Congressional Record, Volume 133, Number 185, November 18, 1987

United States of America Congressional Record PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE 100th CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION Vol. 133 WASHINGTON, WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 18, 1987_No. 185 Senate Mr. HECHT. I thank the distinguished Senator. I have listened with great interest to the discussion of Senator Johnston, Senator McClure, Senator Simpson, each complimenting one another on being such fine attorneys in the courtroom. Well, Mr. President, I can say to you that I am not a fine attorney. Mr. President, I can say to you I am not an attorney at all. Mr. President, I can say to you that I have been a practical businessman for 35 years. Mr. President, I stand here today realizing that the U.S: Senate is about to make a major mistake and that there is little that this Senator can do to stop it. During the last few days, I have pointed out to this body that the road it is on?the road toward deep geologic disposal of nuclear waste, is the wrong. road. I have pointed out that ther^are much better alternatives available. I have pointed out the need to reorient our national policy away from deep geologic disposal and toward reprocessing of nuclear waste. I have pointed out the merits of further research on subseabed disposal. During this debate, I have pointed out the dangers of committing our Nation to deep geologic disposal which has not been proven safe. I have talked about the billions of dollars we've already spent and the many billions more this country will be committing to an unwise policy. But, the horse has left the barn. It's too late to close the door. This decision has been made. It's the wrong decision but, it has been made nevertheless. Realizing that the road had been chosen and that the Congress was going to commit our Nation to deep geologic disposal, I have offered amendments in an effort to make this a safer and better policy. The 17 Hecht amendments that have been attached to this legislation, 12 in committee and 5 here on the floor, will together go a long way toward making deep geologic disposal safer. They will solve many of the transportation problems and will protect any State that is forced to receive the dump. They will also keep alive the necessary work that needs to be done on alternatives to keep geologic disposal of spent fuel. Specifically, the Hecht amendments now attached to this legislation will: Require a study, by September 30, 1989, of the feasibility of reprocessing spent fuel of different ages. Require that before construction of a repository might actually begin, 10 or more years from now, the Congress will have another opportunity to reconsider the merits of reprocessing spent nuclear fuel. Require that if the site at Yucca Mountain, NV, is characterized for a repository, then that work will include a thorough evaluation of any possible conflict between continued weapons testing at the Nevada test site, the man-made earthquakes this produces, and the safety of a repository that might be constructed nearby. Ensure that sufficient Federal funds will be made available to a State where a repository is located, in order to make transportation improvements to that the waste shipments can be routed safely, and around urban areas. Require all high level nuclear waste packages to be licensed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Require the Energy Department to abide by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's rules for notifying States before waste is shipped. Require the Energy Department to provide funds and assistance to train State and local agencies involved with high level nuclear^ waste transportation. """ Require that waste transportation package prototypes by* submitted to actual tests, not Just computer simulated tests. Require the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to examine other nation's high level nuclear waste packages to see if any are safer that what we plan to use in this country. Require the Energy Department to pay for on-site State oversight for quality control of site characterization and repository construction. Require the Energy Department to consult with the Defense Department and certify that a repository to be named by the President would not jeopardize essential national defense activities nearby, such as those which take place at Nellis Air Force Base or the Nevada test site. Require the Energy Department to promptly report to the Congress on the immediate funding needs for sub-seabed disposal research. Establish a special office in the Energy Department to conduct research on subseabed disposal of nuclear waste. Require a study of the advantages of future long-term research on sub-seabed disposal. Require the Energy Department to comment on the Federal Government's financial responsibilities to a State where a repository might eventually be located, based on the Nevada State Legislature's resolution calling for compensation of a repository State. Require that a State where a repository is located receive special consideration for Energy Department research contracts, such as the superconducting super collider. Require a study of the advantages of 50-year storage of high level nuclear waste before moving it to a repository, allowing for public comment, and specifically analyzing the long-term storage practices of other countries. Mr. President, when the debate on this issue began here on the floor of the Senate, I set three goals to guide my actions during that debate. First, I wanted to educate my colleagues about reprocessing, and research on subseabed disposal of nuclear waste. That objective has clearly been met. I made three lengthy and fairly technical speeches on these subjects, which I trust my colleagues found useful and enlightening. Second, I wanted to amend the bill so that we would not foreclose options other than deep geologic disposal of spent fuel. That objective has also been met. The bill now contains an amendment requiring another look at reprocessing spent fuel, before the construction of a repository begins. The bill also contains two amendments designed to encourage further research on subseabed disposal of high level nuclear waste. My third goal was to make the current program of deep geologic disposal a fairer and safer program. I achieved this objective by attaching two amendments to the bill. The first would make site characterization of Yucca Mountain more thorough and technically satisfactory, should that site eventually be chosen for serious study as a repository. The other makes sure that adequate Federal funds will be available for transportation improvements in any State that get stuck with a repository. This amendment ensures that waste shipments can at least be routed so they don't pass through the most densely populated areas in a repository State. The legislative skill of the chairman of the Energy Committee has been amply demonstrated over the last several weeks, and his ability to marshal votes here on the floor has underscored the wisdom of the approach I have taken to this bill. Rather than betting my State's future on a dramatic but ultimately fruitless filibuster, I have instead amended this basically unacceptable bill to make it safer, fairer, more flexible, and better policy for the people of Nevada and all of America. Mr. President, this body is about to make the wrong decision on the disposal of nuclear waste. I can't stop the decision today, but my fight will not end here. As long as I am a member of the U.S. Senate I will fight deep geologic disposal of nuclear waste. It is wrong and should be stopped. My colleagues can expect to hear from me on a regular basis on the merits of reprocessing and the potential of subseabed disposal. You can expect to see me take whatever steps are necessary to stop a policy which is totally wrong. As long as I am in the Senate you can expect me to do whatever I can to kill this policy. The odds are overwhelmingly against me but, I've faced overwhelming odds before. Years from now, when people look back on the actions I have taken in this body to stop deep geologic disposal of nuclear waste, I hope it reminds them of my favorite poem. The poem is about the men who built those great medieval cathedrals which are monuments not just to the love of men and women for God, but also to the labor by which they share in the work of the Creator. When the Cathedral builders start their task they see the overwhelming task ahead. But, step by step, inch by inch, the move the task along until suddenly it is completed. Here is the poem: They climbed on sketchy ladders toward God, With winch and pulley hoisted hewn rock into heaven, Inhabited sky with hammers, defied gravity, Defied stone, took up God's house to meet him. And came down to their suppers and small beer; Every night slept, lay with their smelly wives, Quarrelled and cuffed the children, lied, Spat, sang, were happy or unhappy, And every day took to the ladders again; Impeded the rights of way of another summer's Swallows, grew greyer, shakier, became less inclined To fix a neighbor's roof of a fine evening. Saw naves sprout arches, clerestories soar, Cursed the loud fancy glaziers for their luck. Somehow escaped the plague, got rheumatism. Decided it was time to give it up, To leave the spire to others; stood in the crowd Well back from the vestments at the consecration, Envied the fat bishop his warm boots, Cocked up a squint eye and said, "I bloody did that." That's how we will stop deep geologic disposal of nuclear waste. Not here today. But inch by inch and step by step. What we are about to do today is wrong and, as long as I am here I'll fight to change this faulty policy. Like the cathedral builders, I will keep at it until I can stand back and look at a better nuclear waste policy and say? "I bloody did that." Mr. McCLURE. I thank the distinguished chairman for yielding this time. ? , .__ We voted on this issue. I do not see that this motion is any different from the issues presented to us on earlier votes. This is a repetition by those who do not want this legislation. They do not want a solution. They do not want to move this program forward. At least the Senator from Nevada. [Mr. Hecht] has identified his position clearly. He does not like any part of it and he is going to try to stop it. Others have the same objective, but do not say so. They are trying to delay, delay, and delay. That is what I see in the substitute before us, the institutionalization of delay of the decisionmaking process on Mr. EVANS. They complained about legislating on an appropriation act and now overnight have submitted a 42-page amendment to an appropriation act. So I think the question of process has been pretty well laid aside. It is the question of substance. Mr. President, I listened to the Senator from Nevada, Senator Hecht. And I agree with much of what he said. I think, frankly, we are moving too fast on deep surface storage as compared with monitored retrievable storage. But the committee bill of the Energy Committee authorizes an MRS facility, it authorizes us to move ahead, it gives us a chance to find out what we need and what we can do with an MRS, and we have a lot better chance of using that to turn, as I think we ultimately should do and must do, to the same sequence of operations that every other nation has used: that is. to move ahead on an MRS, put it into effect with well understood technology and give us more time then to settle on a final deep geologic storage.