Will Texas Store The Nation's High Level Nuclear Waste ???

I previously wrote about the fact that Texas was becoming the nation's nuclear waste dump:

http://sainthoward.blogspot.com/2014/08/texas-americas-new-nuclear-waste-dump.html

Well, now it appears they want to store high level waste there; i.e., spent nuclear fuel:

http://www.statesman.com/news/news/state-regional-govt-politics/politically-connected-waste-site-to-seek-high-leve/nj6Nn/

If approved, this will make a lot of money for someone, but in the long run it will be a very bad idea.

Here are some things to be considered before allowing this to happen:

(1) The US spent billions of dollars to construct the Yucca Mountain Nuclear Waste Repository in Nevada, but that site apparently will never be used. Why is the Texas site safer for the storage of high level waste than the facility which already exists in Nevada?

(2) Spent nuclear fuel contains plutonium, and that plutonium could be separated and used to make nuclear weapons. Storing the nation's spent fuel in Texas will create a serious proliferation and/or terrorism threat, and the site is not that far from our porous border with Mexico. Is Texas prepared for the associated risks?

(3) According to a report in The New York Times, the site has "a base layer of nearly waterproof clay", and the implication is that this clay will ensure the waste does not migrate out from the site:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/21/business/energy-environment/texas-company-alone-in-us-cashes-in-on-nuclear-waste.html

Well, guess what? They used to say the same thing about the low level storage site in Barnwell, South Carolina. The beautiful white clay laid down over centuries by the Savannah River was supposed to keep the waste there bottled up nearly forever. But it didn't. Imperfections and cracks in the clay beds allowed the waste to start leaking into the river in only about 50 years. The same thing is likely to happen in Texas.

(4) The Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in New Mexico was supposed to safely store transuranic waste nearly forever. But it didn't. Somebody screwed up and some of the barrels containing radioactive material started burning and bursting a year ago, allowing radioactive contamination to go airborne and leave the site. How do we know the same thing won't happen in Texas?

(5) Note that the Austin American-Statesman called this a "politically connected waste site". Its political connections may have played a role in its initial siting and licensing. Will they also now play a role in allowing it to store spent nuclear fuel? Making this decision on the basic of politics instead of sound scientific, engineering, and risk assessments will be an extremely bad idea.

Just saying.