[NukeNet] ALERT!!! STOP AB 719 (No nukes in CAL) Sign onto below letter by Tues.

[Roger Herried]

Please sign onto the below letter by sending a message to Rochelle 
Becker at beckers at thegrid.net


Dear Chairwoman Hancock

I(WE) am writing in opposition to AB 719, Assemblyman Devore’s bill to 
lift California’s ban on the siting of new nuclear plants in California. 
In 1976 our state had the foresight to question the federal government’s 
ability to create a permanent and safe solution for long term storage of 
high-level radioactive waste. To undermine this protective legislation 
could have serious health and economic impacts to California 
residents—on whose fragile and seismically active coasts radioactive 
waste continues to accumulate.

AB 719 states that:

(f) Current California law prohibits the permitting of any new 
commercial nuclear powerplants until an approved means of disposal of 
high-level nuclear waste becomes available. With federal efforts well 
underway to provide an approved means of high-level nuclear waste 
disposal, and given that timelines for nuclear powerplant design, 
permitting, construction, on line operation, and first refueling would 
likely be in excess of 10 years, by the time a powerplant would be ready 
for operation, an approved high-level nuclear waste disposal means will 
be available.


The current ban, PRC 25524.2, which AB 719 seeks to overturn, states 
that there can be no new nuclear power plants sited in California until:


(a) The commission (California Energy Commission) finds that there has 
been developed and that the United States through its authorized agency 
has approved and there exists a demonstrated technology or means for the 
disposal of high-level nuclear waste.


As of this date, _none_ of those conditions have been met. The Federal 
government has been trying—for a quarter of a century—since the passage 
of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, to wrestle with the unwieldy 
problem of radioactive waste. When the author of AB 719 writes, “With 
federal efforts well underway to provide an approved means of high-level 
nuclear waste disposal…” one wonders where the facts are to back up this 
assumption. The only solution on the table, the Yucca Mountain national 
repository, has been mired in scientific, administrative and political 
problems for decades. The Department of Energy has yet to even set a 
date on which it will submit its application for approval by the Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission, and the NRC may be a long way from granting that 
application, as evidenced by these statements from the Las Vegas 
Review-Journal of January 23^rd , 2007:


Ed McGaffigan, a veteran member of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 
said Monday that the Yucca Mountain program is deeply flawed and that 
the Nevada nuclear waste site should be scrapped.

"It may be time to stop digging, and it may be time to rethink," 
McGaffigan said in a critique of the Energy Department program as he 
prepares to retire from the five-member commission that regulates 
nuclear safety….

"I think Yucca Mountain has been beset by bad law, bad regulatory 
policy, bad science policy, bad personnel policy, bad budget policy 
throughout its history," McGaffigan said. "Every time somebody has done 
something to try to speed things up, it has backfired….

"Each year that passes, we are not going to get any closer to Yucca 
under the current circumstances," McGaffigan said.


It is therefore, at this time, wholly inappropriate to consider lifting 
the moratorium on new nuclear power plants in California, as conditioned 
by PRC 25524.2.


I (WE) urge that this bill, AB 719, be opposed and rejected.