Public Citizen - Nuclear Information
Resource Service - US Public Interest Research Group - Sierra Club - Alliance
for Nuclear Accountability - Friends of the Earth - Safe Energy Communication
Council
CONTACT: Dec. 1, 1998
Auke Piersma, Public Citizen, 202-546-4996, ext.
318
Mary Olson, Nuclear Information Resource Service, 202-328-0002
Environmental, Consumer Groups Meet with
DOE Secretary Richardson to Urge Disqualification of Yucca Mountain as Proposed
Nuclear Repository
WASHINGTON, D.C.-- Environmental and consumer representatives met with Energy
Secretary Bill Richardson today to urge that he obey the law and abandon Yucca
Mountain, Nev., as the proposed repository for thousands of tons of highly
radioactive waste. The meeting was in response to a petition signed by 219
environmental organizations.
"Secretary Richardson was very gracious in
listening to our arguments about why Yucca Mountain is unsuitable for the
long-term storage of nuclear waste and why it makes no sense to ship this
extremely dangerous material across America's roads and rails to a site that
cannot safely protect the American public from radiation," said Public Citizen
President Joan Claybrook.
The Department of Energy is
set to release a Viability Assessment of the Yucca Mountain site within the next
several weeks, but a final decision on whether to open the nuclear waste
repository is not scheduled before 2001. Claybrook said the organizations
requested that Richardson subject the Viability Assessment to peer review and
public hearings. Richardson agreed that the Viability Assessment does not
constitute a final decision on the repository.
"We are
happy to hear that the secretary in reference to our concerns is taking this
issue very seriously," said Anna Aurilio, staff scientist at the U.S. Public
Interest Research Group.
The final decision on the
site carries enormous significance both for Americans who live near Yucca
Mountain, which is 90 miles north of Las Vegas, and for highway users who will
be exposed over 30 years to 100,000 truck shipments of high-level nuclear waste
through 43 states, with the likelihood of hundreds of accidents.
"Nuclear waste is a major concern to millions of citizens
across the country. This is not just a Nevada issue anymore," said Michael
Mariotte, executive director of the Nuclear Information Resource Service.
The petition, filed with the DOE on Nov. 18, cites
scientific information that should trigger disqualification of the site under
the Nuclear Waste Policy Act (NWPA) and the DOE rules that implement that law.
The NWPA states that a repository site must be disqualified at any time during
the site characterization process if any disqualifying condition exists. The
petition establishes that the DOE now has scientific evidence that two
disqualifying conditions exist, and it raises concerns about three other serious
concerns.
Using chlorine-36 as a tracer, residues from
rainwater less than 50 years old have been detected at the level of the proposed
repository. This significant discovery contradicts earlier models of rainwater
flow (travel time to the water table). Also, evidence shows that significant
amounts of radionuclides are likely to migrate into off-site supplies of
groundwater that is currently suitable for human consumption and crop
irrigation. These facts indicate that the site meets the conditions for
disqualification for two guidelines. Additional concerns including seismic
activity, volcanism and human intrusion also are raised in the petition.
"Communities with DOE nuclear waste sites know what it is
like to have radioactive waste leaking into the groundwater and know that Yucca
Mountain should be disqualified," said Brad Morse of the Alliance for Nuclear
Accountability.
The DOE is under pressure from the
nuclear industry to approve the repository, but the groups say it would be much
safer to leave the waste where it is now. Using the time available to search for
better options prevents the bad mistake of dumping it in Yucca Mountain.
"We look forward to Secretary Richardson following his
tradition of protecting public health and safety," said Steve Pedery of the
Sierra Club's Global Warming and Energy Program. "He should say no to Yucca
Mountain."