ML20023B895

Discusses co-location of Test & Evaluation Facility & Geologic Repository,Per 830318 Commission Briefing on Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982.Related Info Encl

ML20023B895
Person / Time
Issue date:	04/05/1983
From:	Dircks W NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO)
To:	Chilk S NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY)
Shared Package
ML20023B893	List: ML20023B892 ML20023B895
References
REF-10CFR9.7 NUDOCS 8305060700
Download: ML20023B895 (15)

Text

..

g%9 k UNITED STATES 3 f,c g.

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION C

WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 5

t.

I p

APR 5 1983 MEMORANDUM FOR:

Samuel J. Chilk Secretary FROM:

William J. Dircks Executive Director for Operations

SUBJECT:

NUCLEAR WASTE POLICY ACT OF 1982:

C0-LOCATION OF THE TEST & EVALUATION FACILITY AND A GEOLOGIC REPOSITORY At the Msrch 18, 1983 Comission briefing on the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 (the Act), there was a discussion of co-location of the Test &

Evaluation Facility (T&E) and a geologic repository. The Staff Requirements-Memorandum of March 28, 1983 requested a clarification and legislative history of the.co-location question.

Under the Act, DOE is authorized to construct a T&E facility either at a candidate repository site or at some other location.

If DOE proposes to construct a facility at a " candidate site" or " repository site," site selection and development must be conducted in accordance with the procedures applicable to repositories.

Further, DOE may not begin construction.of any surface facility for the T&E prior to issuance by the Comission of a construction authorization for a repository at the site involved. Section 305(b) of the Act. See also the discussion in Enclosure 2 of SECY-83-107.

If the facility is constructed off-site, it is'not licensable by NRC and not subject to the extensive public, State and tribal participation processes prescribed for geologic repositories.

The legislative history on the co-location question (Attachments 1 and 2) is.

fairly extensive.

In general, it indicates a Congressional desire to ensure that a T&E facility does not become a "back-door" repository without undergoing fl,/y/)

f the full public and NRC r ocesses envisioned for respositories.

In addition, Corgress wanted to avoid' premature commitment to any particular candidate repository site that construction of a T&E facility prior to approval of the candidate site. as a repository location couW produce. However, neither the Act nor the legislative history define with precision the precise 8305060700 830328 PDR 10CFR PLR PJ9.7

• v,'

j

't,

, boundaries of a " candidate site." E Accordingly, difficult questions could arise if DOE were to propose to construct a T&E facility in close proximity to a candidate site. Since the answer in any given case would be both difficult and highly fact specific, it is probably a better course not to speculate at this time concerning what position DOE might take in interpreting the T&E provisions of the Act.

I DISTRIBUTION BBerson

)

WJ0lmstead

($ipedWlilliam J.Dircks j

WJDircks, EDO R/F, ED0 S/F OELD R/F, OELD S/F, Regs R/F William J. Dircks l

Central File Executive Director for Operations JDavis, NMSS RMinogue, RES Senate Legislative History

House Legislative History i

l cc: Chairman Palladino Commissioner Gilinsky Commissioner Ahearne Commissioner Roberts Commissioner Asselstine i

I

~1/

For example, the term " candidate site" is defined in the Act as "an area, within a geologic and hydrologic system, that is recommended by the Secretary...for site characterization, approved by the President...for site characterization, or undergoing site characterization." Section 2(4).

Thus a candidate site appears to be something smaller than a geologic or hydrologic system, but no minimum limit is specified. However, the concept of site characterization clearly implies that some area larger than the immediate boundaries of a proposed repository must be examined.

Similarly, an early Senate Report (No.97-282), comenting on provisions in S.1662 (which were subsequently dropped in favor of the House language) states that DOE could use "different areas within the same geologic formation at the same site for the T&E facility and for a repository provided the two facilities are not physically connected and that NRC requirements to preserve the integrity of an available repository site are satisfied." Since the Senate provisions were ultimately dropped in favor of substantially different House language, the viability of this approach is problematical. Discussion in the House, while reasonably clear on the policy grounds for the.co-location provisions, do not enunciate standards for determining when geograph-ically close facilities should be considered co-located for purposes of the Act either.

0FC :0 ELD A,.

n

0Et

EDO

____:1__ p n (v :

NAME :BBerson:de :

tead :WJDitcky

_____:____________:m g7 q.__ :___,________:_____......:___... ____:....________:.._________

DATE :4/1/83

4/1/83

4/5/83

"^

g wwm

t 9

ATTACHMENT 1:

SENATE LEr,ISLATIVE HISTORY a

e i

i 1

k

?

i

i

_... ~. --

,. -. s. a.,.~,.

.AM Calendar No. 393 I'2 h

977u Cowcasse '

SENATE Raroer i.],;.' l-

{

1st Session No.97-282 e s'.

o.

NATIONAL NUCLEAR WASTE POLICY ACT OF 1981 Novuunsa 30,1981.-Ordered to be printed Mr. SAMPSON (for Mr. McCwar), from the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, and on behalf of Mr. SIMPsON, from the Committee on Environment and Public Works, submitted the fol-lowing JOINT RERORT together with ADDITIONAL AND SUPPLEMENTAL VIEWS iTo accompany S.16621 j

The Committees on Energy and Natural Resources and Environ-ment and Public Works, to which was jointl referred the bill l

I (S.1662) to establish a limited program for ederal storage of spent fuel from civilian nuclear powerplants to set forth a Federal pc! icy, initiate a program, and establish a na,tional schedule for the disposal of nuclear waste from civilian activities, and for other i

purposes, having considered the same, each committee reports fa-vorably thereon with an amendment in the nature of a substitute and recommends that the bill, as respectively amended, do pass.

Pumrosz l

The fundamental purpose of the National Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1931 is to estabbsh the policy of Federal responsibility for j

the interim storage of commercial spent nuclear fuel on a limited basis, and for the long-term storage and disposal of commercial i

l high-level nuclear waste and commercial spent fuel. It provides a mechanism.by which States and Indian tribes partici te in health and safety matters relating to these efforts. A Fede 1 program to implement these policies is established and is financed through a

,O+.

l I

, 7.g 1

+.s

% e.. w y -* y -p y

S.

..e-

- r.,wp w,,, n.7w gggw

,*ar *:***.tv **. gw 9.q

' 3 t

l

_. - ~.- =

~

e 22

.h to be met. However, in the event that the DOE application is not MMk submitted by the statutory deadline, the Committee expects NRC' 3* M.T licensing review to be completed within three and one-half yea

. W: :

after the application is submitted.

c. Tbe Committee amendment also provides a detailed plan or

" road map" for the application cl the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) to the development of geolegic re_positor-ies. These provisions do not modify the requirements of NEPA, but rather define how those requirements are to be satisified in the development of geologic repositories. First, the Committee amend-

)

i ment specifies that the activities of the President and the Secre-tary in selecting sites to be characterized are preliminary decision-making activities, and as such, are not subject to NEPA. Second, the Committee amendment specifies that site characterization ac-tivities are subject to NEPA, but that the requirements of NEPA 1

will be fully satisfied by the preparation of an environmental as-sessment, prepared pursuant to the Secretary's NEPA regulations, of the impacts of site characterization activities. In that regard, the Committee has deleted the limitation in the bill that the assess-ment consider c'ily the noaradiological impacts of site characteriza-tion.

The Committee amendment specifies that the Secretary's recom-mendation to the President on the selection of a characterized site for development as a repository is a mWor Federal action s' 9-cantly affecting the quality of the human environment for A

purposes. Thus, a full environmental impact statement on the pro-posed project must accompany each such recom" andation to the President. The Committee amendment also specifies that certain issues need not be considered in these statements to satisfy the requirements of NEPA. Specifically, the statement need not consid-er the need for a repository, the time of the initial availability of the repository or other alternatives to the repository for the isola tion 0; the spe,nt fuel and high level waste. The Committee amend ment also limits the consideration of alternate sites to those other sites that have been characterized under the bill at the time the recommendation is made.

Finally, the Committee amendment directs that NRC rely on the environmental impact statement prepared by DOE to the extent possible, consistent with the independent responsibilities of the NRC. The Committee intends that NRC minimize as much as possible the need to duplicate work already done by DOE in the uepartment's environmental im

..l intent, the Committee expects et statement. To carry out this E to consult with NRC and to consider in the De - rtment's statement to the extent possible those ar_eas that_the N believes imn% t _

d. The Committee amendment also makes several changes to the i

provisions in title IV of the bill authorizing the development of a the purpose of the facihty is to provide generically

{

rather than site-specific, information on nuclear waste handling, packaging and emplacement technology. The changes also require

~

that the proposal for the facility include a detailed plan, schedule

P.

.l and termination date for the research and development activities i

l l

!i E anned to be conducted at the facility. Finally, the changes in the Committee amendment specify that the Secretary may select a e-e-a

_M6 w-w-

"pr****

i

,, - ~ - -

~ ~ - - -

a l

3

.I 23

'~

!l y

pexisting research and development site for the facility, but that the

)%':

l g

%cretary may r.ot select any area of a site that the Secretary qg Nntnntends to recommend for characterization for a repository that

'I

' would permit the physical integration of the test and evaluation HA' facility and the repository.

q; The changes recommended by the Committee regarding the test As and evaluation facility are intended to accomplish three purposes.

npo First, by retaining the existing schedule for the facility and limita-tions on NRC and State reviews, and by permitting the use of an j.

existing research and development site for the facility, the Commit-e tee intends that the generic information to be derived from the l

facility be obtained as early as possible, preferably before the de-e signs for repositories have been finalized by DOE and have been reviewed and approved by NRC. This information can be most useful if supplied early, rather than after DOE and NRC have committed to design features fcr the first repository. Second, by permitting the use of an existing research and development site for the test and evaluation facility, the Committee intends that the Secretary of Energy seek the most cost-effective means for acquir-t ing the needed generic information on waste handling, packaging l

and emplacement. Existing DOE research and development facili-ties now include some activities in this area., and the expansion of

~

one or more of these existing facilities may provide the most cost-effective and expeditious means of obtaining the needed generic information. Therefore, the Committee expects the Secretary to consider this option as well as the option of constructing a new facility at a different site. Third, by limiting the use of sites that the Secretary intends to recommend for site characterization for a repository, tne Committee intends to preclude the Secretarv from !

converting the trat and evaluation facility into the first full 4cale e repository. Permitting such a conversion unfairly prejudices the

{

areful and equal consideration of several alternate sites that is an

{

. essential element of the devel6pment of the first repository under the bill. Moreover, the expedited and more limited NRC and State reviews, which are necessary to obtain early operation of the test i

and evaluation facility, may well foreclose the full NRC review and State participation provisions that are essential elements of the development of the first repository. For these reasons, the Commit-tee amendment prohibits the use for the test and evaluation facili-

{ ty of an area of a site to be characterized that would enable that facility to be converted into the first repository. The Committee 1 amendment would permit, however, the use of different areas i

j within the same geologic formation at the same site for the test and evaluation facility and for a repository provided that the two facilities are not physically connected an,1 that NRC requirements

)

reserve the integrity of an available repository site are satis-

c. The Committee amendment also includes a n provision (sa>

tion 409) directi retary to continue accelerate a re-search and development ag on altern permanent disposal

)

technologies and approac es for ti' lev radioactive waste. These other technologies and approaches include, but not be limit-p'h.di ed to, alternatives that are now u er vestigation such as deep et seabed disposal.

'we

~

I

_~

--.n.,--.w.

3

(

a

,-..,,-_w c

4

4.,.... _ - -. - -

4k u s.w t

i 4N "

$l i

33 reserve storage capacity. The piovision specifles that the Commis-ei (4

sion may not exercise the interi

'I for an application for the usen license or amendment authority

~;

of any technology that has not

'li l,e previously been approved by the Commission for use at any nucle-ar powerplant.

Section 313 authorizes tho Oc procedure in any required hear mmission to use a hybrid hearing ng on an application for a license

. sh-

~ or for a license amendment to expand spent fuel storage capacity i

i at the reactor site.

Section 314 prohibits the from considering, on an applica-tion to expand or add spent fu I storage capacity at a reactor site, the alternative of AFR storage Section 401 establishes the licy of the Federal Government for the permanent disposal of his level radioactive waste and spent feel from civilian nuclear actiiities.

Section 402 provides deadl 3

general envircranental standaines for the preparation by EPA of of technical criteria, for the di ds, and for the preparation by NRC M

and spent fuel.

sposal of high level radioactive waste Section 40Jfa) requires the kpartment of Energy, with the con-currence of the Commission, ta issue guidelines for the selection of sites for characterization foi guidelines must include detai development of a repository. The y

distribution of repositories.

ed geologic criteria and the regional 2,

tary, and the approva(l by theSection 403(b)and c)requi1es the recommendation by the is for a repository.

President, of sites to be characterized IS Section 404 establishes requirements for site characterization for sites for the development of repositories.

Section 405 requires the rec i

the approval by the President,ommendation by the Secretary, and of characterized sites for submittal i ' did Oto NRC of an application for authorization to construct reposito.

%p ries. The provision establishes; schedules for the selection of at least ts defines requirements for thetwo repositories, requires the regional location of repositories, an statements for the proposed reparation of environmental impact y

positories. The provision also estab-lishes deadlines for NRC li ensing decisions for two repositories and imposes limitations on t e capacity of the first repository until the second repository is in o ration.

Section 406 requires the tary and the Commission to take necessary actions to achievy the operation of repositories for which construction has been auth6rized as soon as possible. -

fSection 407 ~squi'es the development of a piop6 sal for a te r

r evaluation facility, to be in operation by 1988. The p ovision in-cludes statutory design critena for the facility and requires the '

submission of a detailed plan, schedule and termination date for i be conducted at the facility. The provision permits the siting of thethe facility at an nisting research and development site but prohibits i

w. -.

intends to recommend for characterization for a repository thatthe citi J

~. '

h. would permit the physical integration of the repository and the test and evaluation facility.

e

.7

-w.._

w.m w-=..

p.e

..n l

s i

6

t ATTACHMENT 2:

HOUSE LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 4

-- j

'S t H 8164 CONGRESSIONAL JLECORD-HOUSE Septem6e,r JO,1#8s' l

the first legisirtlen dealing with this tgry site, th2 construction df the sur' consideration cf nuclear minste issues S#E 't Issue 5 years ago. During the last Con-face facilities for the test and evalua when we were assigned nucless juris.

Ou-gress, both the Flouse and Senate tion facility canno, begin until after, diction under House rules in 1977..

mitte passed versions of a nuclear saste bill, the NRC has issued a constructiot, au-Since that time, the committee has devel but unfortunately it died in confer-thorization for the final repository. spent considerable ' effort developing gram

(

ence. I believe that this year we still itself. Thus the tr0 and evaluation fa-nuclear waste R&D legislation, includ.;

.Tnis hase a good chance at successfully get-cility cannet be used as an argument Ing the reporting of our first R&D bill; rneM ting a bill passed and signed into law. to bias the reposl tory site selection. in the 96th Congress.

V8I*,

One of the reasou I am hopeful of The test and evaluation facility is getting a waste bill through is that we clearly for the pulpose of facilitating In this Congreas, because of'what we 0"*

hate been successful in developing a the licensing p ess, and it is not a had learne:1 from earlier attempts. we I*

compromise in the true democratic back door reposito took the approach of introducing a

• • I strat spirit. Let me tell you--democracy la There are seye other key issues comprehensive bill to demonstrate.

hard work. All th< interested parties associated with t bill. The b!!! pro-how the research and development ac-Fedt i

have had to give ai d take a lot. Work. vides for last reso interim storage of tivities should be integrated into the tons exec ing out this consensus has been a diffl. spent nuclear fuel. While some may overall nuclear waste repository pro,

reso cult and complicata d process.

argue that this interim storage is an gram. This bill is H.R. 5016.

stor But the end result is something we industry ballout, J feel that it is sound In its deliberations on this legisla-ing can au be proud of. The bill actually polley to provide these interim facili. tion, the committee acted only on the the will provide the statutory framework ties as a last resort until a final repost. R&D provisions for both nuclear stor for a rather simple process for provid-tory is ready. The States are also given waste and spent fuel. The legislation tith i

ing a permanent, ]cng terna solution to a role in the siting of any interim stor. was introduced by Mrs. BoveUaan, by i ;i the nuclear waste tsue. Let me briefly age facility withir their boundaries, al. chairman of our Energy Research and Ii summarize this pro:ess.

though since any such facility is only. Production Subcommittee, myself, and the The bill before you first provides temporriry, I feel that the States need 16 additional members of the commit-in !

that guideltnes be developed to define not have as strong a right to object as tee. I want to take this opportunity to sha !

the criteria for selecting a permanent for a permanent repository. There is compliment the gentle!ady from Ten-me repository site. Using these guidelines, also language in this bill allowing for a nessee for her leadership in initiating nis-the Secretary of Energy will recom-monitored retrievable storage (MRS) this legislation at subcommittee and thei mend five sites in it least two differ-program. Again, iome may argue that her willingness to incorporate a diver.

bla ent geologic media for characteriza-an MRS is not necessary if a final re afty of views on the various provisions for tion by July 1.198 L. and then recom-pository can be completed with abso-into the introduced bill. As a result of I.

mend one additionn! site by February lute certainty by 1998, as we have en her consensus approach, this legisla.

frc '

1,1985. Before the site characteriza-deavored to insurr in this bill. I never-tlon received overwhelming endorse.

Ce tion can actually begin. En environ-theless totally atpport the MRS pro-ment when it was reported by the full im mental assessment :nust be completed. gram as a valid L1 ternate technology Scjence and Technology Committee in st!

The States' participat!on in this proc-which must be developed. One last a 3'l to 2 vote, on Nosember 20,1981.

tai ess, and I am keenly aware of this item which shou! 1 be noted in this bill I am very pleased to' note that the States' rights issue, also starts before is that all fur.ds Lo pay for these pro-other committees of jurisdiction have -

D' any site characterization can begin.

grams-the perm inent repository, the recognized the programmatic need for hs When at least thr te of the sites have interim storage incility, and the mon!-

the research and development ele-been chareterized ns to their suitabil-tored retrievable storage-come from l

Ity for a repository, the Secretary wi!! utility-paid trust funds. The Federal ments of our bill which include the concept.of a test and evaluation facill-recommend one of shem to the Presi-Government is nct required to pay for dent as a site for a final repository. A these acth'ities.

ty. This research and developmen.t dd full environmental impact state:nent Mr. Chairman, : do have one amend-concept is recognized as a most valua-h'-

!s required for this Presidential deci-ment which I intend to offer to this ble element of the waste management sion.

bill and I know ofseveral others which progrun by the ' Department of j

Throughout the site characteriza-I will support. However, on the whole Energy, the Nuclear Regulatory Com-tion and site selection process, the I feel that this is ut good bill and I will mission, and the technical community.

States have 6, clear.y defined role of not support any c ilatory amendments It is a focus for the R&D activ'tfer participation, which includes a written or tactics and urgo my colleagues to do which consist of site research and the e

agreement between the State and the so also. The time has come to act on ongoing generic supporting research, Department of Ent rgy. In addition, this vitally-neede$ legislation and we which has been authorized by the Sci-the Governor and the legislature may should do so fairl r and expeditiously.

ence and Technology Committee over.

submit a petition t) Congress disap-Mr. FUQUA. Id r. Chairman, I yield the past 5 years. It is also tallored to proving the Preside?t's site selection.' myself 3 minutes, demonstrate handHng, s W age, and E

I If so, the bill provides for a congres-(Mr. FUQUA asked and was given other aspects of waste management in i

l sional review procbss that requires permission to revise and extend his re-8s pec m

5 that both Houses o cerride the State's marks.)

g g li iss s

petition or the S te veto becomes Mr. FUQUA. Mr. Chairman, the nu-In both cases, the NRC has been given 8

final.

clear waste bill before the House is the a significant role of concurrence with

(

Once a site selection is finalized ' product of great effort on the part of 'f'espect to thy DOE R&D actlyttigg,_

I then the Departme it of Energy would the three committees of primary juris.

We have agreed with the other com-cpply to the Nuclest Regulatory Com-diction and has undergone extensive !mittees to provide the Secretary with a

mission for a construction authoriza-scrutiny by Members of at least seven the discretion to locate the T&E facill-tion. If all coes acc>rding to schedule, comrnittees of the House. It is a genu.[ ty at a randidate reneeneskaita or on the NRC will appi ove or dissporove ine compromise th!ch logically joins l a separate site. II he chooses to go the t

this appliestion byJanuary 1,1989.

the R&D elements of our science and ' route where the T&E facility is a pre-ls,~

The bill also pro 1 1 des for a test and technology bill. H.R. 5016, to the pro-cursor to the repository, the site will evaluation facility which may either cedural and licensing provisions of the he included in all the siting procedures i

be colocated at a tepository alte or at a energy and commerce and interior of iftle I and onsite construction is alte not under consideration as a re-bills. This legislative product is tanti-tied to those procedures. In the ceae of *

/

pository. The puriose of a test and ble evidence that the House can and a separately sited T&E facility, the

/

evaluation fac!!!ty is to resolve issues will act en a national issue that has safeguards ci the R&D title appl) ao j

that might come up during the licens-been the subject of some controversy. that the public is involved and health ng process. If the test and evaluation 11r. Chairman, the Science and and safety lasues are properly ad-facility is to be colocated at the repoal. Technology Committee, first began dressed.

p

/

~

_}

m.

j September 30,1SBS CONF,RESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE

, H 8165 rues.'

iris.

car Sclerice and Technology Com-gress with assurance that adequate en-Mr. SYNAR. Mr. Chairman, I would 177 mittee title also contains a research, vironmental and safety precautions like te ask the gentleman from Ari-has' development, and demonstration pro-but without the threat of dilatory law sona to clarify one point. Does this l Jn tram on the dry storage of spent fuel. suits. I believe $ hat this approach legislation au;horize the Department ud This program encourages the Depart-allows the Congmss to keep its com-of Energy to place nuclear waste re-bill x ment to aid the utilities by develop'Ing mitment to protection of the entfron-positories on lands which the U.S.

saluable licensing data and authorizes ment and at the samt time define a Government tolds in trust for Ameri-onsite demonstration programs st up strong program through a clearly can Indian tritest to three power plants. The Secretary mandated congreialonal policy direc-Mr. UDALI. It is not the W.ent of may also conduct a technology demon-Live.

this legislatfor to grant'such authort.

O I

stration actidty on dry storage at a Mr. Chairman, E believe that the re-ty. Indf an Ianis are held in trust by At*

• Federal facility using up to 300 metric search and devel)pment program es the U.S. Government for the benefit t ac.

(

tons of spent fuel. This activity is an tablished in H.R.

strable but it is a,l7187 is not only de-he of the India 21 people living. On the excellent complement to the last necessary precedent land. It would be difficult for the FM ro-I resort. Away.From. Reactor (AFR) to the successfulhonstruction and op-eral Government, as trustee, to show storage provisions of title I. The fund. erstion of a rep 9s! tory. Although we any benefit to the tribe from placing a In-ing fc-the program may come from currently have the technology to dis-nuclear waste repository on Indian he the DOE. the utilities. and the interim pose of nuclear aste, there remains tmst land wit) cut the full consent of tr storage fund. This program appears in much to be don in the nature of ob-the tribe whoseland is involved.

an title II very much as it was reported taining specific d ta and refinement of Furthermore, nothing in this legisla-

D.

i by the committee in H.R. 5016.

engineering desi and sunlyzing the don would chsnge the existing status i

3d I should note that a few elen2ents of interaction betw n the ws.s'.e package of Indian trust land nor alter any ex-l 2d the three major b!11s have teen placed and the geology. This work can logical-1 sting FedeN law affecung Indan it-in a joint title since they are items of ly be done at th! test and evaluation tribes.

to shared jurisdiction. These three ele, facility which vill also serve as a Mr. SYNAR. Are bdlan tribes trest-n-

ments are: First, the funding mecha. mechanism to answer the questions of tg nism which includes funds for title II, the States, the Nuclear Regulatory ed differently i "om States in this legis-t sd l

the R&D title: second, the mission Commission, and the public regarding lation?

'l f r-plan; and third. the new cfvilian office issues that may a'ise during the licens-Mr. UDE No. The' revening is for nuclear waste management.

ing process. Mr. Cha!rman. In sum-b6dles of affected Ind!an tribes are treated tNe sune as State govern-ef Mr. Chairman, the R&D provisions niary, this bill is programatically and t.

f from the Science and Technology institutionally sound.

ments. The dliference arises not in i

Committee bill, H.R. 5016. were con.

I urge my colleagues to support it.

this bill but in Ihe existing Federal au.

$1 I

formed to apply to the integrated sub.

Mr. UDALI. M1. Chairman. I yield 2 mod 4 6 acqu re land. If the Depart-3 l

stitute. H.R. 7187, and a2e complemen. minutes to the centleman from New ment of Energy were to recommend tary to the licensing and construction Hampshire (Mr. I: ' AMOURS).

ep en.ent 4 a repository on Ped-f authorizat!on provisions governing the Mr. D'AMOUM. There have been eral, State, or pdvate lands, the Feder-

~

i permanent geologic respository thich questions raised on the relat!onship al Government would be able to exer-have been reported by the Commerce between H.R. 718", the Nuclear Waste cise its authority of* eminent domain and Interior Committees, which dealt Policy Act of 1982 and the Marine Pro accordng to Mting law. In the case with the regulatory aspects of the bill. tection. Research, and Sanctustles Act of Insan trust lands, however, exist. -

Mr. Chairman, the Congress should of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1401) which governs ing lag would not give DOE the ex-demonstrate its will to resolve this the disposition el materials into the press authority to acquire or condemn issue now. A majority of the House ocean including ridloactive materials. Indian trust land. Such action would has already expressed views on this It is my understar ding that the intent require either t1e consent of the tribe legislation through several major com. of section 5 of H.R. 7187 is to insure whose land is involved or an explicit I

t mittees; there is a strong consensus to that nothing in the Nuclear Waste act of Congress dealing with the lands I

move this bill.

Policy Act of 1912 will in any way of thatspecificurfbe.

Thank you, Lir. Chairman.

affe:t. the applica)ility of the Marine Mr. LUJAN. Mr. Chairman, I Wld 2 i

Protection. Research, and Sanctuaries minutes to the gentlernan from O 1700 Act to the dumpir g, c"sposal, or other Kanas N Wixw), the ranking Re-Mr. GLICKMAN.

Chairman, disposition of rad oactive materials in publican of the commit:ee.

g will the gentleman yiel ?

the ocean; and further, that the regu.

(Mr. WINN asked and ws.s given per-

,jl

,,j Mr. FUQUA. I will be appy to yield. latory and licensMg programs estab. mission to revise and cutend his re.

-g (Mr. ~ GLICKMAN i ked and was lished pursusnt to the Marine Protec. marks.)

4, j,

given permission to rerise and extend tion, Research, aad Sanctuaries Act Mr. WINN. Mr.thairman. I am ex.

,Q' I

his remarks.)

will remain in efftet for these matert. tremely' pleased that7he" House is Mr. GLICKMAN. h r. Chairman. I als.

today taking up one of the most im-l support the substitutejto H.R. 3809 be-Mr. UDALI. Tha gentleman *s cor. portant pieces of legislation to be con-3 cause there are strong environmental rect in his underst mding. The Nuclear sidered by the Congress. I wish to con-1 controls over the deve opment of a re-Waste Polley act authorizes develop. gratulate Mr. UDAS Mr. LUJAN, Mr.

pository and beca the State and ment of a permanent repository for ra. BRoTHim Mr. FUQUA. Mrs. Bovenaan, the public are fully 17volved in dect-dioactive waste. One of the options for and Mr. Dzwecu. for their rient pa.

stonmaking all alorig the way. The permanent disposal which may be con.

o tience and s1[

tion through,fil in guiding th!s legisla-committees wisely Lneluded in both sidered by the Deaartment of Energy the seven committees of H R. 5016 and H.R. 7p87. A National somewhere in the future is the sub. jurisdiction.

Environmental Polley/Act Road Map seabed option. T tis legislation does - This bill represents a genuine com-which does not abr> gate the require-not specifically atthorize a subseabed promise where no one Member has ev.

[

ment of existing lar but carefully de-repository and it does not affect the erything he would like, but the bill la fines what environmental reports are applicability of the Marine Protection, soraething we all can live with. There required at any particular point. This Research, and Sanctuaries Act to the has been give and take on both sides will allow the Secretary of Energy, the dumping, disposal, or other disposition to develop the compromhe. In fact, L

Administrator of the Environmental of radioactive mathrfals in the ocean.

the bill is more than just something L.

Protection Agency, ;and the Nuclear-Mr. D' AMOURS. I thank the sentle-we can kil live with, it is a critical

)

'tegulatory Commission to conduct man.

piece of legislation. Public opinion

. heir methitics in accordance with the Mr. UDALI. Mr. Chairman I yield I polls have shown again and again that L

law. Such an approach allows these tr.inute to the gentleman from Okla an overwhelming majority of the

l agencies to carry out the will of Con. homatMr. 8Yzaa).

American people feel that.it la very 0l 5!

s f

e 7

b

/

a I

e,

.. = w

' H 8166 CONGRESSIONAL RECOliD--HOUSE September.f0, nat Important for ouf country to develop 'symibility to dhpose of high. level This bOI. Mr CPM protects thi SrP 'f dioactive. waste. In fact, only S percentpermanept sites fer th2 storage cf ra ' waste. This bin fins,lly would provide past due legislatly framework for a process.

ment do not feel the issue is important. Fur-permanent lons-solution to the Few States ynnt a repository whicit Depa thermore. 9 aut 10 Americans agree accumulation of onctive waste sen-would require an annual trafficking of rdef fo ur c

that it is time the Government stop ersted by comme

' procrastinating on nuclear waste. This ty-wastes that ha nuclear at; tivi some 3,000 ton; of spent fuel around loclU been accumulat. the country and into their States. Fur.

atto!

legislation will represent the most sig-Ing for 40 years'no. I believe that aD thermore, there would be extensive es.

gard nificant contribution Congress will of us should agret t make in assuring safe methods of ste,)r legislation in this dahat this is crucial cavation and construction projects and TI y and ase of nu-environmental and health problems..

Eff" ing and disposing of nuclear waste.

Whether you are pronuclear or an cleardevelopment.

This bill addrisses an of these prob.

0"'

There are a large number of amend-lems. In fact, h meets the problems '

IO"8 t! nuclear, there are several important ments that may be offered today. head on. This reasons to support this bill.First,it as Some of these amendments are con-' quate consultat:

en and review by the l l'*"*

bill provides for ade.

i sures that the States win participate in the decision on siting a repository, sistent with, and would enhance, the States. It provides for the judicial I*

Without this legt?lation, there would compromise represented in this b1H review of envircunental documents. It 8'" i$l not be a specific process for State in and should be supported. However, the provides for the ultimate protection of majority of today's ajnendments would the States by giving States the veto T

j volvement nor would the State be as-destroy the careful b g, i slance in this biH authority which requires a two-House 8ftt.

j sured of congressional review if they object to a siting decision.

and st.ould be resiste1.

congressional oserride to proceed over i [tr j

Second, the bill requires flat the Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I urge the objections oj the State.

utilities pay for the cost of storing sad you and our fellow Members to join I think. Mr. Chairman, that is the em disposing of the radioactive waste they me,oday in supportof the tiH.

least we can do.The States must be al-l we have generated. I am pleased not only Mr. LUJAN. Mr. Cialrma n, I yleid 4 lowed to veto if Ihey believe they have dec ger because the utlUtles have agreed to minutes to the genteman riom' Utah reason to do so.

ma this responsibi'ity, but also I am esp

• tMr. MARRIoTr).

Congress Can always override that if

'I cially pleased because this means the (Mr. MARRIOTT asked and was they believe the reasons are not valid.

'a cost of siuclear waste disposal will not given Dermission to revise and extend But without thin protection, Govern-He a

be part of the Federal budget, and will his remarks.)

ment agencies can simply stampede inc Mr. MARIOTT. Mr. Chairman, I rise ns.

Cc today to suppert tha Nuclear Waste'over State concer hirc, hsb p ovi a

map This. bill will restore the publifs Ce for it.Il comp!!ance with the National PoUcy Act, and to th mk the chairman confidence in Co1gress, a body which th Environmental Policy Act and for tne of our committee, Mr. UDA2.t., who for has been tuable Io resolve this nuclear Ju judicial review many years now has been trying to get waste dilemma fcr the past number of ch Fourth, this bill represents a suc this b1D to the floor of the House, and years. Many States have laws prevent-to cessful resolutle:n of the issue of De-I am proud snd haspy to have been ing construction of new nuclear plants th I

fense wastes, which has cat. sed the able to assist him in doing this It is until the waste problem is resolved.

'D -

failure of previo0s atterapts at nuclear Imperative that the ':engress ac! dress The waste problem is also a potential is i,

==5te legislation, this serious national issue, a prcblem problem to Ucensees.

le I

Fif th, the biU is the first plece of nu-f that, if not resolved, can develop into This bill, Mr. Chairman, gives the U

(

eiear waste legislation to be considered a crisis of major *)toportions.

country direction and an orderly proc-cl by the House that includes the test We need a national waste repository, ess to resolve the nuclear waste prob.

O j

and evaluation facility. This concept, and it must be in place by the turn of lem once and for an, and win help us n

as developed by the Science Commit. the century, All waste that is now in becoming enerlyindependent.

I tee, prosides a technology demonstra, stored is temporarily stored. This in.

Nuclear power plays a major role in T

tion facility that is specifically de. clude? 10.3 niulon et bic feet of high-cur national eneigy scenario. Nation.

C signed to help resolve issues that could level waste: 11.8 mill on cubic feet of wide,12 percent of the electricity of a

come up during the Ucensing process. transurt.nic waste; 8,030 metric tons of the country comes from nuclear t

Since the test and evaluation facility commercially spent iuel, and 81 mu-power. Thirty-six States have nuclear s

cannot be con tructed until sft-r the !!on cubic feet ofloadevel waste.

reactors, repository sitint defefem has been Without a proper repository for in-Without nticlear energy. our depend-8 c6nfirmed by the congressional review terim and permanent waste, ar, many ence on foreign oil would be increased.

process, the test and evaluation facul. as 28 nuclear poweTiantt may be substantiant and make us even more ty will not prejudice the repository forced to close for lach of storsee, dependent.

site selection process. In addition, the D l'ig It is imp rtant, Mr. Chairman. that bill insures that the test and evalua.

we become energy independent, not 4

tion facility cannot become a back.

In add'ition, many nucles.r power only for the secujity of this country, I

door repository. The Science and plants in the procesi of completing but also to help keep the inflation Technology Committee has been will be severely hampt rr.d.

costs under contr>1. This biU in the trying to draft specific leg 4tation to There are other rmons why this long run win help us obtain that pass the House for a long time. As nuclear waste bill musL pass the House independence.

ranking ininority member of the Scl. this sessI< n.

I yield back the balance of my time.

i ence and Technology Committee, I am First, the bill provic es a clear direc.

Mr.UDALI. Mr, Chairman. I have proud to point out that we reported tion to DOE on waste iisposal and sets no further recuests for time, and I re-out the first legislation dealing with a national policy.

serve the balance cf my time.

the issue in 1977. During the present Second, we should remember the Mr. LUJAN. Mr Chairman I yield Congress, the Science Committee took Lions / Kansas disasler and the such time as he ausy consum,e to the the lead and reported out a waste blu WIPPS. New Mexico controversy that gentleman from Now York (Mr. Pssa).

last November. We have really worked resulted from a lack of a national (Mr. FISH asked and was given per-1 l*

at coming up with an approach that is policy.

mission % revise md extend his re-I t

acceptable to the variety of viewpoints This bill still gives ui the long await-marks.)

{

j on this issue.

ed national polley we need. This bin Mr. FISH. Mr. t'hairman, I rise in

)

i The sixth reason that this legisla-resolves the present ponflict between support of H.R.

7187. the Nuclear' tion should be supported,by all Mem-the DOE and the Stat'es bers is that this bill demonstrates to s!!e selection, emtrohm.confUcts over Waste Poucy Act qf 1982. This legisla.

ental require tion establishes a comprehensive peo-

)

the public and industry that the Ped. ments and the question of State pro-gram that w!U help our Nation address eral Government is fulf!111ng its re-tection.

Its pressing nuclear wasta manano.

a i

j

\\

t o

- - - + -.

]}

l

. /

~

-s

- - ' =

9

g,, -

w H 8174

. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ~ HOUSE SpgmaerJ4 JNf'

' credible to th? American people, and a LcJan and Mr. Wryw, for their strong gram meshes very web with the ess@.

consensu's thereiore,is needed.

support in moving E.R. S0IS. Mr. sept of a last resort away from reno....

First of all. the highest priority is to Urat.t. Mr. Baoraz1J Mr. Moonzits, ter (AFR) storage program aDowed fort; have a permanent repository.

and Mr. Drnout, and staffs deserve to in title 1 of this bOL

. 14-Second. It seeras to me you have to be commended for their hard work in Mr. Chairman. Det us set en with:

'/

have the tools ta set to that perma reaching agree rent on a unified regu consideration of this haportant pieoer.

nent repository, and here I would like latory title.Tht: unified nuclear waste of legislation. there are a number ot.

to compliment the authors of this bill is not an ideal legisistive vehicle amendme,ts which all three major.

compromise vertion for including, since it falls short of authorizing a committees of jurisdJedon are ready tot i

first, a mission plan which is necessary fully integrated program, neverthe-hocept, let us debate the few saajor to see how we are going to get from less, this is 4 genuine compromise issues that atm in befo'e the House.1 the point of interition to the point of which articulates a national poucy on The Congress mun demonstrate lia.

resolution. Secont. link to that a fund-nu:: lear waste. I am convinced it wDI readiness to address this matlocalf.

Ing mechanism to make sure that we be approved by an overwhelming mut-lasue.

i can, in fact, fund the ne:easary actJvi jorliy of this body..

Mr. Chairman, the Gelence Commit-ties.

I believe it wiu be useful for my col tee's report on E.R 5014, House Third. consens' as is needed on a olve the differences,lengues to understand the principal Report 97-411, part I, states the Inten.

mechanism to re1 lfeatures of our R&D title which tion of the committee relative to title tith the States, that the States should Chairman Fueva has summarised The II of the substitute (B.R 7187) to BJi. "

have, and I think an exceUent job has cornerstone of our research and devel. 3809. There were only minor moutflos- ~

been done in that respect and I urge opment program is the test and evalu Mons made in the process of reaching the committee to retain the language atton (T&I) facility. Th!s Td4 faciHty agreement on the incorporation of the.

contained in this )1ll in that regard.

has e!ght pu; poses and is precisely de-R&D provisions of E.R. 5016 into this I personally do not ; fined in this biU as it was in H.R. 8026.

Mr. Chairman.

substitute. In summary, the subs *2tute see any difference between the treat-The purposes are to:

- bul contains the fonowing providons: '.

ment of defense sarl civillan waste, but Focus the R&D program;'

Tus NecLaan Want Feuer Acv oe 10 3-I think a worthrhile compromise has Inter-ste the repository componenta 3LR.1187-Tara D(R&Daserton)-

been reached in this billin that regard into a functioning system; j

as well.

Resolve technical Ucensing issues re-8 "'T ""88L8'1 N "13'T Finally, let me say that I v11! be of.

garding the repository; '

Requires the seentary to build one het -

fering an amendment during the con.

Validate scientific models;

./ and Evalumuon tT&E) PacWty.

sideration of this bill sith regard to Refine repository component de.

D ma a

date r site the. Interim speat-fuel storage prob.

signs; g

EF mt d_

Supplement the geologic character. ak, w beau it separshly. If tk mW Ierr..

, tzation process.

atte is chosen, the same procedures are used I believe that this is not needed. I think that this t.000 metric tons for i Evaluate and kst waste handlins for tue T&E Faciuty as for the npository.

It it la located separstely, the safeguards of an AFR. away fr)m reactor storage, is systems; and ILR. sols are uend, not needsd and rill. In fact, occasion Establish repository operating caps.

Purposes an to:

the delay of the eventual objective of bility.

Focus the R&D program.

permanently desling with nuclear The timetable for the T&E facility Intesrate the npository components into waste.

depends on whether the Secretary functioning systam.

We have the technology for storing chooses to locate it at a candidate re-Resolve techum! Hoensing issues nesrd-in dry casks and a the liquid pools at pository s!te; or construct an entirely ins the repost ory; the site of reactos aithout the trans.

separate facility.This flexibility of ap.

Vandate scientanc anodels; portation and without the attendant proach is key since it precludes any Refine repos! tory component designs; diffleulties of the wastes that are de.

prejudleing of a site; that is, the so-hppiment geokste chmetertsauon called backdoor repository option. If yjate and tat waste handling systems; veloping and wL11 be accumulated the Secretary decides to colocate this during this decade and beyond. Hope.

fully, the fac111tiel provided in this bill facility, such that it *.s a genuine tech.

Esublish nposiusy operaths wmty.

T&E Faemty construcuon of a separstely, sill have an answer to it.

nological demonstration repositorF. 3osted T&E expreted oculd besta about 2 I urge support of this bill. I think It then onsite construction is delayed years after passese of act.

is a ime comprl) mise. It has. been until a construction permit is issued On-site construcuon for a T&E Facmty no-worked on very hs rd by a lot of people for the full scale repos!! cry. This is cated at a repository site can berta after the l'

and I commend aL1 of them for their not an ideal approach for the R&D wpository construcuan autherisation is efforts in that reg (ard.

program, but the Secretary still has lasued by the NRC (expected about T Fears Mrs. BOUQU AI D. Mr. Chairman, I the discretion to pursue the path cf a "f**f P**'88ISC13 yield myself suchItime as I may con. Aparately located T&E. 'Ipe T&E fa.,,T&E des!8 ggg og high level waste

• sume.

. cility should be designed to accommo-thfuuons-(Mrs. BOUQUA"1D asked and was date up to 100 canisters of h!sh level Operauon krminahs withh fMe pan given permission t} revise and extend waste so it can provide desirable simu. after inlual repository operauon besks-lation and serve as a true test facility.

NRC actively involved in *=adnt puhuc her remarks.)

Mrs. BOUQUARD. Mr. Chairman. I

, the separately s!ted T&E facility health and safety concerns; support the unified nuclear waste bill should still serve as a tool for resolv.

A11 non seneric R&D includ'ng T&E costs before us today, and I urge that the ing technological !! censing issues and paid from Nuclear Waste Fund.

I House act expeditiously to approve it, in that sense the NRC would still have

s. mar stonaos ustancu. navneruzmus The nuclear waste issue is one to an opportunity to review DOE s R&D semonsraarrow esocaaM ron arggy yggg, which I have persone.lly devoted spAny activities. This two-track approach, Ep to a powerp!snt sites may be chosen hours of V:ork, as well as being in.

Mr. Cha!rman, provides the strcng for demo prosram subject to Maching agree-volved in six hearings and five markup linkage between the T&E and first of. unent with owners.

sessions in the Science Committee a kind repository which Is so necessary Cast caisson and stle storace are opuses during this Congress alone. It is clee.r.

to assure program success. In the case for dry storase.

ly an issue which is overripe for con.

of spent fuel storage, the comm!ttee R&D on rod consolidation in exisung the utilities and DOE to obtain riF on$,g,'g*,seg mar be undertaks sideration by the full House, has provided strong encouragement to g **** * "** "

• Mr. Chairman, as author of the Sci.

4tte faensues and an '#"**""

ence Coinmittee bill, I want to thank nearch data from ons!te and Federal and operation costs.

l Chairman FUGUA and the Republican l facility demonstrations of dry storage 3,cretary may conduct technology demon.

leadership on the Committee on Sci.

technologies which spear very prom. strador. on dry storace at federal f.,mm ence and Technology, particu%rly Mr.

Ising. This,8clence Committee pm up to 300 metric tems.

E t

1 Sn

~

1, __

n

=

Novembre 30,1392

,11SMO

. ' CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE q

eme ma resin a 1400 t ri r ner;# ncy. !! the reactor !!nds that crr.tv. Danul HoPar.d F5 cue The Cletk announced the folloWIDE they 2.are rods th:.t they sim::!r do crtnt. Pr. thy Holt Porter not hase space for. they have run cut n amws moc kins enc'nere pair:

'cois, ne M11 hate a Fcccral pro-Dat*t. Dan Ko"*o Prite On this vote-'

i t hlch enn tectpt those rods; and gl;,"p*y Mrd man Mr. Washinston for, with Mr. Monohan Rattrtes:k against.

.,r.d. T.e have made a lot of interna.

or., ente a:urhes

,g tienal cow.mitments orcr the years to gun gter gejore Mr. STANOILAND.and Mr. RI.

nr. tic:n urging thxm to use r.ue car Der.wks uree Eneik=

NALDO changed their votes from tech.%k cr. We hr.te a lot of Interna

• oiekws.n tre:cnd ammid*

"are" to *'no."

$EInss

NOnssas, Mr. WMM and Mr. Q fide tha u

otson Jetsrwa Roberss tson changed their rotes from *no to ca !! ee e.

so yo hste a highly limited. 2.000' onnneur Jer.uns motmson "are."

rerti:c. ton piccrn=. The util!Oes will cerran Johnston Ro'ars So the amend 2:ent was rejected.

no have to show that they cannot provide Dor r.an Jones tscs pousnent Jones som Westenkoons The result of the ute was an.

storage spr.ce at reactor sites, utilitleb i

m ast h Mco & d.

Eoo m.

that will use this Federal space will U,'

Un" m m o manst m.s e Duncan Kenne!!r Rudd pay fcr it, and they hate to be able to Dunn madee muano Mr. 2WIFT. Mr. Chairman. I offer set out es soon as new capaelty can be reasenntly constructed.

o%,"

Eunt an amendment.

The Clerk read as followst So se should not eliminste the AFR rartr zatomarsino sentw tctal:y. This leares a very small AFR rAtrus t At.1 tatta senutse air **D$ ment offerTd by Mr. SWDr. At

"" *" 8 500 1ach sensentenner page 141. Itne 24. strike an after "repostto-program, and the ranendment should E*r" "

18*Lh 8'

F ries " through the end of Kne 3 on page 142 f

ed.

T e C AIRMAN.The question is on g

Yd me secretN y no construction or exesvation of any Test and l

the amendment offered by the gentle.

el 14 ewer sburant man frorn NW Tork (Mr. LtrKDINE).

En,n, cogi g

tong Lu stuander Evaluation Pacilltr prior to tasuance br the The question was taken; and the rvana (IND tong OtD) steen Commis1!on of a con &ttuction authorization Chairman announced that the noes %

ytt, u ggg,,

for a repository at the site imitred.".

8k

,y Mr. SWIFI (during the reading).

sppeared to hare it.

Fuki Idan amH h i1A) arcoteen votr nnwick 1.uxen men Nz)

Mr. Chairman. I ask unanimous con.

f Mr. LUNDINE. Mr. Chairman. I Q" uTdEi sm tens sent that the amendment be cons!d.

ered as read and pr1 Died in the demand a recorded vote, rtodier war;enee arnJth tPA) r u an uarriott anose Reconn.

A recorded vote was ordered.

The rote was taken by electronic M UU' "[C' E.

The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection j

to the request of the gentleman from derlee. and there were-ares 84, noes nenetia u.m<

st oermstn 208. not voting 41, as foDour Peter untos staneetand Ws.shington?

nre nun manou stanton Then was no objection.

NunM N$2er

$*nYan Mr. SWIFT. Mr. Chairman, the pur.

(RonNo 3981

,(

pose of this legislation, among other AYES-44 Franz Heccezra stump

,oewe.

onr nul r,,o,,1 Eccurey sum things, is to assure an ob'ective and a Nee $",n sa Nett Nu N,

U$'$,,to "rfEe technical decision as to where a repost.

. tory should be located. It is, therefore, f

r:orno rem n<

mercet o

geg.

yng, E83rt no e ruemn oernardt naea Taylor alte true that one of the purposes of Ir$'dd EaYsEeter TUafs U$h',t Lhomaa this legislation must be to avoid preju-

,3 u dicing the decision aS to where the Carton. John taF11ce a sanse Duckman Mcler tou)

Udan nartort Pt31 p la and Sencuer Octorater Mineta Tander Jagt permaDent repository will be located oornien u2tchen twt vouaner by spending huge sums of money on it gv'd

{g*A' gnj'

$%#j gy 5"F g

prior to that decision being msde. so citver Marser s:nsinn u

that we hare the camel's nose-under.

cor.)en Mat.s cn.:

,snmnon o3:7,,

g,,,ne,,

croemett Marun INT) r.; mon Green uort.oo watuna the-tent syndrome taking place.

es cruram wurpur weber tosa sayinar. "We must locate it here. We

(*.E'jn so am, SuNn U[ei*

$nurst have already spent so much money on D-rrtem Menach Jtark oorwr u.rn s*"

E2ncern Er.tsner wbtun this location."

"*n TIN wr:1 wantam The amendment that I am offering !

Qtr ygu' D'

$"n! $

N'[Ta$h NNn" E$ ton, a m M a M&m M I see b r

rant ro:.nart wa m the bill as uTitten. There is a major resudsecA> not:1 wes"'

nan. sara wencas wusen use.aten o ar'.en wtan ambiguity in the bill which my amend-h ='

E*8 "

Hammachnued Ot"*cer watt ment seeks to clarify. The b!II. as I

$r[

b$$

$1IsmieuT, F

read it, aan that the test and evalua.

N"'ntroi os.nersun oben:ar w.rth t

tion facility located at a candidate or

'0tman Ober E vr' narxnit r>

Pur. aran wrhe oarc Panet a w2*"

Martta Parma Yuran repositcry site may not commence casu.

untcher Patterson Youns (Art struction of a surface facility until the NOES-308

-N $

ref,er Nuclear Regulatory Commission gives t

Axeta serewter arron A.: -ta seinune c.rrra g;,tiewer pertins zar.oetJ a con.ttruction authorizatiors Nottee A w dte som carner nuer retr' that it says a surface facility.

IN

!N

$pI NOT vFh41 Tou go back to page 9 where the definitions are and look at the defini-Atra ns emand chener Arcneny otnerte-M.ner(CAi Auh erte en.cr

c. amen 4,heroot nes tins wortett tion of a test and evaluation facility. it N

! Neb I,$o

$^*j',

Eny ggan says that that means an at-dtpth un.

derground cavity with subsurface Int-Ai.mnn sceen cm.emN5 sonner nonenneck an,,

n d:

saberuns.

eral excavations extending from a ren.

nousekt

_e..

tniater casa eu.'

avaus xema.,ss tral shaft, and so forth.

w:c.

er%s cotuss(Txi ni,nou, ec i, o,,,,

smo, an. ster It s ems to me therc is a cler.r ambl-nos a.uomth te consta M.cr i P.u a=ountCAl Conte DeNards IA souuWee atenholm gulty as to what section 306 means if.

t urare are n coi corror*"

trnny tav-Trau n Ierens s.ounsoul Couchlin Etarm iO A) talenan washingian in fact. It refers to a test and evalua-SN.:t Ur$r r NJarn "r'i,"n ' **

• N,,,,

s'$nu tion facility and then uses only the wordz

• surface facility'*.

sw aarti s uer cow.wicara y,,,,,

utgin 1

4

~

• o m

m.

. _mc.= _

= =. _ _

-, - w.a

~. ~

, = -

1.s 4"

Notember 30,1982 *

• CONGRESSIONAL' RECORD-HOUSE @

H 8591.*:

.i When you consider that such a T&E sith mpeet to the alte selection and devel-Mr.8WIFT.I yield to the gentleman.

faellity can cost anywhere between a opment of repositories:

from New York.

quarter and one billion do!!ars, should And it goes on to say, and this is the Mr. OTTDIGER. Mr. Chairman. I r

f this be located at a candidate site for a language that the gentleman is chang-thank the gentleman for yleiding.

l l

permanent repository?

ing:

I believe that the concerns of the i'

Clestly, the argument is going to and tas the decretary may not commente gentleman are taken care of; though I i

arise."We have spent this cuarter of a construcuon of any surface factutr.* *

• would acknowledge that it is not as billfon dollars or this billion dollars The subsurface facility. the shaft,is clear as it might be.

here. Now we might as well put the part of the test procedure to see if this The language of section 306(b) san i

site there.*'

is a site. Now. If the Secretary deter, quite clearly that if the test and evalu-i In other words, the objectivity of mines that this should be the site of a ation facility is to be located at any

}1 the decision as to where the site will repository as well as a test faculty. candidate site or repository site-even j.<

be, it would seem to me, could be then he must 30 through and comply Just a candidate site,it applies-site se-harmed by the ambiguity in the act as with the procedures as outlined in title lection and development of such facill-j lt presently exists. It will certainly 3, ty shall be conducted in accordance skew the decision as to where the ulti*

So I appreciate the concern that the with the procedures and requirements mate site for the permanent repos!* gentleman is addressing himself to, establishedintitleI.

tory will 30.

but I think it has been taken tare of in D 1415

e Now, you can make a number of ar* the bill, because we were very careful As Chairman Fueva has ind

cated.

s j9 ruments about T&E facilities them* in drafting the language to take care that would clearly require a constrec.

,selves. The Senate bill, for example

• of exactly the problem that the gen, tion authortradon prior to excavation f'

does not even allow integration oft &E facilities with a candidate site. tiemanisexpressing' f I could regain o I

l.0 Mr. SWIFT. Well i T&E itself as a very controver:61al con-tion (b). It is an additional require-cept at best. There are activities simi my time, then I have elucidated here ment that says one cannot even loette j.;,

what my concern is. The genueman y^

lar 'to T&E going on already in a feels that my concern is unfounded be surf aea facilities at that facility siih-l number of places, so that you have a cause the language in this bill would out getting a construcUon authorisa-tj tion fu a repository.

t whole question as to whether a test preclude this 4

and evaluation fac!!!ty is something The CHAIitMAN. The time of the So I think that subparagraph (B) is an additional recairement; quite clear-

' y that we need at all; but that is not ba. gentleman from Washington has ex ly. If you are going to have a facility 7

sically my point.

pired.

there, under title I which is made to

, {j My point is that the bill as cu rently (At the request of Mr. Orrmosa, and apply. the construeden authorisation written is very unclear as to whether by unanimous consent. Mr. Sw:rr was

;;.y or not it would permit excavation to allowed to proceed for 3 additional would be required.

Mr. FUQUA. Mr. Chairman, wDI the

C be done en a T&E facility at a candi-minutes.)

gentleman yield further?

W date site prior to that site recehing its Mr. SWIFT. So that the gentleman Mr. SWIFT. I yield to the gentleman T

construction authorization from the feels that my concern is unfounded.

from Flwids-l't Nuclear Regulatory Commission; that they could not go ahead and put The CHAIRMAN. The time of the

• thereby giving that site an che in the g-Tl competit!cn. or to put it around an in a T&E facility and do expensive ex-gentleman from Washington has ex.

cavation and therefore. give priority. if ot! er way, a arcater chance of being you will. in selecting that site for a pired.

~

)

] y.'

selected thsn another site in which permanent storage facility.Is that cor un(On request of Mr. Fueva and by animous consent. Mr. Swirr was al.

.-]

there was not a T&E faculty. I really rect. that could not occur?

lowed to proceed for 2 additional min-believe this ambiguity in the bill must Mr. FUQUA. Well.-let me say that

,.g utes.) -

y be clarified so that that kind of event the gentleman is perfectly within his MrEQUA. Mr. Chairman, on page A

could not occur.

rights to express his concern and 142.11ne t. under subparagrapb (2)-

Mr. FUQUA. Mr. Chairman. will the

%.s those concerns were expressed by

[

gentleman yield?

many other people. That is why we No test and essjustion faculty snay be Mr. SWIFT. I am happy to yield to have this language; but to colocate a converted into a repealtory unless site selee-tion and development of such faculty woe the gentleman from Florida.

Mr.FUQUA. l appreciate the gentle test and evaluation facility and then conducted in accordance uith the proce.

b. S I ater put a repository there would not dures and requirements estabushed in tide I u

l man yield'ng.

N.

I certainly understand the concern ; be possible under the Itaguage that is sith respect to the site selection and devel-currently in the bill. because the Sec-epment of repositories.

f'i.:S that the gentleman is expressing to *retary of Energy must cotaply with Mr. Chairman. I therefore think the the committee; but let me point cat to title I if he thinks that this T&E sit

• 1 the ser tieman that on page 141. that snight be a mit*Ma mita for a repos!* concerns that the gentleman has are addressed. The intent was that one i 1.'E the gentleman referred to, in section toty. Tnen he must comply with title could not convert a T&E facility into a 30G(b). this language was worked out L

repository unless the,SOCTetary come

<k in cooperation with Chairman UDAU.,

Now, as far as the shaft is co.n-phed with title I and the additional "P

Chai man Drscr.'t.: the minority mem-kG bers, the gentlernan from North Caro-cerned, that is part of the test proc?' procedures of alte selection.

dure. They may have several shaf ts in Mr. SWIFT. I thank the t;entleman.

OW lina (Mr. Baoyurt.r.), the s'entleman places to determine the geographic and would ask him a question: Does he U H from New Mexico (Mr. LUJAN). and formations, whether they are suitable. essentially agree with what the gentle-di also the gentleman from New York and they must go down and do core man from New York (Mr. Orrtuora)

~

EZ (Mr. Orriscrn). who chafra the sub-drillings and other types of drillings in said, then as I understand it?.

l b 4 committee of the Energy and Com-order to make this determination; but Mr. FUQUA. Mr. Chairman the gen-

! !M merce Committee. It was with their agreement, and this was the compro they are prohibited from locating the ticr:an from New York.*I think, was l$N b ' -

surface facility and any of the other quoting from line 9 of page 142 which mise language. It says:

things there until such time as they says:

E* $*

M 1

(b1 Psocounts.-f t)1f the test and evalu-have complied with title I. which as I

.The Secretwy may not emenee een-atton factitty is to be located at any candi-mentioned and outlineil and the gen-struction of a test and evaluation fecility at

.W; date site or repository site sal site selection 1..g and de elopment of such facility shall be Lleman is familiar with, outlines the a candidate site or site recommended as the '

F, e ennducted m accordance with the proce. procedures.

location for a repository pelor to the date on gy dures aNS requirements estabitshed in title Mr. SWIIT. Mr. Chairman. I thank shich the destrnation of such site is effeP the gentleman for his remarks.

tive under section 113.

p

>...t Now. title I is all the procedures for Mr. OITINGER. Mr. Chairman, will So that is a furthee clarification. It y'

the permanent repository-the gentleman yield?

was added by the gentleman from New

!.kk

~

n+:

s :;

'~~

,...._.".7;

~ - ~ ~ _

y. 3-y y.

y;-

_ gj.%.w. 2. s :...-+. g x

w. -

3

..me c.. _. w <. a.w.: ;

'..H S,592 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -HOUSE 4 November 30, ISBJ York (Mr. OntuctR) in our negotta. enee. The sites my amendment ad-Mr. ROE. Mr. Chairman. I k

dresses would not be used as commer-the gent!cman very much for thatd tions.

• r.OTTINGER. Mr. Cha!rman, will clal low. level disposal sites. Instead, clarification for the situation.

gent!cman yield to me?

my amendment concerns sites used for Mr. RAHALL. I thank t5 gentle.

.r. SWIFT. I yleid to the gentleman Atomic Energy Comg11ssion licensed man from New Jersey for clarifica.

from New York.

activity which have been stab!!!2ed by Lion.

Mr. OTTINGER.I thank the gentle the landowner in accordance with Mr. BROYHILL. Mr.

airman, wD1 man for raciding to me.

NRC criteria. Once stabilized, the the gentleman yield i e7 Mr. Chairman. I think as the gentle. landowner may request the Secretary Mr. RAHALL. I y Id to the gentle.

man hr.s Indleated. Chairman FUQUA of Energy to assume title and custody man from North C Ifna.

and I are in ccreement on this and I of the site. I would like to stress that Mr. EROYHI Mr. Chairman the t

think the gentleman's concerns are ad. the stabilization would be at the land

• gentleman's ndment provides that i

dressed. Therefore. I do nct think an ewner's expense, and, that the Secre-the owner m reake adequate finan.

i amendment is renUy necessary on this tary could take title only at the re* cial arrange ents that are approved quest of the landowner. Furthermore-by the Co ission for the long term matter.

Mr. SWIFT. Mr. Chairman, with the landoaTier would have to make fl* maint ce and monitoring of the j

i those assurances from the two gentle. nancial arrangements with the Secre-atte, men. I ask unanimous consent to with. tary for the long term maintenance My estion is: Is it the Intention of and monitoring of the site.

the ntleman, in his amendment. In draw rny smendment.

The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection, Enabling the Secretary to take t!tle app ving the adequacy of these fl.

f to the request of the gentleman from lto these sites win assure that they cial arrr6cgements with the owner remain undtsturbed and provide for a

.at the Nuclear Regulatory Commis.

Washington?

r t

ge i n consult with the Department of L._

T,hy_a m Mbgetiou

_ _ i y

Y e

Energy?

auzxostx2 orrun av us.amir ment-and there are only a very few Mr. RAHALL. Yes It is my intent Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Chairman. I offer an amendment. -

should be recogn172d as a shared that such consultation would take W

nt The CHAIRMAN.The Chair win in spQ y

e t

pre ude place.

the option of having con

' ated Mr. BROYHILL. Mr. Chairman, quire. is e amendment in order would the gentleman indicate: WlH under the material moved off the site' does the Department have any pewers of Mr. RAHALL. *es. It is. Mr. Chair-not affect the possibility 111 e rtain concurring with these financial.ar.

man.

sites may require Federal Istance rangements or is it the intent that the The Clerk read as i ows:

during the cleanup proced e.

Amendment offered by 16 Ra.natt.: Sec-Mr. ROE. Mr. Ch n, win the final decision rests with the Commta.

sion?

e fo!!orins gentleman yield to me?

Mr. RAHAI.L The final decision ti n 1st is amend,ed by add!ns Mr to the gentle.

at the end thereo.:

I man. RAHALL. I yie would rest with the Commission, as I from New Jerse.

te in the r s o a Lt sed actkity to recover z!reon!pm.

f.

Mr. ROE. I t e gentlernan for understand the way the amendment is structured. -

sm. and rare earths from source materi yielding.

thc Ect: r. upon re:;uest of the ener of Mr. Chairman, have a similar situa.

I might add that the sites that I

/

the site intoh ed. shalf assume title and cus-t.

existing my State and in my mentioned that may be covered by tody of such taste and the land on which it dis et where e have a low level radi-this amendment-and this is from De-is dispond shen such site has been decon-ation. oriu. material which is an ex-partment of Energy information-are t=.inated and stabilized in accordance with tract, as o ow. from rare earth.

Only two s!tes, one in Cook County, the reqrttemdits established by the Com-I am con rned with the amendment Ill., and one in Norton. Maine. The w t to be sure that this NRC identified a site in Parkersburg.

su te f[nanci afr appro ed by because ce amen nt d not forestall not W. Va.

the corr. mission for tr.e lonc-term mainte, nznce and me:::cr!n: ct such site.-

usurp e positio and responsibility Mr. BROYNTTL So the gentleman of t Federal Gov. ment in previ. is stating that consultation 1s !ntended Mr. RAHALL (during the reading).

ous w on the remova f that materi-with the Department of Energy by the Mr. Chai:Tnan. I ask unanimous con-Nucleer Regulatory Commission. In

{

sent that the amendment be consid. al.,e e.re going through a w le exam" the determination of the adequacy of

)

cred as r ad and printed in the tion now by the Federal overn-these financial arrangements?.

Rr.cono.

ment. Nuclear Regulatory Co Js-Mr. RAHALL The gentleman is cor-The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection sion, r6nd so forth so I would like o rect.

]

to the request of the gentleman fro ask the gentlem'an specifically-and The CHAIRMAN. The time of the 1

West Virgin!a,~

thank the gentleman arn!n for yield.

tieman from West Virginia (Mr.

Thcre V as no objection.

ing-am I correct in understanding RA LL) has expired.

(Mr. RAHALL asked and das ven thtt his amendment does not address (On equest of Mr. LCJAN and by permhe Mn to revise and extend is re-the question of financial responsibility unanim s consent. Mr. RAHAtt. wns marks.1 r

'V all wed t roceed for 2 add!tional Mr. RAHALL Mr. Cha!

n. the d

si t

nre not to Mr. LUJ AN.

amendment I am proposing is, virtually stody he ed identical to a provhlen contained in [#",

e[d to t e

. Chairman, will the m ne e

p0,

,g gmuman Wd H

the Energy and Commerce Comm!t-f is it tec's blu r.nd similar in intent to a pro-h"tc changebh sit! g'lar relst.

Mr. RAHALL. I y d b the genue-M'dC**

• *".I""

tision contained in the'Intcrior and E

h h

[tes'. RAHAIL Mr. Chairman, the Mr AN. 2 thank t gutl, man Insular Affairs Commi;tce bill. Hower-j for yielding.

er, it appears that trythe rush to put

!.tr Mr. Chairman. I support the entle-the substitute. H.R. 7187. together* gentleman is completely correct.

6 man's amendment I would cnly e to this provision was/nadvertantly omit. There is no intent in my amendment ask the gentleman: As I remember. e ted.

/

to estabush financial re ?onsibility for passed this through the Committee In any event,jt is my understand *ng such cleanup and caretaking oper.

Interior and Insular Affairs at one i

hat beth the Interior and Encrgy stiens or to change existing law relat.

time, at the time that we were working

}

Comtr.ittecs have no objecuon to this ing thereto.

on the b!H. 4 is my understanding amendment.

It is my intent merely to create a that it passed the Committee on l

This amendment buDds upon the leral mechanism whereby certain sites low lew! a r.ste provisions of H.R. 7181 may be transferred to the Goverrunent Energy and Commerce also. So how 6

come it is not in the b!!!? What hap-

. but addresses a very important differ. for long. term oversight.

h

_