The long and winding road to WIPP.
Reed, James B.
For 15 years, the U.S. Department of Energy has been working to
open the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in New Mexico as a final resting
place for certain nuclear wastes from weapons production. Progress is
slow and the hurdles are many. Last October the 102nd Congress finally
passed twilight-hour, hard-fought legislation withdrawing the 10,240
acre WIPP site from the control of the Department of Interior and
handing it over to DOE. The legislation guaranteed $20 million a year to
New Mexico after the plant opens. Land withdrawal removes a key barrier
blocking the opening of WIPP for tests.
Before tests can begin to determine the safety of disposing waste
in salt beds 2,150 feet underground, there are still a number of
obstacles to overcome. Federal agencies from the Environmental
Protection Agency to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration have certain regulatory responsibilities, and so does the state of New
Mexico. And public safety personnel along potential routes must receive
additional training for accident response that meets federal standards.
If there are no legal challenges, the site could open for tests as early
as September 1993. However, citizens and environmental groups are likely
to continue their vociferous protests and may file suit no matter what
administrative actions are taken. Full-scale disposal operations
probably would not start until the 21st century.
In 1979 Congress authorized WIPP, located at a desert site east of
Carlsbad, N.M., as a research and development facility for the safe
disposal of transuranic radioactive wastes produced by weapons
manufacture. These wastes are largely ordinary items such as rags,
rubber gloves, lab coats, plastic bags and discarded glassware
contaminated with radioactive elements like plutonium--which have a
half-life of 24,000 years or so and are dangerous to living things if
ingested.
The public doesn't like the idea of having nuclear waste
around and particularly of moving it on the highways--and in fact,
nuclear technocrats and environmental groups disagree about whether it
can be safely transported.
A 1988 state-federal showdown brought the transportation issue into
national focus. Governor Cecil Andrus of Idaho stopped two boxcars of
waste from the Rocky Flats nuclear weapons plant in Colorado that were
destined for temporary storage in his state. He was angry that WIPP had
not opened as scheduled earlier in the year and hoped to put pressure on
DOE to move faster. Andrus said that as long as Idaho was seen as an
interim storage site, a permanent solution would not be found. The
crisis passed when weapons production at Rocky Flats ceased in 1989. But
new attention was brought to bear on transportation was brought to bear
on transportation issues like emergency response to accidents, the
integrity of shipping containers and highway routing.
State leaders, particularly in the 25 states where WIPP waste is
stored or through which it will travel, are aware of public concern and
have been making plans. Under the auspices of the Western
Governors' Association, seven western states (Colorado, Idaho, New
Mexico, Oregon, Utah, Washington and Wyoming) are cooperating with DOE
in a program to ensure safe (and what is called "uneventful")
transportation of nuclear waste through their jurisdictions. Although
rail transportation is thought to be safer, only truck shipments are
envisioned during the five-year test phase.
Each state is responsible for developing policy and procedures
related to accident prevention, emergency preparedness and public
information. Elements of the program include procedures for bad weather
and road conditions, safe parking, advance notice of shipments and
mutual aid agreements for response to accidents, as well as selection
and monitoring of carriers, inspection of drivers, vehicles and shipping
containers; emergency responder training; and provision of radiation
detection equipment. In addition to planning, the project is proceeding
with dry runs. A mock accident was staged near Colorado Springs two
years ago and another one took place in September in Idaho to test
accident response procedures. A satellite tracking system will be used
by DOE to pinpoint the location of trucks carrying waste.
Another concern of WIPP critics is whether the waste containers
used can withstand the crushing that might occur in an accident. The
TRUPACT-II containers, specially manufactured for this purpose, are
stainless steel cylinders--10 feet tall and eight feet in diameter--with
walls consisting of two layers of quarter-inch stainless steel and 10
inches of insulation foam. Each holds 14 55-gallon barrels of waste
stacked in two layers. The regulations of the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission and the Department of Transportation require tests of the
containers involving a high-temperature fire, immersion in water,
attempted puncturing and a 30-foot drop. Crush tests are not required by
the NRC, even though crushing in a truck accident is a likely scenario,
according to DOE's 1989 draft environmental impact statement.
"As stringent as the NRC array of tests may be, it does not
allow either NRC or the manufacturer to ascertain how a container will
perform in a crush situation," says Melinda Kassen, an attorney
with the Environmental Defense Fund. "Therefore the fundamental
underpinnings of the NRC certification process, at least with respect to
truck transport, have been called into question." DOE's WIPP
operator, Westing-house Electric Corporation, explained in a letter to
the Colorado Department of Health that "the crush test was not
performed because it would have been less damaging than the tests that
were performed." The larger question of the adequacy of the NRC
testing of containers is still a subject of debate among DOE, the
nuclear industry and environmental interest groups.
A state oversight group is concerned about explosions caused by the
gases produced by the hazardous substances in the wastes. A 1991 report
by the New Mexico Environmental Evaluation Group, located at the N.M.
Institute of Mining and Technology, found that ignition of mixed waste
inside the barrels is more common than previously thought (only one
instance had been documented) and recommended that DOE take steps to
limit conditions that could result in an explosion. DOE's studies
conclude that even if a release or explosion were to occur, "no
adverse human health effects are expected" due to low concentration
of such chemicals (called volatile organic compounds, or VOCs) in the
containers and the physical form of the waste, which reduces the amount
available for release.
Don Hancock of the Southwest Research Institute, an Albuquerque
think tank critical of WIPP, does not fear the problem of volatile
organic compounds as much during the test phase because the waste will
be stringently tested before shipment. But he is not satisfied that VOCs
have been addressed long term, because it still is not known how much of
the volatile compounds are in the waste.
Where the shipments will travel and whether they are safe is
another concern. A recent survey in Oregon found that a significant
number of citizens are sincerely afraid that nuclear waste shipments
will harm them personally or harm their community. Routes that minimize
risk are of paramount importance. Department of Transportation routing
guidelines call for the use of interstate highways, but states can
designate alternate routes if they so choose after conducting a routing
analysis. Waste carriers choose routes from the designated list.
Colorado and New Mexico have designated routes that will carry most of
the waste for the test phase. Other states, through programs like that
of the Western Governors' Association, will be evaluating routes
and assessing infrastructure and accident response needs during the next
five years.
The 10-year test period required by the new law will consist of
data collection, analysis and documentation to judge the performance of
WIPP as a disposal facility able to contain the waste in compliance with
EPA standards. Researchers will examine the possibility of water
infiltration into the caverns that could corrode waste containers and
carry radioactive elements into the ground water system, and will
perform other tests as well. During the test phase, the new legislation
limits the waste to 4,250 drums (0.5 percent of the caverns'
capacity or about 100 shipments), all of it retrievable and none of it
composed of high-level waste or spent fuel. The waste must be
retrievable in case the site does not meet standards set by EPA during
the test phase. DOE must prepare and submit to EPA a test phase plan, a
waste retrieval plan and a decommissioning plan. The decommissioning
plan, which details what will happen to the facility after it stops
taking waste, must be developed within five years.
The state of New Mexico will receive $20 million per year for each
of the first 15 years when waste is first moved to WIPP. Beyond that,
funds indexed for inflation are authorized, although no dollar amount is
set. New Mexico must give some of the money to affected local
governments and can use funds for independent environmental and economic
studies. Much of it will be used to back state bonds for road
improvements, new highway construction and for environmental oversight.
To begin shipping waste for final disposal, DOE must meet EPA
standards, which require protection of the environment from certain
levels of radioactivity for 10,000 years. Southwest Research's
Hancock is doubtful about the prospect. "I'm skeptical about
WIPP's ability to meet any legitimate disposal standard without
expensive changes, including designing a new shipment container,
changing out corroded waste drums and treating waste to decrease
volatility. The new administration will have to make some decisions
about spending new dollars after the $1.3 billion already spent. WIPP is
a Cold War facility built to store weapons waste until 2013; its purpose
should now be re-evaluated in a post-Cold War scenario."
DOE, on the other hand, is committed to making WIPP safe for
disposal operations beyond the test period. The dismantling of nuclear
warheads and weapons facilities creates waste that requires disposal.
The book on WIPP, it would seem, will have several more chapters.
WIPP Battle Started 40 Years Ago
For nearly 40 years, people have been trying to solve the nuclear
waste problem. In 1955, the National Academy of Sciences decided that
salt deposits were the most promising geologic feature for isolating
nuclear waste, and by 1962 the U.S. Geological Survey identified the
Permian Basin covering parts of New Mexico, Texas, Kansas and Oklahoma
as a suitable geologic formation. None of the states seemed eager to
play host, but DOE's predecessor agency, the Energy Research and
Development Administration, fixed on southeastern New Mexico, and in
1979 Congress authorized WIPP.
Court battles followed, with New Mexico alleging violations of both
state and federal law. The court required a negotiated agreement between
the state and DOE on state concerns like transportation monitoring,
highway upgrading, emergency response and accident liability. Meanwhile
DOE was drilling a 2,000-foot hole 12 feet wide and preparing to proceed
with full facility construction. The $1 billion facility was competed in
1988, but it did not open due to lingering regulatory questions.
During the 1980s, DOE was forced to comply with all applicable
state, federal and local standards, regulations and laws including those
of EPA; but in 1987 the U.S. Court of Appeals threw out a portion of the
radiation protection standards for radioactive waste disposal, leaving
no repository standards applicable to WIPP. The new legislation
reaffirmed most of these standards and required EPA to establish generic
disposal standards by April 30, 1993.
In 1990, New Mexico gained authority to regulate WIPP-bound
radioactive mixed wastes, and designated a preferred route from the
state's northern border to the WIPP site. But in October of the
next year, the state filed suit to stop the impending shipments, and the
U.S. District Court upheld the state. In January 1992, the court
nullified the administrative land withdrawal order and that decision was
upheld on appeal in July. Last October, both houses of Congress adopted
the conference report on WIPP land withdrawal, thus eliminating a
crucial obstacle to WIPP's operation.