An Unwelcome Christmas Present

By Ed Magnuson

The Feds select possible nuclear-waste sites in three states

Arbitrary, capricious, uncaring and unreasonable," fumed Governor Mark White of Texas. "Before the people of Deaf Smith County glow in the dark, sparks will fly." Said Booth Gardner, the incoming Governor of Washington: "I am worried about earthquakes and ground-water contamination." Declared Nevada's Governor Richard Bryan: "Nevada has already done its share in the nuclear arena."

The Governors' ire was directed at an unwelcome Christmas gift from the Federal Government. After a two-year study, the three states were selected last week by the Department of Energy as the most promising places in which to bury 40,000 tons of high-level radioactive wastes beginning in 1998. They were the unhappy winners in a competition involving nine possible sites. Most of the nuclear rubbish is in the form of 12-ft.-long spent fuel rods that have been stored for nearly 30 years at the 85 power plants scattered across the U.S. The water pools used at the plant sites to cool and temporarily hold the rods are filling up.

Conceding that "none of the states is supportive" of his decision, Energy Secretary Donald Hodel named the following sites as best suited for the first dump:

Hanford, Wash. Already used as a depository for low-level radioactive wastes, the tract in southeastern Washington is owned by the Federal Government. Its disadvantage, in the view of environmentalists, is that it is in the Columbia Basin. The Energy Department proposes carving a cavern in the basalt rock some 3,000 ft. below the surface, and contends that the radioactivity could never seep into underground water sources or the river. Many job-conscious residents of the three nearby cities of Kennewick, Richland and Pasco were happy that their area remained under consideration. "We're better educated about nuclear energy here," said Dorothy Schoeppach, manager of the Pasco Chamber of Commerce. "We're not afraid."

Deaf Smith County, Texas. Named after one of General Sam Houston's scouts, this flat farm county in the Panhandle covers a salt bed that begins about 2,500 ft. below the wheatfields. Geologists seeking a safe radioactive-waste site have long favored salt formations because they are free of water, tend to reseal if fractured, and handle heat well. But farmers fear that their deep aquifers, used to irrigate crops, might become contaminated. In a state survey of 1,000 area residents, 73% said they would resist placing the dump there, and only 4% favored it.

Yucca Mountain, Nev. Federally owned, the site northwest of Las Vegas covers part of Nellis Air Force Base, the Nevada nuclear-weapons test area and a Bureau of Land Management tract. A volcanic-rock formation 1,500 ft. below the surface would house the waste. Opponents believe that nuclear blasts at the test range could disturb the buried materials. Robert Revert, who owns gas stations in Beatty, estimates that 90% of local residents favor the dump. Says he: "Our young people are out of work. Maybe we could turn this around with Yucca Mountain."

Once the choice is narrowed to just one of the three, federal officials will have a difficult job convincing the appropriate Governor and state legislators that the nuclear garbage heap will be safe. Under a 1982 act of Congress, a state can veto the selection, but Congress can override the objection by majority vote. No such battle, however, is imminent. The presidential choice of a first site is not expected until 1991.

-- By Ed Magnuson. Reported by JohnE. Yang/Washington, with other bureaus

With reporting by John E. Yang