Radioactive waste opponents say lege should consider storage risks

May 01 - Odessa American (TX)

Opponents to storage of high-level radioactive waste in West Texas framed their arguments on Wednesday in the run-up to a legislative committee meeting this summer that will explore bringing such a disposal site to the state.

No date has been set for the House Committee on Environmental Regulation to start reviewing storage of the waste, which are spent nuclear fuel rods, and "make specific recommendations" on what it would take to make that happen, per an interim charge from Speaker of the House Joe Straus. The committee, which includes Ector County's Rep. Tryon Lewis of District 81 , is expected to meet this summer.

"You'll notice that this charge does not include examining the risk," said Karen Hadden , executive director of the Sustainable Energy and Economic Development Coalition based in Austin . "That is a massive oversight as if it is a foregone conclusion that this is a good idea."

Hadden organized a Wednesday presentation that included fellow opponents of a high-level radioactive waste storage site in West Texas : an attorney who litigates nuclear matters, a nuclear expert, a medical doctor, a Fort Worth state representative and other public interest advocates. Their concerns focused on health and safety risks.

Gov. Rick Perry wrote a letter in March to leaders of the House and Senate arguing state leaders have "no choice" but to begin looking at storing high level radioactive waste in Texas . Perry also mentioned a "legitimate site in West Texas " during a TV appearance, although he has not publicly endorsed a specific site.

Approval ultimately rests with the federal government, which could be a slow process, but opponents worry state support could encourage federal approval.

"It almost sounds like it's a Chamber of Commerce promotional perspective on this rather than an honest risk-analysis" of safety and economics, said Rep. Lon Burnam , a Fort Worth Democrat of District 90 .

Burnam said bringing high-level waste goes against previous compacts between states about storage and the 2003 legislation that OK'd the low-level disposal site in Andrews county , "all of which I think is very dangerous and ill-conceived."

At least two groups have expressed interest in storing high-level radioactive waste in West Texas : AFCI Texas LLC , whose co-owners are negotiating with a Loving County landowner for a potential site, and Waste Control Specialists , the low-level waste disposal site in Andrews County whose company officials have begun discussions with local leaders about the possibility.

Both developments are in early stages, representatives of each group said, and neither has sought the permits for the higher-level waste storage.

The advocates during the Wednesday presentation focused on WCS as the most likely storage site.

"It's just an ever expanding nuclear empire, and I think that's who's really looking in this case," Hadden said.

WCS officials have told the Odessa American they will not seek to store high-level radioactive waste without community report and safety studies.

Presenters on Wednesday cited a Texas Commission on Environmental Quality study reporting that high-level waste's radiation field would be four-times the lethal level, enough to incapacitate an unshielded person stating a meter away and kill them in a week. But there are other risks too, the group argued: Transportation accidents, water contamination and security risks, among others.

"High level radioactive waste certainly can be a major threat to health and well-being," said Dr. Elliot Trester , of Texas Physicians for Social Responsibility, cautioning that the level of danger depends on the quantity, strength of radioactivity and length of exposure.

The spent fuel rods are currently kept at the nation's 104 nuclear power plants. Interim storage could still mean decades, experts say, until a permanent geological repository is built so the waste could be buried deep underground -- as had been the plan at the Yucca Mountain site in Nevada until the effort was scuttled, after billions of dollars spent and decades of controversy.

"We have sites for temporary storage: They are the reactor sites," said Arjun Makhijani , president of the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research , who like other presenters argued the waste should be kept in dry storage until a permanent geologic repository is built, which could take decades. "There is absolutely no need for temporary storage," except for emergencies.

Robert Eye , a Kansas -based attorney who litigates nuclear matters, said West Texas is a target for storage because it lacks political clout, it's remote and it's sparsely populated. And he argued the driving force for temporary storage is the nuclear industry, whose reactors serve as a reminder that spent fuel has been dealt with ineffectively and harms support for building new reactors.

"We've got to deal with it and Gov. Perry's enthusiasm about West Texas notwithstanding, this is a conversation we need to have on a national basis," Eye said. "Because this is a problem that is not going to go away."

Contact Corey Paul on Twitter @OAcrude on Facebook at OA Corey Paul or call 432-333-7768.

___

Visit the Odessa American (Odessa, Texas) at www.oaoa.com

http://www.energycentral.com/functional/news/news_detail.cfm?did=32347705&