[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 62 (Thursday, May 18, 2000)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4202-S4203]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. GORTON (for himself, Mr. DeWine, Mr. Voinovich, Mrs. 
        Murray, Mr. Crapo, and Mr. Craig):
  S. 2597. A bill to clarify that environmental protection, safety, and 
health provisions continue to apply to the functions of the National 
Nuclear Security Administration to the same extent as those provisions 
applied to those functions before transfer to the Administration; to 
the Committee on Armed Services.


             legislation assuring cleanup of defense sites

 Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, in 1989, the Department of Energy 
signed an historic agreement with the State of Washington and the 
Environmental Protection Agency, committing to clean up the Hanford 
Nuclear Reservation in the South-Central part of the State of 
Washington. This pact, known as ``The Tri-Party Agreement'' has, for 
the most part, worked well to assure that the federal government keeps 
its commitment to the citizens of the state of Washington to keep the 
byproducts of nuclear materials production from harming the people who 
live and work in that area.
  Last year, responding to different pressures, Congress created the 
National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA). Some officials, 
including my own state Attorney General, are concerned that the 
creation of the NNSA may create some uncertainty as to the Department 
of Energy's continued legal obligation to clean up the site. The NNSA 
was never intended to disrupt the enforceability of legal agreements 
that assure sites such as Hanford are to be cleaned up under specific 
timelines.
  The purpose of this legislation is to clarify that environmental, 
safety and health provisions continue to apply to the functions of the 
recently created NNSA to the same extent as they applied to those 
functions before transfer to the NNSA.
  While the legislative history of the legislation creating the 
National Nuclear Security Administration demonstrated clear 
Congressional intent that the NNSA remain subject to state, federal and 
local environment, safety and health requirements, some have raised 
concern that the legislation could be construed as narrowing the 
existing waivers of federal sovereign immunity with respect to these 
requirements.

[[Page S4203]]

  The Department of Energy hosts some of the most challenging 
environmental contamination sites in the country. Although the Hanford 
site is perhaps the biggest challenge, there are sites in several other 
states as well.
  It is critical to the preservation of the environment and the 
protection of human health that states maintain their existing 
authority to enforce environmental, safety, and health requirements 
with respect to Department of Energy facilities under the NNSA's 
control.
  A wide range of support exists for this legislation clarifying that 
the earlier legislation creating the NNSA was not intended to impair 
state regulatory authority over facilities under the NNSA's 
jurisdiction. Organizations supporting this legislation include the 
National Governors Association, the National Conference of State 
Legislatures, and the National Association of Attorneys General.
  Just as this bill will clarify that the NNSA does not impair state 
regulatory authority over facilities under the NNSA's jurisdiction, the 
bill is carefully worded so as not to expand the states' authority in 
this regard. This bill simply reaffirms the ability of states to use 
the enforcement measures that are contained in cleanup agreements made 
with the federal government, such as the Tri-Party Agreement.
                                 ______