Senate Action
On July 9th, the Senate voted 60-39 to approve Yucca Mountain, Nevada as the
nation's central nuclear waste repository. Combined with the House vote of May
8th, the action thereby unified the Congress in overriding the veto of the Nevada
Governor. The approval vote included forty-five Republicans and fifteen Democrats.
It should be noted that all of the approving Democrats have nuclear waste in
their states that would be shipped to the Yucca site. The three Republicans
who voted against the measure were John Ensign (NV), Ben Nighthorse Campbell
(CO), and Lincoln Chafee (RI) who were joined by Independent James Jeffords
(VT). The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) can now submit a license application
to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to solve the decades old problem
of creating a central repository for spent nuclear fuel and defense-related
high-level radioactive waste. The Yucca Mountain site, adjacent to the Nevada
Test Site, has been the only location under consideration since 1987 when Congress
identified the site as the only one to receive further study.
The approval vote came after considerable debate. Significant concern was expressed regarding the validity of the science utilized in site selection, and the safety of transporting spent nuclear fuel to the location. Ever since the beginning of nuclear power in the 1950s, plans for waste disposal have been blocked or delayed over concerns about health, safety and the environment. However, the growing accumulation of waste at the many temporary storage facilities caused Congress to consider the waste build-up to be a more pressing problem. It was stressed, however, that the congressional override did not allow construction to proceed, but only gave DOE the opportunity to submit an application for a site approval license. To date, it has cost the DOE over $6 billion to characterize the site's suitability for long-term containment of nuclear waste. The NRC now has four years to study the suitability of the site before issuing a license.
Background
Spent nuclear fuel is currently stored at more than eighty commercial reactor
facilities throughout the nation and at a number of DOE locations. This situation
will not change until at least 2010, which is the earliest the repository is
expected to open. Originally the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 required DOE
to remove waste from commercial reactor sites by 1998. The Act also indicated
that disposal of spent nuclear fuel should be placed in a deep geologic formation
unlikely to be disturbed for thousands of years. But, over the years, Congress
has failed to pass the necessary legislation or to gain enough Senate support
to override an anticipated presidential veto. Many external groups have also
registered concern over the site's proximity to Las Vegas, the routes necessary
to transport waste to the site, potential seismic or volcanic activity in the
area, the possibility of groundwater infiltration, the possibility of nuclear
chain reactions, and the existence of fossil fuel or mineral deposits that might
encourage future development.
Seismic Activity
To support those who argue that the Yucca Mountain site might be subject to
seismic activity, a mild earthquake hit the area in mid-June. A magnitude 4.4
earthquake occurred at Little Skull Mountain, which is about 12 ½ miles
east of Yucca Mountain. DOE reported no damage to the Yucca site, which is designed
to withstand an event with 1,000 times more energy than that released in June.
The agency also indicated that the event occurred in a known and studied geologic
zone. Opponents of the proposed nuclear waste repository stated that the event
clearly indicated why an underground radioactive dumpsite should not be located
on an active fault line.
Conclusion
Creating a large permanent nuclear waste storage facility has involved all three
branches of government, the power industry, and environmental groups. Power
companies have sued the federal government to recover the cost of storage beyond
the date the government promised removal. The last three Congresses have wrestled
with the issues of interim storage, acceptable levels of radiation, long-term
monitoring, and waste transportation. The nuclear industry wants Congress to
have DOE build an interim storage facility to receive spent fuel from nuclear
power plants as soon as possible. They contend that such a facility could reduce
spent fuel storage costs, increase safety, and allow the federal government
to satisfy its legal obligations. However, environmental and anti-nuclear power
groups oppose interim storage claiming it would cause early transportation of
unprecedented quantities of nuclear waste. They contend it would be safer to
leave the waste in place until a permanent solution can be reached. And to complicate
the issue even further, the events of September 11th have heightened concerns
about the vulnerability of stored spent fuel. In any event, it seems clear that
disposal requirements for nuclear waste have become more stringent, and the
concern about the hazards of radioactivity has increased dramatically.
This column is a bimonthly feature written by John J. Dragonetti, CPG-02779,
who is Senior Advisor to the American Geological Institute’s Government Affairs
Program.
Please send any comments or requests for information to the AGI Government Affairs Program.
Contributed by John Dragonetti, AGI Government Affairs.
Posted November 7, 2002
| Information Services | | Geoscience Education | | Public Policy | | Environmental Geoscience | | Publications | | Workforce | | AGI Events | ||
|
© 2013. All rights reserved. | ||||||||
