Vol. 2, No. 16
.jpg)
June 15, 2005
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| . | |||||||
 |
CRIMINAL DEFENSE |
COPYWRITING
|
|
Does Department Of Energy Have Collective Heads In The Yucca Sands?
Possibility Of Falsified Documents Of No Consequence; "It's Still Sound Science," Said In Congress Hearings
by Johnny Gunn
As a child might when caught with hands in the cookie jar, Department of Energy (DOE) officials are saying the possibility of documents dealing with quality control at Yucca Mountain may have been falsified, but that doesn't have any bearing on the science of the project. Licensing procedures are going to continue. That license would be a function of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).
According to Nils J. Diaz, Chairman, in testimony before congress, "The NRC has made significant progress on activities related to protecting public health and safety in relation to disposal of nuclear waste." Diaz made those comments well after it became known that certain scientists from the United States Geologic Survey (USGS) had discussed falsifying records in order to prove that surface water might not infiltrate the Yucca facility and have an affect on the casks holding the waste.
In the meantime John Arthur one of those in charge of the Yucca project has said, "The net infiltration estimates are technically defensible." He went on to say that the falsification of data is of no matter because, "we have other individuals and organizations to make sure the information is either replaced or redone so it stands up in our license application." One person who he doesn't have anymore is the director of USGS.
Charles G. Groat resigned from his director's chair on June 10. Groat's spokesperson insists the resignation has nothing to do with the alleged falsification of data by USGS hydrologists. Groat plans to do research work and teach. His resignation becomes effective on June 17.
During congressional hearings Nevada representatives questioned why Groat had not taken disciplinary action against the hydrologists in question. Representative Jon Porter (R-NV) led the questioning and said recently that USGS has not followed through with any information concerning the questionable e-mails or what action USGS might be taking.
In his testimony before congress, Diaz of NRC reminds all that the rules have been changed by the federal appeals court. "In July of 2004, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals vacated the 10,000 year compliance period established by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)." The 10,000 years was the period in which the casks holding the nuclear waste would maintain their integrity.
Although the court didn't specify a specific length of time for the casks to be viable, it recommended a period of 250,000 years. Diaz said before congress, "As required the NRC stands ready to amend its regulations consistent with any forthcoming changes to the EPA standards for Yucca Mountain."
If USGS scientists had their doubts about water infiltration over a 10,000-year period and were willing to falsify their documents to meet that time-line, what will DOE and USGS do with a 250,000-year time-line?
Edwin S. Lyman, PhD, and Senior Scientist, Global Security Program in testimony before the U.S. Senate said on May 26 this year, that he has serious concerns about the safety and security of nuclear fuel rods, nuclear waste, and nuclear energy plants themselves. Working as a member of the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), Lyman says he has two basic concerns about NRC security issues. (For a complete look at his testimony, click here to see the pdf file.)
"First," he says, "some of these facilities possess highly enriched uranium or plutonium, which can be used to make nuclear weapons, and this material is potentially vulnerable to theft by terrorists." Lyman continued, "And second, nuclear power plants remain vulnerable to terrorist attacks that could result in the release of significant radiation --- far more deadly than any 'dirty bomb'."
Lyman said since Al Quaeda is intent on acquiring nuclear weapons, the potential for theft of weapon-usable fissile materials is of great concern. "This calls into question," he testified, "for example the relatively lax security requirements that the NRC imposes on university research reactors that possess substantial quantities of highly enriched uranium."
He went on to say that at just a couple of university programs, and he pointed out Duke University's two programs, that there is enough plutonium at the facility, about 80 kilograms, to make a dozen Nagasaki-type nuclear bombs. He said security at those facilities is pitiful.
DOE and NRC have barrels full of problems and seem to be acting like that child with his hand in the cookie jar. Falsified reports, significant security lapses, lying to the public, and going on about their collective merry way without a worry in the world, one big sugar cookie in hand.
So far, DOE hasn't even created and certified that they have posted a database to the Internet that should hold about 3.5 million documents and records. The licensing program can't go forward until that posting is complete and accepted by NRC. It is NRC that will issue a license for the Yucca Mountain Repository.
There is one bit of light heartedness about the entire procedure: if one of the casks full of nuclear waste fails at some point between 10,000 years and 250,000 years from now, no one on earth today will be called before a court of law to answer for the failure.
•••
______________________________________________________________________________________