The EPA will require Yucca Mountain to meet a safety standard that will protect ground water for the next one-million years. This is vastly more protective than anything EPA requires for chemicals, which do not decay and thus can remain hazardous permanently, where the maximum period EPA requires for protection is 10,000 years and in most cases less than a few hundred years. And wastes from mining activities are exempted from being defined as "hazardous" by current statute. Yucca Mountain, located on the Nevada Test Site, replaces the mining and burning of billions of tons of coal, and if spent fuel were recycled and only residual wastes sent to Yucca Mountain, it could replace hundreds of billions of tons of coal. Before claiming that Yucca Mountain is somehow environmentally unacceptable, one needs to look at the very real, very large global effects that our use of fossil fuels have. The only sad thing is that the Nevada Nuclear Projects Agency is not the Nevada Nuclear and Chemical Projects Agency, because it could do far more to protect the environment and public health a hundred thousand years from now by suing the EPA to develop more rigorous standards for Nevada's mining industry, than by litigating the EPA safety standard for Yucca Mountain. The best thing to do is to move forward and let the Nuclear Regulatory Commission review the DOE license application for Yucca Mountain, and determine whether it can comply with the million-year EPA safety standard. If so, then the U.S. should use this repository, but look seriously at recycling spent fuel rather than sending it to Yucca Mountain.