AMARGOSA VALLEY -- The two people who testified at Monday's public hearing on the proposed radiation safety standard for the planned Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository had one thing in common: They're not worried about radioactive dangers because they've lived in the shadow of the Nevada Test Site for many years.

So, if they can survive 41 years of detonating more than 900 nuclear bombs, then they can endure 77,000 tons of spent nuclear fuel and highly radioactive waste tucked away inside the mountain, 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas. It doesn't matter, they said, if it's there for 10,000 or even 1 million years.

"This community has very little concern about the increase in radiation," Jan Cameron, chairwoman of the Amargosa Valley Town Advisory Board, said after making her comments to Environmental Protection Agency officials who traveled to this community of 1,400, the closest to the mountain.

"There is really very little likelihood of danger from Yucca Mountain," she said. "It doesn't mean there shouldn't be monitoring and they shouldn't be keeping an eye on it."

In testimony, she told the EPA panel that setting a 10,000-year standard "is iffy -- to try to define a standard for a million years passes ridiculous."

Similarly, Amargosa Valley's Ken Garey said the exposure cap the EPA has proposed in its two-tiered standard is really just a tad above what the community gets each day from background radiation from natural sources, cosmic rays and what's already been put in the environment from man-made sources.

To satisfy a court ruling, the EPA issued a standard in August for 10,000 and 1 million years. The dose limits were set at 15 millirem and 350 millirem per year, respectively, above background levels.

For comparison, a chest X-ray exposes a patient to 10 millirem while a mammogram results in a 30 millirem exposure.

Adding another 15 millirem to the 110 millirem that Garey said is based on actual background measurements in Amargosa Valley "is insignificant compared to the other risks we accept and take."

The figure from Garey, a test site consultant, differs from the 350 millirem that EPA uses for its background radiation levels for Amargosa Valley. The 350-millirem figure is based on a statewide average that factors in exposures from naturally occurring radon gas.

Despite the opinions expressed at the hearing by Cameron and Garey, four others who spoke at a round-table discussion preceding the hearing were highly skeptical of the EPA's plan. They said they intend to challenge the proposed standard in written comments and upcoming hearings today through Thursday at the Cashman Center in Las Vegas.

Steve Frishman, a full-time consultant to the Nevada Nuclear Projects Agency, said the EPA's proposal is a step backward. The long-term standard is far less protective in the distant future when radioactive materials carrying peak doses are expected to leak into the environment.

"This is the first time they've ever reversed themselves on the idea of 'Don't pass risks to future generations that you're not willing to accept for this generation,' " Frishman said.

"This is a policy break necessitated by Yucca Mountain," he said.

Judy Treichel, executive director of the Nevada Nuclear Waste Task Force, a group critical of the program, agreed.

"I think they've colluded with the (Department of Energy) and (Nuclear Regulatory Commission) on this whole thing," she said after the roundtable discussion.

"For the U.S, government to say that it is perfectly fine for people to receive doses equal to a chest X-ray every week, from the moment of conception, throughout their lives is simply crazy and dangerous."

During the discussion, Frishman said the EPA is knuckling under to the whim of the Energy Department.

"You need to set a standard that DOE has to provide credible scientific analysis that it can be met," he said.

Jennifer Viereck of Tecopa, Calif., said she is bewildered by the EPA setting an arbitrary standard that doesn't consider future cancer cases.

"I can't imagine you giving us this recommendation without doing risk calculations," she said.

Corbin Harney of the Western Shoshone tribe questioned the integrity behind the EPA's proposed standard.

"I want to know for sure if we're going to tell the truth," he said. "We can not be telling each other fibs."