How would "temporary" surface storage "parking lot dumps" impact your state, congressional district, and major cities near you, in terms of Mobile Chernobyl risks?

• Nevada Agency for Nuclear Projects - Cities Potentially Affected by Shipments to Yucca Mountain (pdf-2.45M)
• Nevada Agency for Nuclear Projects - States Potentially Affected by Shipments to Yucca Mountain, Nevada - Fred Dilger, PhD
• Nevada Agency for Nuclear Projects - Congressional Districts Potentially Affected by Shipments to Yucca Mountain, Nevada

While the reports and routing maps above pertain to the permanent burial dump targeted at Yucca Mountain, NV, many similar or even exact same routes (road and rail) would be used to ship high-risk, highly radioactive, irradiated nuclear fuel, to so-called centralized interim storage facilities (CISFs) in Texas (Waste Control Specialists) and/or New Mexico (Holtec International/Eddy-Lea [Counties] Energy Alliance).

Barge shipments on numerous surface waters across the U.S. (the Great Lakes, rivers, sea coasts) could also begin, if either CISF opens.

While the Yucca dump is limited by law to 70,000 metric tons of highly radioactive wastes, Holtec/ELEA have proposed up to 120,000 metric tons of storage at its facility in s.e. NM; WCS has proposed another 40,000 metric tons in TX. Holtec/ELEA and WCS are only 38 miles apart. As you can see, up to 160,000 metric tons of highly radioactive waste would represent significantly more shipments, and thus risk, than even what is targeted to go to Yucca!