Nuclear Waste Policy Amendments Act of 2017

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. TONKO. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of H.R. 3053, the Nuclear Waste Policy Amendments Act.

First, let me recognize the hard work done by Mr. Shimkus on this bill. He has been tireless in this effort. And to his and his staff's credit, he has worked with us to make what I believe are a number of improvements to the given bill. Regardless of your position on nuclear energy, we have to acknowledge the reality that tens of thousands of tons of waste already exist. This is a problem for over 120 host communities across our country, and it will not be solved by continuing to ignore it.

But even if you do not represent one of those communities, all of our constituents are paying for this waste. Decades ago, the Federal Government entered into agreements to remove it from nuclear plants. Deadlines have been missed, and now all taxpayers have a legal liability of over $34 billion, which is being paid from the Treasury's Judgment Fund.

In my view, the most important thing this bill does is set up a path forward on interim storage, which will allow spent nuclear fuel to be stored in a consolidated location on a temporary basis while a permanent repository is pursued.

The bill includes language based upon a proposal developed by our colleague, Doris Matsui, to allow the Secretary of Energy to enter into an agreement to establish an interim storage pilot program, which can move forward directly after enactment.

Consolidating waste at a small number of sites instead of 121 communities across our country will help ensure waste is managed more safely and securely while allowing those 121 sites to begin to be redeveloped for other purposes.

I know a number of our colleagues have concerns with this bill, and I understand their position. And many Members that support this bill, including myself, have not passed judgment on the merits or final disposition of the Yucca Mountain project. That is why Members of the minority demanded a number of troubling Nevada-related provisions be removed from the bill during the committee process.

This bill will not rubber-stamp the Yucca permitting application. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission will still need to adjudicate the many remaining issues with the application, and it will need appropriations in order to do so.

I know we will hear about the challenges of transporting spent fuel to a final repository, but the reality is nuclear material is already moved around our country today without incident due to strict safety requirements. The only alternative to not moving this waste is keeping it spread out in 121 locations for tens of thousands of years.

Overall, this bill is a step in the right direction toward beginning to address our Nation's very difficult nuclear waste issues, which is why it was reported out of committee by a vote of 49-4.

I urge my colleagues to support the bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. TONKO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone), our outstanding ranking member of the Energy and Commerce Committee.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. TONKO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. McNerney).

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. TONKO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Michigan (Mrs. Dingell).

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. TONKO. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Matsui).

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. TONKO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Mexico (Mr. Ben Ray Lujan).

Mr. BEN RAY LUJAN of New Mexico. Mr. Chairman, I oppose this bill because I believe that it makes it more likely that a future interim storage site--potentially one in New Mexico--becomes a permanent home for nuclear waste.

I know that these are tough issues, and I agree that we have a responsibility to address the waste issues that result from our country entering the atomic age.

However, addressing nuclear waste is not our only responsibility. Seventy years ago, rural New Mexico became ground zero for the detonation of the first nuclear bomb. This marked the beginning of sickness and suffering for generations of people who lived and grew up in the Tularosa Basin.

``That atomic bomb,'' Gloria wrote to me, ``has caused anguish to so many people in New Mexico. . . . The people from New Mexico have suffered physically, mentally, and financially. And we are all here in hope that you will find a way to help us.''

It has been over 70 years since the Trinity Test. Seventy years, and the Federal Government has done almost nothing to recognize or compensate those impacted by that test. They are not alone.

In 1990, Congress passed the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act to begin to right this wrong. However, we have since learned that there are many more individuals who are sick or dying because they worked in the uranium industry, lived near a mining operation, or lived downwind from a test. The Navajo, Hopi, and Yavapai Apache Indian Reservations were particularly affected.

That is why I have repeatedly introduced the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act Amendments to compensate those workers. We have had Navajo elders travel out here to Washington, D.C., and ask us in Congress, ``Are you waiting for us all to die to solve this problem?'' The Rules Committee rejected amendments that I offered.

Why in the world is it that the people of New Mexico, where the first bomb went off, are the only ones that are left out of protections?

People in Nevada, Colorado, and Utah are included, but New Mexico has been left out. The first place the bomb was tested, these people weren't given a warning. All they saw was a light flash when they were in their kitchens or outside working.

Mr. Chairman, this deserves action, and I hope I can work with my colleagues to get this done.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. TONKO. Mr. Chair, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Nevada (Ms. Titus).

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. TONKO. Mr. Chair, I yield an additional 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Nevada.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. TONKO. Mr. Chair, may I inquire as to how much time I have remaining.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. TONKO. Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Nevada (Mr. Kihuen).

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. TONKO. Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Nevada (Ms. Rosen).

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. TONKO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Courtney).

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. TONKO. Mr. Chairman, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. TONKO. Mr. Chairman, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. TONKO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gene Green).

Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I thank my colleague, our ranking member, for allowing me to speak.

I rise in support of H.R. 3053, the Nuclear Waste Policy Amendments Act of 2018. Congress, back in 1982, passed the Nuclear Waste Policy Act, directing the Department of Energy and Nuclear Regulatory Commission to open a permanent repository for our Nation's spent nuclear fuel. Now, Congress is slow, but this is amazing how we haven't dealt with this.

Over three decades later, America is still without a repository, leaving tens of thousands of tons of nuclear waste vulnerable to acts of terror or other catastrophes.

If you say you are for all-of-the-above for power generation, then you need to vote for this bill, because if we are really going to use nuclear power, which we get about 20 percent in Texas, we need a place to put that waste, and not just on the sites where we produce it.

There was a decision made in the 1980s it would be out in Yucca Mountain, and that wasn't our decision, but that is there, and it is Federal property. That is where we exploded atomic bombs during the testing. Nobody is going to build condos on that property, because I was out there with the chairman of the committee.

Until the day we find interim storage to ensure 70,000 tons of spent fuel sitting in our Nation's nuclear plants are safe from harm at an interim storage facility, there is one proposed in west Texas that the folks out there want it.

I ask my colleagues to support this bill so we ca finally move the ball forward on safely storing our Nation's spent nuclear fuel.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. TONKO. Mr. Chairman, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. TONKO. Mr. Chairman, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. TONKO. Mr. Chairman, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. TONKO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, it is very rare that we consider a perfect bill. This is not the bill Mr. Pallone or I would have written on our own, and I do not think it is a bill Mr. Shimkus would have wanted on his own either, but that is the nature of compromise.

I again want to thank Mr. Shimkus and his staff for their willingness to work with us to address a number of our concerns with the initial bill.

And I want to acknowledge the hard work done by Tuley Wright, Rick Kessler, and other members of the Energy and Commerce Committee minority staff, who worked so diligently on this legislation.

I truly understand the concerns raised by my colleagues in opposition, especially those from the Nevada delegation, and I sympathize with many of their arguments, but the reality is our Nation has a substantial amount of nuclear waste, and we as a Nation need a plan to address it.

We are dealing with the constraints of legislation passed some 30 years ago, and within those constraints, I believe this bill is a step in the right direction to address our Nation's nuclear waste issues.

Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. TONKO. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment. I know that this takes the issue and the response of this bill and makes it even stronger. With that in mind, I thank my colleague and those with whom he worked on this amendment for their input, and for, again, an amendment that makes the response so much stronger.

With that, I plan to support the amendment.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. TONKO. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Illinois for yielding, and I stand in support of the amendment.

I thank the gentleman from Illinois and the gentlewoman from New York for their hard work on the amendment and for the sensitivity shown the people in host communities for our nuclear facilities across our country.

Mr. Chairman, I support this amendment and encourage our colleagues to do likewise.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source