Images de page
PDF
ePub

QUESTION 7:

ANSWER:

What can be done to assure the objectivity of contractor site investigations? Should site investigators be allowed to be eligible for site construction and operation contracts? Should contractors be hired for generic types of work at all candidate sites?

The Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 has many
technical and process requirements including
independent reviews by the States, Nuclear
Regulatory Commission and other Federal
agencies. We believe that these processes,
coupled with technical competence of contractors
and with peer review of technical data will
ensure that a site recommended by DOE for a
repository can be supported technically,
scientifically and institutionally.

In any

In regard to the eligibility of site
investigators for the site construction and
operation, a decision has not been made.
event, the construction manager and operating
manager will be competitively selected. Such
selection by DOE will be based on technical and
management qualifications and will not be biased
to favor a site investigator.

QUESTION 8:

ANSWER:

Is an increase of in-house technical personnel at DOE headquarters, capable of providing review of site investigation efforts independent of project offices, necessary or desirable?

We believe that an increase in in-house technical
personnel in DOE headquarters is a necessity for
proper management of the Nuclear Waste Policy
Act. Technical persons are needed to assure that
environmental assessments are complete and

adequate, site characterization plans properly
reflect the requirements of the Act and the
regulations, and evaluations of technical
information from site development as well as
designs are technically sound and properly
considered. As the site screening process

proceeds, the need for a strong,

multi-disciplinary, technical capability at DOE headquarters increases. However, the

Headquarters staff providing this technical

capability will be limited in size so as not to

duplicate functions of project staff in the

operations offices who have the primary

responsibility for day-to-day management of the

program.

TESTIMONY OF

NEW MEXICO GOVERNOR TONEY ANAYA

ON THE NEW MEXICO/FEDERAL GOVERNMENT RELATIONSHIP
REGARDING THE WASTE ISOLATION PILOT PLANT (WIPP),
IN PARTICULAR CONCERNING THE PROPOSED LAND WITHDRAWAL

TESTIMONY GIVEN BY

ROBERT MCNEILL, SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT
FOR THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT

OF THE COMMITTEE ON INTERIOR AND INSULAR AFFAIRS.

REPRESENTATIVE MORRIS K. UDALL, CHAIRMAN
May 26, 1983

GOOD MORNING, MR. CHAIRMAN, AND HONORABLE MEMBERS OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE. MY NAME IS ROBERT MCNEILL, SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT FOR THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO, AND EMPLOYER OF TOM UDALL, A VERY TALENTED YOUNG LAWYER WITH WHOM I BELIEVE THE CHAIRMAN HAS A PASSING ACQUAINTANCE. I AM ALSO CHAIRMAN OF THE RADIOACTIVE WASTE TASK FORCE, WHICH OVERSEES WIPP FOR THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT IN NEW MEXICO.

I AM PRIVILEGED TO BE HERE TODAY ON BEHALF OF TONEY ANAYA, GOVERNOR OF NEW MEXICO. I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO TESTIFY AT THIS IMPORTANT AND TIMELY HEARING. AT GOVERNOR ANAYA'S REQUEST, I WILL BE ADDRESSING THE ISSUE OF NEW MEXICO'S RELATIONSHIP WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AS IT INVOLVES THE WASTE ISOLATION PILOT PLANT, BETTER KNOWN AS THE WIPP PROJECT. I WILL BE SUBMITTING FOR THE RECORD THE COMPLETE REMARKS WHICH I WILL BE SUMMARIZING FOR THIS SUBCOMMITTEE. IN ADDITION, THE GOVERNOR HAS ASKED ME TO ATTACH A SUMMARY OF NEW MEXICO'S

HISTORY RELATING TO THE DOE AND WIPP. (SEE APPENDIX A). THIS SUMMARY HIGHLIGHTS SEVERAL PROBLEMS THAT HAVE ARISEN IN THE PAST BETWEEN THE STATE AND THE DOE. THE RELATIONSHIP HAS HONESTLY BEEN A ROCKY ONE, GOING BACK TO THE BEGINNINGS OF THE PROJECT IN NEW MEXICO, ALMOST A DECADE AGO.

I HAVE ALSO SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD THE "COMMENT OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO ON THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY'S LAND WITHDRAWAL APPLICATION", WHICH WAS PREVIOUSLY SUBMITTED TO THE BLM. THE DOCUMENT WAS WRITTEN IN SUCH A WAY AS TO LAY OUT THE ARGUMENTS ON BOTH SIDES OF THE QUESTION OF WHETHER OR NOT NEW MEXICO SHOULD ASK FOR A PERMANENT LAND WITHDRAWAL NOW, OR WAIT UNTIL SUCH TIME AS RADIOACTIVE WASTE WAS READY TO BE EMPLACED IN A FULLY CONSTRUCTED FACILITY. GOVERNOR ANAYA WAS CONVINCED BY SOME OF ATTORNEY GENERAL PAUL BARDACKE'S ARGUMENTS, THAT A PIECEMEAL APPROACH TO THE WIPP LAND WITHDRAWAL USURPS CONGRESSIONAL PREROGATIVES, AND VIOLATES THE CONGRESSIONAL INTENT OF THE FEDERAL LAND POLICY AND MANAGEMENT ACT OF 1976. THEREFORE, I SUBMIT AS APPENDIX B, FOR THE RECORD, ATTORNEY

GENERAL BARDACKE'S COMMENTS.

MR. CHAIRMAN, I ASK THIS SUBCOMMITTEE, WHAT IS SO UNIQUE ABOUT THE WIPP PROJECT THAT MAKES IT IMPERATIVE THAT NEW MEXICO NOT BE ACCORDED THE SAME RIGHTS AS OTHER STATES WHO ARE POTENTIAL REPOSITORY SITES?

WHY IS IT THAT NEW MEXICO, ALONE AMONG ALL THE STATES, WILL HAVE NO VETO POWER OVER ITS NUCLEAR WASTE REPOSITORY?

WHY IS IT THAT NEW MEXICO, ALONE AMONG ALL THE STATES,

WILL

GET NO NRC LICENSING FOR WIPP?

WHY IS IT THAT NEW MEXICO, ALONE AMONG ALL THE STATES, HAS

- 2 - .

BEEN CHOSEN FOR A NUCLEAR WASTE REPOSITORY WITHOUT THAT REPOSITORY SITE BEING REQUIRED TO BE COMPARED AND CONTRASTED WITH ALTERNATIVE SITES FIRST?

WHY IS IT THAT NEW MEXICO, AGAIN ALONE AMONG THE STATES, IS BEING ASKED TO APPROVE A REPOSITORY SITE BEFORE THE KEY PRESI

DENTIAL DECISION IS MADE WHICH COULD AFFECT THE FUTURE MISSION OF THE DECISION WHETHER OR NOT TO COMMINGLE COM

THE REPOSITORY

-

MERCIAL AND MILITARY HIGH-LEVEL WASTES?

ALSO, GIVEN THAT NEW MEXICO IS BEING ASKED TO HOUSE THE FIRST PERMANENT NUCLEAR WASTE REPOSITORY IN THE NATION, A REPOSITORY WHICH WILL CONTAIN DANGEROUS TRU WASTES SUCH AS PLUTONIUM, WHICH HAS A HALF-LIFE OF 24,000 YEARS, WHY IS IT THAT WE ARE NOT COVERED BY THE NUCLEAR WASTE POLICY ACT OF 1982?

AND NOW, LACKING ALL THESE ELEMENTARY SAFEGUARDS THAT THE OTHER STATES WILL HAVE, NEW MEXICO IS BEING ASKED TO ALLOW THE WIPP FACILITY TO BE BUILT BEFORE WE REQUIRE THAT THE LAND BE PERMANENTLY WITHDRAWN. MR. CHAIRMAN, THIS IS NOT RIGHT. WE ARE ASKING THIS SUBCOMMITTEE TO HELP US TAKE A LOOK AT THIS PROJECT, AND THIS LAND WITHDRAWAL. WE WOULD ALSO ASK THAT THIS SUBCOMMITTEE INVESTIGATE WAYS OF BRINGING NEW MEXICO'S RIGHTS AND PROTECTIONS UP TO THE SAME STANDARDS THAT OTHER STATES NOW ENJOY. IT IS NOT RIGHT THAT OUR STATE HAS BEEN LEFT SO UNIQUELY BEREFT OF THESE ELEMENTARY SAFEGUARDS.

BEFORE I LEFT NEW MEXICO EARLIER THIS WEEK, GOVERNOR ANAYA TOLD ME THAT HE COULD SEE THE HEADLINES FROM THIS TESTIMONY "ANAYA OPPOSES PROPOSED BLM/DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR/ JAMES WATT ACTION AGAIN". AS MOST OF YOU KNOW, IT WAS ONLY A

ALREADY

-

« PrécédentContinuer »