WISCONSIN SELECTED FOR

In January, 1986 DOE tentatively recommended two
Wisconsin areas for the second repository-the Wolf
River Batholith and the Puritan Batholith. In May, 1986
DOE indefinitely deferred its search for a second reposi-
tory because of projections showing reduced need. Since
then, DOE has indicated site selection for the second re-
pository will resume in the 1990s. Many observers be-
lieve that the deferral was based on political considera-
tions, which could be reversed. Some members of
Congress want DOE to resume its second repository site
selection, and Washington state has filed suit against DOE
protesting the deferral.
/     ONE     T
WOLF RIVER BATHOLITH
LANGLADE
LINCOLN
MAAN      MENOMINEE ,
SHAWANO
* ChtonIlle
PORTAGE
WAUPACA          /GreenBay
WOOD    s  -nRon        OUTAGAMIE BROWN
The 1,094-square-mile area within the Wolf River Batholith was
the largest of the 20 crystalline areas under consideration. This
potentially acceptable site proposed by DOE includes parts of
seven Wisconsin counties, the land of three Indian tribes and off
reservation treaty lands of six other tribes. Treaty lands are
areas where tribes have retained hunting, gathering and fishing
rights under signed treaties with the US government.
DOE thought the billion-and-a-half-year-old Wolf River
Batholith worth further consideration because it is massive
(strong) and similar to a well studied rock body in Illinois. Their
geologists believe the area has little groundwater at deep levels
and good engineering properties for large excavations. But
others think such predictions cannot be made without firsthand
investigation.
Problems with the Wolf River Batholith include:
Uranium ore underground contributes to high natural back-
ground radiation. This could make it difficult to monitor radia-
tion released from a disposal site. There is also some concern
that releases from repository operations might raise radiation
levels in the area above EPA limits. Extensive groundwater re-
sources exist at shallow levels and deeper groundwater has not
been studied.
THE PURITAN BATHOLITH
The 171 square miles within the Puritan Batholith was a
back-up area. It includes parts of three counties and treaty lands
of six Indian tribes. Exposed rocks, according to some geolo-
gists, indicate that the buried area could be massive and rela-
tively unfractured.
Because of a thick glacial overburden, little of the batholith
is exposed and not much is known about the deep geology. The
area is covered by wetlands and lies mostly in the Che-

If DOE resumes its search in Wisconsin, the Wolf
River Batholith and the Puritan Batholith may once again
be under scrutiny. It is therefore prudent to learn about
these areas and why DOE recommended them for further
study.
Both batholith areas are part of the Precambrian
Shield, which includes bedrock older than 600-million
years. The Precambrian Shield extends north into Canada
and Michigan, and west into Minnesota. A batholith is a
geological term for a large composite rock body.

THE PRECAMBRIAN SHIELD

WISCONSIN'S CONCERNS
The Radioactive Waste Review Board
is concerned that a Wisconsin repository
might harm the public's health and the
state's environment and economy. De-
sign error, human error or mechanical
failure could cause an accident during
transportation or disposal of radioactive
waste. Consequences of such accidents
would most likely be minor, but they
could be catastrophic.
Specifically, the Board's concerns
are:
* Groundwater contamination.
* Environmental disturbance.
* Transportation of radioactive
waste.
* Social and economic effects.
quamegon National Forest, which is used for fishing, boating,
camping, hiking and logging. In addition, the US Navy has op-
posed the Puritan area because of proximity to the Extra Low
Frequency antenna (ELF), it uses to communicate with subma-
rines. It is unlikely that DOE will resume study of the Puritan
Batholith area.

FURTHER STUDY
HOW WAS WISCONSIN CHOSEN FOR STUDY?

The regional phase study selected 235 rock bodies by
analyzing information from books, reports and files. Of
these, 20 were recommended for field research. This was
based on siting guidelines developed by DOE to estab-
lish standards for the site selection process. Certain areas
were automatically disqualified, such as:
* State and federal parks
* Places with more than 1,000 people per square mile
* Those with known mineral resources, deep mines
or quarries
But Wisconsin and other states and groups think the
siting guidelines should also exclude:
* Lakes and rivers
* State and national forests
* Indian reservations
* Groundwater discharge areas such as springs, sur-
face waters and wetlands
* Tourist areas with high summer populations
Consequently, Wisconsin and several other states
filed suit against DOE to eliminate these areas from
consideration.
Based on its siting guidelines, DOE developed a
screening methodology to objectively compare and rank
all 235 areas studied during the regional phase. This com-
plicated procedure assessed each square mile (grid cell)
TRIBAL RELATIONS
In Wisconsin, lands in the Wolf River Batholith owned by the
Stockbridge-Munsee, Menominee and Winnebago Indian na-
tions were recommended in the repository search. In addition,
treaty lands where six other tribes have hunting and fishing
rights were also under consideration.
Indian land is sacred. "Our religious rituals rely on living in
harmony with nature - catching the fish, collecting the wild
plants. A nuclear waste repository could harm our ancestral
way of life forever," insists Steve Dodge, who represents Indian
views to the Wisconsin DNR. Indian people, who have a unique
relationship with their land, did not have suflicient input in the
siting process.
The Nuclear Waste Policy Act (NWPA) of 1982 recognizes
the sovereignty of Indian nations. It gives tribes the same status
as states and requires DOE to deal directly with tribal
governments.
Starting in 1983, DOE supplied funds for states, but not
tribes, to review and comment on all drafts of its regional stud-
ies and to develop public information programs. DOE also in-
vited states to help develop the screening methodology.
Though DOE was not required to fund states or tribes until
designating potentially acceptable sites, it did fund states and
thus gave them some influence on DOE. This privilege was not
extended to tribes.
The Radioactive Waste Review Board fully recognizes and
respects the sovereignty of Indian nations. The Board made
funds available for tribal representatives to attend Review
Board meetings and demands that DOE treat tribes the same as
states.
In addition, Wisconsin law requires tribal representation on
the Review Board's Policy Advisory Council.

under study on 16 factors, then ranked the grid cell be-
tween one (unacceptable) through five (very good).
The 20 areas with the highest rank were recom-
mended for study.
Wisconsin disagreed with DOE's choices in the state
because:
* Rock fractures and groundwater are prevalent in
the Wolf River Batholith.
* The batholith's immense 1,094-square-mile area
makes it three times larger than the next Proposed Poten-
tially Acceptable Site (PPAS).
* The Puritan Batholith was included as a Candidate
Area.
* Small lakes, rivers and wetlands of less than 320
acres were also included as well as Indian reservation
lands, sacred to Native Americans.
Much of the available data on Wisconsin's ground-
water was compiled by DOE. Computer analysis by Wis-
consin experts determined that almost 600 square miles,
or more than 60% of the total area in the Wolf River
Batholith, should never have been included in the recom-
mended study area. According to DOE's own standards,
this part of the batholith is not suitable for radioactive
waste disposal because of potential groundwater
problems.
Factors used by DOE to
evaluate rock bodies in the
screening process
1. Rock mass extent (larger is better).
2. Major groundwater discharge zones.
3. Rock and mineral resources.
4. Seismicity (earthquakes).
5. Suspected faulting in the past 2-million
years.
6. Post-emplacement faulting (fracturing
after the rock body was laid down or
intruded).
7. Proposed federal protected lands.
8. Population density.
9. Proximity to federal protected lands.
10. Proximity to state protected lands.
11. National forest lands.
12. State forest lands.
13. Threatened or endangered species.
14. Wetlands (greater than 320 acres).
15. Surface water bodies (greater than 320
acres).
16. Proximity to highly populated areas
(greater than 1,000 people per square
mile).

Wisconsin Natural Resources

U

High-Level Nuclear Waste