William Bryan: “what the Senate is asked to do this morning is a total repudiation and rejection of good science. S. 104 is opposed by…”

“what the Senate is asked to do this morning is a total repudiation and rejection of good science. S. 104 is opposed by the Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board, a body of eminent scientists, created pursuant to an act of Congress. They reviewed it last year in 1996 and last year. They say two things. First, it is unnecessary. Second, it interferes with the citing process, which is currently taking place. We dismantle the environmental laws in America if we enact this legislation. In 1992, the Energy Efficiency Act directed the National Academy of Sciences in conjunction with EPA to develop a standard. They are about ready to do that. This legislation rejects that standard and proposes a limitation on the ability of the National Academy of Sciences and the EPA to develop the standard that would provide minimal protections for health and safety. The third point that needs to be made is that the Nevada test site is frequently referenced. That is the proposed site for the alternative storage, the interim storage. No study has ever been made that would indicate that the Nevada test site is either desirable or suitable as an interim storage facility. The fourth point I make is that this legislation, in fact, preempts laws in my own State, unlike it does any other State in America. The environmental protection laws are essentially delegated to the States with their ability to enforce. This legislation would preempt that ability.”