 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Witness Testimony
The Honorable Jon C. Porter
A Review of the Department of Energy's Yucca Mountain Project, and Proposed Legislation to Alter the Nuclear Waste Trust Fund (H.R. 3429 and H.R. 3981).
Mr. Chairman, thank you for providing me the opportunity to testify today. As you know, the Yucca Mountain issue has for over two decades been of intense personal interest to Nevadans. I understand the concerns of the utility companies and States with nuclear reactors. Many of my colleagues are feeling increasing pressure from the nuclear energy industry and their constituencies to remedy the situation. I agree that they are in a difficult position. Unfortunately, the answers coming out of past Congresses and this one do not provide the right solutions, and only serve to further intensify the problem. Political expediency has prevailed over sound science and common sense. As Nevadans have learned over the past twenty years, when an answer does not suit the Department of Energy or the nuclear industry, they simply change the question. When an earthquake hits just eight miles from Yucca Mountain, the DOE tells us not to worry, the rock is so solid. When one of their own scientists raises the possibility of water percolating up through the proposed repository level from the water table, his theories are dismissed. When an analyst acknowledges the possibility of criticality, his theories are discredited. Instead of admitting their mistakes, successive Administrations, Republican and Democrat, decided to continue dumping billions of dollars into studies to turn a molehill into a mountain recipient of nuclear waste. To date, our government has spent about $9 billion on this fiasco. The nuclear industry is fond of pointing out how much money has been spent studying Yucca Mountain, as if the amount already spent somehow justifies spending more. But has anyone told you how much the site will cost from this point on? It is estimated the Yucca Mountain Project will cost over and above industry fees of $60 billion. This body knows that it is not sunk costs that matter in decision making; it is future costs. The nuclear industry is demanding that you and your constituents, the American taxpayer, foot the bill for an unnecessary and unsafe project. As a legislator, like all of you, I need to be fully informed about the effects legislation and issues will have on my constituents. As Members of Congress, we consistently seek evidence before rather than later, when making decisions. How can we be expected to do less now?? Yet, that is exactly what the nuclear industry expects you to do. They have once again come to Congress for help and asked you to eliminate congressional oversight of funding which has been paid by the American taxpayer. The bill before this Committee, H.R. 3981 would effectively remove the Yucca Mountain Project from Congress' budgetary authority and eliminate any congressional oversight of the Project for future Congresses. The passage of such legislation poses a great danger to my state and the nation on a physical level and on a symbolic level. As you know, the transport of nuclear waste to the Yucca Mountain site requires the greatest deal of oversight. For this reason, I, on behalf of the people of Nevada, insist that this body maintain its oversight authority over such potentially dangerous projects. On a more abstract scale, I worry that such legislation will serve as a dangerous precedent of abdicating our Congressional authority over Interstate Commerce. With all the problems that have plagued the Yucca Mountain Project since its inception and the hundreds of scientific questions still left unanswered, why would we even give such a budgetary gimmick consideration, when now more than ever, this Project, the federal agencies involved, and the people of Nevada need the strong support of Congressional authority. The American people deserve more from us than wasting our time throwing billions of dollars at an industry that has spent too long already at the public trough. A couple of weeks ago, I held a hearing in Las Vegas to examine the Department of Energy's plan to ship nuclear waste to the proposed Yucca Mountain repository. Any assessment of Yucca Mountain's suitability as the national nuclear waste repository must look at the feasibility of transporting waste to the site. Taking 77,000 metric tons of dangerous radioactive nuclear waste, removing it from reactor sites around the country, and putting it on trucks, trains and barges, and moving it through cities, towns and waterways across America is a disastrous scheme. On September 11th, we witnessed the single-most horrific event in our nation's history. Instantly we became all too aware of our country's vulnerability to threats from outside our borders. Even more recently, the terrorist train bombings in Madrid, Spain, and the discovery of a bomb concealed under railroad tracks in France have brought renewed attention to the very danger railroads and mass transit face in our country in a post-9/11 world. The idea of transporting tens of thousands of tons of nuclear waste across the country was not a good idea before September 11th, and it's certainly not a good idea now. We had never thought of a fully fueled passenger plane as a weapon. Let's not make the same mistake with the trucks, trains, and barges that will be transporting nuclear waste past Chicago, Toledo, Los Angeles, Dallas, Pittsburg, and Denver. Just to name a few. At the end of the day, all Yucca Mountain will do is create one more large storage facility and millions of new security threats, one for every road, rail, and water mile this waste will travel along. We were all elected and sent to Washington to represent millions of people around the country. These constituents have instilled their faith in each of us to make tough decisions to protect their interests and their hard earned tax dollars. What interests are really being served here today, the health and public safety of our citizens or the balance sheets of the nuclear utility companies? Again, thank you Mr. Chairman for the opportunity to testify today. We in Nevada, Mr. Gibbons and Mrs. Berkley, along with our Senators, will continue to stand united and fight to protect our homes and our livelihoods from this ill thought-out scheme. Related Documents |
|||||||||||
|
