Yucca nuke waste project director says plan on schedule

Mary Manning and Benjamin Grove

Friday, June 23, 2000 | 11:01 a.m.

WASHINGTON -- The director of the proposed project to bury the nation's nuclear waste in Nevada today said the project was on schedule, despite concerns of delay.

The Department of Energy next year will make a recommendation about whether Yucca Mountain, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas, is a suitable site to bury 77,000 tons of highly radioactive nuclear waste, Ivan Itkin, director of the DOE's Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management said. Yucca should open in 2010 as expected, Itkin said.

"The overriding goal of the federal government's high-level waste management policy is the establishment of a permanent geological repository," Itkin stressed in remarks to a Congressional committee.

The DOE since 1987 has been studying Yucca to determine if its a safe waste site. The House subcommittee on energy and water was meeting for a routine oversight hearing on next year's funding for Yucca.

Nevada's two congressional representatives urged the subcommittee to base any further action on scientific evidence that Yucca is a good site. And plenty of evidence exists that Yucca is not safe, they argued.

Rainwater has seeped through the mountain within 50 years, and groundwater under Yucca is in danger of being radiated, Rep. Jim Gibbons, R-Nev., said.

"This again meets the conditions for disqualification and is a true show stopper," Gibbons said.

Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., noted that the state has demonstrated on three occasions by using the DOE's own data why the site 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas should not become a repository.

Berkley cited earthquake faults, four nearby volcano cones and rapid ground water movement as leading state concerns. She argued that no one knows how waste stored at Yucca would be affected by the environment 100 years from now.

Berkley and several Yucca plan supporters on the committee exchanged sharp words.

"My point is you can't guarantee anything 100 years from now," said Rep. Steve Largent, R-Oklahoma. "That doesn't mean we should do nothing today. I think some of our best and brightest have come up with a solution, and it's Yucca Mountain."

Rep. John Shimkus, R-Ill., agreed.

"One site is better than 60 sites across the country, a desert is better than a temperate climate zone and below-ground (storage) is better than above ground," Shimkus said.

Berkley countered that shipping stored waste accumulating at nuclear power plants to Nevada simply created one more big waste site in America. She said Congress should pour its money into researching a scientific method to neutralize the waste.

"Yucca is another temporary solution," Berkley said. "What happens when it's filled up?"

At one point Rep. Ed Bryant, R-Tennessee, corrected subcommittee chairman Joe Barton, R-Texas, in his pronunciation of "Nevada."

"It's not Texas, so I'm not that worried about it," Barton said, joking. Later Berkley suggested Barton store the waste in his state.

"I wouldn't have a problem with that if it had met the scrutiny that Yucca Mountain has," Barton answered. "It appears to me the decision to build it there is a safe decision. I know it is a controversial decision."

In other testimony, a member of the U.S. Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board said several critical concerns remain about Yucca.

"Important technical questions remain about Yucca Mountain, especially about the effects of heat on the movement of water in the mountain and on the associated transport of radionuclides," said Debra Knopman. "The DOE is taking steps to address these questions, but some uncertainty will inevitably continue about predictions of the performance (of Yucca.)"

The DOE is asking for $437.5 million for Yucca projects in the 2001 fiscal year.

When Congress passed the original legislation for the DOE to study Yucca, oversight money was included in the overall Yucca budget for the state and affected counties.

However, state and local governments lost oversight funds after an audit initiated by Barton showed misuse of the nuclear waste funds. By law the funds cannot be used to oppose or lobby against the Yucca project.

Nevada's congressional team has been fighting to restore the state oversight funds and up to $2.5 million may become available this year.