Utah, Nevada join forces to stop nuclear waste dumping in the West
6 years ago | 245 views | 0 0 comments | 2 2 recommendations | email to a friend | print
    Congressman Jim Matheson and Nevada Congresswoman

Shelley Berkley have legislation mandating that nuclear waste be stored

on-site where it is produced.  The measure requires the federal

government to take responsibility for possession, stewardship,

maintenance and monitoring of the waste.

    Matheson and Berkley are joined on the bill by

Nevada Congressmen Jim Gibbons and Jon Porter, as well as Utah

Congressmen Chris Cannon and Rob Bishop.

    Companion legislation has been introduced in the

Senate by Senator Harry Reid, Senator John Ensign, Senator Robert

Bennett and Senator Orrin Hatch.

    “The West – whether it is Utah’s Skull Valley, or

Nevada’s Yucca Mountain – is not the de facto dumping ground for this

lethal material,” said Matheson.

“Storing nuclear waste on site is the safest, most reasonable and most

effective way of allowing nuclear power plants to continue operating

while we search for an appropriate long-term storage solution.”

    Congresswoman Berkley said, “This legislation will

keep radioactive garbage out of Nevada, out of Utah and off of

America’s roads and railways.  That is good news for Nevadans and

for the millions of families living along nuclear waste transportation

routes that face the threat of an accident or terrorist attack

involving one of these shipments.”

    Matheson said that under the Nuclear Waste Policy

Act of 1982, the government has focused only on the proposed Yucca

Mountain site as a central repository for spent nuclear fuel

rods.  As scientific, falsified documentation, transportation and

other problems with Yucca Mountain have raised doubts that Yucca will

open, companies have proposed a private storage facility on the Goshute

Indian Reservation in Utah’s west desert.

    “Dry cask storage – the method proposed by Private

Fuel Storage in Skull Valley – is currently being used at 33 nuclear

power plants around the country. As approved by the Nuclear Regulatory

Commission, dry cask containers can safely store waste for at least 100

years. We should not subject citizens to the dangers posed by

transporting it through their communities when it can remain where it

is,” said Matheson.

    “Yucca Mountain is far too dangerous and far too

expensive to ever be completed.  Dry cask storage is a proven

technology that is already in use, and all sides agree that waste can

be securely isolated in these containers for the next century,” Berkley

said.  “Dry cask storage also eliminates the need for decades of

nuclear waste shipments that would be required under the Yucca Mountain

scenario.  Once enacted, our plan will increase national security,

decrease the risk to public safety and will save billions of dollars

that are now being wasted on efforts to turn Nevada into the nation’s

nuclear garbage dump.”

    Summary of the Spent Nuclear Fuel On-Site Storage

Security Act of 2005 Amends the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 as

follows:

*    Requires commercial nuclear utilities to transfer

nuclear waste from spent nuclear fuel pools into dry storage casks

within 6 years after enactment or 6 years after the waste is produced,

whichever comes first.

*    Requires the Department of Energy (DOE) to take

title to all spent nuclear fuel currently in on-site dry cask storage

within 30 days of enactment.

*    Requires the spent nuclear fuel on-site storage sites and storage casks to comply with NRC regulations.

*    Requires the Department of Energy to take title to,

and full responsibility for, the waste at the reactor sites after it

has been transferred to dry cask storage in compliance with regulations.

*    Expenditures from the Nuclear Waste Fund will

compensate utilities for expenses associated with transferring and

storing the waste.
report abuse...

Express yourself:

We're glad to give readers a forum to express their points of view on issues important to this community. That forum is the “Letters to the Editor.” Letters to the editor may be submitted directly to The Times-Independent through this link and will be published in the print edition of the newspaper. All letters must be the original work of the letter writer – form letters will not be accepted. All letters must include the actual first and last name of the letter writer, the writer’s address, city and state and telephone number. Anonymous letters will not be accepted.

Letters may not exceed 400 words in length, must be regarding issues of general interest to the community, and may not include personal attacks, offensive language, ethnic or racial slurs, or attacks on personal or religious beliefs. Letters should focus on a single issue. Letters that proselytize or focus on theological debates will not be published. During political campaigns, The Times-Independent will not publish letters supporting or opposing any local candidate. Thank you letters are generally not accepted for publication unless the letter has a public purpose. Thank you letters dealing with private matters that compliment or complain about a business or individual will not be published. Nor will letters listing the names of individuals and/or businesses that supported a cause or event. Thank you letters about good Samaritan acts will be considered at the discretion of the newspaper.