[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 158 (2012), Part 6]
[House]
[Pages 8013-8014]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                             YUCCA MOUNTAIN

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from 
Illinois (Mr. Shimkus) for 5 minutes.
  Mr. SHIMKUS. Mr. Speaker, I come back to the floor again--this is my 
13th time, really--doing a tour of the United States highlighting the 
locations where we currently store high-level nuclear waste in this 
country.

                              {time}  1040

  With the end of this location, I will have placed in the Record the 
position of our U.S. Senators in each one of these States on where they 
stand on either keeping high-level nuclear waste in their State at 
their location or helping us move to a centralized repository at Yucca 
Mountain in the desert in Nevada.
  So let's go to the location. Here's Yucca Mountain, which is, by law, 
the site, based upon the 1982 Nuclear Waste Policy Act and the 
amendments passed in 1987. So I'm comparing it to a place in Virginia 
very close by, the North Anna Nuclear Generating Station on North Anna 
Lake, which is a recreational lake that many people in Virginia know.
  Yucca Mountain right now has currently no nuclear waste on site. What 
about North Anna? North Anna has 1,200 metric tons of uranium, spent 
nuclear fuel, on site.
  If we had nuclear waste in Yucca Mountain, where would it be? It 
would be stored 1,000 feet underground. Where is the nuclear waste 
stored at North Anna? It's stored above the ground in pools and in 
casks.
  If it was at Yucca Mountain, as designed by law, where would it be in 
comparison to the groundwater? Well, it would be a thousand feet above 
the water table because Yucca Mountain is in a desert. What about North 
Anna? Well, it is 53 feet above the groundwater. And as you can see 
from the photo, it's right next to a major lake in the Commonwealth of 
Virginia.
  If the waste was at Yucca Mountain, how far would it be from the 
largest body of water in the area? It would be 100 miles from the 
Colorado River. Again, from the photo, you see that North Anna is right 
next to the lake.
  So let's look at the Senators from the Commonwealth of Virginia, and 
in their time serving, what's their position on where the nuclear waste 
should be? Should it stay in the Commonwealth of Virginia or should it 
move to the desert underneath a mountain?
  Well, let's start with Senator Webb, who's not running for 
reelection. He's been in the Chamber now 5\1/2\ years. No stated 
position. It's kind of hard to believe you can be a U.S. Senator who

[[Page 8014]]

has nuclear waste on site and does not have a stated position on 
whether you want nuclear waste stored right next to a recreational lake 
in your State or moved underneath a mountain in the desert. Senator 
Warner came 2 years after Senator Webb. He's been there 4 years. No 
stated position.
  Why is this concerning? Well, we go to the total tally of our 100 
U.S. Senators based on either votes taken in the Senate or public 
statements rendered, and this is what we have as of today. Remember, 
I've come to the floor 13 different times identifying nuclear waste 
storage facilities all around the country. Most of the time they're 
generating stations. Sometimes they're Department of Defense waste 
sites like Hanford, Washington, which is the first place that I talked 
about.
  Based upon our tally, we have 55 votes for a high-level nuclear waste 
central repository at Yucca Mountain. We have 22 individuals--we 
noticed two today--who have never taken a position whether the high-
level nuclear waste should be in their State, in their locality, or in 
the desert underneath a mountain. We also have 23 that have cast votes 
or made statements against that.
  Now, why is this tally important? Well, it only takes 60 votes to 
move a piece of legislation in the U.S. Senate, cloture debate based 
upon a filibuster than a simple majority vote. So the question is: When 
will these 22 Senators at least make some position statement on the 
high-level nuclear waste repository?
  Now, there are four other Senators that I've included in this--two 
from Alaska, two from Hawaii. They have no nuclear waste in their 
State. But Senator Begich from Alaska has no stated position. Senator 
Murkowski voted for the high-level nuclear waste storage site. She's 
also from Alaska. Senator Akaka voted ``no'' in a 2002 vote. Senator 
Inouye voted ``no'' in a 2002 vote. So that finishes the culmination of 
all the Senators.
  Based upon the problem in Japan with Fukushima Daiichi and the issue 
of high-level nuclear waste, isn't it about time we stop this 
administration's attack and move to Yucca Mountain?

                          ____________________