[ RadSafe ] Yucca Mountain

Sun Jun 8 22:25:01 CDT 2008

Dan W. McCarn, Geologist; 3118 Pebble Lake Drive; Sugar Land, TX 77479; USA
HotGreenChile at gmail.com    mccarn at unileoben.ac.at    UConcentrate at gmail.com

Dear Jerry:

I've been on both sides.  In my opinion, the mining companies seem to be the
ones seeking truth and balanced judgment since they have to live with both
the financial and regulatory consequences until project completion.  The
politically-driven YM project reflects Congress's search for political coin
and is a quintessential boondoggle; But it is the Achilles Heel of the
nuclear industry and has to see completion. Personally, I'd rather see
reprocessing, but I'm uncertain of the cost compared to a once-through fuel
cycle.

I don't know if you've been following the politics of licensing, but the NRC
has been challenged twice now in the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals.  The
earlier challenge was from the State of Utah regarding interim storage of
nuclear waste, and the current challenge is surrounding the right of a
private company to license uranium mining operations on private land in New
Mexico.  I have 9 of the court briefs in the May 2008 New Mexico case if
anyone is interested, but they are too big to attach here.  Please write me
offline.  I've provided affidavits in two of the NRC administrative hearings
for the uranium mining issue.  These include Amicus Briefs,
Intervener-Respondent Briefs, etc.

No. 02-4149, AUG 4 2004 Decision
THE SKULL VALLEY BAND OF GOSHUTE INDIANS and PRIVATE FUEL STORAGE, L.L.C.,
Plaintiffs-Counterdefendants-Appellees, v. (Virtually everyone in the State
of Utah)

And the current case:

No. 07-9505 FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT:
EASTERN NAVAJO DINÉ AGAINST URANIUM MINING, SOUTHWEST RESEARCH AND
INFORMATION CENTER, MARILYN MORRIS AND GRACE SAM, Petitioners, v. UNITED
STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION AND THE UNITED STATES, Respondents.
PETITION FOR REVIEW OF A DECISION OF THE UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION AND THE UNITED STATES

Personally, I think it is essential for the average professional to keep up
with these issues

I presented my San Luis Valley (SLV) Analog in the hope that some normalcy
could be brought to a comparison of effects.  Perhaps it's time to "refresh"
the concepts.

http://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/publications/PDF/te_1396_web.pdf
McCarn, Dan W. (2004): Scoping Calculations: Natural and anthropogenic
multi-pathway risks associated with naturally occurring uranium
mineralization in aquifers; IAEA-TECDOC-1396, pp. 289-315.

Dan ii

-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl [mailto:radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl] On Behalf
Of Jerry Cohen
Sent: Sunday, June 08, 2008 3:14 PM
To: Steven Dapra; radsafe at radlab.nl
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Yucca Mountain

If you are looking for the person who "complained" about the Yucca Mountain
Project (YM), I believe I am the guilty party. 
  IMHO, YM constitutes a gross , and inordinately expensive, solution to a
problem that is not very serious to begin with. It is a vain attempt by
politicians ans technologists to assuage public fears of the radiation
boogeyman. The common perception toward nuclear waste is that [1] it is so
hazardous that even if a miniscule amount of this radoactive material is
released to the biosphere, serious health consequenses will result, and [2]
because of the long half-life of certain components, we are faced with a
problem of unprecedented duration. Neither of these beliefs can stand up to
critical analysis. YM is simply a monumental boondogle. If and when the
public becomes aware of its magnitude and the amount or money and other
resources that have been needlessly squandered on it, heads may roll.

  Steven Dapra <sjd at swcp.com> wrote:
  At 09:17 PM 6/7/08 -0500, Dan W McCarn wrote:
>Dan W. McCarn, Geologist; 3118 Pebble Lake Drive; Sugar Land, TX 77479; USA
>HotGreenChile at gmail.com mccarn at unileoben.ac.at UConcentrate at gmail.com
>
>Dear James:
>
>I apologize if you feel that my last comment amounted to an ad hominem 
>attack. Please accept my apologies if you have felt slighted by my 
>comments. I do hope that someday that you will complete your degree and 
>add a host of peer-reviewed publications to your CV.
>
>I am keenly aware of your obsession with DU, [edit]

"obsession" is too mild a word. (Steven Dapra)

[edit]

> Who complained about geologists, hydrologists and their ilk and Yucca 
> Mountain? Steve, was that you? Don't be shy!

Wasn't me! I've never complained about anything in my entire 
life. Well . . . at least I've never complained about Yucca Mt. --- at 
least not on RADSAFE, except perhaps to wish that it would be opened 
promptly. (Steven Dapra)

[edit]

>-----Original Message-----
>From: James Salsman [mailto:jsalsman at gmail.com]
>Sent: Saturday, June 07, 2008 4:45 PM
>To: Dan W McCarn
>Subject: personal note

[edit]

>Does the subject matter of my schooling (math) bear on your ability to
>answer these questions, or were you asking after my degree because
>your inability to answer the questions I have posed embarrassed you,
>and you wish to join Steve Dapra in personal attacks?

If anyone is making personal attacks, it's you, James. What are 
the academic credentials that qualify you to expound on DU and etc.? Let's 
hear them.

Steven Dapra

> Do you think
>such retorical tactics make the readers more or less convinced of your
>position? Do you think they make me more or less interested in
>withdrawing from the topic?
>
>I have discussed this matter with medical experts, and I can put you
>in touch with them if you like.
>
>James Salsman

_______________________________________________
You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list

Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood the
RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
http://radlab.nl/radsafe/radsaferules.html

For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit:
http://radlab.nl/radsafe/

_______________________________________________
You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list

Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood the
RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
http://radlab.nl/radsafe/radsaferules.html

For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit:
http://radlab.nl/radsafe/