|
Sept. 20, 2001
by Kevin Kamps, nuclear waste specialist, Nuclear Information & Resource Service, Washington, D.C.
From 9/3 to 9/7, the 13 th international Packaging and Transportation of Radioactive Materials conference brought 630 representatives of government and industry from 20 countries together in a posh hotel in downtown Chicago. The event, sponsored by the U.S. Dept. of Energy (DOE), was devoted to paving the way for expanding nuclear materials transportation both here and around the world. I was invited as the token anti-nuclear activist, to sit on a point/counterpoint panel discussion. The conference theme was “Transport: The Vital Link,” that without nuclear materials shipments, the entire nuclear enterprise would grind to a screeching halt. All week long, the “inherent safety” of nuclear materials transport was proclaimed. Until the Liability Workshop, that is, when legal experts reviewed all the domestic and international laws in place to protect nuclear power and transport companies in the event of a catastrophic radiation release during a severe shipment accident, by paying for damages (which could run into the billions) with taxpayer money. Most ironically, during the point/counterpoint panel, a representative of British Nuclear Fuels, which ships weapons-usable plutonium and high-level radioactive waste on the high seas between Europe and Japan, scoffed at the notion of terrorist threats to the deadly cargoes. That was before 9/11.
From 3:30 pm on 9/10 till just before 9 am on 9/11, an intensely radioactive liquid atomic waste truck shipment (traveling from a Maryland nuclear plant to a South Carolina dump) parked on the side of the road near the intersection of Pennsylvania Avenue and the Beltway around Washington, D.C. The reason? Maryland regulations prohibit such a heavy load on the Beltway during those hours. The driver tried to make it to Virginia before 3:30, but fell 10 miles short. Thus the waste, emitting 20 to 45 times normal background radiation levels at its container surface, parked overnight near a gas station, a used car lot, a residential neighborhood, and a busy highway. Nuclear waste shipments are like mobile x-ray machines that cannot be turned off, zapping unsuspecting passersby with government permitted but still harmful gamma radiation doses. Ironically, the waste truck had parked for over 17 hours next to the front entrance of Andrews Airforce Base at a time when George W. Bush’s Air Force One, which is based there, was reportedly targeted for terrorist attack. The waste truck was a mere 5 to 8 miles from the Pentagon at 9:45 am on 9/11 when the hijacked jumbo jet crashed there. By sheer coincidence, a nuclear waste shipment nearly found itself in the middle of a terrorist attack. (How do I know all this? Because we watchdogged the stranded waste truck that whole time, and had a radiation monitor to take readings. The entire experience was photographed by my partner, Gabriela Bulisova.)
But what if that waste truck had been associated with the terrorist attack? Had the radioactive waste truck taken a right (towards the Pentagon) instead of a left (towards South Carolina) off of the Beltway, it would have passed the Pentagon right when the hijacked plane crashed into it. How can I know that? Because I was tailing the waste truck, but it turned left and I turned right. I passed the Pentagon just as the plane crashed.
In response to the 9/11 terrorist attacks, U.S. Energy Secretary Spence Abraham the very next day announced a halt to all DOE nuclear materials shipments. Actions speak louder than words, and Abraham’s ban stands in stark contrast to DOE’s previous downplaying of the risks of nuclear waste transportation. The stoppage includes a postponement of the controversial shipment of highly radioactive atomic fuel rods by train from West Valley, New York, through Nebraska, to Idaho. Before the terrorist strike, an inside source reported to Nuclear Info. & Resource Service that the 3 to 4 day long, cross-country West Valley shipment was scheduled to begin right around Sept. 20 th. That plan may be on hold, but given that Abraham’s statement also announced that the shipment ban would be lifted as soon as possible, and the fact that the West Valley shipment is ready to go, it may still move before DOE’s October 31 st deadline. [Because the transport containers’ gaskets have not been certified for extremely cold weather conditions (John Chamberlain, the DOE spokesman at West Valley, himself compared the situation to the “O” rings on the Space Shuttle Challenger!), DOE has said that it will not ship these containers between Oct. 31 and April 1, so as to avoid running into extreme low temperatures.] Concerned citizens in all ten States that the West Valley waste would pass through are gearing up to protest the imminent shipment.
DOE has announced the deadline for final public comments on Yucca Mtn., and the “Mobile Chernobyl” it would launch. (The deadline was set for Oct. 5 th, but the Nevada Congressional delegation has demanded, and DOE will likely grant, an extension till mid to late Oct. in light of the disruption caused by 9/11.) Three years ago, then-U.S. Senator Spence Abraham protested a controversial DOE plutonium shipment through his home State of Michigan. He fired off a letter to DOE stating “it is imperative that a public hearing be conducted,” and that “to not do so would be irresponsible and offensive to Michigan residents.” Now himself Energy Secretary, Abraham plans to hold a grand total of zero public hearings in the 43 States, including Nebraska, where tens of thousands of radioactive waste trucks and trains would pass within half a mile of the homes of 50 million Americans.
Take action now! Write, e-mail, or fax Carol Hanlon, DOE, Yucca Mountain Site Characterization Office (M/S #025), P.O. Box 30307, North Las Vegas, NV 89036-0307, E-mail: YMP_SR@ymp.gov, Fax: 1-800-967-0739. Ask DOE how it can recommend to go forward with Yucca Mtn. when potentially catastrophic impacts of high-level nuclear waste transportation have not been addressed. Ask DOE why it thinks burying atomic waste in an active earthquake zone, that leaks water like a sieve into a drinking water supply, makes sense. Be sure to write “Re: Yucca Mountain Preliminary Site Suitability Evaluation” on your comments, and be sure to send copies of your comments to U.S. Senators Nelson and Hagel (US Senate, Washington, DC 20510) and your U.S. Representative (US House, Washington, DC 20515). Congress could very well vote to approve or disapprove the Yucca Mtn. plan within the next year.
|
