[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 86 (Thursday, May 18, 2017)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3033-S3034]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                             Yucca Mountain

  I rise today to once again speak out against the administration's 
proposal

[[Page S3034]]

to revive Yucca Mountain. I know I have said it before, and I will say 
it again: Yucca Mountain is dead. Nevada will not be our Nation's 
nuclear waste dump.
  I conveyed that message in my meeting with Secretary Perry during his 
confirmation and reiterated it ahead of his visit to Yucca in March. My 
former colleague, Senator Harry Reid, was a powerful and outspoken 
opponent of Yucca and worked hard to make sure the project did not see 
the light of day. Now I am standing between this administration and 
Yucca. I say to my colleagues on both sides of the aisle that I will be 
leading this fight.
  This is a reckless proposal. Over the last 30 years, the Federal 
Government wasted billions of taxpayer dollars to design and permit 
Yucca Mountain, all without any signal that Nevada would consent to it. 
A State without a single nuclear power plant should not have to 
shoulder the entire Nation's nuclear waste burden. We will not be run 
over by the desires of other States that want to move the nuclear waste 
that they produce, that they create out of their own backyards and then 
put it into ours.
  I will say it again: Nevada will not be our Nation's nuclear waste 
dump.
  Last week's accident at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation in Washington 
State serves as a chilling reminder of what Nevada could have to deal 
with at Yucca Mountain. I was relieved that no one was harmed after the 
tunnel collapsed but believe it serves as a wake-up call to my 
colleagues.
  We need to find a viable solution to our Nation's nuclear waste 
problem. In addition to the potential tragic loss of life, radiation 
exposure resulting from a similar event at Yucca Mountain could shatter 
Nevada's economy. This is not to mention the threat of transportation 
accidents along the proposed waste transportation routes.
  What this means is that under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act, we are 
looking at shipping 9,495 rail casks in 2,800 trains, and 2,650 trucks 
hauling one case each to Yucca Mountain over the next 50 years. If the 
capacity limit at Yucca is more than doubled as has been discussed with 
the Department of Energy, we would shift 21,909 rail casks in about 
6,700 trains and 5,025 truck casks to Yucca Mountain.
  So I ask my colleagues: Do you really believe that over the span of 
the next 50 years there will not be a single transportation accident 
with an ensuing radiological release?
  Under the DOE's proposal, these shipments would use 22,000 miles of 
railways, 7,000 miles of highways crossing over 44 States and the 
Tribal lands of at least 30 Native American Tribes, the District of 
Columbia, and 960 counties with a population of about 175 million 
people.
  Between 10 and 12 million people live within the radiological region 
of influence for route shipments; that is, within one-half mile of 
these rail and highway routes. In effect, these rail and highway routes 
would impact most of the Nation's congressional districts, estimated at 
330 districts.
  For those who are not familiar with the West or Nevada, access to 
rail corridors or highways is often difficult because they are in such 
remote locations. If there were a spill or an accident, questions 
remain within the Department of Energy regarding their response time 
for emergency radiological exposure. This is not to mention the issue 
of private ownership of rail rights-of-way, making it uncertain who 
would even control accident sites.
  What we do know is that the local communities would be the ones 
forced to suffer any type of long-term effects of radiation exposure. 
This is in a State that was home to our Nation's nuclear test site and 
the surrounding communities, which have suffered for years from 
resulting exposure.
  I ask my colleagues: Should Nevada be forced to once more to shoulder 
this burden?
  Secretary Perry, in response to last week's accident, acknowledged 
our Nation's problem with nuclear waste, saying that the nation could 
no longer kick the can down the road.
  I do not believe that our Nation should continue to kick the can--or 
in this case the cask--down the road. We must find a long-term viable 
solution to our Nation's nuclear waste problem, one that is rooted in a 
consent-based siting.
  I stand ready to work with my colleagues to make sure States have a 
voice in this process. Failure to do so will serve only to make this 
problem worse, risking future accidents similar to what we saw last 
week.
  We can no longer afford to look backward at the failed proposals of 
the past and waste even more taxpayer dollars. Instead, we need to move 
forward on a real solution to a very real problem.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. MERKLEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.