paid without regard to the provisions of chapter 51 
     and subchapter III of chapter 53 of such title relating to 
     classification and General Schedule pay rates, except that no 
     individual so appointed may receive pay in excess of the 
     annual rate of basic pay payable for GS-18 of the General 
     Schedule.

     ``SEC. 607. SUPPORT SERVICES.

       ``(a) General Services.--To the extent permitted by law and 
     requested by the Chairman, the Administrator of General 
     Services shall provide the Board with necessary 
     administrative services, facilities, and support on a 
     reimbursable basis.
       ``(b) Accounting, Research, and Technology Assessment 
     Services.--The Comptroller General, the Librarian of 
     Congress, and the Director of the Office of Technology 
     Assessment shall, to the extent permitted by law and subject 
     to the availability of funds, provide the Board with such 
     facilities, support, funds and services, including staff, as 
     may be necessary for the effective performance of the 
     functions of the Board.
       ``(c) Additional Support.--Upon the request of the 
     Chairman, the Board may secure directly from the head of any 
     department or agency of the United States information 
     necessary to enable it to carry out this title.
       ``(d) Mails.--The Board may use the United States mails in 
     the same manner and under the same conditions as other 
     departments and agencies of the United States.
       ``(e) Experts and Consultants.--Subject to such rules as 
     may be prescribed by the Board, the Chairman may, subject to 
     appropriations, procure temporary and intermittent services 
     under section 3109(b) of title 5 of the United States Code, 
     but at rates for individuals not to exceed the daily 
     equivalent of the maximum annual rate of basic pay payable 
     for GS-18 of the General Schedule.

     ``SEC. 608. REPORT.

       ``The Board shall report not less than 2 times per year to 
     Congress and the Secretary its findings, conclusions, and 
     recommendations.

     ``SEC. 609. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       ``There are authorized to be appropriated for expenditures 
     such sums as may be necessary to carry out the provisions of 
     this title.

     ``SEC. 610. TERMINATION OF THE BOARD.

       ``The Board shall cease to exist not later than one year 
     after the date on which the Secretary begins disposal of 
     spent nuclear fuel or high-level radioactive waste in the 
     repository.
                     ``TITLE VII--MANAGEMENT REFORM

     ``SEC. 701. MANAGEMENT REFORM INITIATIVES.

       ``(a) In General.--The Secretary is directed to take 
     actions as necessary to improve the management of the 
     civilian radioactive waste management program to ensure that 
     the program is operated, to the maximum extent practicable, 
     in like manner as a private business.
       ``(b) Site Characterization.--The Secretary shall employ, 
     on an on-going basis, integrated performance modeling to 
     identify appropriate parameters for the remaining site 
     characterization effort and to eliminate studies of 
     parameters that are shown not to affect long-term repository 
     performance.

     ``SEC. 702. REPORTING.

       ``(a) Initial Report.--Within 180 days of the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall report to Congress 
     on its planned actions for implementing the provisions of 
     this Act, including the development of the Integrated Waste 
     Management System. Such report shall include--
       ``(1) an analysis of the Secretary's progress in meeting 
     its statutory and contractual obligation to accept title to, 
     possession of, and delivery of spent nuclear fuel and high-
     level radioactive waste beginning no later than January 31, 
     2002, and in accordance with the acceptance schedule;
       ``(2) a detailed schedule and timeline showing each action 
     that the Secretary intends to take to meet the Secretary's 
     obligations under this Act and the contracts;

[[Page H9681]]

       ``(3) a detailed description of the Secretary's contingency 
     plans in the event that the Secretary is unable to meet the 
     planned schedule and timeline; and
       ``(4) an analysis by the Secretary of its funding needs for 
     fiscal years 1996 through 2001.
       ``(b) Annual Reports.--On each anniversary of the submittal 
     of the report required by subsection (a), the Secretary shall 
     make annual reports to the Congress for the purpose of 
     updating the information contained in such report. The annual 
     reports shall be brief and shall notify the Congress of--
       ``(1) any modifications to the Secretary's schedule and 
     timeline for meeting its obligations under this Act;
       ``(2) the reasons for such modifications, and the status of 
     the implementation of any of the Secretary's contingency 
     plans; and
       ``(3) the Secretary's analysis of its funding needs for the 
     ensuing 5 fiscal years.''.

     SEC. 2. CONTINUATION OF CONTRACTS.

       Subsequent to the date of enactment of this Act, the 
     contracts executed under section 302(a) of the Nuclear Waste 
     Policy Act of 1982 shall continue in effect under this Act in 
     accordance with their terms except to the extent that the 
     contracts have been modified by the parties to the contract.

     SECTION 1. AMENDMENT OF NUCLEAR WASTE POLICY ACT OF 1982.

       The Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 is amended to read as 
     follows:

     ``SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE AND TABLE OF CONTENTS.

       ``(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the `Nuclear 
     Waste Policy Act of 1997'.
       ``(b) Table of Contents.--

``Sec. 1. Short title and table of contents.
``Sec. 2. Definitions.
``Sec. 3. Findings and purposes.

                         ``TITLE I--OBLIGATIONS

``Sec. 101. Obligations of the Secretary of Energy.

                ``TITLE II--INTEGRATED MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

``Sec. 201. Intermodal transfer.
``Sec. 202. Transportation planning.
``Sec. 203. Transportation requirements.
``Sec. 204. Interim storage.
``Sec. 205. Permanent disposal.
``Sec. 206. Land withdrawal.

                      ``TITLE III--LOCAL RELATIONS

``Sec. 301. On-site representative.
``Sec. 302. Benefits agreements.
``Sec. 303. Content of agreements.
``Sec. 304. Acceptance of benefits.
``Sec. 305. Restriction on use of funds.
``Sec. 306. Initial land conveyances.

                  ``TITLE IV--FUNDING AND ORGANIZATION

``Sec. 401. Program funding.
``Sec. 402. Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management.
``Sec. 403. Defense contribution.

            ``TITLE V--GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS

``Sec. 501. Compliance with other laws.
``Sec. 502. Water rights.
``Sec. 503. Judicial review of agency actions.
``Sec. 504. Licensing of facility expansions and transshipments.
``Sec. 505. Siting a second repository.
``Sec. 506. Financial arrangements for low-level radioactive waste site 
              closure.
``Sec. 507. Nuclear Regulatory Commission training authorization.
``Sec. 508. Acceptance schedule.
``Sec. 509. Subseabed or ocean water disposal.
``Sec. 510. Compensation.

            ``TITLE VI--NUCLEAR WASTE TECHNICAL REVIEW BOARD

``Sec. 601. Definitions.
``Sec. 602. Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board.
``Sec. 603. Functions.
``Sec. 604. Investigatory powers.
``Sec. 605. Compensation of members.
``Sec. 606. Staff.
``Sec. 607. Support services.
``Sec. 608. Report.
``Sec. 609. Authorization of appropriations.
``Sec. 610. Termination of the board.

                     ``TITLE VII--MANAGEMENT REFORM

``Sec. 701. Management reform initiatives.
``Sec. 702. Reporting.

     ``SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.

       ``For purposes of this Act:
       ``(1) Accept, acceptance.--The terms `accept' and 
     `acceptance' mean the Secretary's act of taking possession of 
     spent nuclear fuel or high-level radioactive waste.
       ``(2) Acceptance schedule.--The term `acceptance schedule' 
     means the schedule established by the Secretary under section 
     508 for acceptance of spent nuclear fuel and high-level 
     radioactive waste.
       ``(3) Affected indian tribe.--The term `affected Indian 
     tribe' means an Indian tribe--
       ``(A) whose reservation is surrounded by or borders on an 
     affected unit of local government, or
       ``(B) whose federally-defined possessory or usage rights to 
     other lands outside of the border of the Indian tribe's 
     reservation arising out of Congressionally-ratified treaties,

     may be affected by the locating of an interim storage 
     facility or repository, if the Secretary finds, upon petition 
     of the appropriate government officials of the Indian tribe, 
     that such affects are both substantial and adverse to the 
     Indian tribe.
       ``(4) Affected unit of local government.--The term 
     `affected unit of local government' means the unit of local 
     government with jurisdiction over the site of a repository or 
     interim storage facility. Such term may, at the discretion of 
     the Secretary, include other units of local government that 
     are contiguous with such unit.
       ``(5) Atomic energy defense activity.--The term `atomic 
     energy defense activity' means any activity of the Secretary 
     performed in whole or in part in carrying out any of the 
     following functions:
       ``(A) Naval reactors development.
       ``(B) Weapons activities including defense inertial 
     confinement fusion.
       ``(C) Verification and control technology.
       ``(D) Defense nuclear materials production.
       ``(E) Defense nuclear waste and materials byproducts 
     management.
       ``(F) Defense nuclear materials security and safeguards and 
     security investigations.
       ``(G) Defense research and development.
       ``(6) Civilian nuclear power reactor.--The term `civilian 
     nuclear power reactor' means a civilian nuclear power plant 
     required to be licensed under section 103 or 104 b. of the 
     Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2133, 2134(b)).
       ``(7) Commission.--The term `Commission' means the Nuclear 
     Regulatory Commission.
       ``(8) Department.--The term `Department' means the 
     Department of Energy.
       ``(9) Disposal.--The term `disposal' means the emplacement 
     in a repository of spent nuclear fuel, high-level radioactive 
     waste, or other highly radioactive material with no 
     foreseeable intent of recovery, whether or not such 
     emplacement permits recovery of such material for any future 
     purpose.
       ``(10) Disposal system.--The term `disposal system' means 
     all natural barriers and engineered barriers, and engineered 
     systems and components, that prevent the release of 
     radionuclides from the repository.
       ``(11) Engineered barriers.--The term `engineered barriers' 
     and `engineered systems and components,' means man made 
     components of a disposal system. Such term includes the spent 
     nuclear fuel or high-level radioactive waste form, spent 
     nuclear fuel package or high-level radioactive waste, and 
     other materials placed over and around such packages.
       ``(12) High-level radioactive waste.--The term `high-level 
     radioactive waste' means--
       ``(A) the highly radioactive material resulting from the 
     reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel, including liquid waste 
     produced directly in reprocessing and any solid material 
     derived from such liquid waste that contains fission products 
     in sufficient concentrations;
       ``(B) the highly radioactive material resulting from atomic 
     energy defense activities; and
       ``(C) other highly radioactive material that the 
     Commission, consistent with existing law, determines by rule 
     requires permanent isolation.
       ``(13) Federal agency.--The term `Federal agency' means any 
     Executive agency, as defined in section 105 of title 5, 
     United States Code.
       ``(14) Indian tribe.--The term `Indian tribe' means any 
     Indian tribe, band, nation, or other organized group or 
     community of Indians recognized as eligible for the services 
     provided to Indians by the Secretary of the Interior because 
     of their status as Indians including any Alaska Native 
     village, as defined in section 3(c) of the Alaska Native 
     Claims Settlement Act (43 U.S.C. 1602(c)).
       ``(15) Integrated management system.--The term `integrated 
     management system' means the system developed by the 
     Secretary for the acceptance, transportation, storage, and 
     disposal of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive 
     waste.
       ``(16) Interim storage facility.--The term `interim storage 
     facility' means a facility designed and constructed for the 
     receipt, handling, possession, safeguarding, and storage of 
     spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste in 
     accordance with title II of this Act.
       ``(17) Interim storage facility site.--The term `interim 
     storage facility site' means the specific site within Area 25 
     of the Nevada Test Site that is designated by the Secretary 
     and withdrawn and reserved in accordance with this Act for 
     the location of the interim storage facility.
       ``(18) Low-level radioactive waste.--The term `low-level 
     radioactive waste' means radioactive material that--
       ``(A) is not spent nuclear fuel, high-level radioactive 
     waste, transuranic waste, or byproduct material as defined in 
     section 11 e.(2) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 
     2014(e)(2)); and
       ``(B) the Commission, consistent with existing law, 
     classifies as low-level radioactive waste.
       ``(19) Metric tons uranium.--The terms `metric tons 
     uranium' and `MTU' means the amount of uranium in the 
     original unirradiated fuel element whether or not the spent 
     nuclear fuel has been reprocessed.
       ``(20) Nuclear waste fund.--The terms `Nuclear Waste Fund' 
     and `waste fund' mean the nuclear waste fund established in 
     the United States Treasury prior to the date of enactment of 
     this Act under section 302(c) of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act 
     of 1982.
       ``(21) Office.--The term `Office' means the Office of 
     Civilian Radioactive Waste Management established within the 
     Department prior to the date of enactment of this Act under 
     the provisions of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982.
       ``(22) Program approach.--The term `program approach' means 
     the Civilian Radioactive Waste Management Program Plan, dated 
     May 1996, as modified by this Act, and

[[Page H9682]]

     as amended from time to time by the Secretary in accordance 
     with this Act.
       ``(23) Repository.--The term `repository' means a system 
     designed and constructed under title II of this Act for the 
     permanent geologic disposal of spent nuclear fuel and high-
     level radioactive waste, including both surface and 
     subsurface areas at which spent nuclear fuel and high-level 
     radioactive waste receipt, handling, possession, 
     safeguarding, and storage are conducted.
       ``(24) Secretary.--The term `Secretary' means the Secretary 
     of Energy.
       ``(25) Site characterization.--The term `site 
     characterization' means activities, whether in a laboratory 
     or in the field, undertaken to establish the geologic 
     condition and the ranges of the parameters of a candidate 
     site relevant to the location of a repository, including 
     borings, surface excavations, excavations of exploratory 
     facilities, limited subsurface lateral excavations and 
     borings, and in situ testing needed to evaluate the 
     licensability of a candidate site for the location of a 
     repository, but not including preliminary borings and 
     geophysical testing needed to assess whether site 
     characterization should be undertaken.
       ``(26) Spent nuclear fuel.--The term `spent nuclear fuel' 
     means fuel that has been withdrawn from a nuclear reactor 
     following irradiation, the constituent elements of which have 
     not been separated by reprocessing.
       ``(27) Storage.--The term `storage' means retention of 
     spent nuclear fuel or high-level radioactive waste with the 
     intent to recover such waste or fuel for subsequent use, 
     processing, or disposal.
       ``(28) Withdrawal.--The term `withdrawal' has the same 
     definition as that set forth in the Federal Land Policy and 
     Management Act (43 U.S.C. 1702 and following).
       ``(29) Yucca mountain site.--The term `Yucca Mountain site' 
     means the area in the State of Nevada that is withdrawn and 
     reserved in accordance with this Act for the location of a 
     repository.

     ``SEC. 3. FINDINGS AND PURPOSES.

       ``(a) Findings.--The Congress finds that--
       ``(1) while spent nuclear fuel can be safely stored at 
     reactor sites, the expeditious movement to and storage of 
     such spent nuclear fuel at a centralized Federal facility 
     will enhance the nation's environmental protection;
       ``(2) while the Federal Government has the responsibility 
     to provide for the centralized interim storage and permanent 
     disposal of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive 
     waste to protect the public health and safety and the 
     environment, the costs of such storage and disposal should be 
     the responsibility of the generators and owners of such waste 
     and fuel, including the Federal Government;
       ``(3) in the interests of protecting the public health and 
     safety, enhancing the nation's environmental protection, 
     promoting the nation's energy security, and ensuring the 
     Secretary's ability to commence acceptance of spent nuclear 
     fuel and high-level radioactive waste no later than January 
     31, 2000, it is necessary for Congress to authorize the 
     interim storage facility;
       ``(4) deficit-control measures designed to limit 
     appropriation of general revenues have limited the 
     availability of the Nuclear Waste Fund for its intended 
     purposes; and
       ``(5) the Federal Government has the responsibility to 
     provide for the permanent disposal of waste generated from 
     United States atomic energy defense activities.
       ``(b) Purposes.--The purposes of this Act are--
       ``(1) to direct the Secretary to develop an integrated 
     management system in accordance with this Act so that the 
     Department can accept spent nuclear fuel or high-level 
     radioactive waste for interim storage commencing no later 
     than January 31, 2000, and for permanent disposal at a 
     repository commencing no later than January 17, 2010;
       ``(2) to provide for the siting, construction, and 
     operation of a repository for permanent geologic disposal of 
     spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste in order 
     to adequately protect the public and the environment;
       ``(3) to take those actions necessary to ensure that the 
     consumers of nuclear energy, who are funding the Secretary's 
     activities under this Act, receive the services to which they 
     are entitled and realize the benefits of enhanced protection 
     of public health and safety, and the environment, that will 
     ensue from the Secretary's compliance with the obligations 
     imposed by this Act; and
       ``(4) to provide a schedule and process for the expeditious 
     and safe development and commencement of operation of an 
     integrated management system and any necessary modifications 
     to the transportation infrastructure to ensure that the 
     Secretary can commence acceptance of spent nuclear fuel and 
     high-level radioactive waste no later than January 31, 2000.
                         ``TITLE I--OBLIGATIONS

     ``SEC. 101. OBLIGATIONS OF THE SECRETARY OF ENERGY.

       ``(a) Disposal.--The Secretary shall develop and operate a 
     repository for the permanent geologic disposal of spent 
     nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste.
       ``(b) Acceptance.--The Secretary shall accept spent nuclear 
     fuel and high-level radioactive waste for storage at the 
     interim storage facility pursuant to section 204 in 
     accordance with the acceptance schedule established under 
     section 508, beginning not later than January 31, 2000.
       ``(c) Transportation.--The Secretary shall provide for the 
     transportation of spent nuclear fuel and high-level 
     radioactive waste accepted by the Secretary.
       ``(d) Integrated Management System.--The Secretary shall 
     expeditiously pursue the development of each component of the 
     integrated management system, and in so doing shall seek to 
     utilize effective private sector management and contracting 
     practices in accordance with title VII of this Act.
                ``TITLE II--INTEGRATED MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

     ``SEC. 201. INTERMODAL TRANSFER.

       ``(a) Before Rail Access.--Until such time as direct rail 
     access is available to the interim storage facility site, the 
     Secretary shall utilize heavy-haul truck transport to move 
     spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste from 
     the mainline rail line at Caliente, Nevada, to the interim 
     storage facility site.
       ``(b) Capability Date.--The Secretary shall develop the 
     capability to commence rail to truck intermodal transfer at 
     Caliente, Nevada, no later than January 31, 2000.
       ``(c) Acquisitions.--The Secretary shall acquire lands and 
     rights-of-way necessary to commence intermodal transfer at 
     Caliente, Nevada.
       ``(d) Replacements.--The Secretary shall acquire and 
     develop on behalf of, and dedicate to, the City of Caliente, 
     Nevada, parcels of land and rights-of-way as required to 
     facilitate replacement of land and city wastewater disposal 
     activities necessary to commence intermodal transfer pursuant 
     to this Act. Replacement of land and city wastewater disposal 
     activities shall occur no later than January 31, 2000.
       ``(e) Notice and Map.--Within 6 months of the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall--
       ``(1) publish in the Federal Register a notice containing a 
     legal description of the sites and rights-of-way to be 
     acquired under this section; and
       ``(2) file copies of a map of such sites and rights-of-way 
     with the Congress, the Secretary of the Interior, the State 
     of Nevada, the Archivist of the United States, the Board of 
     Lincoln County Commissioners, the Board of Nye County 
     Commissioners, and the Caliente City Council.

     Such map and legal description shall have the same force and 
     effect as if they were included in this Act. The Secretary 
     may correct clerical and typographical errors and legal 
     descriptions and make minor adjustments in the boundaries.
       ``(f) Improvements.--The Secretary shall make improvements 
     to existing roadways selected for heavy-haul truck transport 
     between Caliente, Nevada, and the interim storage facility 
     site as necessary to facilitate year-round safe transport of 
     spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste.
       ``(g) Heavy-Haul Transportation Route.--
       ``(1) Designation of route.--The route for the heavy-haul 
     truck transport of spent nuclear fuel and high-level 
     radioactive waste shall be as designated in the map (entitled 
     `Heavy-Haul Route' and on file with the Secretary).
       ``(2) Truck transportation.--The Secretary, in consultation 
     with the State of Nevada and appropriate counties and local 
     jurisdictions, shall establish reasonable terms and 
     conditions pursuant to which the Secretary may utilize heavy-
     haul truck transport to move spent nuclear fuel and high-
     level radioactive waste from Caliente, Nevada, to the interim 
     storage facility site.
       ``(3) Improvements and maintenance.--Notwithstanding any 
     other law--
       ``(A) the Secretary shall be responsible for any 
     incremental costs related to improving or upgrading Federal, 
     State, and local roads within the heavy-haul transportation 
     route utilized, and performing any maintenance activities on 
     such roads, as necessary, to facilitate year-round safe 
     transport of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive 
     waste; and
       ``(B) any such improvement, upgrading, or maintenance 
     activity shall be funded solely by appropriations made 
     pursuant to sections 401 and 403 of this Act.
       ``(h) Local Government Involvement.--The Commission shall 
     enter into a Memorandum of Understanding with the City of 
     Caliente and Lincoln County, Nevada, to provide advice to the 
     Commission regarding intermodal transfer and to facilitate 
     on-site representation.
       ``(i) National Environmental Policy Act of 1969.--The 
     Secretary's activities in connection with the development of 
     intermodal transfer capability, and upgrading and 
     improvements to, and maintenance of, the roads within the 
     heavy-haul transportation route shall be considered 
     preliminary decisionmaking activities. Such activities 
     shall not require the preparation of an environmental 
     impact statement under section 102(2)(c) of the National 
     Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)) or 
     any environmental review under subparagraph (E) or (F) of 
     section 102(2) of such Act.
       ``(j) Regulation.--Notwithstanding any other law, the 
     Secretary's movement of spent nuclear fuel and high-level 
     radioactive waste by heavy-haul transport route pursuant to 
     this subsection shall be subject to exclusive regulation by 
     the Secretary of Transportation and the Commission in 
     accordance with regulatory authority under the provisions of 
     this Act, chapter 51 of title 49, United States Code 
     (relating to the transportation of hazardous materials), and 
     the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2011 et seq.).

[[Page H9683]]

     ``SEC. 202. TRANSPORTATION PLANNING.

       ``(a) Transportation Readiness.--The Secretary shall take 
     those actions that are necessary and appropriate to ensure 
     that the Secretary is able to accept spent nuclear fuel and 
     high-level radioactive waste beginning not later than January 
     31, 2000, and transport such fuel or waste to mainline 
     transportation facilities. As soon as is practicable 
     following the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall 
     analyze each specific reactor facility in the order of 
     priority established in the acceptance schedule under section 
     508, and develop a logistical plan to assure the Secretary's 
     ability to transport spent nuclear fuel and high-level 
     radioactive waste.
       ``(b) Transportation Planning.--In conjunction with the 
     development of the logistical plan in accordance with 
     subsection (a), the Secretary shall update and modify, as 
     necessary, the Secretary's transportation institutional plans 
     to ensure that institutional issues are addressed and 
     resolved on a schedule to support the commencement of 
     transportation of spent nuclear fuel and high-level 
     radioactive waste to the interim storage facility no later 
     than January 31, 2000. Among other things, such planning 
     shall provide a schedule and process for addressing and 
     implementing, as necessary, transportation routing plans, 
     transportation contracting plans, transportation training in 
     accordance with section 203, and transportation tracking 
     programs.

     ``SEC. 203. TRANSPORTATION REQUIREMENTS.

       ``(a) Package Certification.--No spent nuclear fuel or 
     high-level radioactive waste may be transported by or for the 
     Secretary under this Act except in packages that have been 
     certified for such purposes by the Commission.
       ``(b) State Notification.--The Secretary shall abide by 
     regulations of the Commission regarding advance notification 
     of State and local governments prior to transportation of 
     spent nuclear fuel or high-level radioactive waste under this 
     Act.
       ``(c) Technical Assistance.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall provide technical 
     assistance and funds to States, affected units of local 
     government, and Indian tribes through whose jurisdiction the 
     Secretary plans to transport substantial amounts of spent 
     nuclear fuel or high-level radioactive waste for training for 
     public safety officials of appropriate units of local 
     government. Training shall cover procedures required for safe 
     routine transportation of these materials, as well as 
     procedures for dealing with emergency response situations. 
     The Secretary's duty to provide technical and financial 
     assistance under this subsection shall be limited to amounts 
     specified in annual appropriations.
       ``(2) Minimizing duplication of effort and expenses.--The 
     Secretaries of Transportation, Labor, and Energy, Directors 
     of the Federal Emergency Management Agency and National 
     Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Chairman of the 
     Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and Administrator of the 
     Environmental Protection Agency shall review periodically, 
     with the head of each department, agency, or instrumentality 
     of the Government, all emergency response and preparedness 
     training programs of that department, agency, or 
     instrumentality to minimize duplication of effort and expense 
     of the department, agency, or instrumentality in carrying out 
     the programs and shall take necessary action to minimize 
     duplication.
       ``(d) Use of Private Carriers.--The Secretary, in providing 
     for the transportation of spent nuclear fuel and high level 
     radioactive waste under this Act, shall by contract use 
     private industry to the fullest extent possible in each 
     aspect of such transportation. The Secretary shall use direct 
     Federal services for such transportation only upon a 
     determination by the Secretary of Transportation, in 
     consultation with the Secretary, that private industry is 
     unable or unwilling to provide such transportation services 
     at a reasonable cost.
       ``(e) Transfer of Title.--Acceptance by the Secretary of 
     any spent nuclear fuel or high-level radioactive waste shall 
     constitute a transfer of title to the Secretary.

     ``SEC. 204. INTERIM STORAGE.

       ``(a) Authorization.--The Secretary shall design, 
     construct, and operate a facility for the interim storage of 
     spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste at the 
     interim storage facility site. The interim storage 
     facility shall be subject to licensing pursuant to the 
     Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2011 et seq.) in 
     accordance with the Commission's regulations governing the 
     licensing of independent spent fuel storage installations 
     and shall commence operation in phases by January 31, 
     2000.
       ``(b) Design.--The design of the interim storage facility 
     shall provide for the use of storage technologies licensed or 
     certified by the Commission for use at the interim storage 
     facility as necessary to ensure compatibility between the 
     interim storage facility and contract holders' spent nuclear 
     fuel and facilities, and to facilitate the Secretary's 
     ability to meet the Secretary's obligations under this Act.
       ``(c) Licensing.--
       ``(1) Phases.--The interim storage facility shall be 
     licensed by the Commission in two phases in order to commence 
     operations no later than January 31, 2000.
       ``(2) First phase.--No later than 12 months after the date 
     of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to the 
     Commission an application for a license for the first phase 
     of the interim storage facility. The license issued for the 
     first phase of the interim storage facility shall have a term 
     of 20 years. The interim storage facility licensed in the 
     first phase shall have a capacity of not more than 10,000 
     MTU. The Commission shall issue a final decision granting or 
     denying the application for the first phase license no later 
     than 16 months from the date of the submittal of the 
     application for such license.
       ``(3) Second phase.--Upon the issuance of the license for 
     the first phase of the interim storage facility under 
     paragraph (2), the Secretary shall submit to the Commission 
     an application for a license for the second phase interim 
     storage facility. The license for the second phase facility 
     shall authorize a storage capacity of 40,000 MTU. The license 
     for the second phase shall have an initial term of up to 100 
     years, and shall be renewable for additional terms upon 
     application of the Secretary.
       ``(d) Additional Authority.--
       ``(1) Construction.--For the purpose of complying with 
     subsection (a), the Secretary may commence site preparation 
     for the interim storage facility as soon as practicable after 
     the date of enactment of this Act and shall commence 
     construction of the first phase of the interim storage 
     facility subsequent to submittal of the license application 
     except that the Commission shall issue an order suspending 
     such construction at any time if the Commission determines 
     that such construction poses an unreasonable risk to public 
     health and safety or the environment. The Commission shall 
     terminate all or part of such order upon a determination that 
     the Secretary has taken appropriate action to eliminate such 
     risk.
       ``(2) Facility use.--Notwithstanding any otherwise 
     applicable licensing requirement, the Secretary may utilize 
     any facility owned by the Federal Government on the date of 
     enactment of this Act and within the boundaries of the 
     interim storage facility site, in connection with an imminent 
     and substantial endangerment to public health and safety at 
     the interim storage facility prior to commencement of 
     operations during the second phase.
       ``(3) Acceptance of fuel and waste.--
       ``(A) General rule.--In each year, once the Secretary has 
     achieved the annual acceptance rate for spent nuclear fuel 
     from civilian nuclear power reactors established pursuant to 
     the contracts executed under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 
     1982 (as set forth in the Secretary's annual capacity report 
     dated March 1995 (DOE/RW-0457)), the Secretary--
       ``(i) may, additionally, accept spent nuclear fuel or high-
     level radioactive waste of domestic origin from civilian 
     nuclear power reactors which have permanently ceased 
     operation; and
       ``(ii) except as provided in subparagraph (B), shall accept 
     at least 25 percent of the difference between such annual 
     acceptance rate and the annual rate under the acceptance 
     schedule established under section 508 for spent nuclear fuel 
     from civilian power reactors of--

       ``(I) spent nuclear fuel from foreign research reactors; 
     and
       ``(II) spent nuclear fuel from naval reactors and high-
     level radioactive waste from atomic energy defense 
     activities.

       ``(B) Exception.--If the annual rate under the acceptance 
     schedule established under section 508 is not achieved, the 
     acceptance rate of the Secretary of the materials described 
     in subclauses (I) and (II) of subparagraph (A)(ii) shall be 
     the greater of the acceptance rate prescribed by subparagraph 
     (A) and calculated on the basis of the amount of spent 
     nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste actually 
     received or 5 percent of the total amount of spent nuclear 
     fuel and high-level radioactive waste actually accepted.
       ``(e) National Environmental Policy Act of 1969.--
       ``(1) Preliminary decisionmaking activities.--The 
     Secretary's activities under this section, including the 
     selection of a site for the interim storage facility, the 
     preparation and submittal of any license application, and the 
     construction and operation of any facility shall be 
     considered preliminary decisionmaking activities for purposes 
     of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 
     4321 et seq.). No such activity shall require the preparation 
     of an environmental impact statement under section 102(2)(C) 
     of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 
     4332(2)(C)) or require any environmental review under 
     subparagraph (E) or (F) of such Act.
       ``(2) Environmental impact statement.--
       ``(A) Final decision.--A final decision of the Commission 
     to grant or deny a license application for the first or 
     second phase of the interim storage facility shall be 
     accompanied by an Environmental Impact Statement prepared 
     under section 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy 
     Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)). In preparing such 
     Environmental Impact Statement, the Commission--
       ``(i) shall assume that 40,000 MTU will be stored at the 
     facility;
       ``(ii) shall analyze the impacts of the transportation of 
     spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste to the 
     interim storage facility in a generic manner; and
       ``(iii) shall consider the results of the study by the 
     National Academy of Sciences on the migration of plutonium at 
     the Nevada test site.
       ``(B) Considerations.--Such Environmental Impact Statement 
     shall not consider--

[[Page H9684]]

       ``(i) the need for the interim storage facility, including 
     any individual component thereof;
       ``(ii) the time of the initial availability of the interim 
     storage facility;
       ``(iii) any alternatives to the storage of spent nuclear 
     fuel and high-level radioactive waste at the interim storage 
     facility;
       ``(iv) any alternatives to the site of the facility as 
     designated by the Secretary in accordance with subsection 
     (a);
       ``(v) any alternatives to the design criteria for such 
     facility or any individual component thereof, as specified by 
     the Secretary in the license application; or
       ``(vi) the environmental impacts of the storage of spent 
     nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste at the interim 
     storage facility beyond the initial term of the license or 
     the term of the renewal period for which a license renewal 
     application is made.
       ``(f) Judicial Review.--Judicial review of the Commission's 
     environmental impact statement under the National 
     Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) 
     shall be consolidated with judicial review of the 
     Commission's licensing decision. No court shall have 
     jurisdiction to enjoin the construction or operation of the 
     interim storage facility prior to its final decision on 
     review of the Commission's licensing action.
       ``(g) Waste Confidence.--The Secretary's obligation to 
     construct and operate the interim storage facility in 
     accordance with this section and the Secretary's obligation 
     to develop an integrated management system in accordance with 
     the provisions of this Act, shall provide sufficient and 
     independent grounds for any further findings by the 
     Commission of reasonable assurance that spent nuclear fuel 
     and high-level radioactive waste will be disposed of 
     safely and on a timely basis for purposes of the 
     Commission's decision to grant or amend any license to 
     operate any civilian nuclear power reactor under the 
     Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2011 et seq.).
       ``(h) Savings Clause.--Nothing in this Act shall affect the 
     Commission's procedures for the licensing of any technology 
     for the dry storage of spent nuclear fuel at the site of any 
     civilian nuclear power reactor as adopted by the Commission 
     under section 218 of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, as 
     in effect prior to the enactment of the Nuclear Waste Policy 
     Act of 1997. The establishment of such procedures shall not 
     preclude the licensing, under any applicable procedures or 
     rules of the Commission in effect prior to such 
     establishment, of any technology for the storage of civilian 
     spent nuclear fuel at the site of any civilian nuclear power 
     reactor.

     ``SEC. 205. PERMANENT DISPOSAL.

       ``(a) Site Characterization.--
       ``(1) Guidelines.--The guidelines promulgated by the 
     Secretary and published at 10 CFR part 960 are annulled and 
     revoked and the Secretary shall make no assumptions or 
     conclusions about the licensability of the Yucca Mountain 
     site as a repository by reference to such guidelines.
       ``(2) Site characterization activities.--The Secretary 
     shall carry out appropriate site characterization activities 
     at the Yucca Mountain site in accordance with the Secretary's 
     program approach to site characterization if the Secretary 
     modifies or eliminates those site characterization activities 
     designed to demonstrate the suitability of the site under the 
     guidelines referenced in paragraph (1).
       ``(3) Date.--No later than December 31, 2002, the Secretary 
     shall apply to the Commission for authorization to construct 
     a repository that will commence operations no later than 
     January 17, 2010. If, at any time prior to the filing of such 
     application, the Secretary determines that the Yucca Mountain 
     site cannot satisfy the Commission's regulations applicable 
     to the licensing of a geologic repository, the Secretary 
     shall terminate site characterization activities at the site, 
     notify Congress and the State of Nevada of the Secretary's 
     determination and the reasons therefor, and recommend to 
     Congress not later than 6 months after such determination 
     further actions, including the enactment of legislation, that 
     may be needed to manage the Nation's spent nuclear fuel and 
     high-level radioactive waste.
       ``(4) Maximizing capacity.--In developing an application 
     for authorization to construct the repository, the Secretary 
     shall seek to maximize the capacity of the repository.
       ``(b) Licensing.--Within one year of the date of enactment 
     of this Act, the Commission shall amend its regulations 
     governing the disposal of spent nuclear fuel and high-level 
     radioactive waste in geologic repositories to the extent 
     necessary to comply with this Act. Subject to subsection (c), 
     such regulations shall provide for the licensing of the 
     repository according to the following procedures:
       ``(1) Construction authorization.--The Commission shall 
     grant the Secretary a construction authorization for the 
     repository upon determining that there is reasonable 
     assurance that spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive 
     waste can be disposed of in the repository--
       ``(A) in conformity with the Secretary's application, the 
     provisions of this Act, and the regulations of the 
     Commission;
       ``(B) without unreasonable risk to the health and safety of 
     the public; and
       ``(C) consistent with the common defense and security.
       ``(2) License.--Following substantial completion of 
     construction and the filing of any additional information 
     needed to complete the license application, the Commission 
     shall issue a license to dispose of spent nuclear fuel and 
     high-level radioactive waste in the repository if the 
     Commission determines that the repository has been 
     constructed and will operate--
       ``(A) in conformity with the Secretary's application, the 
     provisions of this Act, and the regulations of the 
     Commission;
       ``(B) without unreasonable risk to the health and safety of 
     the public; and
       ``(C) consistent with the common defense and security.
       ``(3) Closure.--After emplacing spent nuclear fuel and 
     high-level radioactive waste in the repository and collecting 
     sufficient confirmatory data on repository performance to 
     reasonably confirm the basis for repository closure 
     consistent with the Commission's regulations applicable to 
     the licensing of a repository, as modified in accordance with 
     this Act, the Secretary shall apply to the Commission to 
     amend the license to permit permanent closure of the 
     repository. The Commission shall grant such license amendment 
     upon finding that there is reasonable assurance that the 
     repository can be permanently closed--
       ``(A) in conformity with the Secretary's application to 
     amend the license, the provisions of this Act, and the 
     regulations of the Commission;
       ``(B) without unreasonable risk to the health and safety of 
     the public; and
       ``(C) consistent with the common defense and security.
       ``(4) Post-closure.--The Secretary shall take those actions 
     necessary and appropriate at the Yucca Mountain site to 
     prevent any activity at the site subsequent to repository 
     closure that poses an unreasonable risk of--
       ``(A) breaching the repository's engineered or geologic 
     barriers: or
       ``(B) increasing the exposure of individual members of the 
     public to radiation beyond the release standard established 
     in subsection (d)(1).
       ``(c) Modification of Repository Licensing Procedure.--The 
     Commission's regulations shall provide for the modification 
     of the repository licensing procedure, as appropriate, in the 
     event that the Secretary seeks a license to permit the 
     emplacement in the repository, on a retrievable basis, of 
     only that quantity of spent nuclear fuel or high-level 
     radioactive waste that is necessary to provide the Secretary 
     with sufficient confirmatory data on repository performance 
     to reasonably confirm the basis for repository closure 
     consistent with applicable regulations.
       ``(d) Licensing Standards.--Notwithstanding any other 
     provision of law, the Administrator of the Environmental 
     Protection Agency shall not promulgate, by rule or otherwise, 
     standards for protection of the public from releases of 
     radioactive materials or radioactivity from the repository 
     and any such standards existing on the date of enactment of 
     this Act shall not be incorporated in the Commission's 
     licensing regulations. The Commission's repository licensing 
     determinations for the protection of the public shall be 
     based solely on a finding whether the repository can be 
     operated in conformance with the overall system performance 
     standard established in paragraph (1)(A) and applied in 
     accordance with the provisions of paragraph (1)(B). The 
     Commission shall amend its regulations in accordance with 
     subsection (b) to incorporate each of the following licensing 
     standards:
       ``(1) Release standard.--
       ``(A) Establishment of overall system performance 
     standard.--The standard for protection of the public from 
     release of radioactive material or radioactivity from the 
     repository shall prohibit releases that would expose an 
     average member of the general population in the vicinity of 
     the Yucca Mountain site to an annual dose in excess of 100 
     millirems unless the Commission determines by rule that 
     such standard would constitute an unreasonable risk to 
     health and safety and establishes by rule another standard 
     which will protect health and safety. Such standard shall 
     constitute an overall system performance standard.
       ``(B) Application of overall system performance standard.--
     The Commission shall issue the license if it finds reasonable 
     assurance that--
       ``(i) for the first 1,000 years following the commencement 
     of repository operations, the overall system performance 
     standard will be met based on a deterministic or 
     probabilistic evaluation of the overall performance of the 
     disposal system; and
       ``(ii) for the period commencing after the first 1,000 
     years of operation of the repository and terminating at 
     10,000 years after the commencement of operation of the 
     repository, there is likely to be compliance with the overall 
     system performance standard based on regulatory insight 
     gained through the use of a probabilistic integrated 
     performance model that uses best estimate assumptions, data, 
     and methods.
       ``(2) Human intrusion.--The Commission shall assume that, 
     following repository closure, the inclusion of engineered 
     barriers and the Secretary's post-closure actions at the 
     Yucca Mountain site, in accordance with subsection (b)(3), 
     shall be sufficient to--
       ``(A) prevent any human activity at the site that poses an 
     unreasonable risk of breaching the repository's engineered or 
     geologic barriers; and

[[Page H9685]]

       ``(B) prevent any increase in the exposure of individual 
     members of the public to radiation beyond allowable limits as 
     specified in paragraph (1).
       ``(e) National Environmental Policy Act.--
       ``(1) Submission of statement.--Construction and operation 
     of the repository shall be considered a major Federal action 
     significantly affecting the quality of the human environment 
     for purposes of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 
     (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.). The Secretary shall submit an 
     environmental impact statement on the construction and 
     operation of the repository to the Commission with the 
     application for construction authorization.
       ``(2) Considerations.--For purposes of complying with the 
     requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 
     and this section, the Secretary shall not consider in the 
     environmental impact statement the need for the repository, 
     alternative sites or designs for the repository, the time of 
     the initial availability of the repository, or any 
     alternatives to the isolation of spent nuclear fuel and high-
     level radioactive waste in a repository.
       ``(3) Adoption by commission.--The Secretary's 
     environmental impact statement and any supplements thereto 
     shall, to the extent practicable, be adopted by the 
     Commission in connection with the issuance by the Commission 
     of a construction authorization under subsection (b)(1), a 
     license under subsection (b)(2), or a license amendment under 
     subsection (b)(3). To the extent such statement or supplement 
     is adopted by the Commission, such adoption shall be deemed 
     to also satisfy the responsibilities of the Commission under 
     the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, and no further 
     consideration shall be required, except that nothing in this 
     subsection shall affect any independent responsibilities of 
     the Commission to protect the public health and safety under 
     the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2011 et seq.). In 
     any such statement prepared with respect to the repository, 
     the Commission shall not consider the need for a repository, 
     the time of initial availability of the repository, 
     alternate sites to the Yucca Mountain site, or nongeologic 
     alternatives to such site.
       ``(f) Judicial Review.--No court shall have jurisdiction to 
     enjoin issuance of the Commission repository licensing 
     regulations prior to its final decision on review of such 
     regulations.

     ``SEC. 206. LAND WITHDRAWAL.

       ``(a) Withdrawal and Reservation.--
       ``(1) Withdrawal.--Subject to valid existing rights, the 
     interim storage facility site and the Yucca Mountain site, as 
     described in subsection (b), are withdrawn from all forms of 
     entry, appropriation, and disposal under the public land 
     laws, including the mineral leasing laws, the geothermal 
     leasing laws, the material sale laws, and the mining laws. 
     Withdrawal under this paragraph shall expire at the beginning 
     of the year 2012 if the interim storage facility site is not 
     used in accordance with section 204(c)(2) and other 
     provisions of this Act. After the expiration of the 
     withdrawal, the sites will return to the Federal agency which 
     had jurisdiction over them before the withdrawal and for the 
     purposes previously used.
       ``(2) Jurisdiction.--Jurisdiction of any land within the 
     interim storage facility site and the Yucca Mountain site 
     managed by the Secretary of the Interior or any other Federal 
     officer is transferred to the Secretary.
       ``(3) Reservation.--The interim storage facility site and 
     the Yucca Mountain site are reserved for the use of the 
     Secretary for the construction and operation, respectively, 
     of the interim storage facility and the repository and 
     activities associated with the purposes of this title.
       ``(b) Land Description.--
       ``(1) Boundaries.--The boundaries depicted on the map 
     entitled `Interim Storage Facility Site Withdrawal Map,' 
     dated July 28, 1995, and on file with the Secretary, are 
     established as the boundaries of the Interim Storage Facility 
     site.
       ``(2) Boundaries.--The boundaries depicted on the map 
     entitled `Yucca Mountain Site Withdrawal Map,' dated July 28, 
     1995, and on file with the Secretary, are established as the 
     boundaries of the Yucca Mountain site.
       ``(3) Notice and maps.--Within 6 months of the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall--
       ``(A) publish in the Federal Register a notice containing a 
     legal description of the interim storage facility site; and
       ``(B) file copies of the maps described in paragraph (1), 
     and the legal description of the interim storage facility 
     site with the Congress, the Secretary of the Interior, the 
     Governor of Nevada, and the Archivist of the United States.
       ``(4) Notice and maps.--Concurrent with the Secretary's 
     application to the Commission for authority to construct the 
     repository, the Secretary shall--
       ``(A) publish in the Federal Register a notice containing a 
     legal description of the Yucca Mountain site; and
       ``(B) file copies of the maps described in paragraph (2), 
     and the legal description of the Yucca Mountain site with the 
     Congress, the Secretary of the Interior, the Governor of 
     Nevada, and the Archivist of the United States.
       ``(5) Construction.--The maps and legal descriptions of the 
     interim storage facility site and the Yucca Mountain site 
     referred to in this subsection shall have the same force and 
     effect as if they were included in this Act. The Secretary 
     may correct clerical and typographical errors in the maps and 
     legal descriptions and make minor adjustments in the 
     boundaries of the sites.
                      ``TITLE III--LOCAL RELATIONS

     ``SEC. 301. ON-SITE REPRESENTATIVE.

       The Secretary shall offer to Nye County, Nevada, an 
     opportunity to designate a representative to conduct on-site 
     oversight activities at such site. Reasonable expenses of 
     such representatives shall be paid by the Secretary.

     ``SEC. 302. BENEFITS AGREEMENTS.

       ``(a) In General.--
       ``(1) Separate agreements.--The Secretary shall offer to 
     enter into separate agreements with Nye County, Nevada, and 
     Lincoln County, Nevada, concerning the integrated management 
     system.
       ``(2) Agreement content.--Any agreement shall contain such 
     terms and conditions, including such financial and 
     institutional arrangements, as the Secretary and agreement 
     entity determine to be reasonable and appropriate and shall 
     contain such provisions as are necessary to preserve any 
     right to participation or compensation of Nye County, Nevada, 
     and Lincoln County, Nevada.
       ``(b) Amendment.--An agreement entered into under 
     subsection (a) may be amended only with the mutual consent of 
     the parties to the amendment and terminated only in 
     accordance with subsection (c).
       ``(c) Termination.--The Secretary shall terminate an 
     agreement under subsection (a) if any element of the 
     integrated management system may not be completed.
       ``(d) Limitation.--Only 1 agreement each for Nye County, 
     Nevada, and Lincoln County, Nevada, may be in effect at any 
     one time.
       ``(e) Judicial Review.--Decisions of the Secretary under 
     this section are not subject to judicial review.

     ``SEC. 303. CONTENT OF AGREEMENTS.

       ``(a) In General.--
       ``(1) Schedule.--The Secretary shall make payments to the 
     party of a benefits agreement under section 302(a) in 
     accordance with the following schedule:

 
                           ``BENEFITS SCHEDULE
                          [Amounts in millions]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                            Event                                County
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(A) Annual payments prior to first receipt of fuel...........       $2.5
(B) Upon first spent fuel receipt............................       $5
(C) Annual payments after first spent fuel receipt until            $5
 closure of facility.........................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------


       ``(2) Definitions.--For purposes of this section, the 
     term--
       ``(A) `spent fuel' means high-level radioactive waste or 
     spent nuclear fuel; and
       ``(B) `first spent fuel receipt' does not include receipt 
     of spent fuel or high-level radioactive waste for purposes of 
     testing or operational demonstration.
       ``(3) Annual payments.--Annual payments prior to first 
     spent fuel receipt under line (A) of the benefit schedule 
     shall be made on the date of execution of the benefits 
     agreement and thereafter on the anniversary date of such 
     execution. Annual payments after the first spent fuel receipt 
     until closure of the facility under line (C) of the benefit 
     schedule shall be made on the anniversary date of such first 
     spent fuel receipt.
       ``(4) Reduction.--If the first spent fuel payment under 
     line (B) is made within 6 months after the last annual 
     payment prior to the receipt of spent fuel under line (A) of 
     the benefit schedule, such first spent fuel payment under 
     line (B) of the benefit schedule shall be reduced by an 
     amount equal to \1/12\ of such annual payment under line (A) 
     of the benefit schedule for each full month less than 6 that 
     has not elapsed since the last annual payment under line (A) 
     of the benefit schedule.
       ``(b) Contents.--A benefits agreement under section 302 
     shall provide that--
       ``(1) the parties to the agreement shall share with one 
     another information relevant to the licensing process for the 
     interim storage facility or repository, as it becomes 
     available; and
       ``(2) the affected unit of local government that is party 
     to such agreement may comment on the development of the 
     integrated management system and on documents required under 
     law or regulations governing the effects of the system on the 
     public health and safety.
       ``(c) Construction.--The signature of the Secretary on a 
     valid benefits agreement under section 302 shall constitute a 
     commitment by the United States to make payments in 
     accordance with such agreement.

     ``SEC. 304. ACCEPTANCE OF BENEFITS.

       ``(a) Consent.--The acceptance or use of any of the 
     benefits provided under this title by any affected unit of 
     local government shall not be deemed to be an expression of 
     consent, express, or denied, either under the Constitution of 
     the State of Nevada or any law thereof, to the siting of the 
     interim storage facility or repository in the State of 
     Nevada, any provision of such Constitution or laws to the 
     contrary notwithstanding.
       ``(b) Arguments.--Neither the United States nor any other 
     entity may assert any argument based on legal or equitable 
     estoppel, or acquiescence, or waiver, or consensual 
     involvement, in response to any decision by the State of 
     Nevada, to oppose the siting in Nevada of the interim storage 
     facility or repository premised upon or related to the 
     acceptance or use of benefits under this title.
       ``(c) Liability.--No liability of any nature shall accrue 
     to be asserted against the State

[[Page H9686]]

     of Nevada, its Governor, any official thereof, or any 
     official of any governmental unit thereof, premised solely 
     upon the acceptance or use of benefits under this title.

     ``SEC. 305. RESTRICTION ON USE OF FUNDS.

       ``None of the funding provided under section 303 may be 
     used--
       ``(1) directly or indirectly to influence legislative 
     action on any matter pending before Congress or a State 
     legislature or for any lobbying activity as provided in 
     section 1913 of title 18, United States Code;
       ``(2) for litigation purposes; and
       ``(3) to support multistate efforts or other coalition-
     building activities inconsistent with the purposes of this 
     Act.

     ``SEC. 306. INITIAL LAND CONVEYANCES.

       ``(a) Conveyance of Public Lands.--Within 120 days of the 
     date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Interior, 
     or other agency with jurisdiction over the public lands 
     described in subsection (b), shall convey the public lands 
     described in subsection (b) to the appropriate county, unless 
     the county notifies the Secretary of the Interior or the head 
     of such other appropriate agency in writing within 60 days of 
     such date of enactment that it elects not to take title to 
     all or any part of the property, except that any lands 
     conveyed to the County of Nye, County of Lincoln, or the City 
     of Caliente under this subsection that are subject to a 
     Federal grazing permit or a similar federally granted 
     privilege shall be conveyed between 60 and 120 days of the 
     earliest time the Federal agency administering or granting 
     the privilege would be able to legally terminate such 
     privilege under the statutes and regulations existing at the 
     date of enactment of this Act, unless the Federal agency, 
     county or city, and the affected holder of the privilege 
     negotiate an agreement that allows for an earlier conveyance.
       ``(b) Special Conveyances.--Subject to valid existing 
     rights and notwithstanding any other law, the Secretary of 
     the Interior or the head of the other appropriate agency 
     shall convey:
       ``(1) To the County of Nye, Nevada, the following public 
     lands depicted on the maps dated October 11, 1995, and on 
     file with the Secretary:
       Map 1: Proposed Pahrump Industrial Park Site
       Map 2: Proposed Lathrop Wells (Gate 510) Industrial Park 
     Site
       Map 3: Pahrump Landfill Sites
       Map 4: Amargosa Valley Regional Landfill Site
       Map 5: Amargosa Valley Municipal Landfill Site
       Map 6: Beatty Landfill/Transfer station Site
       Map 7: Round Mountain Landfill Site
       Map 8: Tonopah Landfill Site
       Map 9: Gabbs Landfill Site.
       ``(2) To the County of Lincoln, Nevada, the following 
     public lands depicted on the maps dated October 11, 1995, and 
     on file with the Secretary:
       Map 2: Lincoln County, Parcel M, Industrial Park Site, 
     Jointly with the City of Caliente
       Map 3: Lincoln County, Parcels F and G, Mixed Use, 
     Industrial Sites
       Map 4: Lincoln County, Parcels H and I, Mixed Use and 
     Airport Expansion Sites
       Map 5: Lincoln County, Parcels J and K, Mixed Use, Airport 
     and Landfill Expansion Sites
       Map 6: Lincoln County, Parcels E and L, Mixed Use, Airport 
     and Industrial Expansion Sites.
       ``(3) To the City of Caliente, Nevada, the following public 
     lands depicted on the maps dated October 11, 1995, and on 
     file with the Secretary:
       Map 1: City of Caliente, Parcels A, B, C and D, Community 
     Growth, Landfill Expansion and Community Recreation Sites
       Map 2: City of Caliente, Parcel M, Industrial Park Site, 
     jointly with Lincoln County.
       ``(c) National Environmental Policy Act of 1969.--The 
     activities of the Secretary and the head of any other Federal 
     agency in connection with subsections (a) and (b) shall be 
     considered preliminary decision making activities. No such 
     activity shall require the preparation of an environmental 
     impact statement under section 102(2)(C) of the National 
     Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)) or 
     any environmental review under subparagraph (E) or (F) of 
     section 102(2) of such Act.
                  ``TITLE IV--FUNDING AND ORGANIZATION

     ``SEC. 401. PROGRAM FUNDING.

       ``(a) Contracts.--
       ``(1) Authority of secretary.--In the performance of the 
     Secretary's functions under this Act, the Secretary is 
     authorized to enter into contracts with any person who 
     generates or holds title to spent nuclear fuel or high-level 
     radioactive waste of domestic origin for the acceptance of 
     title and possession, transportation, interim storage, and 
     disposal of such spent fuel or waste upon the payment of fees 
     in accordance with paragraphs (2) and (3). Fees assessed 
     pursuant to this paragraph shall be paid to the Treasury of 
     the United States and shall be available for use by the 
     Secretary pursuant to this section until expended.
       ``(2) Annual fees.--
       ``(A) Electricity.--Under a contract entered into under 
     paragraph (1) there shall be a fee for electricity generated 
     by civilian nuclear power reactors and sold on or after the 
     date of enactment of this Act. The aggregate amount of such 
     fees collected during each fiscal year shall be no greater 
     than the annual level of appropriations for expenditures on 
     the possession, transportation, interim storage, and disposal 
     of such spent fuel or waste consistent with subsection (d) 
     for that fiscal year, minus--
       ``(i) any unobligated balance of fees collected during the 
     previous fiscal year;
       ``(ii) such appropriations required to be funded by the 
     Federal Government pursuant to section 403; and
       ``(iii) the amount of one-time fees received pursuant to 
     paragraph (3).

     The Secretary shall determine the level of the annual fee for 
     each civilian nuclear power reactor based on the amount of 
     electricity generated and sold, except that the annual fee 
     shall not exceed 1.0 mill per kilowatt-hour generated and 
     sold. Fees assessed pursuant to this subparagraph shall be 
     paid to the Treasury of the United States and shall be 
     available for use by the Secretary pursuant to this section 
     until expended.
       ``(B) Expenditures if shortfall.--If, during any fiscal 
     year, the aggregate amount of fees assessed pursuant to 
     subparagraph (A) is less than the annual level of 
     appropriations for expenditures on those activities specified 
     in subsection (d) for that fiscal year, minus--
       ``(i) any unobligated balance collected pursuant to this 
     section during the previous fiscal year;
       ``(ii) such appropriations required to be funded by the 
     Federal Government pursuant to section 403; and
       ``(iii) the amount of one-time fees received pursuant to 
     paragraph (3).

     the Secretary may make expenditures from the Nuclear Waste 
     Fund up to the level of the fees assessed.
       ``(C) Budget priorities if shortfall.--If, during any 
     fiscal year, the provisions of subparagraph (B) come into 
     effect--
       ``(i) the Secretary, for purposes of preparing annual 
     requests for appropriations and allocating appropriated funds 
     among competing requirements under the Nuclear Waste Policy 
     Act of 1997, shall accord--

       ``(I) the activities leading to an operating repository the 
     highest priority; and
       ``(II) the activities leading to an operating interim 
     storage facility under section 204 the next highest priority; 
     and

       ``(ii) the Commission, for purposes of preparing annual 
     requests for appropriations and allocating appropriated funds 
     among competing requirements under the Nuclear Waste Policy 
     Act of 1997, shall accord--

       ``(I) the activities leading to an operating repository the 
     highest priority; and
       ``(II) the activities leading to an operating interim 
     storage facility under section 204 the next highest priority.

       ``(D) Rules.--The Secretary shall, by rule, establish 
     procedures necessary to implement this paragraph.
       ``(3) One-time fee.--The one-time fee collected under 
     contracts executed under section 302(a) of the Nuclear Waste 
     Policy Act of 1982 before the date of enactment of this Act 
     on spent nuclear fuel, or high-level radioactive waste 
     derived from spent nuclear fuel, which fuel was used to 
     generate electricity in a civilian nuclear power reactor 
     before April 7, 1983, shall be paid to the Treasury. The 
     Secretary shall collect all such fees before the expiration 
     of fiscal year 2002. The Commission shall suspend the license 
     of any licensee who fails or refuses to pay the full amount 
     of the fee referred to in this paragraph and the license 
     shall remain suspended until the full amount of the fee 
     referred to in this paragraph is paid. In paying such a fee, 
     the person delivering such spent nuclear fuel or high-level 
     radioactive wastes, to the Secretary shall have no further 
     financial obligation under this paragraph to the Federal 
     Government for the long-term storage and permanent disposal 
     of such spent nuclear fuel or high-level radioactive waste.
       ``(b) Advance Contracting Requirement.--
       ``(1) In general.--
       ``(A) License issuance and renewal.--The Commission shall 
     not issue or renew a license to any person to use a 
     utilization or production facility under the authority of 
     section 103 or 104 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 
     U.S.C. 2133, 2134) unless--
       ``(i) such person has entered into a contract under 
     subsection (a) with the Secretary; or
       ``(ii) the Secretary affirms in writing that such person is 
     actively and in good faith negotiating with the Secretary for 
     a contract under subsection (a).
       ``(B) Precondition.--The Commission, as it deems necessary 
     or appropriate, may require as a precondition to the issuance 
     or renewal of a license under section 103 or 104 of 
     the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2133, 2134) that 
     the applicant for such license shall have entered into an 
     agreement with the Secretary for the disposal of spent 
     nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste that may 
     result from the use of such license.
       ``(2) Disposal in repository.--Except as provided in 
     paragraph (1), no spent nuclear fuel or high-level 
     radioactive waste generated or owned by any person (other 
     than a department of the United States referred to in section 
     101 or 102 of title 5, United States Code) may be disposed of 
     by the Secretary in the repository unless the generator or 
     owner of such spent fuel or waste has entered into a contract 
     under subsection (a) with the Secretary by not later than the 
     date on which such generator or owner commences generation 
     of, or takes title to, such spent fuel or waste.
       ``(3) Assignment.--The rights and duties of a party to a 
     contract entered into under this section may be assignable 
     with transfer of

[[Page H9687]]

     title to the spent nuclear fuel or high-level radioactive 
     waste involved.
       ``(4) Disposal condition.--No spent nuclear fuel or high-
     level radioactive waste generated or owned by any department 
     of the United States referred to in section 101 or 102 of 
     title 5, United States Code, may be stored or disposed of by 
     the Secretary at the interim storage facility or repository 
     in the integrated management system developed under this Act 
     unless, in each fiscal year, such department funds its 
     appropriate portion of the costs of such storage and disposal 
     as specified in section 403.
       ``(c) Nuclear Waste Fund.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Nuclear Waste Fund established in 
     the Treasury of the United States under section 302(c) of the 
     Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 shall continue in effect 
     under this Act and shall consist of--
       ``(A) all receipts, proceeds, and recoveries realized by 
     the Secretary before the date of enactment of this Act;
       ``(B) any appropriations made by the Congress before the 
     date of enactment of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1997 to 
     the Nuclear Waste Fund; and
       ``(C) all interest paid on amounts invested by the 
     Secretary of the Treasury under paragraph (3)(B).
       ``(2) Use.--The Nuclear Waste Fund shall be used only for 
     purposes of the integrated management system.
       ``(3) Administration of nuclear waste fund.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Secretary of the Treasury shall hold 
     the Nuclear Waste Fund and, after consultation with the 
     Secretary, annually report to the Congress on the financial 
     condition and operations of the Nuclear Waste Fund during the 
     preceding fiscal year.
       ``(B) Amounts in excess of current needs.--If the Secretary 
     determines that the Nuclear Waste Fund contains at any time 
     amounts in excess of current needs, the Secretary may request 
     the Secretary of the Treasury to invest such amounts, or any 
     portion of such amounts as the Secretary determines to be 
     appropriate, in obligations of the United States--
       ``(i) having maturities determined by the Secretary of the 
     Treasury to be appropriate to the needs of the Nuclear Waste 
     Fund; and
       ``(ii) bearing interest at rates determined to be 
     appropriate by the Secretary of the Treasury, taking into 
     consideration the current average market yield on outstanding 
     marketable obligations of the United States with remaining 
     periods to maturity comparable to the maturities of 
     such investments, except that the interest rate on such 
     investments shall not exceed the average interest rate 
     applicable to existing borrowings.
       ``(C) Exemption.--Receipts, proceeds, and recoveries 
     realized by the Secretary under this section, and 
     expenditures of amounts from the Nuclear Waste Fund, shall be 
     exempt from annual apportionment under the provisions of 
     subchapter II of chapter 15 of title 31, United States Code.
       ``(d) Use of Appropriated Funds.--During each fiscal year, 
     the Secretary may make expenditures of funds collected after 
     the date of enactment of this Act under this section and 
     section 403, up to the level of appropriations for that 
     fiscal year pursuant to subsection (f) only for purposes of 
     the integrated management system.
       ``(e) Prohibition on Use of Appropriations and Nuclear 
     Waste Fund.--The Secretary shall not make expenditures of 
     funds collected pursuant to this section or section 403 to 
     design or construct systems and components for the 
     transportation, storage, or disposal of spent nuclear fuel 
     from civilian nuclear power reactors.
       ``(f) Appropriations.--
       ``(1) Budget.--The Secretary shall submit the budget for 
     implementation of the Secretary's responsibilities under this 
     Act to the Office of Management and Budget triennially along 
     with the budget of the Department of Energy submitted at such 
     time in accordance with chapter 11 of title 31, United States 
     Code. The budget shall consist of the estimates made by the 
     Secretary of expenditures under this Act and other relevant 
     financial matters for the succeeding 3 fiscal years, and 
     shall be included in the budget of the United States 
     Government.
       ``(2) Appropriations.--Appropriations shall be subject to 
     triennial authorization. During each fiscal year, the 
     Secretary may make expenditures, up to the level of 
     appropriations, out of the funds collected pursuant to this 
     section and section 403, if the Secretary transmits the 
     amounts appropriated for implementation of this Act to the 
     Commission and the Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board in 
     appropriate proportion to the collection of such funds.
       ``(g) Effective Date.--This section shall take effect 
     October 1, 1998.

     ``SEC. 402. OFFICE OF CIVILIAN RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT.

       ``(a) Continuation of Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste 
     Management.--The Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste 
     Management established under section 304(a) of the Nuclear 
     Waste Policy Act of 1982 as constituted prior to the date of 
     enactment of this Act, shall continue in effect subsequent to 
     the date of enactment of this Act.
       ``(b) Functions of Director.--The Director of the Office 
     shall be responsible for carrying out the functions of the 
     Secretary under this Act, subject to the general supervision 
     of the Secretary. The Director of the Office shall be 
     directly responsible to the Secretary.
       ``(c) Audits.--
       ``(1) Standard.--The Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste 
     Management, its contractors, and subcontractors at all tiers, 
     shall conduct, or have conducted, audits and examinations of 
     their operations in accordance with the usual and customary 
     practices of private corporations engaged in large nuclear 
     construction projects consistent with its role in the 
     program.
       ``(2) Time.--The management practices and performances of 
     the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management shall be 
     audited every 5 years by an independent management consulting 
     firm with significant experience in similar audits of private 
     corporations engaged in large nuclear construction projects. 
     The first such audit shall be conducted 5 years after the 
     date of enactment of this Act.
       ``(3) Comptroller general.--The Comptroller General of the 
     United States shall annually make an audit of the Office, in 
     accordance with such regulations as the Comptroller General 
     may prescribe. The Comptroller General shall have access to 
     such books, records, accounts, and other materials of the 
     Office as the Comptroller General determines to be necessary 
     for the preparation of such audit. The Comptroller General 
     shall submit to the Congress a report on the results of 
     each audit conducted under this section.
       ``(4) Time.--No audit contemplated by this subsection shall 
     take longer than 30 days to conduct. An audit report shall be 
     issued in final form no longer than 60 days after the audit 
     is commenced.
       ``(5) Public documents.--All audit reports shall be public 
     documents and available to any individual upon request.

     ``SEC. 403. DEFENSE CONTRIBUTION.

       ``(a) Allocation.--No later than one year from the date of 
     enactment of this Act, acting pursuant to section 553 of 
     title 5, United States Code, the Secretary shall issue a 
     final rule establishing the appropriate portion of the costs 
     of managing spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive 
     waste under this Act allocable to the interim storage or 
     permanent disposal of spent nuclear fuel, high-level 
     radioactive waste from atomic energy defense activities, and 
     spent nuclear fuel from foreign research reactors. The share 
     of costs allocable to the management of spent nuclear fuel, 
     high-level radioactive waste from atomic energy defense 
     activities, and spent nuclear fuel from foreign research 
     reactors shall include--
       ``(1) an appropriate portion of the costs associated with 
     research and development activities with respect to 
     development of the interim storage facility and repository; 
     and
       ``(2) interest on the principal amounts due calculated by 
     reference to the appropriate Treasury bill rate as if the 
     payments were made at a point in time consistent with the 
     payment dates for spent nuclear fuel and high-level 
     radioactive waste under the contracts.
       ``(b) Appropriation Request.--In addition to any request 
     for an appropriation from the Nuclear Waste Fund, the 
     Secretary shall request annual appropriations from general 
     revenues in amounts sufficient to pay the costs of the 
     management of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive 
     waste from atomic energy defense activities as established 
     under subsection (a).
       ``(c) Report.--In conjunction with the annual report 
     submitted to Congress under section 702, the Secretary shall 
     advise the Congress annually of the amount of spent nuclear 
     fuel and high-level radioactive waste from atomic energy 
     defense activities requiring management in the integrated 
     management system.
       ``(d) Authorization.--There is authorized to be 
     appropriated to the Secretary, from general revenues, for 
     carrying out the purposes of this Act, such sums as may be 
     necessary to pay the costs of the management of spent nuclear 
     fuel and high-level radioactive waste from atomic energy 
     defense activities as established under subsection (a).
            ``TITLE V--GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS

     ``SEC. 501. COMPLIANCE WITH OTHER LAWS.

       ``If the requirements of any law (other than the Federal 
     Lands Policy Management Act of 1976, the Endangered Species 
     Act of 1973, the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918, and the 
     Federal Water Pollution Control Act as such Acts pertain to 
     fish and wildlife and wetlands) are inconsistent with or 
     duplicative of the requirements of the Atomic Energy Act and 
     this Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2011 et seq.), the Secretary 
     shall comply only with the requirements of the Atomic Energy 
     Act of 1954 and this Act in implementing the integrated 
     management system. Any requirement of a State or political 
     subdivision of a State is preempted if--
       ``(1) complying with such requirement and a requirement of 
     this Act is impossible; or
       ``(2) such requirement, as applied or enforced, is an 
     obstacle to accomplishing or carrying out this Act or a 
     regulation under this Act.

     ``SEC. 502. WATER RIGHTS.

       ``(a) No Federal Reservation.--Nothing in this Act or any 
     other Act of Congress shall constitute or be construed to 
     constitute either an express or implied Federal reservation 
     of water or water rights for any purpose arising under this 
     Act.
       ``(b) Acquisition and Exercise of Water Rights Under Nevada 
     Law.--The United States may acquire and exercise such water 
     rights as it deems necessary to carry out its 
     responsibilities under this Act pursuant to the substantive 
     and procedural requirements

[[Page H9688]]

     of the State of Nevada. Nothing in this Act shall be 
     construed to authorize the use of eminent domain by the 
     United States to acquire water rights for such lands.
       ``(c) Exercise of Water Rights Generally Under Nevada 
     Laws.--Nothing in this Act shall be construed to limit the 
     exercise of water rights as provided under Nevada State laws.

     ``SEC. 503. JUDICIAL REVIEW OF AGENCY ACTIONS.

       ``(a) Jurisdiction of United States Courts of Appeals.--
       ``(1) Original and exclusive jurisdiction.--Except for 
     review in the Supreme Court of the United States, and except 
     as otherwise provided in this Act, the United States courts 
     of appeals shall have original and exclusive jurisdiction 
     over any civil action--
       ``(A) for review of any final decision or action of the 
     Secretary, the President, or the Commission under this Act;
       ``(B) alleging the failure of the Secretary, the President, 
     or the Commission to make any decision, or take any action, 
     required under this Act;
       ``(C) challenging the constitutionality of any decision 
     made, or action taken, under any provision of this Act; or
       ``(D) for review of any environmental impact statement 
     prepared or environmental assessment made pursuant to the 
     National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et 
     seq.) with respect to any action under this Act or alleging a 
     failure to prepare such statement with respect to any such 
     action.
       ``(2) Venue.--The venue of any proceeding under this 
     section shall be in the judicial circuit in which the 
     petitioner involved resides or has its principal office, or 
     in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of 
     Columbia.
       ``(b) Deadline for Commencing Action.--A civil action for 
     judicial review described under subsection (a)(1) may be 
     brought no later than 180 days after the date of the decision 
     or action or failure to act involved, as the case may be, 
     except that if a party shows that the party did not know of 
     the decision or action complained of or of the failure to 
     act, and that a reasonable person acting under the 
     circumstances would not have known of such decision, action, 
     or failure to act, such party may bring a civil action no 
     later than 180 days after the date such party acquired actual 
     or constructive knowledge of such decision, action, or 
     failure to act.
       ``(c) Application of Other Law.--The provisions of this 
     section relating to any matter shall apply in lieu of the 
     provisions of any other Act relating to the same matter.

     ``SEC. 504. LICENSING OF FACILITY EXPANSIONS AND 
                   TRANSSHIPMENTS.

       ``(a) Oral Argument.--In any Commission hearing under 
     section 189 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2239) 
     on an application for a license, or for an amendment to an 
     existing license, filed after January 7, 1983, to expand the 
     spent nuclear fuel storage capacity at the site of a civilian 
     nuclear power reactor, through the use of high-density fuel 
     storage racks, fuel rod compaction, the transshipment of 
     spent nuclear fuel to another civilian nuclear power reactor 
     within the same utility system, the construction of 
     additional spent nuclear fuel pool capacity or dry storage 
     capacity, or by other means, the Commission shall, at the 
     request of any party, provide an opportunity for oral 
     argument with respect to any matter which the Commission 
     determines to be in controversy among the parties. The oral 
     argument shall be preceded by such discovery procedures as 
     the rules of the Commission shall provide. The Commission 
     shall require each party, including the Commission staff, 
     to submit in written form, at the time of the oral 
     argument, a summary of the facts, data, and arguments upon 
     which such party proposes to rely that are known at such 
     time to such party. Only facts and data in the form of 
     sworn testimony or written submission may be relied upon 
     by the parties during oral argument. Of the materials that 
     may be submitted by the parties during oral argument, the 
     Commission shall only consider those facts and data that 
     are submitted in the form of sworn testimony or written 
     submission.
       ``(b) Adjudicatory Hearing.--
       ``(1) Designation.--At the conclusion of any oral argument 
     under subsection (a), the Commission shall designate any 
     disputed question of fact, together with any remaining 
     questions of law, for resolution in an adjudicatory hearing 
     only if it determines that--
       ``(A) there is a genuine and substantial dispute of fact 
     which can only be resolved with sufficient accuracy by the 
     introduction of evidence in an adjudicatory hearing; and
       ``(B) the decision of the Commission is likely to depend in 
     whole or in part on the resolution of such dispute.
       ``(2) Determination.--In making a determination under this 
     subsection, the Commission--
       ``(A) shall designate in writing the specific facts that 
     are in genuine and substantial dispute, the reason why the 
     decision of the agency is likely to depend on the resolution 
     of such facts, and the reason why an adjudicatory hearing is 
     likely to resolve the dispute; and
       ``(B) shall not consider--
       ``(i) any issue relating to the design, construction, or 
     operation of any civilian nuclear power reactor already 
     licensed to operate at such site, or any civilian nuclear 
     power reactor to which a construction permit has been granted 
     at such site, unless the Commission determines that any such 
     issue substantially affects the design, construction, or 
     operation of the facility or activity for which such license 
     application, authorization, or amendment is being considered; 
     or
       ``(ii) any siting or design issue fully considered and 
     decided by the Commission in connection with the issuance of 
     a construction permit or operating license for a civilian 
     nuclear power reactor at such site, unless--

       ``(I) such issue results from any revision of siting or 
     design criteria by the Commission following such decision; 
     and
       ``(II) the Commission determines that such issue 
     substantially affects the design, construction, or operation 
     of the facility or activity for which such license 
     application, authorization, or amendment is being considered.

       ``(3) Application.--The provisions of paragraph (2)(B) 
     shall apply only with respect to licenses, authorizations, or 
     amendments to licenses or authorizations, applied for under 
     the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2011 et seq.) before 
     December 31, 2005.
       ``(4) Construction.--The provisions of this section shall 
     not apply to the first application for a license or license 
     amendment received by the Commission to expand onsite spent 
     fuel storage capacity by the use of a new technology not 
     previously approved for use at any nuclear power plant by the 
     Commission.
       ``(c) Judicial Review.--No court shall hold unlawful or set 
     aside a decision of the Commission in any proceeding 
     described in subsection (a) because of a failure by the 
     Commission to use a particular procedure pursuant to this 
     section unless--
       ``(1) an objection to the procedure used was presented to 
     the Commission in a timely fashion or there are extraordinary 
     circumstances that excuse the failure to present a timely 
     objection; and
       ``(2) the court finds that such failure has precluded a 
     fair consideration and informed resolution of a significant 
     issue of the proceeding taken as a whole.

     ``SEC. 505. SITING A SECOND REPOSITORY.

       ``(a) Congressional Action Required.--The Secretary may not 
     conduct site-specific activities with respect to a second 
     repository unless Congress has specifically authorized and 
     appropriated funds for such activities.
       ``(b) Report.--The Secretary shall report to the President 
     and to Congress on or after January 1, 2007, but not later 
     than January 1, 2010, on the need for a second repository.

     ``SEC. 506. FINANCIAL ARRANGEMENTS FOR LOW-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE 
                   WASTE SITE CLOSURE.

       ``(a) Financial Arrangements.--
       ``(1) Standards and instructions.--The Commission shall 
     establish by rule, regulation, or order, after public notice, 
     and in accordance with section 181 of the Atomic Energy Act 
     of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2231), such standards and instructions as 
     the Commission may deem necessary or desirable to ensure in 
     the case of each license for the disposal of low-level 
     radioactive waste that an adequate bond, surety, or other 
     financial arrangement (as determined by the Commission) will 
     be provided by a licensee to permit completion of all 
     requirements established by the Commission for the 
     decontamination, decommissioning, site closure, and 
     reclamation of sites, structures, and equipment used in 
     conjunction with such low-level radioactive waste. Such 
     financial arrangements shall be provided and approved by the 
     Commission, or, in the case of sites within the boundaries of 
     any agreement State under section 274 of the Atomic Energy 
     Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2021), by the appropriate State or 
     State entity, prior to issuance of licenses for low-level 
     radioactive waste disposal or, in the case of licenses in 
     effect on January 7, 1983, prior to termination of such 
     licenses.
       ``(2) Bonding, surety, or other financial arrangements.--If 
     the Commission determines that any long-term maintenance or 
     monitoring, or both, will be necessary at a site described in 
     paragraph (1), the Commission shall ensure before termination 
     of the license involved that the licensee has made available 
     such bonding, surety, or other financial arrangements as may 
     be necessary to ensure that any necessary long-term 
     maintenance or monitoring needed for such site will be 
     carried out by the person having title and custody for such 
     site following license termination.
       ``(b) Title and Custody.--
       ``(1) Authority of secretary.--The Secretary shall have 
     authority to assume title and custody of low-level 
     radioactive waste and the land on which such waste is 
     disposed of, upon request of the owner of such waste and land 
     and following termination of the license issued by the 
     Commission for such disposal, if the Commission determines 
     that--
       ``(A) the requirements of the Commission for site closure, 
     decommissioning, and decontamination have been met by the 
     licensee involved and that such licensee is in compliance 
     with the provisions of subsection (a);
       ``(B) such title and custody will be transferred to the 
     Secretary without cost to the Federal Government; and
       ``(C) Federal ownership and management of such site is 
     necessary or desirable in order to protect the public health 
     and safety, and the environment.
       ``(2) Protection.--If the Secretary assumes title and 
     custody of any such waste and land under this subsection, the 
     Secretary shall maintain such waste and land in a manner that 
     will protect the public health and safety, and the 
     environment.

[[Page H9689]]

       ``(c) Special Sites.--If the low-level radioactive waste 
     involved is the result of a licensed activity to recover 
     zirconium, hafnium, and rare earths from source material, the 
     Secretary, upon request of the owner of the site involved, 
     shall assume title and custody of such waste and the land on 
     which it is disposed when such site has been decontaminated 
     and stabilized in accordance with the requirements 
     established by the Commission and when such owner has made 
     adequate financial arrangements approved by the Commission 
     for the long-term maintenance and monitoring of such site.

     ``SEC. 507. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION TRAINING 
                   AUTHORIZATION.

       ``The Commission is authorized and directed to promulgate 
     regulations, or other appropriate regulatory guidance, for 
     the training and qualifications of civilian nuclear 
     powerplant operators, supervisors, technicians, and other 
     appropriate operating personnel. Such regulations or guidance 
     shall establish simulator training requirements for 
     applicants for civilian nuclear powerplant operator 
     licenses and for operator requalification programs; 
     requirements governing Commission administration of 
     requalification examinations; requirements for operating 
     tests at civilian nuclear powerplant simulators, and 
     instructional requirements for civilian nuclear powerplant 
     licensee personnel training programs.

     ``SEC. 508. ACCEPTANCE SCHEDULE.

       ``The acceptance schedule shall be implemented in 
     accordance with the following:
       ``(1) Acceptance priority ranking shall be determined by 
     the Department's annual `Acceptance Priority Ranking' report.
       ``(2) The Secretary's spent fuel acceptance rate shall be 
     no less than the following: 1,200 MTU in 2000 and 1,200 MTU 
     in 2001, 2,000 MTU in 2002 and 2,000 MTU in 2003, 2,700 MTU 
     in 2004, and 3,000 MTU thereafter.
       ``(3) If the Secretary is unable to begin acceptance by 
     January 31, 2000 at the rates specified in paragraph (2), or 
     if the cumulative amount accepted in any year thereafter is 
     less than that which would have been accepted under the 
     acceptance rate specified in paragraph (2), the acceptance 
     schedule shall be adjusted upward such that within 5 years of 
     the start of acceptance by the Secretary--
       ``(A) the total quantity accepted by the Secretary is 
     consistent with the total quantity that the Secretary would 
     have accepted if the Secretary had began acceptance in 1998, 
     and
       ``(B) thereafter the acceptance rate is equivalent to the 
     rate that would be in place pursuant to paragraph (2) above 
     if the Secretary had commenced acceptance in 1998.
       ``(4) The acceptance schedule shall not be affected or 
     modified in any way as a result of the Secretary's acceptance 
     of any material other than contract holders' spent nuclear 
     fuel and high-level radioactive waste.

     ``SEC. 509. SUBSEABED OR OCEAN WATER DISPOSAL.

       ``Notwithstanding any other provision of law--
       ``(1) the subseabed or ocean water disposal of spent 
     nuclear fuel or high-level radioactive waste is prohibited; 
     and
       ``(2) no funds shall be obligated for any activity relating 
     to the subseabed or ocean water disposal of spent nuclear 
     fuel or high-level radioactive waste.

     ``SEC. 510. COMPENSATION.

       ``The Secretary shall compensate the owners of any land the 
     value of which is diminished by actions taken under this Act 
     as follows:
       ``(1) If the value of the land, as set by a professional 
     appraiser, is diminished by at least 20 percent, the 
     Secretary shall provide compensation to the owner of the land 
     so that when the compensation is added to the value of the 
     land the value of the land will not be considered as 
     diminished; and
       ``(2) If the value of the land is diminished by at least 50 
     percent, the Secretary shall offer to purchase the land at 
     its value before action was taken under this Act.
            ``TITLE VI--NUCLEAR WASTE TECHNICAL REVIEW BOARD

     ``SEC. 601. DEFINITIONS.

       ``For purposes of this title--
       ``(1) Chairman.--The term `Chairman' means the Chairman of 
     the Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board.
       ``(2) Board.--The term `Board' means the Nuclear Waste 
     Technical Review Board continued under section 602.

     ``SEC. 602. NUCLEAR WASTE TECHNICAL REVIEW BOARD.

       ``(a) Continuation of Nuclear Waste Technical Review 
     Board.--The Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board, established 
     under section 502(a) of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 
     as constituted prior to the date of enactment of this Act, 
     shall continue in effect subsequent to the date of enactment 
     of this Act.
       ``(b) Members.--
       ``(1) Number.--The Board shall consist of 11 members who 
     shall be appointed by the President not later than 90 days 
     after December 22, 1987, from among persons nominated by the 
     National Academy of Sciences in accordance with paragraph 
     (3).
       ``(2) Chair.--The President shall designate a member of the 
     Board to serve as Chairman.
       ``(3) National academy of sciences.--
       ``(A) Nominations.--The National Academy of Sciences shall, 
     not later than 90 days after December 22, 1987, nominate not 
     less than 22 persons for appointment to the Board from among 
     persons who meet the qualifications described in subparagraph 
     (C).
       ``(B) Vacancies.--The National Academy of Sciences shall 
     nominate not less than 2 persons to fill any vacancy on the 
     Board from among persons who meet the qualifications 
     described in subparagraph (C).
       ``(C) Nominees.--
       (i) Each person nominated for appointment to the Board 
     shall be--

       ``(I) eminent in a field of science or engineering, 
     including environmental sciences; and
       ``(II) selected solely on the basis of established records 
     of distinguished service.

       ``(ii) The membership of the Board shall be representatives 
     of the broad range of scientific and engineering disciplines 
     related to activities under this title.
       ``(iii) No person shall be nominated for appointment to the 
     Board who is an employee of--

       ``(I) the Department of Energy;
       ``(II) a national laboratory under contract with the 
     Department of Energy; or
       ``(III) an entity performing spent nuclear fuel or high-
     level radioactive waste activities under contract with the 
     Department of Energy.

       ``(4) Vacancies.--Any vacancy on the Board shall be filled 
     by the nomination and appointment process described in 
     paragraphs (1) and (3).
       ``(5) Terms.--Members of the Board shall be appointed for 
     terms of 4 years, each such term to commence 120 days after 
     December 22, 1987, except that of the 11 members first 
     appointed to the Board, 5 shall serve for 2 years and 6 shall 
     serve for 4 years, to be designated by the President at the 
     time of appointment.

     ``SEC. 603. FUNCTIONS.

       ``The Board shall evaluate the technical and scientific 
     validity of activities undertaken by the Secretary after 
     December 22, 1987, including--
       ``(1) site characterization activities; and
       ``(2) activities relating to the packaging or 
     transportation of spent nuclear fuel or high-level 
     radioactive waste.

     ``SEC. 604. INVESTIGATORY POWERS.

       ``(a) Hearings.--Upon request of the Chairman or a majority 
     of the members of the Board, the Board may hold such 
     hearings, sit and act at such times and places, take such 
     testimony, and receive such evidence, as the Board considers 
     appropriate. Any member of the Board may administer oaths or 
     affirmations to witnesses appearing before the Board.
       ``(b) Production of Documents.--
       ``(1) Response to inquiries.--Upon the request of the 
     Chairman or a majority of the members of the Board, and 
     subject to existing law, the Secretary (or any contractor of 
     the Secretary) shall provide the Board with such records, 
     files, papers, data, or information as may be necessary to 
     respond to any inquiry of the Board under this title.
       ``(2) Extent.--Subject to existing law, information 
     obtainable under paragraph (1) shall not be limited to final 
     work products of the Secretary, but shall include drafts of 
     such products and documentation of work in progress.

     ``SEC. 605. COMPENSATION OF MEMBERS.

       ``(a) In General.--Each member of the Board shall be paid 
     at the rate of pay payable for level III of the Executive 
     Schedule for each day (including travel time) such member is 
     engaged in the work of the Board.
       ``(b) Travel Expenses.--Each member of the Board may 
     receive travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of 
     subsistence, in the same manner as is permitted under 
     sections 5702 and 5703 of title 5, United States Code.

     ``SEC. 606. STAFF.

       ``(a) Clerical Staff.--
       ``(1) Authority of chairman.--Subject to paragraph (2), the 
     Chairman may appoint and fix the compensation of such 
     clerical staff as may be necessary to discharge the 
     responsibilities of the Board.
       ``(2) Provisions of title 5.--Clerical staff shall be 
     appointed subject to the provisions of title 5, United States 
     Code, governing appointments in the competitive service, and 
     shall be paid in accordance with the provisions of chapter 
     51 and subchapter III of chapter 3 of such title relating 
     to classification and General Schedule pay rates.
       ``(b) Professional Staff.--
       ``(1) Authority of chairman.--Subject to paragraphs (2) and 
     (3), the Chairman may appoint and fix the compensation of 
     such professional staff as may be necessary to discharge the 
     responsibilities of the Board.
       ``(2) Number.--Not more than 10 professional staff members 
     may be appointed under this subsection.
       ``(3) Title 5.--Professional staff members may be appointed 
     without regard to the provisions of title 5, United States 
     Code, governing appointments in the competitive service, and 
     may be paid without regard to the provisions of chapter 51 
     and subchapter III of chapter 53 of such title relating to 
     classification and General Schedule pay rates, except that no 
     individual so appointed may receive pay in excess of the 
     annual rate of basic pay payable for GS-18 of the General 
     Schedule.

     ``SEC. 607. SUPPORT SERVICES.

       ``(a) General Services.--To the extent permitted by law and 
     requested by the Chairman, the Administrator of General 
     Services shall provide the Board with necessary 
     administrative services, facilities, and support on a 
     reimbursable basis.
       ``(b) Accounting, Research, and Technology Assessment 
     Services.--The Comptroller General, the Librarian of 
     Congress, and the Director of the Office of Technology

[[Page H9690]]

     Assessment shall, to the extent permitted by law and subject 
     to the availability of funds, provide the Board with such 
     facilities, support, funds and services, including staff, as 
     may be necessary for the effective performance of the 
     functions of the Board.
       ``(c) Additional Support.--Upon the request of the 
     Chairman, the Board may secure directly from the head of any 
     department or agency of the United States information 
     necessary to enable it to carry out this title.
       ``(d) Mails.--The Board may use the United States mails in 
     the same manner and under the same conditions as other 
     departments and agencies of the United States.
       ``(e) Experts and Consultants.--Subject to such rules as 
     may be prescribed by the Board, the Chairman may procure 
     temporary and intermittent services under section 3109(b) of 
     title 5 of the United States Code, but at rates for 
     individuals not to exceed the daily equivalent of the maximum 
     annual rate of basic pay payable for GS-18 of the General 
     Schedule.

     ``SEC. 608. REPORT.

       ``The Board shall report not less than 2 times per year to 
     Congress and the Secretary its findings, conclusions, and 
     recommendations.

     ``SEC. 609. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       ``There are authorized to be appropriated for expenditures 
     such sums as may be necessary to carry out the provisions of 
     this title.

     ``SEC. 610. TERMINATION OF THE BOARD.

       ``The Board shall cease to exist not later than one year 
     after the date on which the Secretary begins disposal of 
     spent nuclear fuel or high-level radioactive waste in the 
     repository.
                     ``TITLE VII--MANAGEMENT REFORM

     ``SEC. 701. MANAGEMENT REFORM INITIATIVES.

       ``(a) In General.--The Secretary is directed to take 
     actions as necessary to improve the management of the 
     civilian radioactive waste management program to ensure that 
     the program is operated, to the maximum extent practicable, 
     in like manner as a private business.
       ``(b) Site Characterization.--The Secretary shall employ, 
     on an on-going basis, integrated performance modeling to 
     identify appropriate parameters for the remaining site 
     characterization effort and to eliminate studies of 
     parameters that are shown not to affect long-term repository 
     performance.

     ``SEC. 702. REPORTING.

       ``(a) Initial Report.--Within 180 days of the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall report to Congress 
     on its planned actions for implementing the provisions of 
     this Act, including the development of the Integrated 
     Waste Management System. Such report shall include--
       ``(1) an analysis of the Secretary's progress in meeting 
     its statutory and contractual obligation to accept title to, 
     possession of, and delivery of spent nuclear fuel and high-
     level radioactive waste beginning no later than January 31, 
     2000, and in accordance with the acceptance schedule;
       ``(2) a detailed schedule and timeline showing each action 
     that the Secretary intends to take to meet the Secretary's 
     obligations under this Act and the contracts;
       ``(3) a detailed description of the Secretary's contingency 
     plans in the event that the Secretary is unable to meet the 
     planned schedule and timeline; and
       ``(4) an analysis by the Secretary of its funding needs for 
     fiscal years 1996 through 2001.
       ``(b) Annual Reports.--On each anniversary of the submittal 
     of the report required by subsection (a), the Secretary shall 
     make annual reports to the Congress for the purpose of 
     updating the information contained in such report. The annual 
     reports shall be brief and shall notify the Congress of--
       ``(1) any modifications to the Secretary's schedule and 
     timeline for meeting its obligations under this Act;
       ``(2) the reasons for such modifications, and the status of 
     the implementation of any of the Secretary's contingency 
     plans; and
       ``(3) the Secretary's analysis of its funding needs for the 
     ensuing 5 fiscal years.''.

     SEC. 2. CONTINUATION OF CONTRACTS.

       Subsequent to the date of enactment of this Act, the 
     contracts executed under section 302(a) of the Nuclear Waste 
     Policy Act of 1982 shall continue in effect under this Act in 
     accordance with their terms except to the extent that the 
     contracts have been modified by the parties to the contract.

  The CHAIRMAN. No amendment shall be in order except those printed in 
House Report 105-354. Each amendment may be offered only in the order 
specified, may be offered only by a Member designated in the report, 
shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified 
in the report, equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an 
opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject 
to a demand for a division of the question.
  The Chairman of the Committee of the Whole may postpone a request for 
a recorded vote on any amendment, and may reduce to a minimum of 5 
minutes the time for voting on any postponed question that immediately 
follows another vote, provided that the time for voting on the first 
question shall be a minimum of 15 minutes.
  After a motion that the Committee rise has been rejected on a day, 
the Chairman may entertain another such motion on that day only if 
offered by the majority leader or his designee.
  After a motion to strike out the enacting clause of the bill has been 
rejected, the Chairman may not entertain another such motion during 
further consideration of the bill.
  It is now in order to consider amendment No. 1, printed in House 
Report 105-354, as modified.


 Amendment No. 1, as Modified, Offered by Mr. Dan Schaefer of Colorado

  Mr. DAN SCHAEFER of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, I offer amendment No. 1, 
as modified.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment, as modified.
  The text of the amendment, as modified, is as follows:

       Amendment No. 1, as modified, offered by Mr. Dan Schaefer 
     of Colorado:
       Page 19, line 2, insert before the period the following:

     , using routes that minimize, to the maximum practicable 
     extent and consistent with Federal requirements governing 
     transportation of hazardous materials, transportation of 
     spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste through 
     populated areas
       Page 19, beginning in line 3, strike ``In conjunction 
     with'' and insert the following:
       ``(1) In general.--In conjunction with''

     and add after line 16 on page 19 the following:
       ``(2) Rail routes.--Not later than one year after the date 
     of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Transportation 
     shall establish procedures for the selection of preferred 
     rail routes for the transportation of spent nuclear fuel and 
     high-level radioactive waste to the interim storage site and 
     the repository site. Such procedures shall be established in 
     consultation with the designated emergency services planning 
     management official for any State or Indian tribe affected by 
     the rail routes selected.
       Page 20, line 20, insert after ``organizations'' the 
     following: ``, voluntary emergency response organizations,''.
       Page 24, line 16, strike ``regulations promulgated by the 
     Commission'' and insert ``existing Federal regulations''.
       Page 25, beginning on line 1, strike ``The'' and all that 
     follows through ``paragraph (1)'' on line 3 and insert ``If 
     training standards are required to be promulgated under 
     paragraph (1), such standards''.
       Page 25, line 5, strike ``include the following 
     provisions--'' and insert ``provide for--''.
       Page 25, after line 19, insert the following:

     ``The Secretary of Transportation may specify an appropriate 
     combination of knowledge, skills, and prior training to 
     fulfill the minimum number of hours requirements of 
     subparagraphs (A) and (B).''.
       Page 43, strike lines 17 and all that follows through line 
     13 on page 44, and insert the following:

     ``SEC. 207. APPLICABILITY.

       ``Nothing in this Act shall affect the application of 
     chapter 51 of title 49, United States Code; part A of 
     subtitle V of title 49, United States Code; part B of 
     subtitle VI of title 49, United States Code; and title 23, 
     United States Code.''.
       Page 81, after line 13, insert the following:

     ``SEC. 510. SEPARABILITY.

       ``If any provision of this Act, or the application of such 
     provision to any person or circumstance, is held to be 
     invalid, the remainder of this Act, or the application of 
     such provision to persons or circumstances other than those 
     as to which it is held invalid, shall not be affected 
     thereby.''.
       In the table of contents--
       (1) in the item relating to section 207 amend the heading 
     to read as follows: ``Applicability''; and
       (2) add at the end of title V the following:

``Sec. 510. Separability.

       Page 21, line 6, redesignate subparagraph (B) as 
     subparagraph (C) and insert after line 5 the following:
       ``(B) Emergency responder training standards.--The training 
     standards for persons responsible for responding to emergency 
     situations occurring during the removal and transportation of 
     spent nuclear and high level radioactive waste shall, in 
     accordance with existing regulations, ensure their ability to 
     protect nearby persons, property, or the environment from the 
     effects of accidents involving spent nuclear fuel and high-
     level radioactive waste.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 283, the gentleman from 
Colorado [Mr. Dan Schaefer] and a Member opposed will each control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Colorado [Mr. Dan Schaefer].
  Mr. DAN SCHAEFER of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time 
as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I want to clarify that this pending amendment is an 
amendment made in order earlier by a unanimous consent request. The 
manager's amendment makes a number of noncontroversial changes to H.R. 
1270, and reflects the views of the Committee on Commerce, the 
Committee on Resources, and the Committee on Transportation and 
Infrastructure.

[[Page H9691]]

                              {time}  1830

  Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Missouri [Ms. 
McCarthy].
  (Ms. McCARTHY of Missouri asked and was given permission to revise 
and extend her remarks.)
  Ms. McCARTHY of Missouri. Mr. Chairman, I thank the esteemed 
gentleman from Texas [Mr. Hall], ranking member, as well as the 
gentleman from Colorado [Mr. Dan Schaefer], and the gentleman from 
Michigan [Mr. Upton], the sponsor of H.R. 1270. They have all been 
helpful and supportive in working with me to help clarify an issue 
related to rail transportation that is incorporated in the bill before 
us.
  Mr. Chairman, it is an issue which is critical to the constituents in 
my district and the citizens of Missouri. While no specific routes for 
rail shipments have been determined, approximately 1,400 rail shipments 
of waste projected over the next 30 years, possibly a third of these 
wastes would be transported through Missouri.
  There currently are no Federal regulations related to determining 
preferred rail routes for transportation of this material. My language 
in this manager's amendment establishes this process to safeguard rail 
transportation and ensure that the appropriate State and tribal 
authorities are involved in the decision-making process.
  Mr. Chairman, this type of consultative relationship and route 
planning is essential to ensuring the highest levels of safety to our 
communities. There are other important clarifications in the manager's 
amendment that further advance safety and transportation portions of 
this bill. I thank the managers and urge support of this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank my esteemed ranking member, Mr. 
Hall, as well as the gentleman from Colorado, Chairman Schaefer, and 
the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Upton], sponsor of H.R. 1270, who have 
all been very helpful and supportive in working with me on clarifying 
an important issue related to rail transportation that is incorporated 
in the manager's amendment before us. This is an issue that is 
critically important to the constituents in my district of Greater 
Kansas City, the second largest rail hub in the nation, and the 
citizens of Missouri, which contains the 3rd largest rail hub in St. 
Louis.
  While no specific routes for rail shipments have been determined, 
approximately 1,400 rail shipments of waste are projected over thirty 
years. Existing rail line options are limited for east-west transit and 
lead us to the realization that a significant percentage of shipments, 
possibly a third if distributed across all options, would be 
transported through Missouri.
  Current Hazardous Materials [HazMat] law established a process, which 
this legislation builds upon, for highway routing decisions related to 
transportation of spent nuclear fuel. There currently are no federal 
regulations related to determining preferred rail routes for the 
transportation of this material. My language in the Manager's amendment 
establishes this process to safeguard rail transportation and ensure 
that the appropriate state and tribal authorities are involved in the 
decisionmaking process.
  This type of consultative relationship and route planning is 
essential to ensuring the highest level of safety for our communities. 
There are other important clarifications in the manager's amendment 
that further advance the safety and transportation portions of the 
bill. I thank the managers for their inclusion of this language in the 
amendment and urge my colleagues to support the adoption of the 
amendment.
  Mr. DAN SCHAEFER of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, I would say that the 
gentlewoman from Missouri [Ms. McCarthy] has been very gracious in her 
input.
  Mr. HALL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I just want to congratulate and give accolades to the 
gentlewoman from Missouri [Ms. McCarthy], who has established a system 
of selecting preferred rail routes, and currently there is no system 
for that. I thank her and I thank the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Sawyer], 
and I thank those of the Nation's firefighters who have helped work 
this out.
  Mr. DAN SCHAEFER of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance 
of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment, as modified, offered 
by the gentleman from Colorado [Mr. Dan Schaefer].
  The amendment, as modified, was agreed to.
  The CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 2 printed 
in House Report 105-354.


                 Amendment No. 2 Offered by Mr. Kildee

  Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 2 offered by Mr. Kildee:
       Page 4, strike line 11 and all that follows through page 5 
     line 11, and insert the following:
       ``(3) Affected indian tribe.--The term affected Indian 
     tribe' means an Indian tribe whose reservation is surrounded 
     by or borders on an affected unit of local government, or 
     whose federally-defined possessory or usage rights to other 
     lands outside of the border of the Indian tribe's reservation 
     arising out of Congressionally-ratified treaties may be 
     affected by the locating of an interim storage facility or 
     repository, if the Secretary finds, upon petition of the 
     appropriate government officials of the Indian tribe, that 
     such affects are both substantial and adverse to the Indian 
     tribe.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 283, the gentleman from 
Michigan [Mr. Kildee] and a Member in opposition each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Kildee].
  Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  (Mr. KILDEE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. DAN SCHAEFER of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. KILDEE. I yield to the gentleman from Colorado.
  Mr. DAN SCHAEFER of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, we have looked over this 
amendment. We have no opposition to it and we will accept it.
  Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, with that then I will enter my remarks into 
the Record.
  Mr. Chairman, the amendment I am offering today will make sure that 
Indian tribes are not inadvertently left out of the consultation or 
assistance process. My amendment simply incorporates the Senate 
definition of ``Affected Indian tribe''. This amendment is supported by 
the Nevada tribes as well as the National Congress of American Indians.
  Under the current House definition of ``affected Indian tribe'', no 
Indian tribes in Nevada, including the shoshone and Paiute tribes who 
have lived on this land for more than 10,000 years, will qualify for 
treatment as an ``affected Indian tribe''. This strikes me and many 
others as patently unfair.
  These tribes are governments and ought to be treated on the same 
footing as other local governments. That is to say, they ought to be 
given the same opportunity and the same level of financial and 
technical assistance as we are giving other Nevada communities to 
enable them to carefully review program activities and evaluate the 
impacts of nuclear storage on their lands.
  The Senate definition of an ``affected Indian tribe'' includes tribes 
whose reservation boundaries are contiguous with other affected units 
of local government. This simply means that Indian tribes who are close 
to the storage site will have an opportunity to receive aid and 
assistance to the same extent that any other local government has.
  I believe that this is a reasonable proposal and, given the fact that 
the tribes in Nevada have lived on this particular land for thousands 
of years, only fair.
  I urge my Committee colleagues to support this amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Kildee].
  The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. HASTERT. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the House Resolution 283, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Michigan 
[Mr. Kildee] will be postponed.
  It is now in order to consider amendment No. 3 printed in House 
Report 105-354.


                Amendment No. 3 Offered by Mr. Traficant

  Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment, and I ask 
unanimous consent that that amendment be modified by the modification 
that has been placed at desk.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 3 offered by Mr. Traficant:
       Page 7, line 14, strike ``reprocessing'' and insert 
     ``reprocessing in the United States'', beginning in line 20 
     strike ``activities'' and insert ``activities in the United 
     States'', and in line 21, strike ``material'' and insert 
     ``material in the United States''.

[[Page H9692]]

       Page 11, line 14, strike ``reactor'' and insert ``reactor 
     in the United States''.


        Modification to Amendment No. 3 Offered by Mr. Traficant

  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will report the modification to the amendment 
offered by the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Traficant].
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Amendment No. 3 printed in House Report 105-354, as 
     modified by Mr. Traficant:
       Page 6, insert after line 7 the following:
       ``(II) Nuclear nonproliferation.''
       Page 7, line 14, strike ``reprocessing'' and insert 
     ``reprocessing in the United States''.
       Page 11, line 13 insert after ``fuel'' the following: ``, 
     other than foreign spent nuclear fuel as defined in section 
     131f(4) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 
     2160(f)(4),''.

  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the modification to the amendment 
offered by the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Traficant]?
  There was no objection.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 283, the gentleman from 
Ohio [Mr. Traficant] and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Traficant].
  Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Chairman, the amendment is very simple. It says 
that we will not become the dumping ground for any foreign waste unless 
it was covered by an international agreement or military procurement 
understandings.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Colorado [Mr. Dan 
Schaefer], chairman of the committee.
  Mr. DAN SCHAEFER of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, the Traficant amendment 
certainly prohibits the disposal of spent nuclear fuel from other 
plants in foreign countries, and I think the gentleman is right on. We 
worked out, I think, all the problems on this and we appreciate the 
fact that we have found a resolution to this. We have no problems on 
this side, and we will accept the amendment.
  Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman's concerns 
and advice, and I yield to the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Hall], the 
ranking member.
  Mr. HALL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, we certainly appreciate the 
modification and think it is a good amendment.
  Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment, as modified, offered 
by the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Traficant].
  The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. UPTON. Mr. Chairman, I object to the vote on the ground that a 
quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not 
present.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 283, further proceedings 
on the amendment, as modified, offered by the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. 
Traficant] will be postponed.


        Sequential Votes Postponed in the Committee of the Whole

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 283, proceedings will now 
resume on those amendments on which further proceedings were postponed 
in the following order: Amendment No. 2 offered by the gentleman from 
Michigan [Mr. Kildee]; the amendment No. 3, as modified, offered by the 
gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Traficant].
  The Chair will reduce to 5 minutes the time for any electronic vote 
after the first vote in this series.


                 Amendment No. 2 Offered by Mr. Kildee

  The CHAIRMAN. The pending business is the demand for a recorded vote 
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Kildee], 
on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the ayes 
prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 408, 
noes 10, not voting 14, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 543]

                               AYES--408

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Andrews
     Archer
     Armey
     Bachus
     Baesler
     Baker
     Baldacci
     Ballenger
     Barcia
     Barrett (NE)
     Barrett (WI)
     Bartlett
     Bass
     Bateman
     Becerra
     Bentsen
     Bereuter
     Berry
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop
     Blagojevich
     Bliley
     Blumenauer
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bonior
     Bono
     Borski
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Brady
     Brown (CA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Bryant
     Bunning
     Burr
     Burton
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Canady
     Cannon
     Cardin
     Carson
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Chenoweth
     Christensen
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Coburn
     Collins
     Combest
     Condit
     Conyers
     Cook
     Cooksey
     Costello
     Cox
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Crane
     Crapo
     Cummings
     Cunningham
     Danner
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (VA)
     Deal
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     DeLay
     Dellums
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dickey
     Dicks
     Dixon
     Doggett
     Dooley
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     Engel
     English
     Ensign
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Everett
     Farr
     Fattah
     Fawell
     Fazio
     Filner
     Flake
     Foglietta
     Foley
     Forbes
     Ford
     Fowler
     Fox
     Frank (MA)
     Franks (NJ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Frost
     Furse
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gejdenson
     Gekas
     Gephardt
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Goodling
     Gordon
     Goss
     Graham
     Granger
     Green
     Greenwood
     Gutierrez
     Gutknecht
     Hall (OH)
     Hall (TX)
     Hamilton
     Hansen
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Hefner
     Herger
     Hill
     Hilleary
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Hooley
     Horn
     Houghton
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hutchinson
     Hyde
     Inglis
     Istook
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Jenkins
     John
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (WI)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kasich
     Kennedy (MA)
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kennelly
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kim
     Kind (WI)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kleczka
     Klink
     Klug
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     Kucinich
     LaFalce
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Lantos
     Largent
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lazio
     Leach
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     Livingston
     LoBiondo
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Luther
     Maloney (CT)
     Maloney (NY)
     Manton
     Manzullo
     Markey
     Martinez
     Mascara
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McDade
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHale
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek
     Menendez
     Metcalf
     Mica
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller (CA)
     Miller (FL)
     Minge
     Mink
     Moakley
     Mollohan
     Moran (KS)
     Murtha
     Myrick
     Nadler
     Neal
     Nethercutt
     Neumann
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Owens
     Oxley
     Packard
     Pallone
     Pappas
     Parker
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Paul
     Paxon
     Payne
     Pease
     Pelosi
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pickett
     Pitts
     Pombo
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Portman
     Poshard
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Redmond
     Regula
     Reyes
     Riggs
     Riley
     Rivers
     Rodriguez
     Roemer
     Rogan
     Rogers
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Rothman
     Roukema
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce
     Rush
     Ryun
     Sabo
     Salmon
     Sanchez
     Sanders
     Sandlin
     Sawyer
     Saxton
     Scarborough
     Schaefer, Dan
     Schaffer, Bob
     Schumer
     Scott
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Sisisky
     Skaggs
     Skeen
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (OR)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith, Adam
     Smith, Linda
     Snowbarger
     Snyder
     Souder
     Spence
     Spratt
     Stabenow
     Stark
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Strickland
     Stupak
     Sununu
     Talent
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Thomas
     Thompson
     Thornberry
     Thune
     Thurman
     Tiahrt
     Tierney
     Torres
     Towns
     Traficant
     Turner
     Upton
     Velazquez
     Vento
     Visclosky
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Waters
     Watkins
     Watt (NC)
     Watts (OK)
     Waxman
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Weygand
     White
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wise
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wynn
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                                NOES--10

     Barr
     Barton
     Coble
     Ewing
     Hastert
     Hefley
     Hostettler
     Sanford
     Solomon
     Stump

                             NOT VOTING--14

     Berman
     Cubin
     Dingell
     Gonzalez
     Kelly
     Lewis (CA)
     McIntosh
     Moran (VA)
     Morella
     Schiff
     Stokes
     Tauzin
     Weldon (FL)
     Yates

[[Page H9693]]



                              {time}  1855

  Messrs. COBLE, EWING, and HEFLEY changed their vote from ``aye'' to 
``no.''
  Mr. SHADEGG changed his vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the amendment was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


                      Announcement by the Chairman

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 283, the Chair announces 
that he will reduce to a minimum of 5 minutes the period of time within 
which a vote by electronic device will be taken on the second amendment 
on which the Chair has postponed further proceedings.


         Amendment No. 3, as Modified, Offered by Mr. Traficant

  The CHAIRMAN. The pending business is the demand for a recorded vote 
on the amendment, as modified, offered by the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. 
Traficant] on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the 
ayes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will designate the amendment, as modified.
  The Clerk designated the amendment, as modified.


                             Recorded Vote

  The CHAIRMAN. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The CHAIRMAN. This is a 5-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 407, 
noes 11, not voting 14, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 544]

                               AYES--407

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Andrews
     Archer
     Armey
     Bachus
     Baesler
     Baker
     Baldacci
     Ballenger
     Barcia
     Barr
     Barrett (NE)
     Barrett (WI)
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bass
     Bateman
     Becerra
     Bentsen
     Bereuter
     Berry
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop
     Blagojevich
     Bliley
     Blumenauer
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bonior
     Bono
     Borski
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Brady
     Brown (CA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Bryant
     Bunning
     Burr
     Burton
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Canady
     Cardin
     Carson
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Chenoweth
     Christensen
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clement
     Coble
     Coburn
     Collins
     Combest
     Condit
     Conyers
     Cook
     Cooksey
     Costello
     Cox
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Crane
     Crapo
     Cummings
     Cunningham
     Danner
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (VA)
     Deal
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     DeLay
     Dellums
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dickey
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Dixon
     Doggett
     Dooley
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     Engel
     English
     Ensign
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Everett
     Ewing
     Farr
     Fattah
     Fawell
     Fazio
     Filner
     Flake
     Foglietta
     Foley
     Forbes
     Ford
     Fowler
     Fox
     Franks (NJ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Frost
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gejdenson
     Gekas
     Gephardt
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Goodling
     Gordon
     Goss
     Graham
     Granger
     Green
     Greenwood
     Gutierrez
     Gutknecht
     Hall (OH)
     Hall (TX)
     Hamilton
     Hansen
     Harman
     Hastert
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Hefner
     Herger
     Hill
     Hilleary
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Hooley
     Horn
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hutchinson
     Hyde
     Inglis
     Istook
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Jenkins
     John
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (WI)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Kaptur
     Kasich
     Kennedy (MA)
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kennelly
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kim
     Kind (WI)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kleczka
     Klug
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     Kucinich
     LaFalce
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Lantos
     Largent
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Lazio
     Leach
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     Livingston
     LoBiondo
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Luther
     Maloney (CT)
     Maloney (NY)
     Manton
     Markey
     Mascara
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McDade
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHale
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek
     Menendez
     Metcalf
     Mica
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller (CA)
     Miller (FL)
     Minge
     Mink
     Moakley
     Mollohan
     Moran (KS)
     Moran (VA)
     Murtha
     Myrick
     Nadler
     Neal
     Nethercutt
     Neumann
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Owens
     Oxley
     Packard
     Pallone
     Pappas
     Parker
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Paul
     Paxon
     Payne
     Pease
     Pelosi
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pickett
     Pitts
     Pombo
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Portman
     Poshard
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Redmond
     Regula
     Reyes
     Riggs
     Riley
     Rivers
     Rodriguez
     Roemer
     Rogan
     Rogers
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Rothman
     Roukema
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce
     Rush
     Ryun
     Sabo
     Salmon
     Sanchez
     Sanders
     Sandlin
     Sanford
     Sawyer
     Saxton
     Scarborough
     Schaefer, Dan
     Schaffer, Bob
     Schumer
     Scott
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Sisisky
     Skaggs
     Skeen
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (OR)
     Smith, Adam
     Smith, Linda
     Snowbarger
     Snyder
     Solomon
     Souder
     Spence
     Spratt
     Stabenow
     Stark
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Strickland
     Stump
     Stupak
     Sununu
     Talent
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Thomas
     Thompson
     Thornberry
     Thune
     Thurman
     Tiahrt
     Tierney
     Torres
     Towns
     Traficant
     Turner
     Upton
     Velazquez
     Vento
     Visclosky
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Waters
     Watkins
     Watt (NC)
     Watts (OK)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Weygand
     White
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wise
     Wolf
     Wynn
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                                NOES--11

     Cannon
     Clyburn
     Frank (MA)
     Furse
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kanjorski
     Klink
     Lofgren
     Martinez
     Waxman
     Woolsey

                             NOT VOTING--14

     Berman
     Campbell
     Cubin
     Gilman
     Gonzalez
     Kelly
     Manzullo
     McIntosh
     Morella
     Schiff
     Smith (TX)
     Stokes
     Weldon (FL)
     Yates

                              {time}  1906

  Mr. BERRY and Mr. MILLER of California changed their vote from ``no'' 
to ``aye.''
  So the amendment, as modified, was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. LaHood). It is now in order to consider 
amendment No. 4 printed in House Report 105-354.


                 Amendment No. 4 Offered by Mr. Ensign

  Mr. ENSIGN. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 4 offered by Mr. Ensign:
       Page 15, insert after line 8 the following:
       ``(e) Risk Assessment and Cost Benefit.--The Secretary 
     shall not take any action under this Act unless the Secretary 
     has with respect to such action conducted a risk assessment 
     which is scientifically objective, unbased, and inclusive of 
     all relevant data and relies, to the extent available and 
     practicable, on scientific findings and which is grounded in 
     cost-benefit principles.

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 283, the 
gentleman from Nevada [Mr. Ensign] and a Member opposed each will 
control 10 minutes.
  Mr. DAN SCHAEFER of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to 
the amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The gentleman from Colorado [Mr. Dan 
Schaefer] will control the 10 minutes in opposition.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Nevada [Mr. Ensign].
  Mr. ENSIGN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 3 minutes.
  Mr. Chairman, the amendment that I have offered today is consistent 
with the language in the Contract With America that Republicans brought 
to this floor a little over 2 years ago. It is based on a concept that 
before the Government does something, we should do studies that say 
what are the risks, what are the costs versus the benefits? Very 
simple.
  What this, H.R. 1270, does is, H.R. 1270 presumes that this Congress 
knows everything that there is to know about nuclear waste. It presumes 
that this Congress has all the experts that it needs right here, that 
all of the studies have already been done.
  And the nuclear energy industry actually says that all of the studies 
say that the Yucca Mountain is suitable and all these things, when even 
the Government's own scientists have said

[[Page H9694]]

the Yucca Mountain has not been deemed suitable or acceptable. That is 
why the President has threatened to veto this bill. What we are saying 
with this amendment is simply that the Secretary of Energy shall 
conduct these studies prior to moving the bill forward.
  The GAO has estimated the Yucca Mountain project to cost nearly $33 
billion. Before dumping endless amounts of taxpayer dollars into the 
project, let us take a step back and make sure that this is the best 
use of the American people's money. If this project is as good as my 
colleagues say, obvious cost-benefit analysis will show that it is.
  Mr. Chairman, we are asking that the Republicans especially who 
support this bill, that they be consistent in their arguments. They 
have argued in the past for cost benefit analysis. And why is that? 
They have argued in the past because it is a good thing to do. Before 
the Government goes and does something, we should prove that there are 
benefits. What are the risks? What are the benefits?
  Let us just stick to the principle in the Contract With America that 
we all came and we all signed in 1994 on the steps of the Capitol.
  Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. ENSIGN. I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts.
  Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  You know, this is one item in the Contract With America that passed 
the House of Representatives overwhelmingly. Almost everyone agreed 
that there should be some risk assessment when the Federal Government 
is getting into these major Federal projects. We were guaranteed that 
there would not be any danger, because there was not going to be any 
delay, because that was not the objective, and now we get the perfect 
example of where it should apply. I urge adoption of the amendment.
  Mr. ENSIGN. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. DAN SCHAEFER of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he 
may consume to the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Upton], the author of 
the bill.
  Mr. UPTON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 3 minutes.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. 
Markey] for a simple, quick answer. How did the gentleman vote on that 
provision of the Contract With America? I was looking for a ``yes'' or 
``no,'' not a card game.
  Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will yield, even a blind 
squirrel finds an acorn once in a while. I now realize the correctness 
of the provision.
  Mr. UPTON. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, this Ensign amendment 
would require that the Department of Energy undertake a risk assessment 
before it takes any action under the act. The amendment would stop the 
nuclear waste program in its tracks and would prevent the Department of 
Energy from taking any action for years. It would guarantee that all 
nuclear waste in this country stays right where it is, spread out all 
over the country, rather than going to one safe site.
  I would say, too, that the risk assessments required by the Ensign 
amendment are in addition to the requirements that the Department of 
Energy prepare EIS, environmental impact statements, before major 
actions.

                              {time}  1915

  Under this amendment the DOE would have to perform a risk assessment 
and prepare an environmental impact statement. There is no need for the 
risk assessment required by this amendment. The Department of Energy 
nuclear waste program is probably the most closely scrutinized Federal 
program created. There is layer after layer of oversight. The State of 
Nevada oversees the program, as does the Nuclear Waste Technical Review 
Board and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. All of this oversight is 
funded by consumers, and this would be viewed as a killer amendment. I 
would urge my colleagues to vote ``no.''
  Mr. ENSIGN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 30 seconds to say that, 
first of all, new science is being discovered all the time in Nevada. 
Plutonium just recently was discovered by the National Academy of 
Sciences to have migrated almost one mile. The significance of that 
discovery is that they did not expect that. Because all of the 
proponents of the bill have been saying, first of all, Yucca Mountain 
is safe, there is no water to worry about, do not worry about the 
groundwater table or any of that. But science is constantly finding new 
things. That is why we need this cost-benefit and risk analysis.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Nevada [Mr. 
Gibbons], who sits on the Committee on Resources, who rejected this 
bill, by the way.
  Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time.
  First, I find it odd that people would object to a cost-benefit 
analysis. It is a tool that is commonly used in private businesses 
throughout America. It is widely accepted in academia as a tool by 
which we make sound judgment for sound policy about what we are doing 
in this Nation.
  If Members want to talk about risk, let us look at the environmental 
hazards that are posed by transportation of nuclear waste around 
America. Let us look at the idea that this bill tells us that we can 
ignore all those environmental laws that we have talked about earlier. 
Let us look at the fact that we have got a train wreck right here. This 
is a risk, Mr. Chairman. This is a risk for America. We need to look at 
these risks, and we need to analyze what is going to be the benefit or 
what is going to be the cost.
  Once again, take a look at where all of these risks are going to take 
place. That is 43 States in this country. Forty-three States ought to 
have an opportunity to evaluate the risks of this bill and to analyze 
the costs that are going to be involved to these States with the 
transportation of this material through those States, through those 
communities, next to those schools with kids playing out there if an 
accident occurs.
  This is a critically important amendment for this bill. It is an 
amendment which is going to allow States or require the Secretary of 
Energy to perform those analyses, to evaluate those risks, and to take 
appropriate actions with that information.
  Mr. DAN SCHAEFER of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the 
gentleman from Texas [Mr. Hall].
  Mr. HALL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I of course believe that tools are 
good if they are used properly and if they are not used for 
obstruction, and that is really what this amendment is. This amendment 
would just simply prohibit the Secretary from taking any action. I 
think it creates an absolute obligation for the Secretary to conduct 
the proposed analysis subject to anything that comes under H.R. 1270, 
any type action. It makes no allowance for the Secretary to conduct a 
risk assessment during other steps of the process.
  This proposal lacks even an adequate definition of risk assessment. 
It provides no direction as to the consequences of the assessment. We 
say that the EIS already requires this and it is going to be done, it 
will be done, it is directed that it be done.
  It throws up a number of procedural hurdles that really renders 
impossible the storage as this act calls for. It is a little like back 
in the 1960's, the States of New Mexico and Arizona when they were 
mining copper, when the enviros, well meaning though they were, set up 
a rule of law that you had to replace the terrain as it was in its 
natural state. Of course, no court upheld that, but it gave rise to an 
injunction that put off and put off and put off and prevented and that 
caused escalation of the price.
  This is a bad amendment. It is just meant to cripple. I urge that 
Members vote it down.
  Mr. ENSIGN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, every major environmental group in this country opposes 
H.R. 1270: The Sierra Club, the National Resource Defense Council, 
Friends of the Earth, U.S. PIRG, Public Citizen, Citizen Alert, League 
of Conservation Voters, Greenpeace, Nuclear Information and Resources 
Service, Military Production Network.
  By the way, those are the people that live around these facilities 
that we are talking about that have the nuclear

[[Page H9695]]

waste, and those people are standing up and saying that it is our moral 
responsibility to come up with solutions, and the solution is not an 
interim storage facility out in Nevada. The reason, and one of the 
reasons that these environmental groups oppose this bill is because we 
have not determined what the risks are. We have not determined what the 
costs are going to be. As the GAO does new studies and finds out that, 
first of all, Yucca Mountain is much more expensive than anybody ever 
thought before, and it seems like every year they come out with new 
studies that say Yucca Mountain is much more expensive, the same thing 
with interim storage. If you actually do the cost-benefit analysis and 
risk assessment, when you start taking into account, there was a case 
in New Mexico where radioactive waste was transported by a person's 
property, that person was awarded by the court and upheld by the State 
Supreme Court of New Mexico that that was considered a takings and that 
person had to be compensated for the loss because of the perceived loss 
of valuation of that person's land.
  As we are transporting nuclear waste, the most deadly substance known 
to mankind, across 43 States, across all kinds of people's property, 
let us say that you have a very nice, beautiful piece of property that 
is a resort. Now you have got nuclear waste being transported by it. It 
could very well be argued, especially viewing what happened in Germany 
where they had 30,000 police officers being required to transport 
nuclear waste, just 6 casks, by the way, of nuclear waste, just 6,300 
miles to the north, 173 people were injured.
  People are trying to say that private property is not going to be 
devalued by nuclear waste being transported by it? And especially this 
bill says that you have to give local notice. We know that as you give 
local notice, that people are going to come out in this country and 
protest the shipment of this waste. Land is going to be devalued. So we 
do not even know how much this is actually going to cost because of 
that.
  By the way, the taxpayer ends up holding the bill on this. It is 
under our Constitution, if the Federal Government based on the Fifth 
Amendment does devalue somebody's land, it is going to be the taxpayer 
that ends up holding the bill on this.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. DAN SCHAEFER of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from Idaho [Mr. Crapo].
  Mr. CRAPO. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to speak in 
opposition to the amendment. A lot has been said about this being an 
amendment to add risk assessment into the legislation, but properly 
understood, it really should be called the additional regulatory 
bureaucracy and delay amendment. It is very clear from the debate we 
have had here already that the action required by this amendment would 
be to force the Department of Energy to undertake a risk assessment 
before it takes any action under this act. And since the amendment does 
not define which DOE actions require a risk assessment, each action 
would probably end up requiring such a risk assessment.
  We have heard discussion about whether there is unreasonable risk 
involved in this entire process. I think that the proponents of the 
amendment and the opponents of the bill would have Members believe that 
we are simply transporting nuclear fuel around the country without any 
evaluation of risk standards or that we are evaluating the sites 
without consideration of environmental harm or risk or other 
considerations. The fact of the matter is just the opposite.
  As I said in my earlier debate, the regulatory regime for radioactive 
material transport has been very heavily evaluated. It focuses on risk 
extremely aggressively and has an absolutely perfect safety record. I 
went through that information previously but over the last 30 years, we 
have had 2500 shipments of spent nuclear fuel in the United States; 
since 1957, 667 shipments of Navy fuel, over a million miles of travel, 
and in the last 22 years the Department of Energy under these programs 
has transported nuclear weapons and special nuclear materials nearly 
100 million miles. All of this has occurred without a radioactive 
release. Those who would have Members believe that risk is not 
carefully evaluated, monitored and regulated in our current nuclear 
regime in the United States are misstating the reality. The fact is 
that we will have adequate protections both environmentally and in 
terms of the risk, and there is no reason why we should not proceed 
with the legislation that is now before us to solve this critical issue 
to this country.
  Mr. DAN SCHAEFER of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Hastert].
  Mr. HASTERT. Mr. Chairman, the issue here is what is expedient, how 
do we get the job done, and how do we make sure it is done safely? 
Before we ever start to cross the threshold on this whole issue, there 
has to be an environmental impact study. That is in place. It is being 
done. What this amendment asks us to do is to every time that there is 
any action at all dealing with this, there has to be an impact study 
done, that there has to be a financial research study done.
  If we want to give $2500 to the Mayville, Ohio fire department to 
beef up their education, there has to be a financial impact study done. 
If we want to help railroad employees do safety inspections and we 
decide to do that, that is an action. And so whenever one of these 
actions happens, you stop the whole process until the financial impact 
statement has been done, which might be a whole period of time, and you 
take instead of the whole gestalt, the whole issue, you divide it into 
millions of little pieces and you stop that action every time you turn 
around.
  I understand that the proponents of this amendment would like to slow 
the action down. They would like to stop this from happening. They 
would like us to stop solving the problem of safe storage for nuclear 
waste in this country. But this amendment that brings this thing down 
to a death of a thousand cuts just will not work.
  We need to pass this legislation, we need to do it safely, we need to 
do the environmental impact statements, we need to do the overall 
financial statements, but we cannot stop the process a million and 10 
times that this amendment asks for. We need to reject this amendment 
and move forward.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore [Mr. LaHood]. The Chair would advise that 
the gentleman from Colorado [Mr. Dan Schaefer] has 2 minutes remaining 
and the gentleman from Nevada [Mr. Ensign] has 1\1/2\ minutes 
remaining.
  Mr. DAN SCHAEFER of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire, who has 
the right to close on this amendment?
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The gentleman from Colorado has the right 
to close.
  Mr. ENSIGN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from 
Ohio [Mr. Kucinich].
  Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Chairman, I support the amendment to have a cost-
benefit analysis. We are embarking on one of the most dramatic changes 
in nuclear policy that has ever been conducted in the history of the 
world. There are going to be 15,000 shipments by rail and highway of 
radioactive waste through 43 States and the District of Columbia. 
Hundreds of cities are involved across America's heartland. If nuclear 
waste is privatized as some are proposing, far more of the waste 
traffic would go by truck. It is estimated there would be 79,300 truck 
shipments, 12,600 rail shipments. We ought to evaluate this, we ought 
to look at the cost-benefit as it affects every community in this 
country.
  Mr. ENSIGN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. 
The government's own scientists at the Nuclear Waste Technical Review 
Board said that there is no hurry, that we do not need to do this now. 
There is time to do a cost-benefit analysis.

                              {time}  1930

  We are not running out of space, there is plenty of space. All you 
have to do is build cement pads at the nuclear facilities with dry cast 
storage. The NRC has said that is good for 100 years.
  It has been mentioned we have not had an accident yet. Mr. Chairman, 
I am from Las Vegas. We go on odds in Las Vegas. With 100 miles or 
whatever they said that have been traveled so far with no accidents, 
the odds are, one is coming. All you have to do is see how many train 
wrecks we have had in the last several years. Imagine what one of

[[Page H9696]]

those train wrecks would do if the people that have done some of the 
early studies were wrong on these canisters.
  We are not talking about a small risk here; we are talking about 
major environmental safety hazards. I think a reasonable cost-benefit 
risk assessment is very justified. I would urge a yes vote on this 
amendment.
  Mr. DAN SCHAEFER of Colorado. Mr. Chairman. I yield two minutes to 
the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Upton], the author of the bill.
  Mr. UPTON. Mr. Chairman, I just want to remind my colleagues what 
this bill does is it gets it out of these temporary storage places that 
are along the Great Lakes and the Chesapeake Bay and rivers and streams 
and into one safe place. We have had a perfect record of transporting 
this stuff. It was not mined in the dunes of Lake Michigan. It had to 
get there somehow. It got there in a perfect way, without a single 
incident of exposure or release of radioactive material. We think that 
that can continue as we get it out of the dunes and off of the shores 
of these environmentally sensitive areas to one safe place.
  I just want to close on this amendment and urge my colleagues to vote 
no. The result of this amendment is pointless delay. I want to give one 
example.
  The amendment would require the Department of Energy to perform a 
risk assessment before it provided funds to emergency response teams 
for public safety training. It is redundant. We do not need a risk 
assessment for items like that, and this amendment, if it was adopted, 
would require that every action would require a risk assessment.
  It is too much. We do not need it. The bill is designed to be safe in 
the transportation of this material. It will be so.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. LaHood). The question is on the 
amendment offered by the gentleman from Nevada [Mr. Ensign].
  The question was taken, and the Chairman pro tempore announced that 
the noes appeared to have it


                             Recorded Vote

  Mr. ENSIGN. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 283, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Nevada will 
be postponed.
  It is now in order to consider an Amendment No. 5 printed in House 
Report 105-354.


                 Amendment No. 5 Offered by Mr. Gibbons

  Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 5 offered by Mr. Gibbons:
       Page 19, insert after line 16 the following:
       ``(e) Emergency Response Team.--The Secretary may not plan 
     for the transportation of spent nuclear fuel or high-level 
     radioactive waste through any State unless the Governor of 
     such State can certify that an adequate emergency response 
     team exists in such State to appropriately manage any nuclear 
     accident that may occur in such transportation.

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 283, the 
gentleman from Nevada [Mr. Gibbons] and a Member opposed will each 
control 10 minutes.
  Mr. DAN SCHAEFER of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim the time 
in opposition to the amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The gentleman from Colorado, Mr. Dan 
Schaefer will be recognized for 10 minutes in opposition to the 
amendment offered by the gentleman from Nevada, Mr. Gibbons.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Nevada [Mr. Gibbons].
  Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, my amendment simply states that the Governor of each 
State with nuclear waste routes shall certify that emergency response 
teams exist and can properly manage any nuclear accident before 
transportation plans can be implemented by the Secretary.
  Governors of States faced with the mandate of accepting highly 
dangerous irradiated nuclear waste in their State should be given the 
legal authority to ensure that an emergency response team is adequately 
prepared to protect the health and safety of those citizens.
  A Department of Energy report estimated that a radioactive accident 
could take up to 460 days and cost up to $19.4 billion to clean up. No 
State can afford the economic consequences of a disaster of this 
magnitude. Realizing that, these costs cannot include the intangible 
loss of life that could also occur.
  Without the passage of my amendment, Mr. Chairman, Governors' voices 
will be stifled in the oversight of transportation of nuclear waste.
  Many people feel as I do, that this is an infringement on States' 
rights. Every State should have the legal authority to make sure their 
citizenry is safe, and it is the job of that Governor to ensure that 
all possible remedies are used to ensure that.
  If a nuclear accident did occur, those first to respond to the 
disaster must be adequately trained. Local firefighters and police 
officers will be the first to respond to nuclear truck or train 
accidents.
  The International Association of Fire Fighters stated in a letter 
that the International Association of Fire Fighters represents more 
than 225,000 emergency responders, who are the Nation's first line of 
defense during any hazardous material incident, including the 
transportation of highly radioactive material. Without adequate 
training, it is easy to see why they are opposing this bill.
  It is the responsibility of the Governor of these States to uphold 
their States' constitution and protect the health and safety of its 
citizenry. How can any Governor expect to protect their States, their 
constituents, as well as the firefighters and the policemen, without 
the legal authority granted under this amendment?
  H.R. 1270, the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1997, would mandate that 
nuclear waste be shipped through 43 States, regardless if consent is 
granted by these States or not.
  It is a simple issue of States' rights and public safety. If this 
body wishes to pass H.R. 1270, then I feel it is our obligation, an 
obligation that most of us, if not all on this side of the aisle, have 
stated for a long time, an obligation to return power to the States and 
allow them every opportunity to protect themselves from the deadly 
mandate under H.R. 1270 and this Congress.
  Every State should be prepared to handle a nuclear accident before it 
happens, not after the deadly contents spill upon the ground. I would 
ask Members to trust their Governors, their State, and especially their 
constituency, to support State rights and support this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. DAN SCHAEFER of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Upton], the author of the bill.
  Mr. UPTON. Mr. Chairman, I would note that this Gibbons amendment 
would bar the Department of Energy from planning for the transportation 
of spent nuclear fuel or high level radioactive waste through any State 
unless the Governor of the State certified that an adequate emergency 
response team existed in the State.
  This, in a sense, would give every Governor a veto over nuclear waste 
transportation through their State. All that the Governor would have to 
do is to refuse to certify that their State has adequate emergency 
response teams, and that is it. That is it. A killer amendment.
  The temptation would be irresistible to perhaps the Governor of 
Nevada, because no matter how adequately trained their emergency 
response team might be, the Governor would just say, no.
  I would ask my colleagues to vote no on this amendment. I would note 
that in the deliberations in the markup before our full committee, the 
gentlewoman from Missouri, Karen McCarthy, a respected Member, wanted 
to offer an amendment. We worked with her, it was included, in fact, in 
the manager's amendment, and it directed that the Secretary of 
Transportation would, in fact, establish procedures for the selection 
of preferred railroad routes for transportation of nuclear waste to an 
interim storage facility and repository, and DOT would be directed to 
consult with State emergency response officials in the development of 
these preferred routes.
  That means that there is local input. The Governors and the States 
are

[[Page H9697]]

going to be involved. Thanks to the input of the gentlewoman from 
Missouri [Ms. McCarthy], that amendment has been adopted as part of 
this bill, and, therefore, there is no need for the Gibbons amendment.
  Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 30 seconds to respond to 
this.
  Mr. Chairman, first of all, let me State we are not just simply 
picking this stuff up and placing it down here without any 
transportation occurring throughout the course of 43 different States. 
It is not irresponsible for Governors to want to work and present and 
protect the safety of their citizens. I think it is irresponsible of a 
Governor who does not do that.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Nevada [Mr. 
Ensign].
  Mr. ENSIGN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time.
  Mr. Chairman, this is clearly about States' rights and the tenth 
amendment. This is not a national security issue, as some people have 
said it was. We have had nuclear waste at these facilities for decades. 
If it was a national security issue now, it would certainly have been a 
national security issue then, and it will be in the future then, 
because we are not taking all the nuclear waste from these facilities.
  It will continue to exist in the district of the gentleman from 
Michigan [Mr. Upton], in the district of the gentleman from Illinois 
[Mr. Hastert], and on and on. Nuclear waste will still be in their 
districts. They will not have as much of it, but they will have it.
  What the amendment of the gentleman from Nevada [Mr. Gibbons] does is 
says that the Governor, who is the closest representative to a State 
and is aware of what is happening in their State and knows best, would 
say that these emergency response teams have to exist and be properly 
trained before nuclear waste can come through their State.
  What representative here in Congress would not want their Governor to 
have to say, yes, the emergency response teams are in place? Now you 
can bring the waste through our State. But until that Governor says 
that these emergency response teams are in place and are trained 
properly, no nuclear waste can come through my State if I was a 
Governor. I would certainly want that right if I was a Governor, and I 
know virtually every Governor across this country would want that right 
as well.
  Mr. DAN SCHAEFER of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the 
gentleman from Texas [Mr. Hall].
  Mr. HALL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding 
me time.
  Mr. Chairman, this amendment would prevent the Secretary from taking 
any, any, significant action to prepare for the transportation of this 
nuclear fuel through the State, if the Governor, any Governor of the 
State, refused to certify that ``an adequate emergency response team 
exists.''
  In the first place, the amendment is not necessary for safe 
transportation, because the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act, as 
the gentleman from Ohio pointed out, and the Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission regulations, apply to all shipments of spent fuel and high 
level radioactive waste. That, and the consulting provisions of H.R. 
1270, provide the Governor of each State with an opportunity to 
designate.
  A Governor can designate the alternate transportation routes, but 
they do not give the Governor the authority to prohibit the interstate 
transportation of materials through a State as this amendment would do. 
This amendment would kill that.
  Now, in reality, the amendment would bring the entire nuclear program 
to a halt by giving any Governor the right to veto transportation 
through their State. I think their Governor, I think it is Governor 
Miller, has indicated he would do almost anything to prevent this from 
happening. I do not blame him. I would take the same position he has 
taken. But this gives him the same position as any Governor. He is a 
Governor, and any Governor can do it. This gives them a veto.
  First, I would point out that nuclear energy has been around a long, 
long time. The first plant came on in Shippingport, Pennsylvania, back 
in 1961. From that day to this date shipping is obvious. You have to 
ship it. It has to go somewhere. It has to be transported.
  Then if that happens, we have to look and see what the safety record 
has been to date. During the last 30 years, commercial nuclear energy 
has built an impeccable safety record of more than 2,900 shipments of 
used fuel across the U.S. highways and railroads, and in that time, no 
injuries, no fatalities, no environmental damage has occurred, because 
of the radioactivity of the cargo. In fact, there has been no release 
of radioactivity during these shipments; 2,900 shipments, shipments of 
commercial used nuclear fuel and research reactor fuel, have traveled 
more than 1.6 million miles across the country's highways and rail 
lines since 1964, according to the data from the NRC, the State of 
Nevada, and from the industry.
  This is not needed, and I certainly urge that it be defeated.
  Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to my colleague and 
friend, the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Kucinich].
  Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Gibbons 
amendment. The commerce clause of the Constitution of the United States 
is not a vehicle to endanger the rights of States, but to facilitate 
the rights of the Union respecting the States.
  There is no respect for the States when we decide to ship millions of 
tons of nuclear waste through 43 States without giving the States a 
strong voice in the process.
  The Governors are ultimately responsible for the safety of 
populations within the State. Just today the Subcommittee on Government 
Operations urged that the protection of gulf war veterans, the 
responsibility for that protection, be taken away from two major 
Federal departments because those departments were lax in protecting 
the gulf war veterans who experienced the gulf war syndrome.

                              {time}  1945

  States ought to take pause when the safety and protection of their 
population rests solely on one Federal department which must be 
responsive first to the nuclear industries, and then perhaps to the 
civilian population.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge a vote for the Gibbons amendment.
  Mr. DAN SCHAEFER of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the 
gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Hastert].
  Mr. HASTERT. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the 
time.
  Mr. Chairman, one of the things that when we look at amendments we 
have to say, what is the reason this amendment exists? Why do people 
want to put it in?
  It is very simple. If one wanted to stop nuclear waste and high-level 
military waste from moving across this country, as it has for scores of 
millions of miles, for decades across this country, safely, then one 
would say we would give the ability for an individual in a State, in 
this case the Governor, just to veto this and say ``You cannot move 
this through my State anymore.''
  Especially if one wanted to stop nuclear waste from going to a 
permanent repository or a temporary repository, one would give the 
Governor the ability, the Governor of that State or of other States, to 
say, ``I am going to veto this,'' regardless of the Secretary of the 
Department of Transportation, the plans they have for safe 
transportation, and the Department of Energy, despite the plans they 
have for safe storage of high-level nuclear waste, regardless of what 
those plans are.
  But one of the things that I think the author of this amendment 
forgot to look at is the constitutionality. One of the things that we 
have guaranteed in the Constitution of the United States is the ability 
for interstate trade, and the movement and transportation of trade 
across the borders of States not to be inhibited by any one State or 
any one person in a State.
  This amendment, to my view, is clearly unconstitutional. What it 
really does is give the veto power to States and individuals in States 
to stop interstate commerce, something that is guaranteed in the 
Constitution.
  But beyond that, it also is a way just to stop the process, not to 
stop the process just for the storage of nuclear waste that this bill 
tries to move us to, a safe storage of nuclear waste, but of all the 
movement of military waste, of domestic waste that we have in this 
country today.

[[Page H9698]]

  That means we cannot move it anywhere, we cannot move it off the 
ships, we cannot move it off of any repositories we have, we cannot 
move it to safer places. So the only alternative left is to have this 
nuclear waste stack up in the open, out in the elements, near some of 
our most important natural resources, the Great Lakes, for instance, in 
Michigan and other places, and to be exposed to the elements. That is 
not the best and highest purpose that we have to move forward on to 
store high-level nuclear waste. It was never the intent.
  We have to remember that the Federal Government had made a contract 
with the American people in 1982 that they would take this nuclear 
waste and store it in a safe way, and when we say store it, we also 
have to assume it is transportation in a safe manner. We need to move 
forward and reject this amendment.
  Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to my colleague, the 
gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Markey].
  Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the 
time.
  Mr. Chairman, I am a very strong believer in Thomas Jefferson's 
belief in States' rights, the rights of States to assert their 
legitimate authority over that which takes place in their domain.
  I hate it when I see Members of Congress out trampling on an 
individual State's ability to act, on a Governor's right to protect a 
State's own citizens, especially when we are told that we do not even 
have to make the truck drivers liable because it is so safe. They 
cannot even have an accident if they tried. It is in containers that 
cannot break, so we are told. Well, as a result, we are going to 
suspend the Governor's right to be able to ask a few questions, but it 
is over a subject that they are telling us is absolutely harmless.
  Again, I think if Thomas Jefferson were here, he would be very 
suspicious of a central government telling the State to trust us, we 
are sending through cannisters of highly dangerous materials, but they 
do not have to worry because the central government has taken care of 
them. That is where I think Alexander Hamilton was always questioned by 
Thomas Jefferson. I hate to see it when Members are out usurping the 
legitimate right of Governors on this kind of a matter.
  Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the Members for allowing me to present 
my argument on this matter.
  Mr. Chairman, I notice my colleague, the gentleman from Illinois, 
talks about the Commerce Clause. The Commerce Clause regulates commerce 
among the several States, but it is the 10th Amendment which reserves 
those powers not expressly delegated to the Federal Government to the 
States themselves and to the people.
  It is the health and safety of the people of those States through 
which this transport of hazardous nuclear waste material is going to 
take place. Those Governors have the right, notwithstanding any other 
arguments that I have heard here before, to regulate and ask that the 
safety of their constituents be protected.
  Let me also say something my mother said to me, that ``If you fail to 
prepare, you are preparing to fail.'' Governors across this Nation 
should prepare their response teams for the inevitable accident of 
nuclear waste.
  Mr. Chairman, I ask that my colleagues support this, support this in 
the name of safety, support this in the name of States' rights.
  Mr. DAN SCHAEFER of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time 
as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, this can turn into a political issue very, very rapidly 
when a Governor of a particular State has to make the decision on 
whether or not they are going to allow the transport of this across 
State lines.
  I guess the one concern that I have on this is that every one of 
these Governors politically are going to say, hey, no way, and we will 
end up leaving the waste in the 35 States or 38 States that it is in 
today. So I would just say I oppose the amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Nevada [Mr. Gibbons].
  The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Chairman, on that I demand a recorded vote.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 283, further proceedings 
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Nevada [Mr. Gibbons] 
will be postponed.
  It is now in order to consider amendment No. 6 printed in the House 
report 105-354.


                 Amendment No. 6 Offered by Mr. Ensign

  Mr. ENSIGN. Mr. Chairman, I offer amendment No. 6.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 6 offered by Mr. Ensign:
       Page 19, insert after line 16 the following:
       ``(c) Emergency Response.--The Secretary may not plan for 
     the transportation of spent nuclear fuel or high-level 
     radioactive waste in a fiscal year for which funds 
     appropriated under section 203(c) are insufficient (as 
     determined by the Federal Emergency Management Agency) to 
     ensure adequate and trained emergency response teams along 
     all the transportation routes to be used in such fiscal year.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 283, the gentleman from 
Nevada [Mr. Ensign] and a Member opposed each will control 10 minutes.
  Mr. DAN SCHAEFER of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim 
opposition to the amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Colorado, Mr. Dan Schaefer, will 
control 10 minutes in opposition to the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Nevada [Mr. Ensign].
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Nevada [Mr. Ensign].
  Mr. ENSIGN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 3 minutes.
  Mr. Chairman, before I go on to talk about this amendment, which 
deals with safety, I want to talk about the comment that the 
subcommittee chairman made on the last amendment when he said that, 
well, of course, if the Governors had their choice, every one of them 
would oppose nuclear waste being transported across their State and 
they would stop it. He said every Governor. He may want to retract that 
statement, but he said every Governor. Does it not make sense that we 
would oppose a bill if every Governor in every State does not want 
nuclear waste being transported across their State?
  Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment, and this amendment would simply 
require certification by FEMA, and by the way, this is an independent 
agency, that adequate appropriations, in other words, monies be 
appropriated to exist for the emergency response teams that are going 
to be necessary across those 43 States if an accident did occur.
  Local fire and police departments will be the first ones on the scene 
of a nuclear waste accident, and it is vitally important that these 
forces are mobilized and trained in responding to possible radiation 
leaks. H.R. 1270 authorizes funding for these purposes, but makes that 
funding contingent upon actions of the Committee on Appropriations.
  This year, for an example, the energy and water appropriations bill 
provided $2.6 billion less than the administration's request for 
programs that are ongoing. The money simply is not there. But we need 
to ensure that if that money is not provided, that we do not undertake 
activities when we have not adequately prepared to deal with the 
consequences of those activities.
  Mr. Chairman, I think it is absolutely outrageous that we would not 
simply make sure that the money is there, that adequate money is there; 
not to be appropriated, but actually there, mandated that we spend to 
make sure that the transport of the deadliest substance known to 
mankind, if an accident occurs, that those response teams have the 
adequate funding that they can prepare to meet the type of accident 
that could ensue.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. DAN SCHAEFER of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the 
gentleman from Idaho [Mr. Crapo].
  Mr. CRAPO. Mr. Chairman, this amendment bars the Department of Energy 
from planning for nuclear waste transportation in any fiscal year in 
which funds are deemed to be insufficient by the Federal Energy 
Management Agency to ensure adequate and trained emergency response 
teams along all the transportation routes to be used in each such 
fiscal year.

[[Page H9699]]

  On its face this sounds like a good idea, but when we look at it, it 
is another amendment designed to prevent transportation of nuclear 
waste. It is going to create a circumstance in which, instead of 
addressing this issue once and for all, we create now yet again another 
regulatory mechanism, where every year we have to fight in this 
Congress over whether we are going to have in place the necessary 
structure to move ahead with transporting the spent nuclear fuel of 
this country to permanent storage.
  This amendment would prevent the Department of Energy from beginning 
to accept nuclear waste in the year 2002. Last year a Federal court 
said that the United States has a legal obligation to begin acceptance 
of nuclear waste in the year 1998. H.R. 1270 provides for that 
acceptance at least by the year 2002.
  This amendment would delay the beginning of that acceptance for 
years. In addition, once FEMA was able to make determinations as 
required by this amendment, opponents of the nuclear waste program 
would seek annually to cut funding for emergency response training or 
to otherwise argue that the funding simply was not sufficient, and if 
that was not enough, they would try to work through regulatory routes 
to get FEMA to simply say they were not ready.
  If their efforts were successful, nuclear transportation would be 
blocked for another entire year, year after year, as the process of 
debate moved forward. This amendment is designed to create yet one more 
venue where we debate endlessly the question of how will we deal with 
spent nuclear fuel in this country. It is not designed to improve 
training of emergency response teams or promote that safe 
transportation; it is designed to keep nuclear waste where it now is, 
spread out across the country in scores of sites in 35 or more States.
  We have, as we have discussed repeatedly tonight, a safe 
transportation system. If we need more safety, we can appropriate the 
necessary dollars to do so. I do not believe there would be much 
objection to appropriating for strengthened and increased training in 
FEMA. But we do not need to fall for the trick of tying that FEMA 
funding to the ability of the Department of Energy to transport the 
spent nuclear fuel in this country as is necessary for the security and 
safety of our Nation.

                              {time}  2000

  Mr. ENSIGN. Mr. Chairman, I think it is important to point out that 
we are more concerned about people's lives, where they are more 
concerned about the process that goes on here in the Congress.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Nevada [Mr. 
Gibbons].
  Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Chairman, it seems that we have been called a lot of 
things this evening, especially obstructionists. Well, I think those 
people who are opposing these amendments are the obstructionists.
  What we are talking about here is response team funding, paying money 
out to save people's lives, human lives. The health of humanity, the 
environment is at risk here. The safety of the citizens is a 
responsibility of the Governors in these 43 States through which this 
material is going to be transported. They need the resources to make 
sure that we are doing this safely in the event of that actuality of an 
accident that is bound to happen.
  By the way, let me also take a little time here to talk a little bit 
about ``Indiana Michigan Power versus DOE.'' I want to dispel these 
myths about the law as it now stands. It does not require the Federal 
Government to take into possession this nuclear material. It says that 
in the event of an unavoidable delay, in the event of an unavoidable 
delay, the parties are to readjust schedules as appropriate to 
accommodate the delay. It does not mandate that the Federal Government 
take possession of this in 1998. It does nothing that all of this 
hyperbole that we hear from the opponents of this amendment say. This 
case literally does not require the Federal Government to take 
possession of that.
  Mr. DAN SCHAEFER of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the 
gentleman from Texas [Mr. Hall].
  Mr. HALL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, inasmuch as the gentleman from 
Nevada [Mr. Ensign] took some of his time to answer the gentleman from 
Colorado [Mr. Schaefer], let me answer something the gentleman from 
Nevada said a little bit ago.
  Mr. Chairman, I do not consider them obstructionists, and we are 
trying not to be. The gentleman mentioned that they play the odds in 
Las Vegas. I have been to Las Vegas. The last time I was out there I 
saw a dejected fellow sitting over there. He lost all of his money and 
he could not borrow any more money and he could not cash any checks, 
but the management was kind out there and they offered him some food. 
And he said, ``No, I can't do that. My bus will be here in a few 
minutes.'' And they said, ``Oh, you have to catch the bus?'' And he 
said, ``No, I'm going to get in front of it.''
  Mr. Chairman, that is what we would do if this amendment passed. 
Because whereas the other amendment said that any Governor could veto 
it, this sets out that a bureaucrat can veto it. They are going to let 
FERC veto it. That is of course outrageous.
  H.R. 1270 provides already for technical assistance and funding to 
the States, to the effected units of local governments, Indian tribes 
and nonprofit organizations for the training of local public safety 
officials.
  The amendment would give the Director of FEMA complete discretion 
over whether this act is implemented. I just do not think we want to do 
that. It would be an illegal delegation of power. It is not a good 
idea. We do not want to leave it up to the bureaucrats.
  Mr. ENSIGN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Massachusetts [Mr. Markey].
  Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Chairman, if it is so very safe to ship these 
materials under the legal regime which has been established under this 
bill, then the sponsors should not have any problems with this 
amendment. All we really do here is say if FEMA determines that there 
is insufficient funds that have been appropriated for emergency 
response teams, then we have to basically deal with that issue.
  But we have reached a point here now where we are saying we have got 
an unfunded mandate where we are not going to help out the State or the 
local municipality in dealing with this issue. We are telling the 
Governors they do not have any authority here to deal with it. And now 
we are turning to the FEMA and we are saying that this very safe 
material is stuff that we do not even want FEMA to have to certify that 
they have enough money to be able to handle it.
  Mr. Chairman, I think that the proponents of this bill do protesteth 
too much about how safe it is while at the same time telling Governors, 
mayors, FEMA to butt out in terms of questioning, in fact, the real 
protections given to the public.
  Mr. DAN SCHAEFER of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Upton].
  Mr. UPTON. Mr. Chairman, I would just remind my colleagues that this 
is a duplicative amendment. Under the existing law and this bill, H.R. 
1270, DOE provides funding from the income under this program to 
provide emergency response training for State and local entities in the 
unlikely event of an accident with radioactive materials.
  Under the funding, the DOE already provides assistance for training 
of State and local officials and tribal emergency rescue workers. The 
commercial nuclear safe record during 2,900 shipments speak to the 
effectiveness of the training.
  I remind my colleagues that this radioactive material did not just 
show up at these 80 different facilities around the country. It had to 
get there. And some 1,300 tons of the radioactive rods were shipped 
without accident, without spillage, without a single release of nuclear 
material, all under the safe guidance of the Department of Energy.
  Mr. Chairman, to change that record and give it to somebody else and 
let them start all over and do their regulations is just further delay. 
I would urge my colleagues: ``If it ain't broke, don't fix it.'' The 
system works now under the guidance of the Department of Energy, and I 
have a feeling of confidence that it will continue without this 
amendment.
  Mr. ENSIGN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Ohio [Mr. Kucinich].
  Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Chairman, I urge a ``yes'' vote on the amendment. 
There

[[Page H9700]]

are a number of assumptions that are being made here in this debate. I 
recall the remarks of the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Hall] about betting 
in Las Vegas. We are betting that radioactive waste cannot spill. We 
are betting that trucks carrying the radioactive waste will not have 
accidents. We are betting that trains which carry the radioactive waste 
will not derail. We are betting that the casks which contain the 
radioactive waste transported will not break, will not come open or 
leak.
  But that has a familiar ring. It sounds like the Titanic will not 
sink. The Hindenburg will not fall out of the sky. Or if my colleagues 
want a modern reference, that Three Mile Island will never have an 
accident.
  Mr. Chairman, I would say, again referring to the remarks of the 
gentleman from Texas, that we might have better odds of getting out in 
front of that bus than we may have of there not being any accident.
  So safety is an issue. Let us keep focused on this safety issue which 
is implicit in this amendment. The bill would send an estimated 100,000 
shipments of high-level radioactive waste through 43 States, passing 50 
million people in their communities. At the very least, we need to 
ensure there are safeguards in place and that means money to train 
emergency response teams along the transportation routes. And if there 
is not enough money, appropriate it to ensure that adequate response 
teams are in place along the waste transportation route.
  Mr. Chairman, the Department of Energy ought not be prohibited from 
planning for the transportation of this radioactive waste.
  Mr. DAN SCHAEFER of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Hastert].
  Mr. HASTERT. Mr. Chairman, I remember when I was a kid the old 
western movies were out there. My mother never told me much about 
nuclear waste, but we used to watch the western movies. And if they had 
to stop the train that had the stuff in it from getting to the good 
guys, first of all they sent the Indians after it. We have to confer 
with the Indians. We passed that amendment tonight. Then they switched 
it off on the spur so it cannot go down the track. Well, we can do 
that. But really the question is here how many bureaucracies do we have 
to have to stop nuclear waste from getting to a place of safe storage?
  Well, Mr. Chairman, we have the Department of Defense, first of all, 
that has some of this nuclear waste. They are involved in this thing. 
We have DOE, Department of Energy, who prescribes the safe way to 
transport this, to bundle it, to package it, to store it. And then we 
also have the Department of Transportation.
  Now, I understand that the sponsors of this amendment certainly would 
like to stop nuclear waste from going to a safe destination where we 
can have a final resting place for this stuff that is stored in scores 
of States and scores of places, in people's backyards, backyards in our 
communities next to natural resources. We need to find a safe place to 
do it.
  But if they are going to stop that from happening, what they really 
do here is say, well, let us let FEMA do this now. Mr. Chairman, FEMA 
has never had any experience in nuclear waste. They are not an agency 
that deals with transportation of nuclear waste, but we are going to 
say that FEMA now has the ability to do this and has to put together 
rules and has to put together a whole process and, by the way, that is 
going to be a couple of years so we cannot even begin to plan to move 
nuclear waste in this country until we have another bureaucracy 
involved.
  Mr. Chairman, we might as well bring in the Indians and try to switch 
this thing off onto the dead track. We need to defeat this amendment 
and move on.
  Mr. ENSIGN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Chairman, what we are talking about here is really just a safety 
issue, just to make sure that there is a comfort level for the people 
in America.
  The authors of the bill have even said this is unnecessary because 
this bill authorizes the monies for these emergency response teams. All 
we are saying is, and I have only been here almost 3 years, and even in 
that very short period of time I have seen bills that are authorized 
for certain amount of money. Does the Highway Trust Fund sound familiar 
to anybody? Authorized for a certain amount of money and then that 
money not being spent. The trust fund that we are talking about here, 
does that sound familiar to my colleagues?
  Well, what we are saying is that we want to make sure that the money 
is not just authorized; that the money actually gets to those emergency 
response teams so that if there is an accident, that the people are 
adequately trained and can handle this.
  We have been lucky in this country. We have not had the kind of 
nuclear disaster from an accident that all of us would never want to 
happen. But if it does happen, would any of us want to face the parents 
of a child that was killed in one of these accidents? Was exposed to 
some kind of radiation that ended up at that point leading to cancer or 
to certain death?
  Well, Mr. Chairman, I think that the very least we can do for those 
people is to make sure that if an accident does occur, that the people 
in the surrounding areas have the comfort level that their emergency 
response teams are in place and have been well-trained because the 
monies from this Congress, and this Congress is the one who is doing 
all of this. It is not the States out there. This Congress is the one 
transporting this waste, authorizing the transport of this waste.
  So this Congress should take the responsibility to make sure that the 
money is appropriated, the money is adequately appropriated, not just 
authorized but adequately appropriated, that these emergency response 
teams would be in place. To do anything less would be a dereliction of 
our moral duty to our constituents all across these United States.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. DAN SCHAEFER of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, I have no more speakers, 
and I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Nevada [Mr. Ensign].
  The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. ENSIGN. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 283, further proceedings 
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Nevada [Mr. Ensign] will 
be postponed.
  It is now in order to consider amendment No. 7 printed in House 
Report 105-354.


                 Amendment No. 7 Offered by Mr. Markey

  Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:
  Amendment No. 7 offered by Mr. Markey:
       Page 36, strike line 18 and all that follows through line 9 
     on page 39.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 283, the gentleman from 
Massachusetts [Mr. Markey] and the gentleman from Colorado [Mr. Dan 
Schaefer] will each control 10 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Markey].

                              {time}  2015

  Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, it is one thing when they tell us, as proponents of 
this legislation, that we really do not have to be concerned about it 
traveling down the highway and we really do not have to give any 
authority to local mayors or Governors, even the FEMA, to be able to 
properly protect public safety. But it is another thing, Mr. Chairman, 
when the Congress determines that a human being can be exposed to 100 
millirems of radiation at this site with no health consequences for the 
individual.
  In other countries in the world, they have much different standards 
than are built into this bill. In Canada, it is one millirem a year. In 
Finland and Switzerland, it is 10 millirems a year. In France, it is 25 
millirems a year. But here the Congress is going to decide that 
pregnant women, children can be exposed to 100 millirems a year, even 
though we know that at that level, one in 286 people exposed to that 
level of

[[Page H9701]]

radiation will, in fact, contract fatal cancer.
  Now, I can understand how we can pretend that the canisters cannot 
break. I can understand how we can pretend that the driver will never 
get drunk. But we cannot pretend that science does not exist. We cannot 
pretend that the National Academy of Sciences does not exist. And we 
cannot pretend to be experts. A congressional expert is an oxymoron. We 
are only experts compared to each other. We are not experts compared to 
real experts, radiation experts, medical people.
  Where do we get off picking 100 millirems knowing that one in 286 
people exposed will in fact contract fatal cancer? By the way, this 100 
millirems is on top of all of the other radiation exposure that a human 
being is exposed to in the course of a year. It is absolutely 
unbelievable.
  Now, the second part of my amendment deals with the absolutely, I 
think, preposterous leap that there can be no human intrusion at Yucca 
Mountain for 1,000 years. That is, by assuming that, we do not have to 
build in any extra environmental protections. Now, we have no idea if 
some nuclear Indiana Jones nine centuries from now might be wandering 
around some desolate location in Nevada not knowing what went on back 
in the Congress in 1997. And perhaps we have not left behind some 
nuclear Rosetta stone, because perhaps English is not being spoken in 
that part of the world at that time, and they come across this site.
  Well, this bill assumes that Indiana Jones cannot break in, cannot 
wander in with their entire tribe and be exposed to this incredible 
blast of radiation that will hit them as soon as they crack through. 
All of it, of course, contributing to the ridiculous final picture of 
what is being sold out here on the floor, is just an attempt to run 
roughshod over EPA, over the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, over the 
FEMA, over Governors, over mayors, over selectmen, over individual 
Americans and over unsuspecting-centuries-from-now individuals that 
might run across this site.
  I ask, Mr. Chairman, for this amendment to be adopted. My amendment 
restores the EPA as an agency which will have to establish the minimal 
radiation exposure for human beings at this site. My amendment pulls 
back the assumption that no human intrusion is possible and, as a 
result, says we have got to build in protections upon the assumption 
that it just might happen at some time.
  We are burying this for 10,000 years, longer than all recorded 
history to this moment. And this Congress is sitting around in 
committees making decisions about how much protection we are going to 
be giving to people centuries from now. I do not think so. I do not 
think we have that kind of wisdom, congressional experts that we may 
be.
  So I ask that the Markey amendment be adopted for the protection near 
term of the women, the children, the men who are going to be exposed to 
the millirems in the construction of this site and working around this 
site, and I ask that it be adopted for future generations as they may 
be exposed unwittingly to this facility.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. DAN SCHAEFER of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the 
gentleman from Idaho [Mr. Crapo].
  Mr. CRAPO. Mr. Chairman, once again we are debating another amendment 
which clearly is going to stop the purpose of the bill from moving 
forward.
  H.R. 1270 establishes a presumptive radiation protection standard of 
100 millirems or 1/3 background levels. This standard was not chosen 
arbitrarily, as those who support the amendment seem to suggest. 
Instead it reflects the judgment of the International Council for 
Radiation Protection and is the standard that has been adopted by the 
NRC in its regulations for general public protection.
  H.R. 1270 further allows NRC to amend the radiation standard if they 
deem it necessary for the protection of public health and safety. And 
it is the NRC, not the EPA, that is the agency with expertise on 
radiation. NRC has concluded that the standard in H.R. 1270, and I 
quote, will fully protect public health and safety and the environment. 
And H.R. 1270 requires the NRC to consult with the EPA.
  But another point needs to be made. That is, this bill does not set a 
standard out of just the desire for Congress to move ahead on this. It 
sets it out of frustration with inaction by the EPA. In 1982, the EPA 
was directed to promulgate these standards. It failed to do so.
  Fifteen years later it has not established such a standard. In 1992, 
the EPA was directed to establish standards for radiation releases and 
still after entering into a science study and getting the results of 
that study in 1995, it has not issued those standards.
  Continued inaction by the EPA should not be allowed to block us from 
moving forward.
  The gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Markey] often states that the 
radiation standard in H.R. 1270 will cause cancer deaths. The fact is, 
however, that two years ago the NRC told the gentleman from 
Massachusetts [Mr. Markey] that the radiation standard in H.R. 1270 
would protect human health.
  On July 13, 1995, the NRC wrote to him and told him that this 
radiation standard will likely cause zero cancer deaths. In the letter 
the NRC stated that there would only be cancer deaths if a population 
of 1,400 people lived on top of the repository for 70 years. And Yucca 
Mountain, as we know, has been withdrawn into this bill and is very 
sparsely populated.
  The fact is that the average American is exposed to 300 millirems of 
natural radiation per year. This standard is safe. The agencies 
involved have declared it to be safe. And if it needs to be adjusted, 
it can be adjusted.
  What about the issue of human intrusion? The gentleman from 
Massachusetts [Mr. Markey] made a good point. He speculated, I think 
with a little smile on his face, about what extreme circumstances we 
could hypothesize that could happen in the future. I guess we could 
hypothesize that the entire earth population would be obliterated by 
some tragedy, that we would lose all ability to communicate or 
understand what had happened, and that someone would then go to Yucca 
Mountain and drill down through the core of the earth into the facility 
and cause a release.
  It is exactly that type of speculation that has caused the National 
Academy of Sciences to say that reaching a conclusion on these types of 
assumptions is not possible in terms of predicting human behavior 
thousands of years into the future, and to say that for that reason it 
is hardly surprising that Congress would seek a resolution of these 
issues so that the EPA and that those conducting the studies do not 
have to go on with endless speculation about these types of activities, 
can make sensible, common sense analysis and move forward in a common 
sense way rather than going on with these irrational ideas about 
speculating about such highly remote possibilities. Those are the 
issues we are facing in this amendment. It is one more attempt to 
derail this legislation. Mr. Chairman, we should oppose this amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Markey] has 4\1/
2\ minutes remaining, and the gentleman from Colorado [Mr. Dan 
Schaefer] has 6 minutes remaining.
  Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman 
from Nevada [Mr. Gibbons].
  Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the 
time. I think he hit the nuclear highlight right on the head today with 
setting the standards. The standards were set not by scientists, not by 
doctors who understand radioactive materials, but rather the 
Congressmen and women, sitting on the Committee on Commerce, 
established a bill with these radioactive standards in it.
  Let me tell my colleagues what the standard really talks about here. 
We are talking about 100 millirems. The standard is clearly far above 
any other standard established in the law today; that was clearly 
pointed out by my colleague, the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. 
Markey].
  Let me tell Members a little more about nuclear radiation and what 
one of these nuclear irradiated rods means to us.
  Now, if you are a person standing one yard away from an unshielded 
10-year-old nuclear rod assembly, you would get a lethal dose; that is, 
a deadly dose of radiation, 500 rems in less than 3 minutes, less than 
3 minutes. A 30-second exposure at 100 rems, which is the

[[Page H9702]]

proposed standard that they have established, a 30-second exposure at 
the same distance at 100 rems would significantly increase the risk of 
cancer or genetic damage.
  Mr. Chairman, we are talking about significant human risk, human life 
and the establishment of a new standard that was not set by scientific 
evaluation. It was set by the people on the Committee on Commerce. That 
is wrong. Vote for the Markey amendment.
  Mr. DAN SCHAEFER of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the 
gentleman from Texas [Mr. Hall].
  Mr. HALL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from 
Michigan [Mr. Upton].
  Mr. UPTON. Mr. Chairman, I did not want to leave my friend from 
Massachusetts' comments unresponded to with regard to the thousand 
years. Here is what it looks like. Looks like the moon.
  I would like to propose that we might get a unanimous consent 
amendment to put a statue of Ed Markey out in front with some of the 
speeches that he has delivered. I can guarantee my colleagues that no 
one will be close to this thing for 2,000 years, let alone 1,000, and 
we will not need the Park Service to build a $330,000 commode for 950 
years from now. I wonder if the gentleman would object to such a 
unanimous consent amendment?
  Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Chairman, if it is facing the Upton statue, I would 
be more than willing.
  Mr. HALL of Texas. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Chairman, I do not know 
anything about statues, but I do not know anybody that runs roughshod 
over the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Markey]. He stands his 
ground pretty well. Sometimes I agree with him; usually I do not. But I 
always respect him and admire him.
  This amendment would strike H.R. 1270 provisions that limit the 
Environmental Protection Agency from setting radiation protection 
standards. Well, for them to set it, we charged EPA 15 years ago to 
develop a radiation standard for a Federal repository. They have yet to 
do so. I do not see any reason to ask them or to even seek their 
opinion, but it is asked.
  EPA is involved in the standard setting practice by advising the 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission. And if the NRC believes a stricter 
standard is required to protect health and safety, the bill authorizes 
the commission to develop a stricter standard. So it gives more 
standards and more strictness to the bill.
  NRC has testified before the Committee on Commerce and let me talk 
about that. Did we run roughshod over them? Listen to the testimony of 
Shirley Ann Jackson, NRC Chairman, April 29, 1997 in testimony 
regarding H.R. 1270 before the House Subcommittee on Energy and Power.
  ``The Nuclear Regulatory Commission notes the standard in H.R. 1270 
of an annual effective dose of 100 millirems to the average member of 
the general population in the vicinity of Yucca Mountain and views that 
standard as consistent with the protection of the public health and 
safety.''
  Not roughshod. What happened in the Committee on Commerce? We had 
this identical, I believe it was identical amendment in the Committee 
on Commerce about a month ago. It was voted down at least 2 to 1. This 
committee voted on this bill just recently, less than a month ago. They 
voted 43 to 3 for the standard that is in this bill.

                              {time}  2030

  I think it is obvious that this is an amendment that should be 
defeated, and I urge the defeat of the amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Massachusetts, Mr. Markey, has 3 
minutes remaining. The gentleman from Colorado, Mr. Dan Schaefer, has 3 
minutes remaining.
  Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Ohio 
[Mr. Kucinich].
  Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Chairman, Lincoln is often quoted as saying, ``A 
government of the people, by the people, and for the people shall not 
perish from this earth.'' Well, neither will radioactive waste.
  If an accident should occur that exposes the public to spent nuclear 
fuel, the results could be deadly. A person standing one yard away from 
an unshielded 10-year-old fuel assembly could receive a lethal dose of 
radiation in less than 3 minutes, and exposure of only 30 seconds would 
significantly increase the risk of cancer or genetic damage. So the 
public ought to be fully informed of such risks.
  The bill sets a standard which allows an annual radiation dose of 100 
millirems per average member of the surrounding population, which is 4 
times the amount allowed by current regulations for storage facilities. 
This exposure level is associated with the lifetime risk of one excess 
cancer death for every 286 exposed individuals.
  If the population local to the interim dump site is to be exposed to 
this increased health risk, then they should be protected in every 
possible way.
  I say support the Markey amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Massachusetts, Mr. Markey, has 2 
minutes remaining. The gentleman from Colorado, Mr. Dan Schaefer, has 3 
minutes remaining.
  Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Nevada [Mr. Ensign].
  Mr. ENSIGN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Massachusetts 
[Mr. Markey] for yielding.
  We have heard that the NRC says that 100 millirems is fine. But also, 
remember, I am from the State of Nevada. Remember what the Federal 
Government said back in the 1950s. They said above-ground nuclear 
tests, atmospheric tests, are safe. As a matter of fact, if we go out 
to the Nevada test site, we will see where the bleachers used to be 
where people used to put on, basically, these glasses with little slits 
in them and they used to watch above-ground nuclear, atmospheric 
nuclear tests. Ask the people in southern Utah if they trust the 
Federal Government to be setting a standard like this.
  We are raising the standard simply because we need to for 
transportation. The international community, in Sweden the standard is 
10 millirems, not 100, like this bill says; France is 25 millirems per 
year; Finland and Switzerland, 10 millirems per year; and Canada is 1 
millirem per year.
  Should we in the United States not protect our citizens the same as 
these countries? I urge a ``yes" vote on the Markey amendment.
  Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the remaining 1 minute.
  Mr. Chairman, the people in Nevada and the people of this country 
were told in the 1940's and the 1950's that they were not going to be 
exposed to undue amounts of radiation when the nuclear test blasts were 
going off in that part of America.
  Well, it turns out that this summer, after holding this information 
for the last 40 to 45 years, that the Federal Government now tells us 
that, in fact, millions of Americans were exposed to unhealthy levels 
of iodine, unhealthy levels of strontium 90 in locations that had never 
before been considered, not just in Nevada but all over the United 
States, wherever the plume of those explosions carried by the winds 
might have endangered health and safety.
  Well, once again we have the Federal Government sitting here picking 
a start, 100 millirems. We decide. ``Do not worry about it. Bring your 
children. Bring your pregnant wife. Do not worry about it.'' We have no 
right, we have no business, especially after what we have learned this 
past summer about what the Federal Government did in Nevada and 
surrounding States in the 1950's.
  Mr. DAN SCHAEFER of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, I yield the final 3 
minutes to the gentleman from Iowa [Mr. Ganske].
  Mr. GANSKE. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment. I 
am on the Committee on Commerce. I am also a physician. And in looking 
at this legislation, I think it is reasonable, I think the standards 
are reasonable.
  We are talking about 100 millirems per year. For the average 
American, the exposure from the sunlight is about 300 millirems per 
year, three times that amount. If one lives in a higher place, a higher 
altitude place like Denver, CO, we are talking about 400 millirems per 
year. If we are talking about a flight attendant, actually probably 
almost all our colleagues who have to fly in airplanes, we get higher 
doses than that. If we are talking about two chest x-rays, we are 
talking about 100 millirems. If we are talking

[[Page H9703]]

about a surgeon who works in an operating room where they take x-rays, 
we are talking about in excess of 100 millirems per year. This is safe.
  But I also support the bill, and I think that we need to look at the 
safety that is built into this bill. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission 
has looked at these casks that this material is going to be transported 
in. That cask is literally stronger and more powerful than a 
locomotive. When a speeding 120-ton locomotive is crashed into a 25-ton 
nuclear waste cask at 80 miles per hour, the train is demolished but 
the cask is okay.
  Other tests show that the cask is impervious to heat, including a 30-
minute exposure to 1475 degrees Fahrenheit that engulfs the entire 
chamber. We drop that cask nearly 4 feet onto a 6-inch steel rod and it 
still does not leak.
  Furthermore, Mr. Chairman, it is not that we have not seen a lot of 
transportation of nuclear material in the last 30 years. There have 
been, on an average, 100 trips per year by specially-trained crews, 
over 2,300 trips, and there has never been a leak or release of any 
radioactivity.
  When we get right down to it, Mr. Chairman, we have to decide on a 
very important issue: Do we want this nuclear waste scattered around 
the country at 50 sites, close to Lake Superior, close to major 
population centers, or should we put it out in the desert away from the 
population centers in a safe place?
  Mr. Chairman, I will tell my colleagues what the people of Iowa are 
telling me. They are telling me, put it away from where the people are, 
put it away from our Great Lakes, get it away from our rivers where, if 
an accident would happen, we would have a disaster; and put it into one 
place, put it into one place where it is efficiently and safely watched 
over.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Markey].
  The question was taken; and the Chair announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 283, further proceedings 
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. 
Markey] will be postponed.
  It is now in order to consider Amendment No. 8 printed in House 
Report 105-354.


                 Amendment No. 8 Offered by Mr. Gibbons

  Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 8 offered by Mr. Gibbons:
       Page 55, beginning in line 3 strike ``, except that'' and 
     all that follows through line 21 and insert a period.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 283, the gentleman from 
Nevada [Mr. Gibbons] and a Member opposed each will control 10 minutes.
  Mr. HALL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to 
the amendment offered by the gentleman from Nevada [Mr. Gibbons].
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Texas [Mr. Hall] will be allocated 
10 minutes in opposition to the amendment offered by the gentleman from 
Nevada [Mr. Gibbons].
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Nevada [Mr. Gibbons].
  Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  The amendment that I am offering today will protect the American 
taxpayers from being forced to pay out of their own pockets for a 
highly irradiated nuclear storage facility at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, 
thousands and thousands of years into the future.
  Since 1987, the utility ratepayers have paid, yes, they have, based 
on electricity generated by nuclear power plants, into the nuclear 
waste trust fund. These funds were intended to be used for suitability 
study and construction of a deep geologic storage facility at Yucca 
Mountain, Nevada, for high-level nuclear waste. The fees were based on 
1 mill per kilowatt hour; 1 mill roughly equals one-tenth of one cent.
  Unfortunately, despite the presence of this trust fund, the nuclear 
power lobby is trying to force all American taxpayers to pick up the 
tab for transporting and storing this waste at Yucca Mountain. Why? 
Because nuclear waste translates into stranded capital cost for these 
energy companies.
  The current Nuclear Waste Policy Act assumes that a permanent storage 
facility would be ready by 1998. However, this option is not available. 
The Nuclear Waste Policy Act states in section 111(a)(5) and 131(a)(1) 
that the responsibility for interim storage rests directly upon the 
generators of high-level waste. However, yet again, these poster boys 
for corporate welfare want American taxpayers to take all legal 
responsibility and provide the funding for this highly irradiated 
nuclear waste.
  My amendment would delete the cap within the bill and give the 
Secretary of Energy the authority to assess a fee on the existing 
reactors to reflect the amount of funding needed in a given year to 
cover the cost of operating Yucca Mountain, thereby sparing taxpayers 
who have no stake in nuclear power or nuclear waste.
  The problem exists as reactors shut down, Mr. Chairman, which will 
increase logarithmically into the future. This means that there will no 
longer be revenue generated nor a revenue stream to fund the 
development and operation of that repository for thousands and 
thousands of years following the last reactor shutdown. The likelihood 
of the utilities being able to cover the cost of permanent repository 
is very unlikely, and the financial burden will be shifted to the 
taxpayer.
  A GAO study has estimated that the Yucca Mountain project 
construction cost will be nearly $33 billion. There is only $13 billion 
in the fund right now. The shortfalls would quickly appear if Congress 
should pass H.R. 1270 without this amendment.
  The Congressional Budget Office states that the impact of carrying 
out H.R. 1270 would be a net discretionary spending increase of $1.9 
billion over the expected waste fund receipts during the 1998 to the 
2002 period. While H.R. 1270 would change the financing of the nuclear 
waste program from a steady 1 mill per kilowatt hour fee to an 
adjustable fee tied to annual program appropriations, the bill also 
dictates that the average fee over the next 12 years cannot exceed 1 
mill.
  Moreover, as electricity deregulation continues and the higher-priced 
nuclear power is forced to compete with cheaper forms of generated 
electricity, it is probable that many nuclear reactors will be 
decommissioned before their licenses expire. One study predicted that 
40 percent of operating reactors would shut down early and would 
therefore cease making contributions to the nuclear waste fund.
  Without passage of this amendment, the nuclear waste fund will boil 
and distill down to Congress either making the taxpayers of this 
country pay for the storage and transportation of nuclear waste or 
abandon the project altogether.
  The great people of Nevada do not benefit from nuclear energy, nor do 
States that lack nuclear power plants. Why should they be required to 
pay for a nuclear storage facility? Why should they be forced to spend 
their tax dollars to support a nuclear industry bailout?
  At a time when Congress is making great strides to balancing the 
Federal budget, we should continue this laudable goal and allow the 
Secretary of Energy to increase the mill rate to protect the taxpayers 
of this country. It is for these reasons, Mr. Chairman, that I ask 
Members to protect the American taxpayer and make a common sense vote 
on a very important fiscal issue. I ask for their support and ask them 
to vote favorably for this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HALL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Let me say, this amendment would delete the 1 mill cap and permit the 
Secretary of Energy to assess a fee on existing nuclear energy plants 
to reflect the amount of funding needed in a given year to cover the 
cost of operations. Basically, that is what it does, but let us really 
analyze it.
  First, they suggested to let the governor have veto power. That will 
flat kill it. Next, they are going to let FERC make some decisions that 
could cancel it. And now they are going to let the Secretary of Energy 
assess a fee, not only an illegal delegation of fees and of 
congressional authority.

[[Page H9704]]

                              {time}  2045

  It is not only an illegal delegation of fees and the congressional 
authority, the facts are hard and clear that sufficient funding exists 
already under H.R. 1270. The annual contribution of nuclear generated 
electricity consumers to the Nuclear Waste Fund would be based on the 
annual amount spent by the government to build storage and disposal 
facilities for used nuclear fuel. This amendment, so far as I read it, 
says, ``We gotta collect more money because there isn't enough money to 
finish the program 30 years from now.'' The key argument against that 
is that we have collected over $13 billion since 1983. We have spent $6 
billion, diverted it elsewhere. I think by 2010 the Nuclear Waste Fund 
balance is projected to be $20.9 billion. That is enough to support an 
interim storage facility and begin operating a permanent repository, 
according to the DOE program cost projections provided to Congress in 
July of this year. Also there is already a provision in the bill to 
expand the $1 million cap to $1.5 million to pay for construction of 
central storage facilities. Mr. Chairman, the amendment is not needed. 
It is already provided for. We urge the defeat of the amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished 
gentleman from Las Vegas, Nevada [Mr. Ensign].
  Mr. ENSIGN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time. First we had environmental protections. They nixed those. Next 
safety, public safety, discarded. Next, States rights, 10th amendment, 
ignored. Also private property rights. They would not even allow us to 
have an amendment on this floor to debate private property rights. 
Gotten rid of. Lastly, Mr. Chairman, we have to at least support the 
taxpayer. Of anybody we have got to be concerned about on here, should 
we at least not be supportive of the taxpayer?
  For crying out loud, what this bill does is says that when these 
nuclear power plants shut down, and they are going to shut down, and 
there will not be ratepayers to pay the bills to keep nuclear waste 
stored and to pay for that nuclear waste and there is not enough money 
in the trust fund and these ratepayers over the next years will not 
have enough money in the trust fund, when that happens, guess who ends 
up holding the buck? The person out there making $30,000 a year, the 
middle income American that has everything on their shoulders already, 
that has this huge national debt already. Now we are going to pile more 
debt on them.
  If Members consider themselves fiscal conservatives, and I do not 
know anybody in this body hardly that considers themselves anything but 
a fiscal conservative, but if you consider yourself a fiscal 
conservative, you have to at least vote for this amendment. This bill 
is bad enough, but at least this amendment would give the taxpayer some 
sort of protection against the nuclear power industry shifting the 
burden from themselves to the taxpayer.
  Mr. HALL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman 
from Illinois [Mr. Hastert].
  Mr. HASTERT. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Texas for 
yielding me this time.
  If Members want to stand logic on its head, take the argument from 
the last gentleman from Nevada and say what we are going to do is not 
the nuclear companies that are the power companies that have this, it 
is the ratepayers. Ratepayers are people who flip the switch on and 
expect the lights to go on and they also happen to be taxpayers. So the 
people who are getting gouged in this amendment are the taxpayers of 
this country, the ratepayers. What they really want you to do is say, 
now when you flick the lights on, not only are you going to have to 
pay, are you paying this contract that you had with the Federal 
Government and the Federal Government says you are going to take this 
waste and store it as of 1998, the Federal Government and these folks 
here say, you can just forget about that contract, that promise to the 
American people, and, by the way, we are going to ask for more money. 
But the real ridiculous issue here is they are going to ask for more 
money. They want more money from American ratepayers, American 
taxpayers? Mr. Chairman, we have paid in $13 billion. Six billion of 
those dollars never went to the nuclear repository. $6 billion went to 
the big spenders over here in the Federal Government. They have funded 
the United Nations with it. They have funded welfare programs with it. 
Now they want to fund more of their big government programs with it. I 
think we need to have some responsibility for the American taxpayer and 
the American ratepayer, those people who have to be responsible, that 
have to go out and earn a living, that carry a lunch box to work. By 
the way, they hope to have lights go on when they flip the lights on, 
they hope to have a safe place to live. They expect the Federal 
Government to carry out its promise, its Federal contract, to say they 
are going to take this nuclear waste and store it. Now all of a sudden 
they are saying, ``Oh, by the way, we're going to change this bill. 
We're going to ask you to pay more.''
  Mr. Chairman, it is not right. We need to keep the contract with the 
American people. We need to dispose of nuclear waste in a safe way, and 
we need to move forward with it. I would ask that Members reject this 
very expensive amendment to the American people and move forward.
  Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Chairman, I would hope that the gentleman who just 
spoke would yield me the opportunity to offer him to give back all this 
money if he would keep his nuclear waste.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. 
Kucinich].
  Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Chairman, utility bills will go up because of this 
legislation. Taxes will go up because of this bill. Utility profits and 
stocks will also go up. Is there a connection? It is an outrage that 
the American people will pay the price with their health, with higher 
utility rates and with higher tax dollars to dispose of waste which 
comes from commercial nuclear reactors. The Gibbons amendment seeks to 
mitigate this unfair condition by ensuring that there will be enough 
money in the Nuclear Waste Fund to pay for the safe disposal of high-
level nuclear waste generated at commercial nuclear reactors. Let the 
nuclear utilities pay the bill for the nuclear dump, not the American 
taxpayers.
  Mr. Chairman, the utilities exist for us. We do not exist for them. 
We give them the right to operate in the public interest, and we have 
the responsibility to protect the American taxpayers. There is a rather 
notorious nuclear reactor in northeast Ohio called the Perry Nuclear 
Power Plant. More than 20 years ago I stood on the grounds where Perry 
was being built to protest this project. It was supposed to have been 2 
reactors at a price of $1 billion, and it turned into one reactor at a 
price of $6 billion. Guess what? The reactor was built on a fault line. 
Since then the nuclear utility company has gone down into the dumper 
and the stocks have gone down. It has almost gone bankrupt. But the 
taxpayers and ratepayers of northeast Ohio have had to suffer the 
consequences.
  Mr. HALL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman 
from Michigan [Mr. Upton].
  Mr. UPTON. Mr. Chairman, I would remind my colleagues that the 
Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 required that consumers of nuclear-
generated electricity pay a fixed fee to the Nuclear Waste Fund for the 
government to manage for this program. Of the $13 billion that has been 
committed to the fund since 1983, about $6 or $7 billion in fact has 
been used for other activities not relating to this one.
  In 1982, I worked for President Reagan. I can remember his signing 
statement in 1982 when Congress passed that bill. Some of us here, not 
me, but some of the Members here voted for that bill, and President 
Reagan thought that in a few years this thing would be done. Here it 
is, 1997, 15 years later, we are debating a bill that, when enacted, 
still will not see this thing completed for another 10 or 15 years.
  We do not need this amendment. The ratepayers are paying already 
tooth and nail for this program. Not all of the money has been spent 
for the program as it was originally intended. To lift the cap on this 
program is not necessary. I would urge my colleagues to vote no.

[[Page H9705]]

  Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute and 10 seconds to the 
gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Markey].
  Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time.
  This is a great amendment. This bill puts a cap on how much money is 
going to be collected for the permanent and interim storage facility, 
and then it says that the money for the permanent repository will be 
expended for the interim facility. Because of wholesale and pretty soon 
retail competition in the marketplace, we know that there are going to 
be fewer and fewer nuclear power plants because they cannot compete 
economically. Connecticut Yankee closed down this year. Maine Yankee is 
about to close. The only place from which you can generate revenues 
from this are nuclear power plants. All the other power plants do not 
have to kick in.
  What is going to happen in the year 2002 is we may find that Yucca 
Mountain is not suitable, we will have run out of money, we will need 
more, there will not be any, we are going to have to pick a new State 
for the site. We know it will be a State with fewer than 3 Members of 
Congress. Maybe it will be a territory, I do not know, but once we do, 
we are going to have to go through the whole process again. Where will 
the money come from? Under the proponents' amendment, all of the money 
will come out of the taxpayers' pockets, even those that never had a 
single kilowatt of nuclear-generated electricity. That is wrong. The 
money should come from those that in fact enjoyed the benefit.
  The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Nevada [Mr. Gibbons] has 20 seconds 
remaining, and the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Hall] has 4 minutes 
remaining. The gentleman from Texas has the right to close.
  Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  I urge every Member of this House to support the Gibbons amendment to 
this bill. Nuclear waste has a half-life of 10,000 years. The opponents 
of this measure are thinking 5, 10 years down the road. Who is going to 
pay for the 9,990 years remaining on this bill and on this nuclear 
waste tab? It is going to be the taxpayers if we do not pass this 
amendment. The shortsighted opposition certainly has not got the best 
interests of the taxpayers of America in sight. Vote yes on this 
amendment.
  Mr. HALL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my 
time. Let me just address the matter of States rights a little bit, 
whether or not States rights have been violated. None of us want to 
violate States rights. We all claim to support States rights. Of 
course, some of us want to put national standards on them and other 
things to give them a little direction.
  But which States are denied or which rights are violated? I do not 
think any of them are because all States send a proportional group of 
selected Congressmen, each of them refigured and recalculated every 10 
years when they do the census. This site was selected by that group of 
Congressmen 10 years ago. The 47 contiguous States, I think, that did 
not get selected have some rights, also. They have the right to expect 
safe transportation. The 47 contiguous States have the right to believe 
that zero transportation reports are true. The 47 contiguous States 
have the right, I think, to believe that the Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission and the Transportation Department would require and regulate 
very strict nuclear fuel shipments and that the commercial nuclear 
industry has safely transported more than 10,000 used fuel assemblies 
and 2900 shipments. None have resulted in the release of radioactivity.
  All the States, all 50 of the States have the right to believe that 
the Department of Energy so far has conducted more than 170 public 
meetings about the transportation of used nuclear fuel across the 
country and all 50 States, contiguous States included, have the right 
to accept that H.R. 1270 would continue to permit States to choose 
alternate highway routes. No other hazardous material in the United 
States undergoes such rigorous transportation planning, even though 
only less than 1 percent of the 100 million packages of hazardous 
material shipped per year in the U.S. are used nuclear fuel.
  I object to this amendment. I urge that we defeat this amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Nevada [Mr. Gibbons].
  The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the noes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 283, further proceedings 
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Nevada [Mr. Gibbons] 
will be postponed.

                              {time}  2100

  The CHAIRMAN. It is now in order to consider Amendment No. 9 printed 
in House Report 105-354.


                Amendment No. 9 Offered by Mr. Traficant

  Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Chairman, I offer Amendment No. 9.
  The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 9 offered by Mr. Traficant:
       Page 81, insert after line 13 the following:

     ``SEC. 510. PURCHASE OF AMERICAN-MADE EQUIPMENT AND PRODUCTS.

       ``(a) In General.--It is the sense of the Congress that, to 
     the greatest extent practicable, all equipment and products 
     purchased with funds made available under this Act should be 
     American-made.
       ``(b) Notice Requirement.--In providing financial 
     assistance to, or entering into any contract with, any entity 
     using funds made available under this Act, the head of each 
     Federal agency, to the greatest extent practicable, shall 
     provide to such entity a notice describing the statement made 
     in subsection (a) by the Congress.
       ``(c) Prohibition of Contracts With Persons Falsely 
     Labeling Products as Made in America.--If it has been finally 
     determined by a court or Federal agency that any person 
     intentionally affixed a label bearing a ``Made in America'' 
     inscription, or any inscription with the same meaning, to any 
     product sold in or shipped to the United States that is not 
     made in the United States, the person shall be ineligible to 
     receive any contract or subcontract made with funds made 
     available under this Act, pursuant to the debarment, 
     suspension, and ineligibility procedures described in 
     sections 9.400 through 9.409 of title 48, Code of Federal 
     Regulations.

  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 283, the gentleman from 
Ohio [Mr. Traficant] and a Member opposed will each control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Traficant].
  Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, my amendment says if we do not buy America, we will in 
fact waste America. It also says if anyone affixes a fraudulent made-
in-America label to an import, they will be tortured and planted for 
10,000 years at Yucca Mountain.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman 
from Colorado, Mr. Dan Schaefer.
  Mr. DAN SCHAEFER of Colorado. I thank the gentleman for yielding me 
time.
  Mr. Chairman, I did not claim any time in opposition, because I think 
it is a terrific amendment, and we over on this side are certainly 
willing to accept it.
  Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to 
the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Hall], the ranking member.
  Mr. HALL of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I certainly agree, and compliment 
the gentleman on his consistent support of buy America.
  Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to 
the distinguished gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Upton], the author of 
the legislation.
  Mr. UPTON. Mr. Chairman, I would say I do not think I have opposed 
one of the gentleman's buy America amendments in the years we have been 
together on the floor, and I look forward to voting for it tomorrow.
  Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Chairman, with that, I urge an ``aye'' vote, and I 
yield back my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Traficant].
  The question was taken; and the Chairman announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. UPTON. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to House Resolution 283, further proceedings 
on

[[Page H9706]]

the amendment offered by the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Traficant] will 
be postponed.
  It is now in order to consider Amendment No. 10 printed in House 
Report 105-354.
  Mr. DAN SCHAEFER of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee 
do now rise.
  The motion was agreed to.
  Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. 
Blunt) having assumed the chair, Mr. McInnis, Chairman of the Committee 
of the Whole House on the State of the Union, reported that that 
Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 1270), to 
amend the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, had come to no resolution 
thereon.

                          ____________________