The Facts

DOE has been working on the Yucca Mountain Project for over 20 years.

DOE Fuzzy Shipment Numbers:

• In the FEIS of Feb, 2002, DOE stated there would be 108,500 shipments over 38 years.
• In May, 2002, DOE’s Office of Public Affairs began publishing documents stating there would be 4,300 shipments over 24 years.

Targets for Terrorism: Moving deadly shipments of nuclear cargo around the country would create tens of thousands of viable targets for terrorists. Terrorists wielding armor-piercing weapons could penetrate a shipping cask, causing a lethal release that would cost billions of dollars to cleanup. After September 11th we know that we can’t take risks with something so deadly.

Faulty Logic: DOE claims that radioactive waste stored around the country cannot be adequately protected against terrorists and must be moved. At the same time, DOE’s Director for Radioactive Waste Management has said that radioactive waste will remain at these sites for at least the next 40 years. In fact, nuclear waste has to cool for a certain period of time before it can be moved. As nuclear power plants continue to operate, there will always be stored waste at nuclear sites around the country, whether Yucca Mountain is built or not.

Access: DOE’s Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) includes proposed rail routes approaching Yucca Mountain where a rail line does not currently exist. Construction of these rail lines would be the largest federal transportation undertaking since World War I and cost billions of dollars.

Cask Durability: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has not actually tested the shipping casks to be used. Instead, they have used computer-simulated tests and NRC has declared these results to be safe. Further, NRC has no immediate plans to actually test the shipping containers durability against fire, sabotage, water immersion, puncture and impact.

The Risks of Being Wrong: This proposal is dangerous and irresponsible. Each time a load of nuclear waste takes to America’s highways, railways or waterways, there will be a chance that something can go wrong — a high-speed collision, a dangerous fire, a submerged cask on a sunken barge, or a successful terrorist attack, a spill, a collision, a fire, or worse. One mistake is too many. And this chance isn’t so small when you consider the tens of thousands of shipments they’re planning. This is a risk we simply can’t take.