RE: S. 1287 and H.R. 45

["Zack Clayton" <zack.clayton@epa.state.oh.us>]

Here is the other piece of the pie that was thrown at us earlier today.  Anyone feel free to copy it and send it along to your representatives, addressed accordingly.  

I am writing in support of S.1287 and H.R.45  I feel that it is in our best interest for these bills to pass and urge you to support them and over ride any threatened veto.

It is also important to support the NRC as the regulatory agency and standard setting body with expertise for radioactive material, either as waste or product.  At the Yucca Mountain waste repository (its not a dump) and for other commerce issues.  The USEPA has demonstrated a total lack of understanding in the area of radiation and has consistently failed to use defensible limits on radiation,  rather bending to the will of whichever outraged interest group holds their ear at the time.

The issue of ground water at Yucca mountain is a red herring played by radical organizations with an agenda of hate and fear.  What little water is found in Yucca Mountain is isolated in perched aquifers and fractures or joints in the rock and would not be resting in contact with the spent fuel as if it were a bathtub. 

The proposed repository will isolate  the spent fuel from all but the most organized recovery efforts and away from fringe terrorist groups with malicious intent.  This protects all the citizens of the United States far better than the piecemeal  storage now in use.

10,000 years compliance is more than enough to protect against radiation hazards.  The spent fuel remaining after this time will be radioactive, but the primary danger would be from heavy metal poisoning, assuming someone managed to break into the repository in 10,000 years and they insisted on eating the material.  Remember, the GOOD thing about radiation is it is a decay process, radioactive material by definition decreases over time.  Chemicals and metallic toxins do not.

These bills will help protect the millions Americans living near current spent fuel storage.  Although there has never been an accident, with over 104 reactors in the United States needing a place to store their fuel it will be safer to move it to a central repository safely isolated and guarded against accident.

There should be little or no risk to the population along the transportation routes as the shipping of radioactive material in interstate commerce uses only the drivers with the best driving records and the industry as a whole has very high safety standards.

Thank you for your consideration of this letter.


Zack Clayton
Ohio EPA - DERR
email:  zack.clayton@epa.state.oh.us
voice:  614-644-3066
fax:        614-460-8249

************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html