THIS SEARCH THIS DOCUMENT THIS CR ISSUE GO TO Next Hit Forward Next Document New Search Prev Hit Back Prev Document HomePage Hit List Best Sections Daily Digest Help Doc Contents [Part] Contents CR Issues by Date
[Page: S2784]
Mr. REID addressed the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nevada.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, if I can ask the Chair, after we finish debate on this matter today, it is my understanding that, again, this matter will be taken up at 2:30 tomorrow afternoon.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. That is correct.
Mr. REID. And there will be a vote at 5:30 or 5:15?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. I believe it is scheduled for 5:15.
Mr. REID. And the debate between 2:30 and 5:15 is equally divided between the----
The PRESIDING OFFICER. It is equally divided between 2:15 and 5:15.
Mr. REID. I recognize that my friend from Minnesota has been on the floor, and I will just take a few minutes because there are many things we can talk about during the time tomorrow. I will just say, so I do not have to answer today everything that my friend from Idaho propounded, that the $80 billion figure that my friend has brought up is, I suggest, maybe not modern math. It simply does not make sense. If in fact we are talking about saving money, the thing to do would be to leave it where it is. We would save not only the cost of the site of construction at Yucca Mountain and the proposed interim storage site of billions of dollars, maybe as much as $10 billion, but we would also not have the American public frightened and concerned about the transportation of nuclear waste. We will talk about that more tomorrow.
I will also say, tomorrow we will discuss in some detail the argument that because there has been nuclear testing there, we should also have nuclear waste; we will establish that is a clearly erroneous and fallacious reason.
Also, we will spend time tomorrow indicating how this legislation would wipe out environmental laws in this country, and that is the reason all environmental organizations in this country vehemently oppose this legislation.
Mr. President, there is a lot that we need to talk about with this legislation. As indicated, however, my friend from Minnesota has been waiting all afternoon. My friend from Idaho, my friend from Alaska and the two Senators from Nevada will discuss this in more detail tomorrow.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Minnesota.
Mr. GRAMS. Mr. President, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. We are not under controlled time.
Mr. GRAMS. Before I begin, I yield a few moments to the Senator from Idaho.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Idaho.
Mr. CRAIG. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Kristine Svinicki, a legislative fellow who works with my office, be granted the privilege of the floor for the duration of the debate on S . 104 .
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The Senator from Minnesota.
Mr. GRAMS. Mr. President, I rise today in strong support of S . 104 , the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1997. This much-needed legislation, as has been outlined today, will help resolve our Nation's nuclear waste storage crisis, help restore the commitments to our Nation's ratepayers, and ultimately to save taxpayer dollars from the Department of Energy's failed policies of the past.
Again, I applaud the majority leader and Energy and Natural Resources Chairman Murkowski and Senator Craig of Idaho, for their leadership in moving this bill.
Again, bottom line, our Nation cannot afford further delay, and the time to act on this commonsense legislation is now. But for the Senate to fully appreciate the gravity of the situation, I believe a brief summary of its history is in order. Since 1982, utility ratepayers have been required to pay the Federal Government nearly $13 billion of their hard-earned money in exchange for the promise that the Department of Energy would transport and store commercially generated nuclear waste in a centralized facility by January 31, 1998. However, with this deadline less than a year away and with over $6 billion already spent by the Department of Energy, there has been little progress toward keeping this 15-year-old promise of establishing a centralized Federal storage facility.
THIS SEARCH THIS DOCUMENT THIS CR ISSUE GO TO Next Hit Forward Next Document New Search Prev Hit Back Prev Document HomePage Hit List Best Sections Daily Digest Help Doc Contents [Part] Contents CR Issues by Date