Nuke waste should stay put

The Department of Energy's disclosure that scientists on the Yucca Mountain project may have falsified documents will inevitably delay the opening of the Nevada storage facility. But it should not be used as a rationale for sending waste to Tooele County. Until the Yucca Mountain mess can be sorted out, the waste needs to stay put.

For starters, Utah doesn't want it. Despite assurances that the waste would be stored in Utah on a temporary basis, Utahns are well aware that "temporary" means 40 years. Then what? Best case scenario, the waste eventually would be moved to Yucca Mountain. What if Yucca Mountain is deemed unsuitable for permanent storage? Does an above ground storage facility in Utah's western desert become the de facto Yucca Mountain?

In light of new developments, Utah's congressional delegation registered its "strong opposition" to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission granting a license to Private Fuel Storage, a consortium of nuclear power plant operators. PFS has entered an agreement with the Skull Valley band of the Goshute Tribe to store the waste on its reservation in Tooele County. The Atomic Safety and Licensing Board has recommended that the NRC grant PFS's license application.

In a written statement, Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, described the PFS solution as a "reckless, short-term fix for a pressing national problem."

Hatch is correct on many levels. Storing nuclear waste in Utah's western desert — even on a temporary basis — is risky in the post-Sept. 11 world. Even if security at the PFS site is impenetrable, spent nuclear rods would constantly be en route to the site. Can PFS ensure that shipments of this material will not invite terrorist attack or theft? At a minimum, such an incident would incite widespread panic. Less likely is radioactive contamination, but the possibility cannot be ruled out completely.

It is premature to declare Yucca Mountain unsafe or unsuitable for a permanent storage site, as some activists contend. It is uncertain if more evaluations are necessary or if data known to be reliable supports the use of the planned facility. But if the federal government believed that the best choice for a permanent storage facility was inside of a mountain, it defies logic that an above-ground storage site could be considered Plan B.

Until the science of Yucca Mountain can be firmly established, the wisest course for all concerned is to continue to store the waste where it was generated and take time to develop the best long-term solution.