Mr. President, I rise today with Senator Bingaman to introduce the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Act of 2003. Our bill will address the efforts made by the Department of Energy (DOE) to recover and dispose of thousands of domestic Greater-than-Class-C (GTCC) radiological sources. These have the highest radiation levels and, in general, pose the greatest concern in terms of being used in a so-called "dirty bomb."
Since September 11th, we have faced the possibility that a terrorist could use a dirty bomb in an attack in the United States. A dirty bomb combines conventional explosives with highly radioactive materials. When exploded, it would disperse the radioactive materials, reducing the impact from radiation. But, if set off in the downtown of a major city, it could still contaminate a wide area with radiation, cause death and destruction due to the explosion, and panic and substantial economic damage could result.
Secretary of Energy Spencer Abraham told an International Atomic Energy Agency conference in March, "Radioactive sources can be found all over the world, and terrorists are seeking to acquire them." CIA Director George Tenet told Congress in February that he was concerned about Al Qaeda's attempts to build a dirty bomb. He said, "construction of a such a device is well within Al Qaeda capabilities – if it can obtain the radiological material."
Radiological sources are used widely in industry, agriculture, medicine, and research. Appropriately, Secretary Abraham has made it priority for the Department of Energy to help other countries secure their radiological sources. But as the United States works internationally to secure dangerous radiological sources, we also must be sure our own house is in order.
When chairman of the International Security Subcommittee of the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee, I held hearings in the fall of 2001 that covered the threat posed by dirty bombs. I also requested that GAO examine U.S. efforts to secure radioactive sources within the United States.
GAO recently finished their inquiry, and I am sorry to report that GAO found our house is not in order.
GAO's report shows that not only the former Soviet Union, but also the United States does not keep track of or account for its radioactive sources in a reliable manner. There is not a precise count of GTCC sources in the United States. Some quarter to half a million are estimated to exist. Some 24,000 new GTCC sources are being produced each year.
A central issue is what is being done with unwanted radioactive devices. We don't have an accurate account of unwanted devices in this country, and the program for recovering and securing them is proceeding too slowly.
In 1985, Congress authorized DOE to provide a facility for disposing of GTCC waste, including GTCC sealed radiological sources that were no longer wanted by their owners. GAO found that after 18 years, DOE still has not developed a facility for storing GTCC wastes.
DOE assumes a facility for receiving GTCC sealed sources will be available by FY 2007. But DOE has not taken serious steps to insure this facility will be built.
Instead, DOE has an interim program for collecting and holding unwanted radiological sources. In 1999, DOE created an Off-site Source Recovery Project, or OSR, in the Office of Environmental Management for these purposes.
The OSR Project has recovered about 5,300 sealed sources. Another 4,400 sources, held by 328 different owners across the United States, are known to be in need of recovery. DOE estimates a further 4,600 sources will need to be recovered by 2010, when the OSR Project is scheduled to end because the permanent storage facility should be operating.
Thousands more sources, however, will need to be recovered outside the OSR project once a depository opens.
Every state in the Union has radioactive sources that need to be recovered, according to the GAO report. States with more than a 100 sources to be recovered include Arizona, California, Illinois, Maryland, New York, and Texas. Another 25 states have between 10 and 100 sources to be recovered.
The GAO report notes that many of these are small sources with small amounts of radiation but hundreds are larger sources with large amounts of radioactivity.
Alarmingly, the question of dirty bombs aside, there are almost two nuclear bombs worth of unwanted plutonium-239 sources that DOE cannot recover because they lack storage space. GAO reports that universities that have this material want to give it up, but cannot, because the DOE does not have the space to store them.
We are concerned that the program to recover, secure, and store GTCC radiological sources is not receiving the priority it deserves. The disposal of thousands of radiological sources must be addressed. But DOE will not be prepared to dispose of these sources permanently in the next seven years because DOE has not identified the type of facility or provided a cost estimate and time-line for its construction.
This bill will address these concerns. To insure the permanent disposal program gets the attention it needs within DOE, our legislation requires DOE to designate a responsible entity within DOE to develop a facility for disposal of GTCC wastes.
It also requires the DOE to report to Congress on the current situation and future plans for the disposal of GTCC radioactive waste. After the completion of this report, the DOE must submit to Congress a report on the cost and schedule to complete an environmental impact statement and record of decision on a permanent disposal facility for GTCC radioactive wastes. Finally, before the year is out, DOE must deliver to Congress a plan to provide for the short-term recovery of GTCC radioactive waste until a permanent facility is available.
I am also concerned that the short-term Offsite Source Recovery Project may lack the funding required to ensure that all designated radiological sources are safely and securely recovered in a timely manner. The program apparently will be funded adequately through the end of FY04. The FY02 emergency supplemental budget provided ten million dollars, and the President requested about two million dollars in his FY04 budget proposal. But I caution Congress to keep an eye on this program to guarantee sufficient funds are requested in the FY05 budget when it is submitted to Congress next year.
Thousands of sealed sources await disposal, some requiring security measures greater than those in place at current storage sites. The problem posed by these sources will not go away by itself. Universities and industry do not have the means or facilities to secure these materials and are asking the federal government for help.
When the United States began non-proliferation efforts in the former Soviet Union, one of the first jobs was to begin consolidating nuclear weapons and fissile materials in secure facilities to await disposal or destruction. As Secretary Abraham has said, due to worries about terrorists acquiring dirty bombs, the DOE now is working to secure radiological sources overseas.
I support these efforts. The bill Senator Bingaman and I have introduced will give radiological sources and waste on American soil the same consideration. Collecting and securing these sources was once a matter of public safety. It is now a national security concern that deserves the attention of Congress.
