Fallout over Nevada's nuclear destiny: plans to bury highly radioactive wastes reignite the Silver State

Science News, Jan 6, 1990 by Janet Raloff

In his letter, Miller lays out three such factors: active tectonics, the potential for movement of contaminated groundwater from the site, and mineralization.

Under federal law, any site with a history of active geologic processes that might lead to future releases of radioactive waste must be disqualified, Loux notes, "and we think these conditions exist at Yucca Mountain. There is young, active volcano within 7 miles of the site. And according to DOE's own data, there are 32 active faults on the site itself."

Yucca Mountain's many geologic faults and its large amount of fractured rock also suggest contaminated water could escape through a network of cracks, carrying leached wastes 5 kilometers or more than the site in as little as 400 or 500 years, according to state analyses. Federal requirements prohibit building a nuclear waste repository where water can travel 5 km from the burial site in less than 1,000 years. "DOE concedes that if the state's view is right, then the site's no good," Loux says. "But they've refused to do any real work to find that out."

Finally, to keep prospectors from digging into interred wastes at some distant time, federal law calls for a site devoid of precious natural resources. Yet Yucca Mountain "is probably among the most highly mineralized areas on this continent," Loux says. "In fact, two of North America's biggest gold mines are within a stone's throw -- 15 to 20 miles away." He adds that the U.S. Geological Survey "has already found gold and silver in several bore holes at Yucca Mountain."

Ultimately, such issues may indeed disqualify the site, says DOE's Philip A. Garon. However, he adds, DOE cannot make that assessment until it can begin site characterization studies. And to conduct useful investigations, "we need those environmental permits [from the state]", he told SCIENCE NEWS.

As for Nevada's Claim to have lawfully vetoed the site, Garon says DOE interprets the Nuclear Waste Policy Act as saying that the only veto that counts comes after the President recommends a site for permanent waste storage. Even if Yucca Mountain's geology proves acceptable, Garon says, such a recommendation is at best many years off.

On Nov. 28, DOE announced it would immediately seek authorization to begin constructing an interim storage facility for high-level wastes, though it did not specify a site. The plan involves building a simple, above-ground structure called a monitored retrievable storage (MRS) facility -- a sort of halfway house for wastes awaiting permanent disposal. Two years ago, Congress debated whether to authorize the construction of such a facility. In the end, it decided to allow DOE to build an interim facility -- but only if the department first found a suitable permanent repository site and received construction authorization for that site from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

As things now stand, the earliest the Energy Department could meet these criteria and begin accepting wastes at an MRS would be 2007, says Jane A. Axelrad, executive director of the MRS Review Commission, a presidentially appointed panel that expired Dec. 31. However, if Congress agrees to let DOE begin constructing an interim facility before fulfilling the specified criteria -- as the review commission recommended in its Nov. 1 report to Congress -- "we believe it could begin receiving waste maybe as early as 1998," says DOE's Ginger P. King.