Nuclear Dump Site Assessment

The April 4 article about research related to proposed radioactive waste facilities in California, Nevada and New York state contained serious inaccuracies concerning the National Academy of Sciences/National Research Council committees conducting the studies. Your editorial on April 10 only served to underscore the errors.

The academy has been scrupulous in maintaining its independence and credibility with regard to these studies. In selecting members for the study committees, we are careful to identify scientists and engineers who would not have conflicts of interest. In the case of the committee studying the Ward Valley, California, site, we did not select any scientists or engineers currently employed by the Department of Interior, which requested and funded the study, or its agencies or the California state government. We also did not select any individuals who have supported or opposed development of a low-level radioactive waste disposal facility at Ward Valley. We paid particular attention to appointing committee members with strong scientific credentials.

Three members of the Ward Valley committee--including its chairman--were first recommended to serve on the committee by some of the same environmental organizations who now claim a lack of input. None of the committee members that we selected were recommended by advocates of the disposal facility at Ward Valley. Members of the general public as well as experts representing different sides of the waste disposal issue have presented their views at every public meeting of the committee and in letters and reports.

Given the political controversy surrounding Ward Valley, it is important to note that the academy’s study addresses seven scientific issues related to the site’s geological and environmental characteristics. It does not address broader issues related to waste disposal or facility licensing, nor will it result in recommendations concerning the suitability of Ward Valley as a waste disposal site. Our committee’s draft report is now undergoing a rigorous review process by a group of independent experts appointed by me. The study will not be released as an academy report until we are satisfied that the reviewers’ comments have been satisfactorily addressed. Many of our prior studies related to radioactive waste issues have been highly critical of policies and actions of the government agencies requesting the studies. I can assure you that each of our current studies is being conducted according to the academy’s highest standards of independence, scientific accuracy and objectivity.

BRUCE ALBERTS, President

National Academy of Sciences

Washington