[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 70 (Monday, May 21, 2001)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5274-S5275]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. THURMOND:
  S. 919. A bill to require the Secretary of Energy to study the 
feasibility of developing commercial nuclear energy production 
facilities at existing Department of Energy sites; to the Committee on 
Energy and Natural Resources.
  Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, one does not need to look much further 
than their mailbox and the bills they receive for filling the gas tank 
or heating the house to realize that the United States is in need of 
direction and leadership when it comes to an energy policy. I am 
pleased that President Bush and Vice President Cheney have unveiled 
their energy plan and I look forward to working with the Administration 
on this important issue.
  The President's National Energy Policy is a long term approach to 
addressing our Nation's energy challenges. The policy is a 
comprehensive plan to address the needs for additional energy 
production and environmental protection. It will promote energy 
efficiency and new technologies to modernize the Nation's energy 
infrastructure. The President's plan will help increase energy supply 
through clean coal technology, nuclear energy, renewable and 
alternative energy, and energy conservation. Now is the appropriate 
time to address these issues before a major energy crisis jeopardizes 
our economy, national security, and our standard of living.
  I am especially pleased that the President highlighted production 
sources that have been ignored and shunned in recent years such as 
clean coal and nuclear power as energy sources which must again be 
embraced. This is a long overdue recognition of the valuable and 
important roles that nuclear and coal power can and must play in 
meeting the energy needs of the United States. These two energy sources 
have clear benefits. However, their increased role in meeting national 
needs will not be realized without challenge.
  To be certain, plans to build any new nuclear production plants will 
be opposed by some quarters. Those who refuse to recognize the 
indispensable role of nuclear power will do everything to delay and 
undermine the construction of new production facilities. Essentially 
these anti-nuclear obstructionists will seek to create as many 
obstacles as they can. Past examples have witnessed lawsuits and 
intervener tactics that drove plant costs up by hundreds of percent and 
delayed the facility coming on line by decades.
  Given such examples, it would certainly not seem that building new 
production facilities would be a financially appealing or rewarding 
proposition to a utility company. Yet the truth of the matter is that 
we desperately need to build new nuclear power production plants. 
Presently, the United States gets approximately 20 percent of its power 
from nuclear plants. Even under the most optimistic projections, the 
majority of the Nation's 103 nuclear power facilities will be coming to 
the end of their service in the coming years.
  The question before us is how do we move forward with increasing this 
critical energy infrastructure but doing so in a more timely and cost-
efficient manner than what took place in the past. The President's 
National Energy Policy Report recommends an expansion at existing 
utility power plant sites. I am pleased that the President addressed 
this issue. As the report states, many existing nuclear power sites 
have the capacity to include additional reactors. This is an 
outstanding initiative. However, I remain concerned that even with 
these new reactors at existing sites the total percentage of energy 
created by nuclear power will decrease. Such a scenario would only 
exacerbate the energy shortage for years to come. Ultimately, we must 
identify new sites for the safe expansion of nuclear energy. I believe 
the solution to this challenge is creating ``energy campuses'' at 
existing Department of Energy facilities throughout the United States. 
More specifically, I am proposing co-locating civilian power production 
facilities on Department of Energy reservations such as: Hanford; the 
Nevada Test Site; the

[[Page S5275]]

Idaho National Environmental Engineering Laboratory; and, the Savannah 
River Site.
  Creating such ``energy campuses'' would solve any number of problems 
associated with building a new civilian production facility. To begin, 
there is no need to secure new land or to convince the local populace 
that having a nuclear facility nearby is not a safety issue. Simply 
put, these are pro-nuclear communities that would welcome new 
industrial investment. Furthermore, it makes for a quicker and less 
contentious licensing process. Finally, it reduces the amount of new 
infrastructure required as you would be ``leveraging'' against what 
already exists at these locations.
  The benefits of such a plan are multiple, not the least being that it 
would get nuclear power plants built and on line rapidly. Several are 
in the west, the Nevada Test Site, Idaho National Environmental 
Engineering Laboratory, and Hanford, Washington, and each would be able 
to directly or indirectly provide more power to energy starved 
California. Furthermore, this plan guarantees long-term energy supply 
reliability while not contributing to greenhouse gases or depleting gas 
reserves.
  These sites were ideal for locating nuclear projects fifty years ago, 
and they remain so to this day. It makes perfect sense to use these 
existing assets as a platform upon which to expand our civilian nuclear 
power production capabilities. I am certain that this ``energy campus'' 
plan offers something for everyone, and if the Bush Administration is 
going to move forward with relying more heavily on nuclear energy, then 
this initiative is one way in which to meet the goal of making certain 
the energy needs of the United States are met.
  In order to take the first step toward establishing these energy 
campuses, I am introducing a bill that will direct the Secretary of 
Energy to undertake a study regarding the feasibility of establishing 
civilian nuclear power production facilities at existing Department of 
Energy sites.
  The economy of the United States is dependent upon reasonably priced 
energy. It is what is required to power everything from the traditional 
service of bringing goods to market to running the computers upon which 
engineers make advances in the high technology industry. There is 
nothing that we touch that does not rely on energy, and the less 
expensive the energy is, the more reasonably priced the goods or 
services we are purchasing or using will be. Simply put, Americans 
enjoy, expect, and demand reasonably priced energy. If we are going to 
continue to provide this resource at an affordable rate, which is a 
goal we must meet in order to keep our economy the world's strongest 
and most diverse, then we are going to have to look for innovative ways 
in which to supply power. It is time once again to recognize the value 
of nuclear power production and to find ways to bring more of these 
facilities ``on-line'' as quickly as possible. Establishing energy 
campuses at Department of Energy reservations will meet these 
objectives and I am certain that my colleagues will join me in 
supporting this legislation. I ask unanimous consent that the text of 
the bill be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                 S. 919

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

     SECTION 1. STUDY TO DETERMINE FEASIBILITY OF DEVELOPING 
                   COMMERCIAL NUCLEAR ENERGY PRODUCTION FACILITIES 
                   AT EXISTING DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY SITES.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary of Energy shall conduct a 
     study to determine the feasibility of developing commercial 
     nuclear energy production facilities at Department of Energy 
     sites in existence on the date of enactment of this Act, 
     including--
       (1) options for how and where nuclear power plants can be 
     developed on existing Department of Energy sites;
       (2) estimates on cost savings to the Federal Government 
     that may be realized by locating new nuclear power plants on 
     Federal sites;
       (3) the feasibility of incorporating new technology into 
     nuclear power plants located on Federal sites;
       (4) potential improvements in the licensing and safety 
     oversight procedures of nuclear power plants located on 
     Federal sites;
       (5) an assessment of the effects of nuclear waste 
     management policies and projects as a result of locating 
     nuclear power plants located on Federal sites; and
       (6) any other factors that the Secretary believes would be 
     relevant in making the determination.
       (b) Report.--Not later than 90 days after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to Congress 
     a report describing the results of the study under subsection 
     (a).
                                 ______