Letter from Senator Chic Hecht (Washington, D.C.) to John S. Herrington, March 19, 1987

CHIC HECHT NEVADA COMMITTEES BANKING, HOUSING AND U R B A N AFFAIRS ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES ' I ' SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE United States Senate WASHINGTON, DC 20510 STATE OFFICES: CARSON CITY OFFICE: 3 0 8 NORTH CURRY STREET (702) 8 8 5 - 9 1 1 1 LAS VEGAS OFFICE: 3 0 0 LAS VEGAS BLVD., SOUTH (702) 3 8 8 - 8 6 0 6 RENO OFFICE: 3 0 0 BOOTH STREET (702) 7 8 4 - 5 0 0 7 March 19, 1987 The Honorable John S. Herrington Secretary Department of Energy 1000 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, D.C, 20585 Dear John: I am writing to you on a matter of great concern to Nevada, as well as to me as a Senator from the Silver State. The Department's draft Mission Plan Amendment for the high-level nuclear waste program schedules the start of exploratory shaft construction at the tuff site at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, to begin in the second quarter of 1988. Site characterization at this site would finish in the first quarter of 1992, a year before site characterization ends at the other two sites, which both are scheduled to end in the first quarter of 1993. As I tried to make clear to you at the recent Energy Committee hearings on the Mission Plan Amendment, I am convinced that this is unfair. Nevada should not be asked to be first in line among the possible repository states. For there to be equity in this first repository program, and just as important, for the people of Nevada and the Nation to have confidence that the Department is acting in an equitable manner, the characterization of all three sites must be scheduled to end at the same time. Mr. Ben Rusche apparently believes that since it is technically possible for the shaft work to begin at Yucca Mountain a year ahead of similar work at the other two sites, then the Department ought to go ahead and get started. I completely reject this fallacious argument. The Department's credibility is the single most important factor that will determine the success or failure of this program: credibility in the sense that the Department is believed to be obeying the law, credibility in the sense that the Department has not pre-judged the result of the program, credibility in the sense The Honorable John S. Herrinqton March 19, 1987 Page 2 that the Department is addressing the technical issues that informed people argue must be addressed. Many people in Nevada already suspect that Nevada has been pre-selected by the Department to host the first repository. The Department's eagerness to get at Yucca Mountain only adds fuel to this fire. The Department's credibility is already in serious doubt. Going ahead with a Mission plan that puts Nevada first in line for site characterization will, in my opinion, totally destroy any remaining credibility this program has in my State. If the Department cares to argue that it has not pre-selected one site over another, then -the Mission Plan must indicate that characterization of all three sites is scheduled to be completed at the same time. Mr. Rusche's argument that we need to get started at Yucca Mountain as soon as possible because the program is already behind schedule is misleading. Even if the Yucca Mountain work started a year early, the overall program would not proceed more quickly, because the Department would have to wait a year until the characterization of the other two sites was finished. Furthermore, I think it is entirely reasonable to wonder whether, as some Members of Congress have already stated, certain parties might seek to stop the funding to finish characterization of the other two sites, and leave the Department with only one option? Yucca Mountain. What are the people of Nevada to think then about the integrity of the Department's program, of the safety of a Yucca Mountain site? Your own staff says the Nuclear Waste Policy Act is not designed to find the safest site, only one that can be licensed. I think many Nevadans would bitterly charge that they have been abused, that their trust has been misplaced. What is most perplexing about this amendment is the fact that the Department apparently saw the wisdom in the arguments I have just outlined when it put together the 1985 Mission Plan. That schedule ended site characterization for all three sites at the same time. I see no reason for the Department to vary from that sensible approach at this time. I am writing to request that you do the fair thing, the intelligent thing, the only thing that can reassure Nevadans that the Department has not already made up its mind to build a repository at Yucca Mountain. If you choose not to make this change in the draft Mission Plan Amendment, then you leave me to conclude that my only course of action is to seek fundamental changes in the Nuclear Waste Policy Act, and the way it is being managed by the Executive Branch. The Honorable John S. Herrington March 19, 1987 Page 3 I would appreciate your early response on Sincerely, Chic ~Hecht CH: sc