Yucca Mountain News Clips
Thursday, June 5, 2003
---------------------------

Las Vegas SUN
June 05, 2003

Senators call for Yucca probe

By Benjamin Grove
<grove@lasvegassun.com>
Las Vegas SUN

WASHINGTON -- Sens. Harry Reid, D-Nev., and John Ensign, R-Nev., are urging Attorney General John Ashcroft to launch an investigation into alleged worker intimidation at the Yucca Mountain project.

In a letter dated Wednesday, the senators also urged Ashcroft to ensure the protection of workers who intend to testify about Yucca flaws. They also asked that Ashcroft review federal laws to ensure that workers are protected from retaliation by managers.

"This incident is about more than the Yucca Mountain Project, it is about how our federal government treats its employees and how it spends taxpayer money," the senators wrote. "The federal government has a responsibility to maintain the highest standards of integrity and professionalism in conducting its programs."

At issue are two Yucca workers who Reid and Ensign invited to testify at a May 28 Senate field hearing in Las Vegas. The hearing was designed to examine Yucca flaws and how Yucca workers are treated by management.

But Yucca auditors Don Harris and Robert Clark did not appear to testify. In separate instances, both had reported Yucca procedural flaws to supervisors and were subsequently reassigned to different duties. Harris was reinstated after several weeks and Clark reportedly voluntarily took another job with the project. The two have declined comment on why they did not appear at the hearing.

Energy Department managers deny worker intimidation, but Reid and Ensign suspect the two felt pressure to not testify. In their letter, the senators cited a letter from Yucca project chief Margaret Chu to Reid in which she wrote that she would not encourage the workers to testify.

"In light of the reported problems with worker retaliation at the project, the witnesses apparently felt this letter was an indication that they would be fired or removed from their current positions if they testified," the senators wrote.

Reid called the alleged intimidation "obnoxious." He said he spoke to Harris and Clark.

"Of course they wanted to testify," Reid said on CNN Wednesday, in an appearance with Ensign. "They are afraid of losing their jobs. This is something that the taxpayer should be concerned about. I think it's time that we got fairness involved in this and have an open book so that the American people knows what's happening."

---------------------------

Las Vegas Review Journal
June 05, 2003

Nevadans allege DOE intimidation
Ashcroft urged to investigate in Yucca case

By STEVE TETREAULT
STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU

WASHINGTON -- Nevada's senators urged Attorney General John Ashcroft on Wednesday to investigate whether the Energy Department intimidated prospective witnesses against the Yucca Mountain Project.

The senators said employees Donald Harris and Robert Clark were prepared to appear at a May 28 hearing in Las Vegas until they became aware of a letter from the nuclear waste repository program's top manager that caused them to withdraw.

"We are extremely concerned by this incident, because the Department of Energy appears to have discouraged these witnesses from testifying," Ashcroft was told in the letter from Sens. Harry Reid, D-Nev., and John Ensign, R-Nev.

The two asked Ashcroft to review whistle-blower protection laws and ensure Harris and Clark would be protected from job loss or harassment if they came forward.

Reid said he has spoken with the workers.

An Energy Department spokesman strongly denied the accusation that the DOE had discouraged the workers from testifying.

"Nobody in the Department of Energy nor anyone in the Yucca Mountain Project told people they could not testify, period," spokesman Joe Davis said. "DOE has not intimidated witnesses."

Nevada's senators long have opposed the program, which seeks to establish a nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain, 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas.

Reached at home, Harris' wife said he declined to comment. A call to Clark's cell phone was not returned.

Harris, employed by a repository contractor, was on an audit team that discovered flaws in a segment of the project's quality assurance program this spring. He has said he believes the audit was connected to his removal from audit duties for several weeks.

His company, Navarro Research and Engineering, said it was a temporary reassignment while Harris was being investigated, and subsequently cleared, of allegations of unprofessional conduct.

Clark was the Yucca Mountain Project's quality assurance director until he was transferred in 2001. The reassignment came after he is reported to have urged corrective actions for the program.

Reid arranged a Las Vegas field hearing by the Senate's energy and water subcommittee to question Clark and Harris on quality assurance in the Yucca project.

Days before the hearing, the witnesses informed Reid they would not appear. Harris told a reporter he decided not to testify after hearing about a letter by Margaret Chu, director of the Energy Department's Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management.

Chu's letter was addressed to Reid.

It stated that Clark no longer worked on quality assurance. "The subject matter for which his testimony is sought is not within the scope of his current duties." As for Harris, Chu said because he was a contractor, "we are not in a position to instruct or otherwise pressure him to testify."

---------------------------

Las Vegas SUN
June 05, 2003

Nevada ranks last as recipient of U.S. funds
Poverty rate lowers government handout

By Benjamin Grove
<grove@lasvegassun.com>
Las Vegas SUN

WASHINGTON -- Nevada ranked last among states in the amount of money it received per capita last year from the federal government.

Congress sent Nevada $10.7 billion in the 2002 fiscal year, which ended Sept. 30, according to new data released today by the U.S. Census Bureau. The largest pot of money was for health programs like Medicaid, a federal-state health program for low-income residents.

The federal money also went to Social Security payments, disability payments, federal government salaries and benefits, government contracts with universities and businesses, as well as education, housing, transportation programs and projects. Three expenditures -- for Medicaid, Medicare and Social Security -- accounted for 47 percent of U.S. domestic spending.

Nevada, the nation's 35th most populous state, ranked 38th among states in the total amount it received from the federal government, according to the Census report. California was the top recipient, with $206 billion.

But Nevada ranked last when measured on a per-capita, or per-person, basis.

"It's disappointing," Clark County Manager Thom Reilly said this morning. "I think it's an obvious area of concern that we continue to be an exporter state in terms of taxes."

Nevada historically has ranked at or near the bottom of the list; Nevada was last in 2001 and 2000, and 49th in 1999 ahead of Virginia. That's largely because Nevada has a relatively small population of low-income residents who qualify for federal aid, Mike Pieper, who is Gov. Kenny Guinn's lobbyist for Nevada in Washington, said. Compared with other states, Nevada receives less per capita for federal programs like Medicaid, typically one of the largest allocations of federal money that states receive.

Nevada also ranks relatively low in the amount of money it receives for federal welfare programs and for the Title I program, which is federal education money for schools with high populations of needy students.

Nevada ranked 20th in per capita personal income in 2002, according to the Commerce Department.

"It's sort of a good news-bad news situation," Pieper said. "The good news is that Nevada does not have a high rate of poverty" compared with other states.

With Medicaid and other health programs, it's also a matter of the state and municipalities not putting up matching funds that bring federal dollars home, Reilly said.

"It's a double-edged sword. You have spend more in order to match, and that's clearly the case on the issue of Medicaid," he said. The state has a great deal of discretion on what to cover under Medicaid, and it tends toward the minimum, he said.

In addition, he said, Nevada doesn't have many federally funded, community-based health clinics, "Given our large number of uninsured we have, that's a concern," he said.

The Census report also listed federal department spending by state, and Nevada ranked No. 1 in one category: Department of Energy nuclear waste disposal programs.

Nevada typically fares well in another category, measured per capita, Pieper noted: interstate and highway projects. The state generally pulls in about $200 million for federal roadway programs, roughly what the state contributes to federal coffers in gas taxes.

Alaska was first in the federal ranking, in part because it receives more than most states per capita for Medicaid and federal housing programs. The state also fares well in money for transportation projects.

Congressional observers often note that Alaska fares well in most federal money rankings largely because Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, is the chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, arguably the most powerful panel in the Senate because it controls the flow of federal project money to states.

Nevada has its own member of the committee, Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., who each year funnels money to Nevada for various projects.

"It's terrible that Nevada ranks very last in federal funding across the board," Reid spokeswoman Tessa Hafen said. "The state is one of the fastest growing in the nation and we must have additional resources to keep up with demand."

Nevada officials have said the state's population boom makes it difficult for the Census Bureau to keep accurate, up-to-date numbers of low-income residents, which means federal aid does not keep up with current population.

"It's kind of like trying to fit a 13-year-old boy into last year's sneakers," said Michael O'Donovan, spokesman for Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev.

This was the second time in a week that Nevada ranked last in federal money survey. Nevada also was at the bottom of the list in the amount it will receive per capita as part of the $20 billion aid program for states that was included in the tax cut legislation signed by President Bush. Nevada again fared poorly because the program was designed to offer states help with Medicaid costs.

Sun reporter

Jean Reid Norman contributed to this story.

---------------------------

CNN
June 4, 2003

Lou Dobbs Moneyline

The proposal to dump the nation's nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, has created a firestorm of controversy from the outset. Now, two U.S. Senators are accusing the Department of Energy of covering up mismanagement and intimidating critics of the proposed highly radioactive waste site.

The two join us now from Capitol Hill. They are Senator Harry Reid and Senator John Ensign, gentlemen good to have you with us.

SEN. JOHN ENSIGN (R), NEVADA: Good to be with you.

SEN. HARRY REID (D), NEVADA: Thank you very much.

DOBBS: You held hearings last week. In those hearings, did you discover anything that you did not already know about the design and the operation of the plant?

REID: I was stunned by people who favored Yucca Mountain. Senator Ensign and I do not favor it but the witnesses that we had favored Yucca Mountain but yet they came forward with what I thought were revealing statements about how the science was bad there, there was money wasted there.

And, the most obnoxious thing that I found is that they intimidated witnesses from coming and testifying at our hearing. Your viewers should understand that Yucca Mountain is not a Nevada problem. It's a problem this nation has. It involved the health and safety of people in this country.

ENSIGN: Lou, we're talking about the deadliest substance known on the planet, nuclear waste, and the scientists want to make sure that when the project is built, it's built to the strictest quality assurance standards and that's really where this whole problem has come to now is that the scientists who are complaining that the Department of Energy is skirting the standards is not using good science.

Those scientists are being intimidated. We called them to testify. They originally wanted to testify. All of a sudden when the hearing was called they made some excuses and the Department of Energy sent us a letter and you could tell in the letter that the Department of Energy was embarrassed by what was going on and they did not want them to testify. So, this needs to be looked into very, very seriously and that's what Senator Reid and I are in the efforts of doing right now.

REID: Lou, one of the things...

DOBBS: If I may, Senator, I just want to point out before if I may, and I should have done this at the outset, Senator Reid obviously a Democrat of Nevada, Senator Ensign a Republican of Nevada. Senator Reid, I apologize.

REID: Lou, what we've done, and thank you for laying the foundation of this, we are sending tonight to secretary -- I'm sorry to Attorney General Ashcroft a letter, a bipartisan letter signed by Senator Ensign and me. This letter is saying we want you under all the laws that are effective in this country to allow us to examine those witnesses.

We've got whistleblower statutes. There are statutes relating to intimidation and we have a written a letter to him and we're going to deliver that tonight saying we need you, John Ashcroft, to do the fair thing and have these witnesses testify. Intimidation should not work in America.

DOBBS: You both, Senator Ensign, Senator Reid, you both say that that intimidation influenced at least two witnesses, one Robert Clark, Department of Energy employee who did not testify, Donald Harris, a Navarro employee which is a consultant, an engineering consultant on the project did not testify. In both instances, am I correct you believe that there was intimidation of these men preventing them from testifying?

ENSIGN: Yes. I think that based on the other witnesses' testimony there seems to be good reason why they would be intimidated. We had a professor from MIT that would testifying that scientists all over the country are afraid to say anything negative about the Yucca Mountain project for fear of losing grants from the federal government.

So, there is this almost atmosphere around this Yucca Mountain project that they want it to go forward no matter what, no matter what the science, no matter how poor the science is, and because of that they'll do anything it seems to intimidate, make sure that the science comes out exactly like they want regardless of what the experts are saying. And these, remember these are experts who are for the Yucca mountain Project. They believe in it. They just want to make sure the science is done right. And so when they point something out wrong, they should have a lot of credibility, but they're not allowed to get that word out.

REID: I would also say, Lou, if you just give me a second here.

DOBBS: You bet.

REID: I have spoke to these two witnesses, proposed witnesses. I've spoken to them. Of course they wanted to testify. They are afraid of losing their jobs. This is something that the taxpayer should be concerned about. This is a project that could cost as much as 100 billion, not million, $100 billion. I think it's time that we got fairness involved in this, and have an open book so that the American taxpayer knows what's happening.

DOBBS: Well, Senator Reid, Senator Ensign, we thank you both for letting our viewers know what's happening. We thank you both for being here tonight. Thank you, gentlemen.

REID: Thanks for your interest.

---------------------------

Inyo Register
June 03, 2003

NRC to clarify Inyo issues

By Darcy Ellis

With deadlines fast approaching that may determine when and if nuclear waste is buried not more than 17 miles from Death Valley, county officials are continuing to examine ways to weigh in with their concerns.

In preparing to further express itself on the Yucca Mountain Project, Inyo County is first looking to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for guidance, officials reported this week.

Top officials and experts with the NRC - charged with approving or denying the application that would allow the U.S. Department of Energy to begin accepting and storing waste at Yucca Mountain - will be in Inyo County this week to hopefully provide some of that guidance.

At today's 9 a.m. Inyo Board of Supervisors meeting in Independence, the NRC is scheduled to give supervisors a presentation on its role - and the county's potential role - in the Yucca licensing phase.

Then, on Wednesday, the NRC is holding a public workshop-style meeting where it will give four presentations on the same subjects, related more specifically to waste transportation and hydrology issues, and its job in ensuring safety of potential waste shipments through southeast Inyo County.

Wednesday's meeting will run from 6:30-8:30 p.m. in the Tecopa Community Center. Today's presentation is being held in the County Administrative Center next to the courthouse in Independence.

According to Inyo County Yucca Mountain Project Assessment Office Coordinator Andrew Remus, both meetings (more than a year in the making) will give local officials a chance to find out how Inyo County can continue to interact with the NRC once the DOE has submitted its license application.

Remus will be on hand for the meetings, should officials or residents ask questions of the county.

Today's meeting in particular, he said Monday, "is important because the NRC hasn't spoken directly to the board to my knowledge ... it's an opportunity to explore what Inyo County's role in the Yucca Mountain Project might be."

Specifically, Remus explained, the county wants to know how its ongoing groundwater studies in Death Valley (to determine whether water under Yucca Mountain deposits in Inyo County as other studies have indicated), will factor into the NRC's decision.

"The key question for us," he said, "is how will our groundwater research be utilized in the licensing process and how will we present our research."

Remus added that, at this juncture, it is unknown what Inyo County will have to respond to in the DOE's license application for the Nye County proposed repository.

If DOE intentions hold true, it could be submitting its application for Yucca Mountain nuclear waste storage next year.

And according to Nuclear Regulatory Commission High-Level Waste Public Outreach Team leader Dr. Janet Kotra, it could be as early as 2007 that the NRC will issue its decision on that application.

As an independent regulatory body - using the scientific and technical evaluations of exclusive, independent contractors - the NRC will have 3-4 years to decide whether the DOE can accept and store spent, high-level nuclear fuel underneath Yucca Mountain.

It is expected that Kotra and her colleagues will explain to county officials and residents just how the NRC will make its decision. Kotra said last week that the NRC will focus on the DOE application itself, relying heavily on the analyses of its independent contractors to determine whether the DOE's application meets, among other stringent guidelines, the mandates of the U.S. Environmental Protection Act.

---------------------------

Las Vegas SUN
June 03, 2003

Yucca lawyers to get edited material
Homeland Security Act cited as reason

By Jennifer Knight
<jknight@lasvegassun.com>
Las Vegas SUN

Lawyers preparing to fight the Yucca Mountain project will have to settle for an edited set of documents from the Energy Department, a result of the federal Homeland Security Act.

Millions of pages of documents chronicling the research and development of the proposed nuclear dump will be run through a new computer program designed by University of Nevada, Las Vegas computer scientists to sift out potentially sensitive information.

While the long-range application of the program holds great promise for government agencies intent on keeping certain facts out of the hands of terrorists, some say the redaction of passages from unclassified documents could serve to hide pertinent facts and at the very least slow down the process of accessing records.

"As lawyers we are always concerned about the flow of information," said Joe Egan, Nevada's lead attorney for the Yucca Mountain licensing procedure. "These types of things can be used to shield documents that would otherwise be available to the public."

But Egan adds that he is not too worried about obtaining the documents he needs because the Energy Department will allow any U.S. citizen on a "need to know basis" to gain access to deleted passages if they make a request in writing.

Egan said it could slow the process down, though.

It is estimated the Energy Department has generated 41 million pages of documentation on Yucca Mountain -- or approximately 3 1/2 million documents. Egan's office, on the other hand, has only received 12,000 documents, with mountains more to come as the proceeding before the Nuclear Regulatory Commission nears. Lawyers will try to block the Energy Department from obtaining a license to operate the Yucca Mountain facility and some of those documents will play a crucial role in helping them prepare their case.

With the passage of President Bush's Homeland Security Act in November 2002, Energy Department officials knew all of that documentation needed to be reviewed before it was released.

UNLV computer scientists had already developed a system that would scan government e-mails for sensitive information and Energy Department officials asked them to change the direction of their research and concentrate on finding a way to sift through millions of pages on Yucca Mountain.

"After 9-11, they wanted to know if this same system could be trained for Homeland Security," said Kazem Taghva, a professor of computer science at UNLV who headed up the project. "If you look at these documents they could provide information that could lead to terrorist activity."

About 10 computer scientists were placed on the project and trained by the Energy Department to review sensitive material.

Researchers began to map out specific areas that might be used against the U.S. such as specific transportation routes, what kind of blast load the structure could withstand, or even what sort of materials something was reinforced with.

"There's information about how a plane could run into a cask and how it could cause radioactive leaks," said Julie Borsack, a computer scientist who helped design the program. "The notion was that this information could be dangerous."

With three years and $4 million of Energy Department funding, UNLV developed a program that they claim is nearly foolproof.

"Based on the initial testing, there has been no error," Taghva said. "Is it possible that it might let something through? Yes, but not probable."

The program is designed to scan all unclassified material for any key words, phrases, names or scenarios. The passage is then highlighted and manual reviewers make the final decision on whether to redact the sentence. All of that material then gets posted on the Energy Department's website for public access.

"If the DOE had to pay individuals to screen all of this information for trial, I'm not sure the federal government has ever printed enough money to pay for that," said Thomas Nartker, UNLV's dean of computer science.

While the issue of the safety of storing nuclear waste 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas will be of crucial importance during the licensing stage of the project, Energy Department representatives maintain the new program is not an effort to hide anything, but a simpler way to comply with homeland security requirements.

"It's not going to be less information," said Allen Benson, director of public affairs for the Yucca Mountain project. "It is to make sure that sensitive information in light of 9/11 is not inadvertently given out."

---------------------------

Las Vegas Review Journal
Tuesday, June 03, 2003

Test site unlikely to land project
Study indicates facility has too many flaws as site to make nuclear weapons component

By STEVE TETREAULT
STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU

WASHINGTON -- A federal study released Monday identified several potential obstacles to the Nevada Test Site being chosen for a major nuclear project.

The government would have to build a pipeline or a rail spur to supply fuel for a factory that would manufacture plutonium "pits," the key component in nuclear weapons, according to a draft environmental impact statement released by the National Nuclear Security Administration.

Such a facility also would outstrip available electrical supplies, the agency said.

State and industry officials said Monday the shortcomings could amount to a "show stopper" for the test site, increasing the likelihood the NNSA may choose from among four other locations being studied for the multi-billion dollar project.

Analysts said Nevada has been considered a long shot in any case. Political leaders in New Mexico and South Carolina have waged aggressive campaigns to lure the Modern Pit Facility, they said.

Jim Bridgman, director of the Alliance for Nuclear Accountability, an activist network, said conventional wisdom holds Nevada as likely last among the government's options.

"It's a combination of political uncertainty given the Yucca Mountain fight and the lack of proximity to facilities that have nuclear experience," Bridgman said.

Others rank Nevada higher, but no experts have placed it as a likely first choice.

The plant is estimated to cost $2 billion to $4 billion to design and build and $300 million per year to operate. The plant would manufacture replacements for aging, grapefruit-size spheres that trigger nuclear weapons.

The federal government wants to revive a capability it dropped when it abandoned pit production at the Rocky Flats plant outside Denver in the late 1980s.

The NNSA has scheduled a July 2 hearing in Las Vegas to discuss the environmental impact statement before the agency revises its report and Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham picks a site in April.

Meetings also are scheduled for other study sites: the Pantex Plant outside Amarillo, Texas; the Savannah River Site in South Carolina; the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant near Carlsbad, N.M., and the Los Alamos, N.M., national laboratory.

No matter if the government decides to build a factory with capacity to produce 125, 250 or 450 pits per year, "electrical energy requirements would exceed available site electrical capacity," at the Nevada Test Site, the agency said in its environmental study.

---------------------------
State of Nevada
Agency for Nuclear Projects
www.state.nv.us/nucwaste/
nwpo@nuc.state.nv.us
775-687-3744