Talking points for Energy and Water Bill Amendments, no date (2 pages)

TALKING POINTS - ENERGY and WATER BILL AMENDMENTS Safety ? Under pressure from the powerful nuclear energy lobby, the Administration and the Subcommittee on Energy and Water are eager to accelerate the Yucca Mountain project despite persisting scientific problems and security risks. ? But transportation of 77,000 tons of nuclear waste across 44 states to Nevada represents an unprecedented and daunting endeavor, because the staggering volume of high level nuclear waste that would be transported as well as in the distance traveled. DOE itself has acknowledged that 300 accidents will occur involving the transportation of high level nuclear waste. ? In addition, the changed threat environment makes this task even more dangerous. ? Given the risks of accident and the heightened security concerns, ensuring the safety of the casks during transportation, and specifically ensuring that casks are reliable and safe through realistic testing is of the utmost importance. ? And yet, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission requirements for testing casks are outdated and dangerously underestimate potential accident scenarios. None of the transportation casks currently in use has ever been physically tested, nor does the NRC require full scale testing of shipping casks as part of the process to certify that the casks would be safe and reliable. ? In addition, current cask tests do not realistically reflect the risk and potential consequences of an accident. For example, the drop test entails dropping a cask 30 feet. But a an accident along a mountainous route or a bridge could cause a cask to drop several hundred feet. This drop, or a collision with an oncoming heavy vehicle, could also exceed the 30 miles/hour speed assumed in the tests. The fire test only contemplates the possibility of a fire that would burn for 30 minutes. Yet just last year, a train derailment in the Baltimore, MD tunnel burned for over 3 days. Would this fire have melted the casks, leading to a radioactive release? We do not know because tests do not account for this possibility. Cask tests also do not realistically reflect the security threats that our nation faces after 9/11. Each shipment would represent a potential target for a terrorist wishing to set off a dirty bomb. The arrest of Jose Padilla demonstrates that this is a real possibility, and that we should do everything we can to defend against this threat. ? But, the NRC does not require cask tests to include missiles even though the risk that a terrorist might aim a missile at a nuclear waste shipment is no longer negligible, and even though there is evidence that a missile can in fact penetrate a cask. ? We cannot afford to let the nuclear industry's efforts to expand at the expense of safety and cheat us out of requiring adequate safety review. Thus I propose the following amendment to the Water and Energy Bill: This amendment would ... Renewable energy ? The Bush Administration supports the nuclear power industry's goal of adding 50,000 megawatts of nuclear generating capacity (approximately 50 nuclear reactors) by 2020. ? In his on-going plan to subsidize the industry, the President is pushing a new initiative called Nuclear Power 2010 which mandates the construction of new commercial reactors by 2010 without resolving any of the nuclear waste issues. The Administration is working closely with the industry to pave the way for these new plants. ? The Administration FY2003 budget requests $46.5 million for nuclear energy technologies, including $38.5 million for the President's Nuclear Power 2010 program, a 480% increase over last year's request. ? This month, the FY2003 House Energy and Water Appropriations Subcommittee approved $41.5 million for nuclear energy technologies and did not specify how much would go to the Nuclear 2010 program. ? At the same time, the Subcommittee provided $ 11 million less than the President requested for renewable energy programs. The President requested $407 million. ? Renewable energy offers the safest and cleanest energy alternative. It does not result in the radioactive and long-lasting waste that nuclear energy produces, and does not produce the pollution that coal and oil yield. In addition it does not deplete scarce natural resources, and is an important part of the response to the problem of green house gas emissions. ? Promoting renewable energy now is also part of a necessary investment for future energy production and efficiency. ? I am offering an amendment to the Energy and Water Appropriations bill that reflect the Administration's budget request, promotes safe energy production sources, and responds to production needs. ? This amendment would decrease the nuclear power 2010 program by $11 million and increase the renewable energy resources program budget by this same amount, which would fully fund the President's FY2003 budget request.