| 01/06/2007 |
| West Valley coalition not thrilled over federal ownership |
| By RICK MILLER , Olean Times Herald |
|
The Coalition on West Valley Nuclear Wastes isn’t rushing to support a federal takeover of the nuclear cleanup site as proposed in last year’s West Valley Remediation Act.
Judy Einach, director of the Coalition on West Valley Nuclear Wastes, said the group hopes to convince Rep. Kuhl and U.S. Sens. Charles Schumer and Hillary Clinton to modify the bill when it is reintroduced — possibly later this month.
“We certainly think the Department of Energy is responsible for removing the underground tanks and taking care of the radioactive plume in groundwater beneath the site,” said Ms. Einach. “We’re opposed to the clause that gives title to the Department of Energy of the land and the waste if it is not cleaned up within 20 years.”
If the federal government owned the land, it would be more difficult to get the site cleaned up fully, Ms. Einach contends. “The Coalition and 40 environmental groups are strongly opposed to the West Valley Remediation Act,” she said.
“This is an opportune moment to restructure the act and reframe it,” she said. “We would rather see it owned by the state.”
Last month, the NYSERDA filed suit in Federal District Court in Buffalo to force the DOE to address underground storage tanks and a plume of radioactive contamination beneath the site.
Ms. Einach said the coalition may intervene in the NYSERDA lawsuit. Talks are ongoing with NYSERDA officials concerning the Coalition’s objections.
The Department of Energy is moving forward with its proposal to leave in the ground the twin 600,000-gallon steel tanks that once held highly-radioactive liquid wastes associated with reclaiming plutonium from spent nuclear fuel rods — many of which originated with the federal government’s nuclear weapons program. The steel tanks, which still contain highly radioactive elements that cling to framework and the sides of the vessels, would be filled with a cement, or grout.
Ms. Einach said the coalition hopes the Citizens Task Force “will re-examine their position on the West Valley Remediation Act.”
The task force, which meets monthly to review issues surrounding the West Valley Demonstration Project, is on record as supporting Rep. Kuhl’s bill. The congressman said Thursday he hopes to reintroduce it in the 110th Congress later this month.
Ms. Einach said a hearing will be held May 5 in U.S. District Court in Buffalo on the coalition’s motion for summary judgment to prohibit the DOE from continuing on a two-prong approach to the environmental impact statement (EIS) process on the West Valley cleanup. The coalition filed the lawsuit last year in a bid to force DOE to follow the rules in the Final Environmental Impact Statement.
Meanwhile, the coalition recently received the DOE’s current draft environmental impact statement for cleanup of the site and long-term monitoring, Ms. Einach said.
“Despite DOE’s attempts to keep the current draft EIS out of our hands, we have just received those documents from the state Department of Environmental Conservation,” she said. “We’ll be able to use this in our full cost accounting study” to assess the economic and environmental costs of various alternatives the DOE is expected to present.
Ms. Einach noted the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has endorsed removal of the underground tanks, which DOE continues to resist on the basis of cost and its impact on other DOE nuclear cleanup sites. The NYSERDA lawsuit also calls for the removal of the tanks.
“We want to see a commitment to seeing those tanks removed,” she said.
Under a court-approved “stipulation of compromise” with the DOE, “the coalition is entitled to these documents” she said. Why? “They claimed national security, everything in the book that they could.” Mrs. Einach said the coalition is also considering intervening in a lawsuit filed by the state of New Jersey against the Department of Energy that could have implications in West Valley and other nuclear cleanup sites across the country. It deals with a perpetual license the DOE is seeking at a New Jersey site. The DOE “guidance” over the license “is too weak a legal term to be applied in perpetuity.”
|