[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 77 (Wednesday, June 12, 2002)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5396-S5397]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          NUCLEAR WASTE POLICY

  Mr. CRAIG. Mr. President, I want to speak about a need of this Senate 
to act and act soon. I am speaking about a provision within the Nuclear 
Waste Policy Act of 1982 that required a procedure by which this 
country would ultimately step forward in determining a permanent 
storage site for high-level nuclear waste. It is known here as Yucca 
Mountain in the State of Nevada. It has been a high-profile issue, one 
that has been given a great deal of debate over the last good number of 
years, but one that has come again to the floor of the Senate in which 
we must make a decision to make one step forward in a review and 
licensing process to determine whether the site of Yucca Mountain in 
the State of Nevada is capable of handling and effectively storing for 
10,000 years the high-level nuclear waste of this country.
  In the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, we established what is known 
as an expedited procedure for consideration of the resolution approving 
the President's selection of the nuclear waste site. Now the President 
has selected, because the NEPA process through the Department of Energy 
has determined that it is now time to go to the Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission for their review and their determination as to whether the 
site ought to be licensed. So the time is at hand, as was seen in 1982 
under this act.
  The expedited procedure under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act, as 
amended, specifically provides that once an approval resolution is on 
the calendar--and that means the authorizing committee has acted and 
sent it forward, as it has--the law says very specifically that any 
Senator may move to proceed to its consideration. And the motion to 
proceed is privileged and nondebatable.
  Under current practices, measures normally reach this floor through 
agreement to a unanimous consent request by the majority leader. It is 
critically important for the operation and the procedure of this Senate 
on a daily basis that the majority leader of the Senate set the agenda. 
But there is always the provision, because we are all equal in the 
Senate under the Constitution, that sometimes the majority leader may 
not set the agenda the way the majority of the Senate would want it 
set. And, of course, that can be objected to and a vote to proceed.
  But what we are talking about here is recognition of a special 
procedure--unprecedented, or at least certainly one that does not 
establish the precedent of the normal decorum of the Senate. If 
unanimous consent cannot be obtained, as we know now, the Senate has 
taken care of that procedure by simply allowing the rule or the 
decision to be tested.
  The Nuclear Waste Policy Act provides special statutory authority to 
make exceptions to the contemporary practice to which I have just 
spoken.
  Let me say that again. The Nuclear Waste Policy Act provides a 
special statutory authority to make exception to contemporary practice. 
In other words, it is not to establish a precedent. It is not to 
override the majority leader, as some would like to have it thought 
today and are certainly arguing. It is in fact the law of the country 
and not the rules of the Senate to which we are speaking. It is one of 
four statutes adopted since the 100th Congress that expressly allow any 
Senator to offer a motion to proceed to an item of approval or 
disapproval. Those statutes are not redundant to Senate rules and do 
not upset contemporary practice regarding motions to proceed to other 
legislation on the Senate calendar.
  Exercising a Senator's right under the statutory authority in the 
Nuclear Waste Policy Act should be considered extraordinary, and not a 
general assault on the normal prerogatives of the majority leader.
  When the Senate passed the Nuclear Waste Policy Act, it envisioned a 
circumstance in which a leader might be unwilling to propound a motion 
to proceed. It appears that may be what is happening on the floor of 
the Senate. Thus, the law expressly permits someone else to act so 
Congress can work its will before a statutory deadline passes.
  Finally, let me say this: If a leader will not propound a motion to 
proceed, he cannot contend his leadership prerogatives will be violated 
if someone else moves the procedure. You can't contend that you have 
been violated if in fact that is the law of the land. And that is the 
law of the land.
  The very procedure I have outlined is expressly stated in the Nuclear 
Waste Policy Act. Agreement with such a position gives the leader 
absolute and unilateral authority to veto power over consideration of 
any legislation, if in fact that can be argued. But at times, when 
Trent Lott was majority leader of the Senate, that was challenged, and 
a majority of the Senate stayed with the leader when it dealt with 
contemporary legislation of the moment and the setting of the calendar 
outside the statutes of the Federal Government within the rules of the 
Senate.
  I wanted to speak about that briefly this morning because I know that 
is now being talked about amongst us Senators as we ultimately come to 
a time, prior to late July, when we must address this issue for the 
sake of the country, for the sake of ratepayers, certainly for the sake 
of the future of the energy sources of our country, and especially for 
nuclear-generated energy.
  It is important to understand, and I will be to the Chamber speaking 
out about this issue more as we develop it. I would hope that the 
majority leader or the authorizing committee chairman who brought the 
resolution forward would act as they should under the rules to 
establish a time and a date certain when this Senate can debate and act 
responsibly on this most critical national environmental issue.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona.
  Mr. KYL. Mr. President, I compliment the Senator from Idaho for

[[Page S5397]]

making this last point. He is absolutely right. Under the law that we 
passed, we have to consider what we are going to do with nuclear waste 
before the middle of July. And there is only one procedure under which 
it can be done. If the majority leader does not bring it up, then the 
statute provides anybody else can. That is what will happen.
  The Senator from Idaho is exactly correct. I compliment him on his 
leadership on this issue.

                          ____________________