Eureka County Nuclear Waste Page - Newsletters Current Issue: Fall 2001 ● Crescent Valley residents attend Yucca Mountain hearing ● Eureka County releases Impact Assessment Report ● Public hearing on Yucca Mountain held in Las Vegas ● The Price-Anderson Act comes up for renewal ● State releases Yucca Mountain video ● Nuclear News in brief ● Special Nuclear Waste Update Insert: The International Nuclear Waste Dilemma Special Edition: Site Recommendation ● DOE announces site recommendation hearings ● DOE releases site suitability report ● Important Dates ● Fact sheet: The decision process for a repository ● How would a Yucca Mountain repository impact Eureka County? ● Resources for more information Past Issues of the Update: Summer 2001 ● County officials tour Yucca Mountain http://www.yuccamountain.org/newslet.htm (1 of 4) [3/28/02 2:13:06 PM] Eureka County Nuclear Waste Page - Newsletters ● Supplemental impact statement released for comment ● Will the Senate power shift affect Yucca Mountain? ● EPA sets radiation standards for proposed repository ● Nuclear news in brief ● DOE releases science report on proposed repository ● County assesses transportation impacts ● Special Nevada nuclear history insert - The Atomic Frontier: Atmospheric Testing in Nevada Winter 2001 ● DOE Delays Release of Site Recommendation Report ● County officials to tour Yucca Mountain ● NRC May Hold Informal Hearings on Yucca Mountain Repository ● County Oversees Yucca Mountain Activities in 2001 ● Scientists Discover New Material that Safely Contains Radiation ● Calendar ● New Nuclear News Yucca Mountain Project Spencer Abraham, Secretary of Energy EPA Radiation Rule Transportation Nevada’s Agency for Nuclear Projects Radiation Compensation Goshute Private Spent Fuel Storage International Transmutation Summer 2000 ● DOE Revises Yucca Mountain Suitability Guidelines ● DOE Nearing Site Recommendation for Yucca Mountain ● Nevada Denies DOE Groundwater Request ● A New Report Evaluates the Possibility of Nuclear Waste Transportation Accidents in Las Vegas ● Interim Storage Facility Proposed for Goshute Indian Reservation, Utah ● Clinton Vetoes Nuclear Waste Legislation ● "Technical Voice" of Nye County Dies ● Fact Sheet: Roles of Federal Organizations with the Yucca Mountain Project ● Transmutation: An alternative to nuclear waste disposal? ● Special Nuclear Waste Update Insert: Project Faultless http://www.yuccamountain.org/newslet.htm (2 of 4) [3/28/02 2:13:06 PM] Eureka County Nuclear Waste Page - Newsletters Winter 2000 ● February 9 Deadline for EIS Comments ● Crowd Objects to Yucca Rail ● Make Your Comments ● Tell It to the DOE ● Calendar Fall 1999 - Special EIS Edition ● Draft EIS Released ● DOE Holding Hearings for Public comments in Nevada ● Important Dates ● Tell it to the DOE ● Possible Impacts of the proposed Carlin Rail Route Summer 1999 ● DOE Extends EIS Comment Period to 180 Days; Announces EIS Hearings ● Nuclear Waste Factsheet ● Beowawe Crescent Valley Nuclear Waste Committee: Announcements and Activities ● Why Nevada Opposes Yucca Mountain ● Comparative Radiation Standards Graph ● NRC to Publish Draft Yucca Mountain Rule ● Important Dates ● Interim Storage Dies in Congress ● DOE Briefs County Commission ● Guinn Opposes Yucca Mountain ● DOE to Study Water Flow at Yucca Mountain June/July 1999 - Special EIS Edition ● Draft EIS Public Comment Time Cut in Half ● Important Dates ● EIS Hearing Schedule ● Participation Q&A http://www.yuccamountain.org/newslet.htm (3 of 4) [3/28/02 2:13:06 PM] Eureka County Nuclear Waste Page - Newsletters ● EIS Impact Checklist ● Resources for More EIS Information Summer 1998 Edition ● Change in proposed Carlin rail route ● Viability Assessment at Yucca Mountain ● WIPP, New Mexico certified as a nuclear dump ● Heat tests at Yucca Mountain ● Foreign reactor research fuel shipped through Nevada ● DOT nuclear waste transportation study released ● Nuclear waste legislation dies in Congress Archived articles from past editions: 1993-1995 Site Index What's New | Newsletter | EIS Data | Legislative Information | Calendar FAQ | Photo Page | Timeline | Internet Links | Maps Documents | Transportation | Regulations Site Map | Home Page Last Updated 02/2002 http://www.yuccamountain.org/newslet.htm (4 of 4) [3/28/02 2:13:06 PM] Fall 2001 Newsletter - Eureka County Nuclear Waste Update Crescent Valley Residents Attend Yucca Mountain Hearing Also In This Issue: ossible damage to natural resources, the threat of a terrorist P ● Eureka County releases Impact attack targeting nuclear waste trains, and the lack of response to Assessment Report previous comments were all concerns expressed during the ● Public hearing on Yucca Mountain October 10th Yucca Mountain hearing in Crescent Valley. The held in Las Vegas Department of Energy (DOE) hurriedly organized the meeting so ● The Price-Anderson Act comes up that residents of the area could comment on the upcoming Yucca Mountain site recommendation decision. But short notice by DOE for renewal resulted in sparse attendance at most rural hearings. ● State releases Yucca Mountain video During the afternoon impromptu question and answer session, ● Nuclear news in brief DOE officials seemed unable to provide more than basic ● Special insert - The International information about the geology of Yucca Mountain and the status Nuclear Waste Dilemma of the site characterization project. To the frustration of those attending the hearing, the department’s representatives were also unprepared to address concerns about the proposed Carlin rail line, which may one day transport nuclear waste through the Crescent Valley. There were many questions but few adequate answers. Participants asked about the possibility of radioactive contamination caused by a transportation accident. Nancy Louden reminded the group of two train accidents that had taken place in the region in recent months. In response, Mark Van der Puy, director of DOE’s Office of Public Support, referred to a poster depicting the nuclear waste shipping casks surviving rigorous safety tests. But Christopher Sewell remained skeptical. Pointing out that the containers are not being subjected to a “worst-case scenario,” he questioned the conditions under which the casks are tested. “There are drops bigger than 30 feet, water deeper than three feet, and fires that could burn longer than 30 minutes,” Sewell said. The recent terrorist attacks of September 11th were also on peoples’ minds. Carrie Dann said she was “afraid that national defense will now be used as an excuse to push this project through.” Others also brought up the fear that trains transporting radioactive materials could be potential terrorist targets. Van der Puy admitted that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission would now have to reconsider the possibility of a terrorist attack when evaluating cask safety. http://www.yuccamountain.org/fall01.htm (1 of 9) [3/28/02 2:17:48 PM] Fall 2001 Newsletter - Eureka County Nuclear Waste Update Another question that came up repeatedly was why DOE is not looking into other options for nuclear waste disposal, such as transmutation. According to Van der Puy, “The international community has concluded that geologic disposal is the most preferable method of disposal.” Sewell disagreed. “Geologic disposal is the best way to deal with [nuclear waste] so that we don’t have to deal with it, which will allow the nuclear power industry to keep producing more waste,” he said. Dann stressed the importance of research into other alternatives: “The United States should try to work to neutralize nuclear waste instead of bury it.” She worried that DOE’s present course gives “no consideration to the future generations.” In the testimonies that were officially recorded by the court reporter, worries about the potential damage to the county’s natural resources figured prominently. People were also concerned about the effect a nuclear waste rail line would have on their property values. Above all, participants worried about the health and safety of Nevada residents. Speaking of the lasting effects of atmospheric testing in Nevada, several Crescent Valley residents pointed out that DOE’s track record in issues of health and safety was not reassuring. “This obtrusive, poisonous, deadly stuff will be going by my house every day,” said Patti Leppala. “You don’t know how safe it is, but you’re going to say it’s safe anyway. My nephew [a downwinder] was supposed to be safe. But now he’s dead,” she said. Joseph Carruthers read a statement from Governor Kenny Guinn, which was being presented at each of the 29 field hearings. Guinn also brought up DOE’s previous violations of public trust. “I don’t have to remind anyone here today that it was not long ago that Nevadans and all Americans were assured that nuclear testing was safe,” the statement read. “Given the history, I trust you can understand why I view this proceeding as morally illegal if not technically so.” Commissioner Donna Bailey testified on behalf of Eureka County. She presented Eureka County’s Impact Assessment Report as part of her testimony, summarizing the main effects a rail line would have on the county. Bailey’s comments also focused on the lack of transportation analysis. “To decide to build a repository at Yucca Mountain, and not to decide how to get the waste to the repository is irresponsible,” she said. The Commissioner was also critical of the short notice given for the hearings, which were announced less than a week in advance. Commissioner Bailey formally requested that another meeting – this