Document ID: EPA-HQ-OAR-2005-0083-0210
Agency: epa
Document Type: Supporting & Related Material
Title: 
Posted Date: 2005-11-08T05:00Z

1
1
2
3
4
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
AGENCY
(
EPA)

5
6
Radiation
Protection
Standards
Applicable
to
7
Yucca
Mountain
8
9
10
11
P
U
B
L
I
C
H
E
A
R
I
N
G
&
C
O
M
M
E
N
T
S
12
October
5,
2005
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Reported
by:
Gina
J.
Mendez,
CCR
No.
787
2
1
MS.
COTSWORTH:
Good
morning.
I'm
2
Elizabeth
Cotsworth.
I'm
the
director
of
EPA's
Office
3
of
Radiation
and
Indoor
Air.

4
I
am
here
today
at
the
request
of
the
5
Administrator
of
the
Environmental
Protection
Agency
to
6
represent
him
at
these
hearings
and
to
hear
the
public
7
comments,
comments
of
Nevadans,
on
our
proposed
8
August
22nd
radiation
protection
standards
applicable
to
9
Yucca
Mountain.

10
I
want
to
thank
all
of
you
for
taking
time
11
this
morning
to
participate
in
the
hearing
process.
At
12
this
hearing,
as
well
as
the
hearings
we
have
had
over
13
the
last
two
days
and
that
which
we
will
have
tomorrow
14
and
next
week
in
Washington,
the
public
has
the
15
opportunity
to
comment
on
this
very
important
proposed
16
rule.

17
We
look
forward
to
receiving
your
comments.

18
It's
a
critical
part
of
the
development
of
the
final
19
rule
and
for
the
development
of
overall
public
policy.

20
We
are
open
to
receiving
all
points
of
view,

21
and
we'll
carefully
consider
them
in
developing
the
22
final
rule.

23
A
few
of
you
who
were
here
last
evening
have
24
heard
my
statements,
but
many
of
you
were
not,
so
I
do
25
want
to
take
a
few
minutes
to
provide
some
context,
some
3
1
background
to
why
we're
here
this
morning.

2
EPA's
mission
is
to
protect
human
health
in
3
the
environment.
It's
a
mission
that
we
take
very
4
seriously.

5
As
you
all
know,
radiation
naturally
exists
6
everywhere.
And
the
majority
of
an
individual's
7
exposure
does
come
from
natural
sources.
But
exposure
8
to
radiation
can
have
an
impact
on
health,
so
we
closely
9
monitor,
and
we
regulate
uses
of
manmade
radiation.

10
That's
the
background
why
Congress
directed
the
EPA
to
11
develop
standards
that
would
apply
to
the
proposed
12
facility
at
Yucca
Mountain.

13
The
Yucca
Mountain
standards
are
intended
14
to
protect
the
public
from
the
hazards
of
radioactive
15
waste
that
may
be
disposed
of
at
that
facility.

16
Yucca
Mountain
can
be
opened
and
operated
17
only
if
it
meets
EPA's
final
standards.
So
we're
here
18
today
to
fulfill
that
specific
role
for
EPA
with
regard
19
to
Yucca
Mountain.
We
have
to
make
sure
that
a
20
Yucca
Mountain
highway
level
­­
a
high­
level
waste
21
facility,
excuse
me,
will
be
operated
and
opened
only
if
22
public
health
can
be
protected.

23
Our
standards
will
be
incorporated
into
the
24
Nuclear
Regulatory
Commission's
licensing
requirements
25
for
the
Yucca
Mountain
facility,
then
the
Department
of
4
1
Energy
can
apply
for
the
license
to
operate
the
site.

2
Again,
only
if
DOE
can
meet
EPA
standards
3
will
it
open
and
operate.

4
In
laying
out
EPA's
role,
Congress
says
that
5
we
needed
to
follow
the
expert
advice
of
the
National
6
Academy
of
Sciences,
which
is
the
leading
U.
S.

7
scientific
organization
composed
of
technical
and
8
leading
experts
and
scientists.

9
The
National
Academy
of
Sciences,
in
a
10
report
to
EPA,
say
that
our
standards
should
cover
at
11
least
the
time
period
when
the
highest
releases
of
12
radiation
are
most
likely
to
occur.

13
EPA
first
issued
Yucca
Mountain
standards
in
14
2001.
Last
July
the
U.
S.
Court
of
Appeals
ruled
that
15
the
10,000­
year
time
period,
when
our
standards
would
be
16
in
effect,
was
inconsistent
with
the
recommendations
17
made
by
that
National
Academy
of
Sciences.

18
It's
important
here
to
point
out
that
the
19
court
did
not
rule
that
EPA
standard
was
not
protective,

20
but
merely
that
EPA
standards
were
not
consistent
with
21
or
based
on
a
longer
time
period
when
the
highest
doses
22
of
radiation
from
the
waste
are
most
likely
to
occur.

23
We
have
now
revised
our
standard
in
response
24
to
the
court
ruling.
Our
new
proposed
rule
limits
25
radiation
doses
from
Yucca
Mountain
for
up
to
a
million
5
1
years
after
it
closes.
No
other
rules
in
the
2
United
States
for
any
kind
of
risks
have
ever
attempted
3
to
regulate
for
such
a
long
period
of
time.

4
To
meet
this
unprecedented
challenge,
we
5
have
tried
to
follow
the
best
advice
of
the
NAS
as
well
6
as
scientific
experts
from
around
the
world.

7
For
the
first
10,000
years,
we
retain
a
dose
8
limit
of
15
millirems
a
year.
This
is
protection
at
the
9
level
of
the
most
stringent
radiation
regulations
in
the
10
United
States
today.

11
From
10,000
up
to
a
million
years,
we
12
propose
a
dose
limit
of
350
millirems.
This
represents
13
a
total
radiation
exposure
for
people
who
live
near
14
Yucca
Mountain
no
higher
than
natural
levels
people
live
15
with
routinely
in
other
parts
of
the
country.

16
One
million
years
does
include
the
time
at
17
which
the
highest
doses
of
radiation
from
the
facility
18
are
currently
expected
to
occur.
It
represents
25,000
19
generations.

20
Our
proposal
also
requires
the
Department
of
21
Energy
to
show
that
Yucca
Mountain
can
safely
contain
22
waste
even
considering
the
effects
of
volcanos,

23
earthquakes,
climate
change,
and
the
corrosion
of
the
24
containers.

25
We've
proposed
the
revised
standards
to
6
1
address
the
issues
raised
by
the
courts,
reflect
sound
2
science
including
its
limitations,
protect
human
health,

3
and
provide
clear
guidance
for
the
Nuclear
Regulatory
4
Commission
for
licensing.

5
The
proposed
rule
maintains
the
6
protectiveness
of
our
earlier
standards
and
addresses
7
the
NAS
advice
by
adding
protections
up
to
one
million
8
years,
the
time,
again,
when
the
highest
doses
of
9
radiation
from
the
site
are
most
likely
to
occur.

10
We
look
forward
to
hearing
your
comments
on
11
our
proposed
approach
to
meeting
this
unprecedented
12
scientific
challenge.
Your
comments
will
become
part
of
13
a
formal
rule­
making
record,
as
will
other
comments
14
received
earlier
in
this
public
hearing
process
and
any
15
submitted
throughout
the
public
comment
period.

16
Once
the
public
comment
period
closes
on
17
November
21st,
we
will
review
the
comments
and
consider
18
them
fully
in
developing
our
rule.

19
Again,
I
want
to
thank
you
for
participating
20
in
these
hearings
today.

21
I
want
to
point
out
that
other
members
22
of
the
panel
who
will
be
hearing
your
comments
today
23
are
Miss
Betsy
Forinash,
who
is
the
team
leader
for
the
24
Yucca
Mountain
team
in
my
office,
as
well
as
25
Mr.
Keith
Matthews
from
the
Office
of
General
Counsel.
7
1
I
will
now
ask
Doug
Sarno,
who
will
be
the
2
hearing
officer
for
today's
proceedings,
to
explain
the
3
ground
rules.

4
MR.
SARNO:
Thank
you.

5
Good
morning.
We
have
a
number
of
folks
6
that
have
preregistered
to
provide
comments
here
this
7
morning.
That
does
not
mean
that
if
you
have
not
8
preregistered
you
will
not
be
able
to
provide
comments.

9
After
I
have
gone
through
the
people
who
are
signed
up,

10
I
will
ask
if
anyone
else
wants
to
make
a
comment.

11
The
comments
for
individuals
will
be
limited
12
to
five
minutes,
and
comments
for
individuals
who
are
13
representing
a
group
will
be
given
ten
minutes.

14
I
want
to
just
reiterate
that
commenting
15
here,
obviously,
is
on
the
record.
But
this
isn't
the
16
only
way
to
get
on
the
record,
there
are
lots
of
17
different
ways
for
your
comments
to
get
into
the
record
18
and
for
EPA
to
consider
those
comments.
A
lot
of
them
19
here
in
the
room.

20
You
can
provide
written
comments,
you
can
21
type
your
comments
into
the
computer
over
there
or
speak
22
into
the
­­
to
the
tape
recorder,
if
you
prefer
to
do
23
that
that
way.
You
may
also
do
them
by
e­
mail
on
the
24
Web,
fax
them,
mail
them,
courier
them.
Get
them
to
EPA
25
in
a
lot
of
different
ways.
8
1
Fax
Sheet
No.
3
over
there
on
the
2
information
table
talks
about
all
of
the
different
3
methods
you
can
use
to
get
on
the
record
and
the
exact
4
parameters
for
that:
Addresses,
fax
numbers,
those
5
sorts
of
things.

6
So
we
do
hope
that
you
take
advantage
of
7
some
avenue
to
get
your
comments
into
EPA.

8
I'm
going
to
call
individuals
up,
and
I
will
9
let
you
know
how
much
time
you
have
available,
whether
10
you're
an
individual
or
with
a
group.
And
I
will
try
to
11
let
you
know
as
you're
running
down.
I'll
hold
up
a
12
two­
minute
sign
then
a
one­
minute
sign
just
so
you
have
13
a
sense
of
where
you
are
in
your
­­
in
your
talk,
and
I
14
will
call
time
at
the
appropriate
­­
at
the
appropriate
15
time.

16
At
this
time
the
first
person
on
our
17
schedule
is
Micki
Jay.

18
MS.
JAY:
Yes.
Do
you
need
me
to
come
up
to
19
the
microphone?

20
MR.
SARNO:
You
do
need
to
come
up
to
the
21
microphone
just
so
everybody
can
hear
you.

22
And
you
will
have
five
minutes.

23
MS.
JAY:
I
hate
being
the
first
one
because
24
I've
blazed
the
trail,
but
I'm
willing
to
do
it
because
25
I
do
have
something
on
my
mind.
9
1
Although
I'm
a
member
of
the
­­
my
name
is
2
Micki
Jay,
M­
i­
c­
k­
i
J­
a­
y.
And
I'm
the
member
of
two
3
conservation
organizations.
One
is
called
the
4
Tule
Springs
Preservation
Committee
in
northwest
5
Las
Vegas.
And
the
other
I
founded
called
the
Northwest
6
Las
Vegas
Equestrian
Safety
Coalition.

7
But
I
am
not
here
representing
them.
I'm
8
here
speaking
myself,
representing
my
children,
your
9
children,
their
children,
their
children,
their
10
children,
and
more
­­
the
future
generations
that
are
11
not
yet
here
to
speak
for
themselves.

12
We're
at
a
point
right
now,
a
very
crucial
13
point,
the
decisions
we
make
will
affect,
obviously
­­

14
you
said
25,000
generations
in
the
future.
That's
mind
15
boggling,
but
here
we
are
doing
that.

16
And
I
have
to
backtrack
a
moment
and
say
to
17
you
that
I
feel
a
single
repository
makes
no
sense.
The
18
site
was
chosen
in
1987,
long
before
the
population
here
19
in
Las
Vegas
was
growing.
I
think
we
have
two
million
20
people
now.
This
is
an
­­
it's
only
90
miles
away.

21
We,
I
am,
advocating
leaving
the
waste
at
22
the
power
plants
where
it
exists
so
no
travel
is
23
necessary.
And
we
suggest
investing
in
waste­
processing
24
technology
as
used
by
other
nations
to
recycle
these
25
nuclear
rods.
10
1
And
I
say
that
to
you
because
of
9/
11.

2
Transporting
the
waste
across
the
country
seems
to
me
3
not
to
be
aware
of
the
possibilities
of
spillage
plus
4
terrorism.
This
can
­­
this
can
have
untold
effect
on
5
everybody,
not
just
Las
Vegas.
On
the
whole
planet.

6
Okay.

7
We
insist
the
West
­­
the
waste
remain
where
8
it
is.
Don't
bring
it
to
the
West.
We
need
onsite
9
storage
and
reprocessing.

10
The
water
flow
inside
the
mountain
could,

11
ultimately,
cause
radiation
to
leak
in
this
repository.

12
There's
really
no
way
to
tell,
we're
blazing
the
trail
13
here.
We
have
no
idea
what
can
happen
even
though
you
14
feel
that
with
scientific
discovery
and
the
research
15
that
there
can
be
no
derogatory
reaction
down
there.

16
That's
not
true.
We
don't,
we're
not
going
to
be
there.

17
We
really
don't
know,
it's
unchartered
territory.

18
So
I
feel
being
it's
unknown,
we
shouldn't
19
take
the
chance.

20
Senator
Robert
Bennett
of
Utah
said,
The
21
nation
should
rethink
using
Yucca
Mountain
for
22
high­
level
nuclear
waste
dump.

23
He
defected
as
a
Yucca
supporter.
He's
24
changed
his
mind.

25
Okay.
Also,
the
two­
tier
radiation
standard
11
1
is
not
stable,
and
there's
no
reason
the
radiation
limit
2
should
increase
so
dramatically.
How
can
we
be
certain
3
that
the
standards
will
protect
people
one
million
years
4
in
the
future?

5
Let's
admit
there's
an
error
in
considering
6
the
single
repository
and
do
further
studies
on
the
7
reprocessing
and
disposal
of
spent
nuclear
fuel.
This
8
is
where
the
money
is
best
spent.
Research
and
9
development,
keeping
the
nuclear
rods
where
they
are
in
10
some
manner.

11
Thank
you
very
much.

12
MS.
COTSWORTH:
Thank
you.

13
MR.
SARNO:
Thank
you,
Miss
Jay.

14
Next
on
our
list
is
Fred
Toomey
(
Phonetic).

15
And
you
also
have
five
minutes.

16
MR.
TOOMEY:
My
name
is
Fred
Toomey.
I'm
an
17
ex­
business
agent
of
433
Ironworkers.

18
I've
been
coming
to
these
meetings
for
25
19
years.
I
have
never
­­
we
have
never
got
any
true
20
answers
off
of
the
board,
atomic,
and
the
people
up
at
21
the
front.

22
Number
one,
a
question
I
would
like
to
ask
23
is
they
had
a
bomb
blow
­­
we
blew
up
at
Hiroshima,
or
24
wherever
it
was
at,
and
the
reporters,
you
talk
to
25
reporters,
you
talk
­­
there's
a
big
city
right
there.
12
1
Right
at
Ground
Zero
there
is
a
big
city.
They're
not
2
dying,
they're
living
just
where
the
atomic
bomb
was
3
blowed
up
at.

4
Now,
is
there
anybody
in
here
that
can
tell
5
me
how
big
the
city
is?
No,
because
they
won't
even
6
tell
you.
It's
been
going
on
for
years.
I
worked
up
7
there.
They
had
an
atomic
bomb
­­
I
got
some
notes,
but
8
I
can't
read
them
all.

9
I
worked
in
Area
3.
We
blasted
the
atomic
10
bomb.
Three
weeks
later,
because
it
wasn't
satisfied,

11
we
went
back
in.
We
pushed
the
sand
aside
what
turned
12
green
in
an
area
as
big
as
this
room,
maybe
four
times
13
as
big
as
this
room,
so
we
could
work
on
it.

14
We
took
the
guidelines,
threw
it
out
to
the
15
street
out
there,
and
that
was
just
green
radiation
that
16
everybody
is
scared
of.
They
got
everybody
scared
of
17
radiation.

18
And
I
believe
they
should
be
scared,
but
at
19
the
same
time,
you're
talking
about
millions
of
years.

20
Fine.
How
about
them
people
over
there
in
the
Japanese
21
who
are
living
there
right
now?
How
about
myself,
I'm
22
pushing
80?
And
I
can
name
six
or
eight
guys
that
we
23
worked
on
that
tower
out
there.
None
of
us
are
dead,

24
and
I'm
not
in
bad
shape
for
pushing
80.

25
Atomic
bomb,
500
feet
in
the
air.
I'd
like
13
1
to
say
500
feet
blasted
down,
radiation
and
everything
2
else.
We're
there
three
weeks
later,
working
there,
the
3
same
area,
that's
Area
3,
for
30
years
­­
almost
25,
30
4
years
­­
there's
a
small
city
up
there
of
construction
5
guys
that
has
their
fabrication
plants
and
everything
6
else
that
have
been
up
there
for
25,
30
years.
Nothing
7
wrong
with
them,
they're
still
working
there.

8
How
come
these
people
don't
tell
you
people
9
this?
They're
so
scared
of
radiation
and
we're
­­

10
here
there's
a
big,
a
huge
metropolis,
the
people
are
11
living
there
right
now,
over
now
in
Japan
that
we
blew
12
up.
Have
any
of
you
heard
about
it?
No.

13
They
talk
about
25,000
years,
a
million
14
years.
How
about
thirty
years?
Twenty­
five
years?

15
Fifty
years?
How
come
we
haven't
got
to
check
them
over
16
there
for
radiation
and
how
they're
living
with
their
17
kids
and
family
and
everybody
else
over
there?
A
city.

18
You
and
I
both
know
they're
not
going
to
put
19
a
city
out
there
in
Mercury.

20
Now,
young
lady,
I
agree
with
her,
for
21
transportation
is
always
dangerous.
So
is
aviation
fuel
22
and
everything
else.
But
right
now
with
this
oil
23
shortage,
we
better
­­
we
better
start
getting
atomic
24
plants
like
they
have
around
the
rest
of
the
world.

25
They're
talking
about
now,
if
we
start
14
1
putting
up
more
atomic
plants
across
the
world,
you're
2
going
to
go
double,
triple
places
to
look
for
to
store
3
the
stuff.

4
Anyhow,
I
got
two
minutes
or
am
I
over?

5
MR.
SARNO:
No.
You've
got
another
minute
6
and
a
half.

7
MR.
TOOMEY:
Minute
and
a
half.
Good
8
enough.

9
Well,
I
did
say
the
rest
of
the
world
are
10
putting
up
atomic
plants
because
we're
short
of
oil,

11
we're
going
to
run
out
of
oil
pretty
soon.
And
this
is
12
back
to
atomic
energy.

13
Thank
you.

14
MR.
SARNO:
Thank
you,
sir.

15
MS.
COTSWORTH:
Thank
you.

16
MR.
SARNO:
Next
up
is
Frank
Perna.

17
MR.
PERNA:
My
name
is
Frank
Perna,

18
P­
e­
r­
n­
a.
I'm
a
Clark
County
resident.

19
I
didn't
know
there
was
a
difference
between
20
an
organization
and
a
person
for
time.
I'm
a
member
of
21
the
Clark
County
Yucca
Mountain
Advisory
Committee.

22
MR.
SARNO:
If
you
would
like
to
speak
on
23
their
behalf,
you
are
welcome
to
have
ten
minutes.

24
MR.
PERNA:
Well,
I
don't
know
about
their
25
behalf.
15
1
I'm
glad
they
called
on
Mr.
Toomey
because
2
his
thinking
is
not
correct.
Of
course,
I
don't
know
3
what
the
death
toll
was
at
Hiroshima
and
Nagasaki,
but
4
it
wasn't
small
potatoes.
We're
talking
forty,
50,000
5
people.
And
the
years
following
that,
many,
many
more
6
died,
but
we
don't
know
exactly
how
many.

7
And
I'd
say
that
there's
a
lot
of
people
­­

8
the
worst
thing
isn't
dying
sometimes,
the
worst
thing
9
is
being
sick.
Some
of
these
people
have
been
sick
ever
10
since.
We've
heard
of
genetic
defects.
So
I
wouldn't
11
write
it
off
as
just
nothing.

12
Same
with
Chernobyl.
Who
knows
what
the
13
effects
are
years
later.
Same
with
our
downwinders
from
14
the
Nevada
Test
Site.

15
And
I'd
ask
this
question:
If
it's
so
safe
16
on
the
Test
Site,
why
are
Test
Site
workers
suing
the
17
government?
Why
are
they
asking
for
compensation?
Are
18
they
all
lying?
I
doubt
it.

19
Do
you
think
some
of
them
have
thyroid
20
problems
because
they
­­
I
don't
know
if
I'm
correct,

21
but
do
you
give
potassium
iodide
to
protect
people's
22
thyroid
in
the
event
of
a
nuclear
problem?
They
weren't
23
given
­­
gosh,
maybe
they
weren't
given
that.
They
24
weren't
even
given
good
ventilators
or
anything.

25
But
you'd
have
to
say
that
those
people
16
1
looking
for
compensation
are
a
bunch
of
liars,
and
I
2
doubt
that
very
much.

3
I
don't
know
anything.
I
couldn't
give
you
4
a
quoted
speech
on
the
stand,
so
I'm
going
to
read
from
5
the
paper
and
quote
a
Notre
Dame
professor.
The
first
6
paragraph
is:
Critics
are
also
troubled
by
the
formula
7
that
the
EPA
used
to
create
the
dose
recommendations.

8
The
formula
calls
for
using
an
average
to
calculate
the
9
dosage
during
the
repository's
first
10,000
years.

10
After
that,
the
dosage
is
calculated
using
a
median.

11
The
first
question
I'd
ask
is:
Why
12
different
criteria?
Writing
in
the
publication,
Science
13
and
Engineering
Ethics,
the
University
of
Notre
Dame
14
professor,
Christian
Shroeder­
Forshette
(
Phonetic)
said,

15
Such
a
standard
shows
that
even
serious
harms
caused
by
16
negligence
or
unfairness
could
be
sanctioned
if
the
rate
17
of
harm
was
below
the
average.

18
She
uses
an
example,
a
hypothetical
release
19
that
affected
715
people
in
a
nearby
town.
She
said,
If
20
a
baby
received
a
fatal
dose
of
10,000
millirems,
but
21
all
the
other
residents
each
received
1
millirem,
the
22
mean
dose
would
be
under
15
millirems.
But
that's
an
23
extreme
but
it
shows
the
fallacy.

24
While
such
a
scenario
is
unlikely,
it
shows
25
the
folly
of
the
rule,
she
said.
Under
the
EPA
17
1
standard,
after
10,000
years,
the
dosage
will
be
2
calculated
using
the
median,
meaning
limits
would
allow
3
nearly
half
of
exposures
to
exceed
any
standard,

4
Shroeder­
Forshette
said.

5
That
means,
in
her
theoretical
town,
357
6
people
could
receive
fatal
doses
of
radiation
if
7
everybody
else
received
350
millirems
or
less.

8
Now,
I'm
not
a
scientist,
but
that
sounds
9
pretty
good
to
me
that
you're
not
protecting
the
10
population
by
your
standards.

11
Shroeder­
Forshette
said
the
EPA's
rule
would
12
allow
radiation
at
350
millirems
a
year,
slightly
higher
13
than
the
level
that
naturally
exists
in
Denver.
An
14
amount,
she
says,
that
causes
about
three
percent
of
the
15
fatal
cancers
in
the
United
States.

16
She
said
if
the
EPA
permitted
air­
polluters
17
to
follow
similar
logic,
they
could
save
money
and
18
increase
profits
at
the
expense
of
the
public
but
claim
19
that
victims'
health
risks
were
acceptable
merely
20
because
they
were
no
worse
than
what
some
natural
event
21
that
caused.
And
that,
critics
say,
is
as
much
concern
22
a
concern
in
2005
as,
perhaps,
it
will
be
in
12,310.

23
Think
she
makes
a
very
good
argument
­­
and
24
this
is
one
of
your
people
saying
it.

25
Now,
talking
about
the
population
shift.
We
18
1
keep
hearing
that
Yucca
Mountain
is
a
hundred
miles
from
2
Las
Vegas.
Well,
of
course,
it
is.
It's
always
going
3
to
be
a
hundred
miles
from
Las
Vegas.
The
only
thing
is
4
our
population
has
shifted.

5
The
first
woman
who
spoke
talked
about
6
Tule
Springs.
When
I
came
here
13
years
ago,
there
was
7
no
population
there.
I
mean,
we
had
the
­­
I
forget
the
8
name
of
the
farm
and
a
little
museum
and
stuff.
And
now
9
there's
homes
going
all
the
way
up.

10
And
further
than
that,
we
have
the
Paiute
11
Snow
Mountain
reservation,
which
is
building
up.
And
12
the
Paiutes
are
going
to
build
more
homes.

13
Then
you
go
down
further,
you
have
Pahrump.

14
Pahrump
is
exploding.
The
population
is
closer.

15
You
go
to
Indian
Springs,
population
is
16
exploding
there.

17
So
although
Yucca
Mountain
is
a
hundred
18
miles
from
Las
Vegas
all
the
time,
there's
more
people
19
closer
to
the
mountain
­­
including
Amargosa
Valley
20
exploding.

21
So
there's
more
and
more
people
going
to
be
22
affected
by
this.
They
expect
our
population
to
go
up
23
one
million
in
eight
years.
I
don't
know,
by
then
I
24
don't
think
any
of
us
will
be
able
to
breathe.

25
Before
we
know
what
the
politicians
are
19
1
doing,
they're
trying
to
steal
somebody
else's
water
to
2
come
in
here.
And
there's
a
lot
of
ideas
they
came
up
3
with,
such
as
desalinization
plants
in
California,
that
4
we
would
pay
for,
and
then
we
would
get
the
Colorado
5
River
water.

6
So
I
mean,
there's
no
limitations
on
our
7
growth
over
here.
That's
what
I'm
saying.
It
could
8
just
keep
growing
because
politicians
will
figure
out
9
some
other
way
to
get
water
off
somebody
else.

10
And
no
one
takes
this
into
account.
We
have
11
the
Test
Site
here.
We
have
been
subjected
for
41
years
12
to
almost
a
thousand
nuclear
detonations.
And
we're
13
finding
migration
­­
I
think
200
of
them
were
below
the
14
ground.
We're
finding
migration
off
that
site
of
new
­­

15
of
radiation.
I
think
it
was
five
miles
or
a
little
16
further
in
one
of
the
monitoring
wells.

17
Well,
that
should
be
taken
into
18
consideration.
We
have
cynical
politicians
that
say,

19
Oh,
you're
already
polluted,
so
we'll
give
you
more
20
pollution.
But
this
should
be
a
calculation
to
say
that
21
the
risk
is
greater
now
from
Yucca
Mountain
because
we
22
have
the
Test
Site
pollution
to
consider
also.

23
And
all
of
this
is
going
to
go
down
into
24
Amargosa
Valley
into
Bad
Water
into
Death
Valley
because
25
it's
all
downhill.
It
will
end
up
in
Bad
Water.
20
1
As
far
as
Nagasaki
and
Hiroshima,
I
mean
2
what
about
the
Bikini
Atoll
where
our
soldiers
and
3
sailors
were
stuck
on
ships
within
a
mile,
two
miles?

4
It's
like,
Don't
worry,
nothing
will
harm
you.

5
Are
those
troops
that
are
putting
in
claims
6
today
a
bunch
of
liars?
I
don't
think
so.

7
What
about
the
troops
that
were
in
the
Test
8
Site,
a
mile
from
the
Test
Site,
in
a
trench?
I
mean,

9
the
most
irresponsible
things
that
I
could
ever
think
10
of,
to
subject
these
troops
to
that
kind
of
a
risk.
But
11
they
did
it.
Are
these
people
that
are
asking
for
12
restitution
a
bunch
of
liars
also?

13
I
think
­­
I
personally
don't
agree
with
14
nuclear
power
as
the
way
for
the
future.
We're
given
15
subsidy
­­
we're
giving
subsidies
to
these
people.
That
16
subsidy
should
be
used
because
the
first
nuclear
plant
17
won't
go
online
for
10
years,
and
succeeding
plants
will
18
be
way
off
into
the
future.

19
Well,
that
subsidy
should
be
used
for
20
alternative
energy.
Nevada
is
a
beautiful
place
for
21
solar
power.
Hell,
we
could
put
solar
panels
everywhere
22
and
get
enough
electricity,
we
could
sell
it
to
some
23
other
state.

24
Geothermal,
we're
loaded
with
it,
which
is
25
another
risk
from
volcanic
activity
because
we
do
have
21
1
geothermal.

2
We're
developing
fuel
cells.
I
think
we're
3
crazy
if
we
ever
think
about
it
for
a
car,
but
I
could
4
see
a
bus
and
a
truck
operating
with
a
fuel
sell.
Or
a
5
fuel
cell
delivering
electricity
directly
instead
of
a
6
power
plant.

7
I
guess
that
about
covers
it.
But
I
think
8
this
process,
and
this
is
my
suspicion,
is
that
this
is
9
more
political
than
scientific
anymore.

10
I
do
not
trust
Congress.
And
President
Bush
11
gave
us
two
promises
here
in
Nevada.
In
2000
when
he
12
was
running,
and
I
voted
for
him,
he
said
sound
science
13
is
going
to
be
the
benchmark
for
this,
for
Yucca
14
Mountain.

15
And
immediately
Spencer
Abraham
came
in
here
16
and
didn't
even
talk
to
us.
And
before
you
know
it,

17
President
Bush,
in
a
half
a
day,
made
a
wonderful
18
decision:
Let's
go
ahead
with
the
licensing.

19
Then
in
2004
he
told
us
the
courts
will
20
decide.
But
you
and
I
know
this
is
heading
to
Congress,

21
that's
where
it's
heading
to.
And
if
he
signs
­­
if
he
22
doesn't
veto
that
bill
­­
and
I'm
afraid
he
broke
23
another
campaign
promise.
So
I'm
suspicious
that
this
24
is
all
political,
more
than
scientific.
And
it's
25
supposed
to
be
all
science.
22
1
Thank
you.

2
MR.
SARNO:
Thank
you.

3
Bill
Vasconey
(
Phonetic).

4
MR.
VASCONEY:
I
don't
have
any
papers
to
5
read.

6
Bill
Vasconey.
I'm
a
construction
worker.

7
I've
been
here
in
Las
Vegas
since
the
early
'
60s.
I'm
8
glad
to
see
Tom
Toomey
was
here
today.
He
and
I
have
9
the
same
birthday,
and
don't
we
both
look
about
37
years
10
old?

11
I
have
grandchildren,
too,
so
the
Test
Site
12
can't
hurt
me
much.

13
I
know
there
was
folks
affected
at
the
Test
14
Site
because
of
radiation.
And
for
those
I
do
care
15
about,
feel
for.

16
For
four
years
I
was
a
radiologic
technician
17
and
monitor
and
probably
went
on
some
25
or
30
reentries
18
into
areas
that
were
detonated.
I'd
also
like
to
say
I
19
worked
out
there
as
a
construction
worker,
electrician,

20
a
general
foreman,
and
probably
participated
in
some
200
21
nuclear
devices
being
detonated.

22
There
was
928
nuclear
devices
detonated
at
23
the
Test
Site.
One
hundred
was
atmospherics,
the
rest
24
were
underground.
Twenty­
four
were
with
Great
Britain
25
before
they
went
to
Australia.
23
1
One
of
the
points
I
also
want
to
make,
it's
2
the
same
folks
that
are
complaining
about
the
dosage
of
3
radiation
they
got,
I
worked
with.
When
we
went
4
underground
in
the
tunnel,
we
put
a
wad
of
chew
in
our
5
mouth.
When
we
weren't
in
the
tunnel,
we
smoked
two
or
6
three
packs
of
cigarettes
a
day.
We
had
a
beer
on
the
7
way
to
work,
we
had
a
beer
on
the
way
home,
normally
in
8
six
packs,
on
the
job.

9
So
some
of
those
same
folks
that
were
10
affected
with
radiation,
I
just
grin
at
them
and
say,

11
Hey,
look
who
you're
talking
to.
You
tell
me
what
12
effect
those
two
or
three
packs
of
cigarettes
and
that
13
chewing
tobacco
­­
which
I
got
a
chew
in
right
now.

14
Anyway,
yeah,
there
was
folks
affected.

15
I
­­
you
can
talk
Yucca
Mountain
all
you
want.
I
think
16
it's
a
necessity.

17
You
can
talk
about
your
standards,
your
18
regulations,
your
limitations.
I
wonder
if
they're
safe
19
or
acceptable.
If
they
are
safe
and
acceptable,
we
can
20
work
with
it.
You
know,
the
Test
Site
has
a
history
of
21
working
with
those
things
nuclear
and
a
safe
run
of
22
working
with
those
things
nuclear.

23
Think
not
that
the
technology
of
the
Nevada
24
Test
Site
wasn't
one
of
the
big
factors
that
stopped
the
25
Cold
War,
as
we
knew
it,
with
Russia.
They
couldn't
24
1
economically,
moneywise,
keep
up
with
the
technology
2
that
was
accumulated
at
the
Nevada
Test
Site.

3
I'm
the
one
that
believes
that
what
we're
4
doing
at
Yucca
Mountain
is
doable.
A
thousand
foot
from
5
the
surface
to
where
they're
going
to
store
the
6
materials,
a
thousand
foot
to
the
water
table.

7
I
don't
see
it
as
a
State's
issue,
it's
a
8
national
issue.
We've
got
over
a
hundred
nuclear
9
vessels
in
the
Navy.
Those
spent
fuel
rods
go
to
Idaho.

10
They
don't
appear
in
Idaho,
they're
shipped
to
Idaho.

11
But
they
come
from
Kittery,
Maine,
from
Hawaii,
Newport.

12
There's
no
problems
there.

13
I
give
our
educational
system
more
credit.

14
You
know,
it
was
mentioned
here
that
in
a
couple
hundred
15
years,
we
don't
have
to
worry
about
oil
because
all
it's
16
going
to
be
used
for
is
a
lubricant.
There's
an
17
exhaustible
supply
that's
going
to
be
gone.

18
Those
things
nuclear
are
going
to
be
here
19
for
the
future.
There's
400
nuclear
reactors
in
the
20
world.
We
have
100
of
them.
England
has
35.
You
can
21
take
England,
Ireland,
Scotland,
and
Wales,
and
it
will
22
fit
inside
the
State
of
Nevada.

23
For
those
of
you
that
say,
Leave
your
24
nuclear
waste
where
it's
at,
we're
only
a
hundred
miles
25
from
it.
Take
it
and
put
it
a
hundred
miles
from
your
25
1
largest
metropolitan
area.
You'd
be
in
another
state.

2
You
wouldn't
be
out
of
town,
you'd
be
in
another
state.

3
We've
got
a
position.
The
position
is
we
4
can
do
it
and
do
it
right
at
Nevada
Test
Site.

5
Our
educational
system,
I
give
them
more
6
credit.
They
know
a
lot
more
about
what
to
do
with
this
7
nuclear
waste.
Because
I
see
it
as
a
renewable
energy
8
resource.
A
renewable
energy
resource.
It
will
work
9
for
us.

10
I
think
it's
ludicrous
to
judge
what's
going
11
to
happen
in
one
million
years.
Ten
thousand
years,

12
that
was
workable
with
me.
You
worry
about
the
13
population,
who's
going
to
feed
the
cows
because
the
14
hay's
going
to
be
contaminated
at
Yucca
Mountain
in
15
10,000
years?

16
All
of
the
scientists
can
tell
us
and
the
17
people
that
study
such
things,
there's
been
38
glacial
18
periods,
six
or
eight
which
affected
us
down
as
far
19
south
as
New
Jersey.
You're
going
to
have
people
from
20
Ottawa,
Montreal,
New
York
City,
Philadelphia,
they'll
21
all
be
down
here.

22
Think
about
it,
folks.
Nuclear
is
the
thing
23
of
the
future.
We
put
it
in
the
past,
but
those
things
24
nuclear
can
help
all
of
us.

25
And
one
more
thing.
I
just
read
an
article,
26
1
they
call
it
the
"
beta
battery."
Beta
battery.
And
2
what
it's
off
of
a
derivative
of
hydrogen,
which
is
3
tritium,
which
this
gentleman
is
talking
about
that
4
mentioned
that
there
was
radiation
coming
off
the
Test
5
Site,
that's
tritium.
Got
a
half
life
of
12.6
years.

6
It's
a
good
source
of
seeing
where
the
water
flow
is,

7
which
that's
a
closed­
water
aquifer.

8
But
back
to
this
beta
volte
battery.
It's
9
250
times
more
powerful
than
a
regular
battery,
250
10
times
more
powerful
than
the
batteries
we
know
today.

11
And
it's
worked
with
tritium.

12
Those
electrons
and
that
battery,
if
that
13
was
­­
if
that
was
looked
at
and
improved
would
be
a
14
hell
of
a
way
to
power
cars.
Hell
of
a
way
to
power
15
cars.

16
If
you
got
any
questions
of
me,
you
know
we
17
always
say,
Make
your
comments,
et
cetera.
Well,
I've
18
made
some
comments,
but
do
you
have
any
questions
of
19
somebody
who's
lived
here
for
40
years
and
worked
at
the
20
Nevada
Test
Site
for
17
years?
You
got
any
questions?

21
You
know
this
is
the
bad
part
of
this
whole
22
presentation
thing.
You
need
to
ask
us
questions,
too,

23
so
we
can
be
responsive
to
them.

24
MR.
SARNO:
Yes.
And
we
agree
with
you,

25
which
is
why
we've
designed
the
meetings
to
have
more
27
1
informal
time
beforehand.
But
right
now
I
need
to
­­
I
2
need
to
go
with
the
hearing
format.

3
MR.
VASCONEY:
A
new
speaker.
Okay,
you've
4
got
it,
partner.

5
MR.
SARNO:
I
encourage
you
to
stick
around
6
and
folks
will
chat
with
you
after
this
is
over.

7
Are
there
any
other
individuals
who
want
to
8
speak?

9
Yes,
sir,
come
on
up.
Please
state
your
10
name
for
the
record.

11
MR.
FILLSKAWE:
Yes.
My
name
is
12
Arthur
Fillskawe
(
Phonetic)
and
I
represent
the
13
Las
Vegas
Paiute
tribe
here.

14
And
I
really
have
two
points
I'd
like
to
15
make
on
their
behalf.
It's
related
to
Executive
Order
16
No.
13,175
that's
entitled
Consultation
and
Coordination
17
with
Indian
Tribal
Government.

18
Down
in
the
reading
a
little
bit,
in
the
19
paragraph
that
says:
This
proposed
rule
does
not
have
20
tribal
implication
as
specified
in
executive
order.
The
21
rule
proposals
today
will
regulate
only
that
DOE
owns
22
the
land
owned
by
the
federal
government.
The
rule
23
proposed
today
does
not
have
substantial
direct
affect
24
on
one
or
more
Indian
tribes.

25
Well,
I
wrote
here
two
words.
I
strongly
28
1
disagree
with
that
because
in
the
valley
here,
we
have
2
Las
Vegas
Paiute
tribe,
and
close
to
us,
we
have
Moapa
3
Paiute
tribe.
And
in
this
region,
Region
9
of
the
EPA,

4
we
have
154
Indian
tribes.
Some
of
them
close
to
5
Death
Valley,
some
of
them
north
of
here.
And
if
we
6
consider
the
State
of
Nevada,
according
to
the
law,
the
7
Nuclear
Waste
Policy
Act,
as
affected
state,
some
of
8
these
tribes
are
affected
tribes.

9
Now,
the
DOE
doesn't
want
to
address
that
10
point
because
you
have
to
go
through
a
whole
lot
of
11
paperwork
to
get
the
Secretary
of
Interior
to
declare
a
12
state
as
affected
tribe.

13
The
tribes
cannot
move
from
their
land.

14
Maybe
I
can
move
from
Clark
County
to
Washington
D.
C.,

15
I'd
love
to,
to
buy
a
house
there.
But
you
can,
but
the
16
tribes
who
live
on
Snow
Mountain
reservation
live
there,

17
and
they're
going
to
live
there.
They
have
no
choice.

18
If
they
want
to
live
someplace
else,
then
they
have
to
19
find
their
own
trust
land.
So
that's
really
the
point.

20
So
somehow,
somewhere
this
point
needs
to
be
21
addressed.
By
saying
that
executive
order
and
the
22
location
of
Yucca
Mountain
does
not
impact
the
tribe,

23
the
tribes
in
this
region
are
going
to
be
affected
one
24
way
or
the
other:
Healthwise,
transportationwise,

25
delegationwise.
29
1
And
I
think
the
tribes
are
now
in
a
position
2
of
­­
they
don't
want
to
be
in
a
position
of
filing
3
lawsuits
and
so
on,
but
if
it
might
come
to
that,
it
may
4
come
to
that,
the
person
from
the
General
Counselor
5
might
hear
me.

6
The
second
point
is,
I'd
like
to
say
on
7
their
behalf,
is
the
U.
S.
Government
has
a
trust
8
responsibility.
They
have
the
trustee,
they
are
the
9
trustee
of
all
these
Native
American
Indian
tribes.
And
10
on
behalf
of
the
Las
Vegas
Paiute
tribe,
I
think
I'd
11
like
to
make
sure
that,
in
the
records,
this
trust
12
responsibility
is
being
conducted
in
terms
of
13
consultation.

14
So
if
we
have
the
privilege,
as
a
citizen
of
15
the
State
of
Nevada,
to
have
a
public
meeting
like
you
16
guys,
so
I
may
suggest
that
you
need
to
start
to
think
17
about
having
public
meetings
with
the
government
of
and
18
the
people
of
the
Native
American
tribes.
All
you
have
19
to
do
is
just
go
on
the
Internet
and
find
out
where
all
20
the
tribes
are
located
around
here.
They
are
listed.

21
There
are
600
federally
recognized
tribes.

22
But
at
least
you
need
to
look
at
that
particular
23
location.
And
maybe
presentation
to
this
and
addressing
24
their
comment
as
a
Native
American,
the
way
they
see
it.

25
They
have
been
here
on
this
land
for
ten,
30
1
15,000
years.
They
have
a
different
perspective
than
2
the
white
man.
I
may
disagree
with
the
rules
about
3
white,
but
the
Native
American
and
Elders
who
are
4
staying
here
­­
we
have
about
one
or
two
or
three
­­

5
they
can
tell
you
the
stories.
They
might
not
have
the
6
written
hieroglyphic
like
the
Egyptians
have,
or
you
7
have
or
whatever,
it
might
not
last,
but
they
have
the
8
stories
that
have
passed
on
generation
upon
generation.

9
So
you
might
hear
a
different
perspective.

10
So
thank
you
for
coming
and
thank
you
for
11
your
time.

12
MR.
SARNO:
Thank
you
very
much.

13
MR.
FILLSKAWE:
I
appreciate
it.

14
MR.
SARNO:
Yes,
sir.

15
MR.
VASCONEY:
I
don't
think
I
used
my
16
entire
ten
minutes.
I'd
just
like
to
explain
one
thing.

17
MR.
SARNO:
Can
I
­­
can
I
­­

18
MR.
VASCONEY:
First
of
all
­­

19
MR.
SARNO:
Can
you
hold
there
just
for
one
20
second?
I
will
let
you
do
that,
but
I
want
to
want
to
21
see
if
anybody
else
­­

22
MR.
VASCONEY:
Oh,
I'm
sorry.

23
MR.
SARNO:
­­
new
wants
to
go
first.

24
Yes,
sir.
Please
state
your
name
for
the
25
record.
31
1
MR.
IZEN:
Ray
Izen,
I­
z­
e­
n.

2
I'm
a
resident
of
Clark
County.
Obviously,

3
my
voice
is
from
New
York.
I'm
also
a
transplant
here
4
from
my
retirement
from
my
second
career
after
I
retired
5
from
my
first.

6
But
I
was
out
at
Yucca
Mountain
last
7
Saturday.
I
was
on
the
tour
that
they
offer
8
periodically
and
saw
it,
a
good
trip,
easy
way
out.

9
My
comment
is,
I
have
lived
here,
my
10
grandchildren
live
here.
And
the
next
million
years,

11
whatever
we
do
will
be
affected.

12
Obviously,
science
is
good,
but
we
don't
13
have
a
million
years
of
science
behind
us.
We
have
very
14
little,
percentagewise,
of
science
behind
us
dealing
15
with
what
we're
talking
about.
So
we're
talking
about
16
computer
models
or
whatever
else
we
may
be
using
to
17
determine
what
we'll
coin
a
scientific
fact.

18
To
the
two
gentlemen
who
spoke
that
they
19
worked
at
the
Test
Site
who
were
exposed
to
radiation,

20
as
opposed
to
people
who
get
radiation
from
other
21
sources,
whether
it
be
medical
­­
from
the
use
of
22
medicine
as
a
way
of
killing
cancers
or
things
that
23
people
are
exposed
to,
good
or
bad,
maybe
they
should
24
think
about
donating
their
bodies
to
science
somewhere
25
along
the
line
because
I
think
they
are
in
a
unique
32
1
position
that
they
were
not
affected
by
this
radiation.

2
Maybe
there's
something
in
their
genes,
in
their
3
heritage,
that
made
it
that
way.
They're
physically
fit
4
just
about
eat
anything
or
whatever
else.

5
But
for
the
average
person
who
is
exposed
to
6
that
much
radiation,
it's
not
good.
We
know
that
as
7
fact.

8
I
don't
want
to
be
glowing
in
the
dark.
I
9
don't
want
the
City
of
Las
Vegas
to
be
glowing
in
the
10
dark,
whether
it
be
the
next
ten
years,
twenty
years,

11
thousand
years,
million
years.

12
According
to
some
of
the
scientists
up
13
there,
today
we
are
at
a
higher
level
of
radiation
here
14
in
Las
Vegas,
350
millirems
or
whatever
it
says
up
15
there,
which
is
above
the
normal
for
other
places.

16
Maybe
that's
because
we
have
some
effects
that
were
17
blessed
on
us
during
the
Test
Site
days
when
people
were
18
standing
out
there
watching
it,
something
their
kids
19
will
have
to
watch
an
above­
ground
test
from
miles
away.

20
If
thoughts
of
what
we
do
­­
I'm
from
21
New
York,
obviously.
One
of
the
things
that
happened
22
back
there
is
they
built
an
atomic
power
plant
­­

23
Shoreham­
Wading
River.
It
never
opened.
Someone
out
at
24
the
Test
Site
said,
What
do
you
mean
it
never
opened?

25
It
never
opened.
They
started
to
warm
it
up,
test
it
33
1
out
and
everything
else,
and
they
discovered
that
2
there's
no
escape
plan,
there's
no
way
of
3
getting
evacuated
from
Long
Island.

4
So
there's
a
dead
plant
sitting
there,

5
mothballed
now,
but
absolutely
useless.
It
was
never
6
used.

7
People
have
thought
about
it
afterwards.

8
Think
about
it
before
we
transport
all
that
radiation
9
across
the
states.
Do
whatever
we
have
to
do
to
get
it
10
here
or
close
to
us.
Hopefully,
not
through
Las
Vegas.

11
Think
about
the
growing
population.
When
12
this
project
started
over
20
years
ago,
population
of
13
Las
Vegas
was
probably
under
200,000.
Today,
over
a
14
million.
So
it's
a
growing
population,
booming,
with
a
15
high
rise
­­
again,
you
read
our
local
newspapers,
the
16
high
rises
planned
for
Las
Vegas.
Our
population
will
17
probably
double
within
the
next
ten
years.

18
That's
close,
too
close
for
comfort.
Leave
19
it
where
it
is.
They're
not
putting
it
in
Texas,

20
they're
not
putting
it
in
New
York.
These
other
places
21
across
the
country
have
taken
advantage
of
it.
Let
them
22
hold
it
there
until
we
find
something
we
can
to
do
with
23
it.

24
Thank
you.

25
MR.
SARNO:
Thank
you.
34
1
Are
there
any
additional
individuals
who
2
wish
to
provide
testimony?

3
Yes,
sir.
Please
come
up.

4
MR.
ANDERSON:
My
name
is
Kenny
Anderson.

5
I'm
from
the
Las
Vegas
Paiute
Tribe.
I'm
the
6
environmental
manager
and
cultural
representative
for
7
the
tribe.
I
work
with
the
EPA
and
for
the
tribe
as
the
8
EPA
person.

9
But
what
I'd
like
to
say
is
a
lot
of
the
10
people
that
have
worked
at
the
Test
Site,
some
of
them
11
were
my
relatives,
are
not
here
anymore
because
of
the
12
radiation.

13
Most
of
my
people
who
are
like
in
this
area
14
are
downwinders
are
not
here
no
more.
My
mother
was
a
15
downwinder.
She's
not
here
no
more.
She
would
be
here
16
if
she
could,
but
she's
gone.

17
What
I'd
like
to
say
is
that
we
need
to
­­

18
or
the
EPA
needs
to
actually
protect
not
only
the
19
tribes,
we
need
to
protect
all
of
our
country
here
by
20
not
­­
or
by
going
by
your
rules
and
sticking
to
them,

21
not,
you
know,
false
readings
in
our
safety.

22
We
are
a
small
tribe.
Las
Vegas
Paiute
23
tribe
is
less
than
70
people.
When
we're
gone,
we're
24
extinct.
There's
no
more.
And
just
like
a
lot
of
25
things
at
the
Test
Site
that's
not
there
anymore,
like
35
1
our
homelands,
we
used
to
go
up
there
and
pick
pine
2
nuts,
hunt.
We
can't
do
that
no
more
because
it's
all
3
contaminated.

4
Plus,
it's
the
test
site,
we
can't
go
there
5
anyway,
but
that
is
one
of
the
lands
that
we
lived
in.

6
At
the
Las
Vegas
Paiute
tribe
that
I'm
a
7
member
of
and
a
counsel
person
for
the
tribe,
we
oppose
8
the
Test
Site
­­
Repository
Nuclear
Test
Site.

9
Nobody
knows,
like
we
say,
in
a
million
10
years
what's
going
to
happen.
And
I
know
there's
a
lot
11
of
people
who
have
­­
who
are
educated
and
talk
about
12
this
and
that.
But
we
don't
know.
I
mean,
no
one
knows
13
in
100,
300,
400
years
from
now
what's
going
to
happen.

14
Who
knows
if
we'll
all
be
here?

15
But
still,
we
need
to
protect
the
public
16
plus
the
ground
water
that
comes
through
the
Test
Site.

17
It
comes
all
the
way
to
Vegas.
So
we
need
to
make
sure
18
that
that
doesn't
­­
is
polluted
with
radiation.

19
And
just
thank
you
for
letting
us
talk
and
20
letting
me
talk
but,
please,
you
know,
help
us
and
make
21
it
a
better
­­
or
make
a
very
good
judgment
to
all
of
us
22
American
people
plus
the
natives
too.

23
Thank
you.

24
MR.
SARNO:
Thank
you
very
much.

25
Any
additional
comments
before
I
get
back
to
36
1
Mr.
Perna?

2
Yes,
sir.

3
MR.
PERNA:
Just
yesterday
we
had
a
meeting
4
with
the
Clark
County
Yucca
Mountain
Advisory
Committee.

5
We
have
a
member,
Calvin
Myers
(
Phonetic)
who
is
from
6
the
Moapa
Paiute
tribe.
And
he
talked
about
the
same
7
subject
as
the
two
gentlemen
from
the
Las
Vegas
Paiutes.

8
And
that's
the
fact
that
they're
sovereign
nations.
But
9
yet
their
opinions
aren't
considered.

10
The
government
is
making
­­
it's
doing
what
11
they've
always
done,
it's
disregarding
the
Indians,

12
breaking
treaties.

13
And
there
is
a
lawsuit
by
an
Indian
tribe.

14
The
north
­­
the
Western
Shoshone
nation
is
suing
the
15
federal
government
under
the
1863
Ruby
Valley
Treaty.

16
And
the
Ruby
Valley
Treaty
covers
lands,
covers
Yucca
17
Mountain,
itself,
and
lands
into
a
couple
of
states.
As
18
usual,
the
government
is
breaking
their
promise
to
the
19
Indians.
In
fact,
they
are
trespassing
on
Western
20
Shoshone
lands
with
Yucca
Mountain.

21
But,
unfortunately,
the
State
of
Nevada
22
never
really
backed
them
up.
I
wish
they
had.
In
fact,

23
we're
not
even
a
party
to
the
lawsuit,
and
we
should
be.

24
So
there
is
a
lawsuit
by
the
Western
25
Shoshone.
37
1
Thank
you.

2
MR.
SARNO:
Thank
you.

3
Yes,
sir.

4
MR.
VASCONEY:
The
only
reason
why
I'm
5
coming
up,
the
man
said
something
about
what
I
said
6
wasn't
the
truth.
I
don't
think
he
was
listening
to
7
what
I
said.

8
It
was
a
crying
shame
that
we
had
an
atomic
9
bomb
over
any
country's
metropolis
and
kill
all
them
10
people.
I
didn't
say
that.
It's
a
crying
shame,
maybe
11
we
should
have
dropped
the
bomb
out
in
the
middle
of
the
12
ocean
and
showed
the
Japanese
that
they
didn't
have
to
13
bomb
the
city.

14
What
I
said
is,
after
it
was
bombed
­­
so
15
you
understand
me
­­
they
built
a
city
there,
probably
a
16
half
a
million
people.
And
they're
living
there
right
17
now.
We're
talking
about
the
Indians
worrying
about
18
being
radiation
and
what
have
you,
how
about
them
people
19
over
there
that's
living
right
there?

20
Talking
about
Fred
Toomey.
This
man
says
21
I'm
­­
maybe
I
could
donate
my
body
because
I'm
rare.

22
Well,
I
got
news
for
him,
I
can
probably
bring
in
about
23
40
people
my
age,
right
around
that,
that
worked
out
24
there
that
had
no
trouble
at
all.
Just
to
get
him
clear
25
on
this,
I'm
80.
I
can
name
one,
two,
three,
four
­­
38
1
five
guys
that
are
84
years
old.

2
And
for
all
your
information,
the
mustache,

3
we
went
in
there
three
weeks
after,
in
the
same
area
4
where
the
atomic
bomb
was
blasted
into
the
ground
­­
so
5
you
understand
that
­­
500
feet
away,
not
over
Indian
6
land
or
no
place
else.
We
went
in
there
and
went
to
7
work.
We
had
two
badges,
one
badge
went
out
here,
the
8
other
badge
was
a
pencil.
When
we
came
in,
and
we
drove
9
out,
in
our
cars
by
the
way.

10
Jack
Harren
(
Phonetic)
which
he's
still
11
alive,
he's
84,
he
had
a
mustache.
Well,
they
checked
12
the
radiation
and
that
thing
would
glow
every
time.
He
13
had
to
go
in
and
had
to
scrub
that
mustache,
believe
14
this
or
not,
and
how
it
was
checked.

15
All
I'm
saying
is
we
worked
there,
we're
no
16
different
than
anybody
else.
And
I
can
pretty
well
17
prove
it
with
­­
you
know,
you
get
guys
84
years
old,
I
18
could
name
one,
two,
three
­­
four:
Harvey
Watt
19
(
Phonetic),
Jack
Harren,
Bickerton
(
Phonetic),

20
Bertie
Jackson,
myself.
You
know,
these
guys
are
old
21
men.

22
We
worked
­­
and
the
reason
why
I
picked
23
that
area,
I
worked
on
every
tower
up
in
that
area.
I
24
happened
to
be
the
steward
up
there
at
the
time
and
had
25
to
go
into
every
one
of
those
areas.
39
1
So
if
you're
talking
about
­­
I'm
not
2
talking
about
it's
not
dangerous.
I'm
not
talking
about
3
that.
I've
got
friends
that
are
Indians,
all
I'm
saying
4
is
it's
not
affecting
anybody.
If
it
didn't
kill
some
5
of
us
when
we
worked
in
there
500
feet
­­
500
feet.

6
When
the
atomic
bomb
blast
blows
up,
it
just
7
blows
­­
it
didn't
put
no
hole
in
the
ground
or
8
anything.
All
it
does
was
just
radiation,
turned
the
9
sand
to
green
and
whatever
the
case
may
be.

10
If
we
lived
through
that,
and
they
can
build
11
metropolis
over
there
in
Japan,
we
better
be
like
the
12
rest
of
the
world,
think
about
using
atomic
energy
to
13
live.

14
This
town
right
here,
the
man
just
said,

15
could
be
a
million,
two
million
people.
This
is
getting
16
crowded.
Where
are
they
going
to
get
their
electricity
17
at?
From
the
oil?
We
need
an
atomic
plant
put
here
18
near
this
town
right
here.

19
Now,
if
it
blows
up,
it
could
be
like
20
Russia,
atomic
­­
kill
a
whole
bunch
of
us.
So
we
21
better
figure
out
how
to
make
it
safe,
how
to
protect
it
22
from
the
terrorists,
and
whatever
the
case
may
be.

23
But
what
I'm
telling
you
is
God's
truth.
We
24
worked
up
there.
I
worked
up
there
through
every
one
of
25
those
atomic
towers
up
there.
There's
still
iron
up
40
1
there
that
some
of
the
towers,
the
dead
men
on
Area
3,

2
where
them
guys
worked
up
there
for
25
years.
They're
3
not
dying.

4
You
know,
they're
­­
everybody
blames
the
5
work
that
was
Mercury.
There's
nobody
ever
worked
up
in
6
Mercury
die
a
natural
cancer
death.
They
died
because
7
of
Mercury.

8
That's
all
I
got
to
say.
Thank
you.

9
MR.
SARNO:
Thank
you
very
much.
Any
10
individuals
that
haven't
had
an
opportunity?

11
We'll
be
here
another
five
or
ten
minutes
12
until
the
stated
end
time.
And
if
anybody
wants
to
come
13
up
during
that
time,
feel
free.

14
UNIDENTIFIED
ATTENDEE:
I'd
just
like
to
add
15
one
thing
in
case
people
weren't
aware
of
it.
When
16
these
hearings
started,
it
seems
like
forever
ago,
the
17
intent
of
DOE
at
that
point
in
time
was
to
build
the
18
Yucca
Mountain
with
the
spent
fuel
rods
inside.
Gummite
19
it,
cement
it,
and
walk
away
and
leave
it.
Put
a
20
granite
plaque
on
top
in
40
different
languages
and
tell
21
people
what
was
buried
there.

22
It
was
because
of
the
public,
people
attend
23
these
kind
of
meetings,
that
it
is
now
300
years
it
will
24
be
monitored.
It
will
be
monitored
for
water
and
for
25
radiation.
It
will
be
monitored
­­
the
canisters
will
41
1
be
monitored.
For
300
years
it
will
be
retrievable.

2
Again,
in
case
our
educational
system
3
catches
up
with
those
things
nuclear,
and
it's
4
acceptable
by
the
public.
And
those
all
being
good
5
things.

6
Now,
today's
meeting
was
based
on
the
7
public,
I
know,
the
public's
dose
rates
and
how
they
8
will
be
acceptable.
And
one
would
think,
well,
maybe
we
9
ought
to
do
away
with
mammograms,
and
maybe
we
ought
to
10
do
away
with
cancer
research
and
chest
x­
rays,
of
which
11
I've
had
several,
that
are
more
than
the
limits
that
are
12
being
sent
right
now
for
Yucca
Mountain.
That
is
not
a
13
good
­­
that
is
not
a
good
trend,
not
a
good
way
to
14
think.

15
The
other
thing
would
be
during
that
300
16
years
and
the
fact
that
there
will
be
workers
there
to
17
work
under
different
standards.

18
I
always
ask
what
the
dose
rate
is
going
to
19
be
for
the
truck
driver,
the
guy
that's
driving
the
20
truck
with
the
radiation
in
the
back.
You
always
worry
21
about
what's
going
to
happen
to
the
cow,
but
what
about
22
that
truck
driver
that's
sitting
in
the
front
seat
23
changing
gears?
We've
got
limits
for
him
too.

24
Those
folks
working
with
the
canisters
25
placing
them
underground
or
taking
them
back
up,
do
you
42
1
want
a
survey
done?
Those
are
the
people
you
ought
to
2
concentrate
on.
They're
working
with
those
items,

3
they're
exposed
to
them
on
a
daily
basis
just
like
the
4
workers
at
the
Nevada
Test
Site.

5
We
had
a
worker's
exposure
rated.
And
you
6
can
always
go
both
ways.
I'm
84,
he
died
when
he
was
7
23.
Well,
I
can
pick
up
any
daily
newspaper
and
see
the
8
same
thing.
There's
a
hell
of
a
lot
more
people
killed
9
with
lightning,
car
wrecks,
cancer,
et
cetera,
than
10
there
are
because
of
those
things
nuclear.

11
Look
at
how
many
thousands
of
young
men
come
12
back
from
serving
on
any
number
our
80
nuclear
powered
13
submarines
or
our
11
nuclear
powered
aircraft
carriers
14
that
don't
even
think
about
those
things
nuclear
because
15
they've
worked
with
them
and
they
know
they're
safe.

16
MS.
COTSWORTH:
Thank
you.

17
MR.
SARNO:
Thank
you
very
much.

18
I
do
encourage
you,
if
you
brought
any
19
written
comments,
please
leave
them
in
the
box
over
20
there,
and
they
will
be
entered
into
the
record
as
well
21
as
take
advantage
of
the
other
ways
to
get
into
the
22
record.

23
24
25