|
|
| The Nuclear Waste Debate Senators Murkowski and Bryan March 28, 1997 |
|---|
RETURN TO THE FORUM
NEWSHOUR LINKS:
November 22, 1996:
An Online NewsHour Forum on nuclear waste and health and safety issues.
June 10, 1996:
A NewsHour report on what to do with discarded nuclear warheads.
OTHER RESOURCES:
A NewsHour report on what to do with discarded nuclear warheads.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is the government agency in charge of regulating commercial nuclear power plants.
The Nuclear Energy Institute supports effort to pass S. 104.
The Critical Mass Energy Project is a nuclear watchdog group.
Yucca Flats Project - The Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management.
EPA's Yucca Flats
Why Nevada is Opposed to Yucca Flats - published by the State of Nevada Nuclear Waste Project Office.
Return to the @the Capitol Homepage.
General information, schedules and past Freshmen Forums.
Scrutinize the work of several major Congressional committees in online forums with the chairs and ranking members.
Follow the first year in Congress of Freshmen Reps. Kay Granger (R-TX) and Jay Johnson (D-WI)
On January 21, 1997, Senators Frank Murkowski (R-AK) and Larry Craig (R-ID) introduced S. 104, the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1997, with 17 co-sponsors. The legislation directs the Department of Energy to create an temporary facility for the storage of nuclear waste at the Nevada Test Site, located 100 miles north of Las Vegas, and to transport nuclear waste from around the country to the site. S. 104 also reaffirms the obligation of the Department to develop a permanent system for nuclear waste disposal.
With the passage of the bill, its sponsors hope to resolve the debate on the disposal of the nation's nuclear waste stockpile. Over 40,000 tons of spent nuclear fuel and high-level defense wastes are currently stored at 80 locations in 41 states. Most of it is stored in cooling ponds at civilian nuclear reactors. S. 104 would amend the original Nuclear Waste Policy Act passed in 1982. The original act directed the Energy Department to construct a permanent nuclear waste repository by 1998 and established the Nuclear Waste Fund, which would pay for the program through a tax on electricity produced with nuclear power. In 1987, amendments to the Act instructed the Energy Department to determine the suitability of Nevada's Yucca Mountain as a permanent depository, where canisters of nuclear waste would be entombed underground. S. 104 would allow the waste to be kept at an iterim facility until the opening of the permanent site, although Yucca Mountain will not be able to accept waste until 2015 at the earliest.
Under Murkowski's bill, the President has until December 31, 1998 to determine that Yucca Mountain will be suitable as a permanent location. If it is found to be an appropriate location, the Energy Department would begin storing waste at the Nevada Test Site by November 30, 1999. If the site is unsuitable, and the President does not determine a new interim site within 18 months, the Energy Department must build an interim storage facility at the Nevada Test Site.
Congressional supporters of S. 104 and the nuclear power industry argue that the creation of a central federal storage facility for nuclear waste will save money, allow the nation's nuclear plants to continue to operate, and enhance the safety of nuclear storage. The key issue is that many of the more than 100 nuclear reactors are running out of storage space for spent fuel. According to one estimate, storage areas at 65 reactors in 29 states will be full by the year 2010, and one-quarter of the total may eventually be forced to shut down. In addition, above-ground storage capacity.
The Nuclear Energy Institute, a Washington-based industry group, estimates that a central interim storage system would save utility companies over $10 billion and consumers almost $8 billion. Supporters of S. 104 also argue that it will be easier and safer to store the nation's nuclear waste if it is kept at a single, modern facility in an isolated area instead of numerous older facilities located near major populated areas.
The State of Nevada and many environmental organizations strongly oppose S. 104. They argue that the legislation is the product of politics and industry lobbying and poses a risk to the well-being of the population and the environment. They maintain that the plan is unnecessary because the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board that oversees the nation's high-level waste program have determined that nuclear waste can remain on site for up to 100 years without posing a serious health and environmental risk. There is therefore no scientific reason why the waste must be moved in the near future. Opponents of S. 104 point out that on site storage will provide additional time for research into alternative, safer waste disposal methods. Senator Richard Bryan (D-NV) has sponsored legislation to store nuclear waste at power plants, allowing utilities to deduct their costs from future contributions to the Nuclear Waste Fund.
Opponents point out that about 20 percent of the U.S. population lives within a mile of the routes that would be used for more than 16,000 shipments of high-level nuclear waste. Even one accident could release huge quantities of radiation and contaminate populated areas. The Nevada delegation also fears the interim site could become a permanent site if the Yucca Mountain site proves unsuitable.
Although S. 104 appears likely to pass, the President has promised to veto the measure. In July 1996, the Senate approved a similar bill in a 63 to 37 vote, but the House failed to vote on it.
The PBS NewsHour is Funded in part by: Additional Foundation and Corporate Sponsors
Program
Support
From:
Copyright © 1996- MacNeil/Lehrer Productions. All Rights Reserved. Support the kind of journalism done by the NewsHour...Become a member of your local PBS station.
