On the recordJune 27, 1996
I must ask my colleagues: Is this the direction we should go? We are putting a great deal of trust in an undeveloped technology for such a critical national security mission. I certainly cannot predict the future, but I am 100 percent at predicting the past. I cannot say with any degree of certainty that the accelerator technology--for which we are authorizing over $140 million in spending in fiscal year 1997--will or will not work. However, I can say with confidence that the Department of Energy has demonstrated a very poor record in managing other large initiatives. Furthermore, the American people have never been enthusiastic about paying for these types of large projects. When costs begin to escalate, what makes us think they will support this risky project in the future? Unfortunately, Mr. President, I fear that the administration, and now this Congress, may be overlooking the most reasonable approach to performing the tritium mission; that being, a new nuclear reactor that could produce tritium, while generating electricity for use in the surrounding area of the country. Since this type of new reactor project would earn revenue from the electricity sales, it could be privatized and, thus, its construction could be paid for largely through private funds--not by the taxpayers. In fact, Department of Energy studies show the new reactor option to be billions of dollars less expensive than the accelerator.
Source
govinfo.gov




