Yucca Mountain News Clips
Monday, November 17, 2003
---------------------------
---------------------------
State of Nevada
Agency for Nuclear Projects
www.state.nv.us/nucwaste/
nwpo@nuc.state.nv.us
775-687-3744
---------------------------
San Francisco Chronicle
November 17, 2003
Last-minute glitches in Yucca nuclear-waste burial plan
New findings could scuttle idea for underground site
Keay Davidson
Chronicle Science Writer
image: http://www.sfgate.com/chronicle/pictures/2003/11/17_t/mn_nukegraphic_t.gif
By 2010, if the U.S. Energy Department gets its way, then an underground burial site for spent nuclear reactor fuel would open for business, thousands of feet beneath the Nevada desert.
But chemists' new findings raise questions about plans for the repository at Yucca Mountain, just northeast of Las Vegas -- and at a very bad time, only 13 months before the agency plans to ask for federal nuclear regulators' approval to build the site.
During the past year, two DOE-funded scientific teams have discovered that the buried fuel rods could experience unexpected chemical changes. Those changes could alter present estimates of how fast the buried fuel rods would disintegrate, leaking poisonous plutonium, neptunium, iodine and other radionuclides into the surrounding terrain and groundwater.
On the one hand, the chemists' findings might be good news for advocates of the Yucca Mountain burial site.
Their research suggests that as the super-hot fuel rods radioactively decay and are exposed to the drip-drip-drip of groundwater, the resulting chemical interactions would breed odd forms of uranium minerals. Like miniature cages, these minerals would tend to lock bits of plutonium and neptunium in the minerals' crystalline atomic lattices. Hence, the disintegrating nuclear fuel probably wouldn't escape very far into the groundwater.
Troubling discoveries
What troubles the chemists, though, is that they've made their discoveries so late in the game. DOE has been funding research into the chemical behavior of buried fuel rods for decades, yet the chemists made their discoveries only during the past year.
Which raises a question: If we made these discoveries this late in the day, then what other unknown chemical phenomena might occur underground over thousands of years? And what might be the consequences for nuclear containment,
consequences not anticipated by present chemistry and computer models?
"What I find amazing in this story is that the Yucca Mountain story had gone this far without (anyone previously) finding out that these (chemical events occur)," said one co-writer of the article, geology Professor Peter Burns of the University of Notre Dame. "I wouldn't have thought you'd want big surprises before (you seek) your licensing application."
The main discovery came in two main steps. Last year, Edgar Buck and Bruce McNamara at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, a DOE lab in Richland,
Wash., discovered in lab tests that a type of uranium mineral called studtite forms from decaying reactor fuel in a pool of water.
In Friday's issue of Science, scientists at UC Davis and Notre Dame University report that the interaction of radioactivity and groundwater would form a type of studtite called uranyl peroxide. The crystalline atomic structures of uranyl peroxides would tend to trap long-lived, dangerous radioactivity decay products such as plutonium and neptunium.
Burns and his team have "exposed quite a hole in our understanding of (buried) spent fuel. In that sense, it's a very important piece of work," Buck of the Richland lab told The Chronicle.
Project opposition
Their findings don't surprise Bob Lux, director of the state of Nevada's Agency for Nuclear Projects, which, despite its name, has fought for years against the Yucca Mountain repository. On Jan. 14, the state plans to argue against the repository on legal and environmental grounds in the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C.
"The uncertainties that are involved in the Yucca Mountain assessment are so large that literally neither DOE nor anyone else knows what's going to occur underground if waste is stored there," Lux said. Despite DOE's plan to cover the spent fuel with titanium to keep out groundwater, "our experts think no metal will last underground more than 400 or 500 years. Titanium goes away in 50 to 60 years because of fluoride in the water."
DOE officials have reacted respectfully to the chemists' findings. Still, the officials are sticking to their schedule: They expect no delay in applying for the license in December 2004, as presently planned.
The chemists "have done a good job" and their work is "an interesting addition to what is known already about the behavior of spent fuel in a system that has (ground)water available to it," said Abe Van Luik, a physical chemist who is senior policy adviser for performance assessment at DOE's Las Vegas office. Indeed, the agency hopes to fund further research into the new phenomenon: "It's definitely in the hopper if there's sufficient money to fund it."
Even so, Van Luik is confident that the new findings don't undermine the DOE's theoretical models for the behavior of buried spent fuel. At worst, the discoveries indicate that radionuclides would escape even more slowly than presently projected, he points out.
Still, the new findings could spark another round in a long-standing, mostly-behind-the-scenes debate among Yucca Mountain planners, a debate that tends to divide into two main camps: engineers and natural scientists. The engineers are confident that no matter what happens underground, they can design a repository that safely stores the fuel for its mandated lifetime of 10,000 years.
Great concern
By contrast, many natural scientists worry that all kinds of unknown processes might occur underground.
"I'm one of those people," Buck acknowledged. As he describes it, the engineers tend to think that no matter what happens underground, "Well, we can put it (the buried fuel) in a bigger and stronger box, and that'll solve the problem." But Buck disagrees: "This is just my opinion, and I'm not an engineer, but I personally take the attitude that 10,000 years is beyond engineering scale."
What about the pyramids of Egypt? Despite some crumbling here and there, they've endured for many millennia. Buck doesn't buy that analogy, though: "There are tombs in northern Europe that have disappeared over that time."
Historic questions
DOE began investigating the possibility of opening the Yucca Mountain repository in the late 1970s. DOE-funded scientists have wrestled with questions as diverse as: What will happen to buried reactor fuel over the centuries? How fast will groundwater leak into the repository? Could local dormant volcanoes erupt, wrecking the repository? Might future terrorists secretly drill into the repository and remove its radioactive materials for making "dirty bombs"? What would happen if a large meteor hit the repository?
Besides Burns, the Science article's other authors are Karrie-Ann Hughes Kubatko, also of Notre Dame, and Katheryn Helean and Alexandra Navrotsky, both of UC Davis. One of them, Helean, stressed the difficulty of forecasting what time and the elements will do to buried spent fuel over 10,000 years, roughly the same amount of time that separates the inhabitants of A.D. 2003 from the last Ice Age.
"The geochemistry and geology are incredibly complicated," she said in a phone interview while her 20-month-old son, Michael, made a racket in the background. "As a mother, I'm concerned greatly about this. That's why I spend my career looking for reliable, safe, scientifically justifiable solutions to the dilemmas that we face in nuclear waste."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RAISING NEW QUESTIONS ABOUT YUCCA MOUNTAIN
Recent research offers good and bad news for the government's plan to build an underground repository for spent nuclear fuel under the Nevada desert. A newly discovered chemical process suggests that leaking radioactive material would be locked in minerals instead of migrating to groundwater. But the fact that scientists are just now finding this out raises a question: What other unknown chemical phenomena might occur over thousands of years?. WASTE STORAGE: Waste is stored in canisters made of a corrosion-resistant nickel alloy. They are transported into the tunnels by rail. A titanium shield would protect the canisters from groundwater, but experts say no metal will last beyond several hundred years.
YUCCA MOUNTAIN: The federal government has chosen this remote site as the best spot to store the spent fuel from the nation's nuclear reactors. Yucca Mountain would someday house as much as 77,000 tons of high-level radioactive waste for an estimated 10,000 years. But concerns about safety persist..
NEW CHEMISTRY: Recent research shows that the fuel's intense radioactivity would split the water atoms, which would then interact with the uranium, creating a mineral called uranyl peroxide. Tests by UC-Davis and University of Notre Dame scientists show that uranyl peroxide would lock bits of disintegrating plutonium, neptunium and other radionuclides in the minerals' crystalline atomic lattices.
Result: The poisonous radionuclides would escape from the repository more slowly than presently expected. But scientists are concerned that if they are just now learning about this process, there may be others with more dangerous consequences.
Sources: U.S. Department of Energy; U.S. Geological Survey
Chronicle and New York Times Graphic
E-mail the writer at kdavidson@sfchronicle.com.
---------------------------
Las Vegas Review-Journal
November 15, 2003
NUCLEAR WASTE: Lawmakers target law firm
State Bar urged to probe possible ethics rule violations on Yucca Mountain Project
By Steve Tetreault
Stephens Washington Bureau
WASHINGTON -- Nevada's lawmakers on Friday continued their pursuit of a law firm accused of a conflict of interest while working on the Yucca Mountain Project.
The state's congressional delegation asked the State Bar of Nevada to investigate evidence that Winston & Strawn may have violated legal ethics rules while employed by the Energy Department on the nuclear waste program.
Nevada officials have been critical of the Chicago-based firm since conflict allegations came to light in 2001, leading the company to withdraw from a $16.5 million contract.
Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., said the latest complaint sends a message that Nevada will challenge any perceived misstep in the Yucca program
"Every weapon in our arsenal needs to be used to bring the project to a halt, and this is just one of the weapons," Berkley said. "This is not a smoking gun, but it continues to build a record" against the Yucca program.
She said the investigation could lead to disciplinary action up to disbarment in Nevada for the company or individual partners.
Winston & Strawn spokeswoman Lisa Wollenberg on Friday would not comment on the complaint. A message left for the director of the Nevada State Bar was not returned.
Wollenberg said she couldn't determine whether the firm has clients in Nevada or does any work in the state.
Winston & Strawn was awarded an Energy Department contract in 1999 for legal services on the repository, to be built 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas. It withdrew from the contract in November 2001, after the DOE inspector general confirmed Winston & Strawn registered to lobby Congress for the pro-Yucca Nuclear Energy Institute.
In a lawsuit by a rival firm, a federal appeals court panel last month also said Winston failed to disclose its activities to DOE. The court also questioned whether Winston was in conflict because it had performed work previously for the project's main contractor.
The appeals court sent the case to a lower court judge for further determinations.
Those challenging the Yucca program in court and before federal agencies said conflicts could taint any work that Winston performed during its two years on the project.
"These infractions have the potential to threaten the safety of all Nevadans and have the seriously tainted the veracity of DOE's Yucca license application," lawmakers said in the letter Friday to Nevada Bar Association executive director Allen Kimbrough.
The letter was signed by Berkley, Republican Reps. Jim Gibbons and Jon Porter, Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., and Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev.
Berkley filed a complaint against Winston & Strawn with the District of Columbia Bar in October 2001. The organization has yet to rule.
---------------------------
Las Vegas SUN
November 15, 2003
Lawmakers urge State Bar of Nevada to probe Yucca law firm
Associated Press
LAS VEGAS (AP) - The state's congressional delegation has asked the State Bar of Nevada to investigate whether a law firm violated ethics rules while working on Energy Department plans to build a nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain.
Nevada officials have been critical of Winston & Strawn since conflict of interest allegations came to light in 2001, leading the company to withdraw from a $16.5 million contract.
Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., told the Las Vegas Review-Journal the latest complaint sends a message that Nevada will challenge any perceived misstep concerning the Yucca Mountain Project.
"Every weapon in our arsenal needs to be used to bring the project to a halt, and this is just one of the weapons," Berkley said Friday. "This is not a smoking gun, but it continues to build a record."
Winston & Strawn spokeswoman Lisa Wollenberg on Friday would not comment on the complaint. A message left for the director of the Nevada State Bar was not returned.
The Chicago-based law firm was awarded an Energy Department contract in 1999 for legal services involving the repository located 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas. It withdrew from the contract in November 2001, after the DOE inspector general confirmed Winston & Strawn registered to lobby Congress for the pro-Yucca Nuclear Energy Institute.
In a lawsuit by a rival firm, a federal appeals court panel last month also said the law firm failed to disclose its activities to DOE. The court also questioned whether it was in conflict because lawyers had previously performed work for the project's main contractor.
The appeals court sent the case to a lower court judge for further determinations.
Those challenging the Yucca program in court and before federal agencies said conflicts could taint any work that Winston & Strawn performed during its two years on the project.
"These infractions have the potential to threaten the safety of all Nevadans and have the seriously tainted the veracity of DOE's Yucca license application," lawmakers said in a letter Friday to Nevada Bar Association Executive Director Allen Kimbrough.
The letter was signed by Berkley, Republican Reps. Jim Gibbons and Jon Porter, Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., and Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev.
Information from: Las Vegas Review-Journal
---------------------------
About
November 15, 2003
Area 51 - Groom Lake, Nevada
Area 51 is still a puzzle.
On 08/19/55, President Dwight D. Eisenhower signed an executive order restricting the airspace over Groom Lake, Nevada. The dry, lake bed remains restricted airspace to this day. Down through the past half century, the restricted area has grown both on the ground and in the air (over 22x20 nautical miles).
Only a handful of investigators make a serious effort to find out the commonly assumed 'secret' of Groom Lake. The rest of us have seemed to accept Area 51, Dreamland, (Groom Lake and Papoose Lake) as an area where the US government tests experimental aircraft. It is comfortable for us to believe that. Wouldn't it be sadly disappointing if it WAS only a place for the Air Force to test planes? Do we want alien spacecraft to be out there?
If you have lived in Las Vegas, or any of the towns nearby, for any length of time, you know several people that have worked at the Nevada test site. That is, the overall site, including the Nellis Air Force Range, and possibly one or two that worked close to or in Area 51. Do they talk about it? No, they don't. They may answer an insignificant question or two. They might even make an occasional comment that leaves you thinking, but for the most part, they seem types that will take their secrets, if any, to the grave.
In the late 1980s, early 90s, copies of Bob Lazar's tape of the alien ships passed freely from person to person and office to office in Las Vegas. We stirred at his credible explanation of gravity propelled engines, but remained skeptical that the US Government would keep all of alien spaceships in one small area while they did research on them.
It makes for great science fiction. It also gives Nevada some unusual sites for tourist to visit; The Extraterrestrial Highway (the official name for Nevada Highway 375), The Little A'Le'Inn of Rachel, Nevada, and The Nevada Test Site (Tours of the site where the US tested their nuclear bombs since 1951, run from Las Vegas every month).
All too soon, we will have another area of international interest in our state, America's high level nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain.
Now, if I were a writer of science fiction, I think that I would have to elaborate on a plot that had an underground tunnel (about 50 miles long) giving the folks at Area 51, access to the depleted, but not dead, radioactive waste so they can operate the duplicate little UFOs that we produce and maintain there. Of course!
We hope that Area 51 did not move to Utah as reported by some folks. We sort of liked having it around all these years. It feels as though it should be part of southern Nevada.
What's out there?
---------------------------
Las Vegas SUN
November 14, 2003
State bar might take up Yucca conflict
Congressional delegation wants new look taken at DOE's hiring of law firm
By Suzanne Struglinski
<suzanne@lasvegassun.com>
Las Vegas SUN
WASHINGTON -- Nevada's congressional delegation wants another investigation into the alleged conflict of interest of the Energy Department's former attorneys for the Yucca Mountain project.
This time the delegation wants the State Bar of Nevada to investigate.
Chicago-based law firm Winston & Strawn had conflicts of interest that could have disqualified the firm from a $16.5 million Yucca Mountain nuclear waste storage project, but there was not enough evidence from the department to show how it determined its eligibility to make a final ruling on the case, according to an Oct. 28 decision by the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.
LeBoeuf, Lamb, Green and MacRae, a rival law firm that had bid and lost the contract, sued the Energy Department over the contract award and the conflict of interest.
Because of the appeals court ruling, the U.S. District Court now will need to determine if or how the department ruled out the law firm's previous work for a contractor on the project and for the Nuclear Energy Institute, the nuclear lobbying group that supports the site, before it granted the contract.
But the appeals court said also the district court "shall" address whether awarding the contract to Winston violated Nevada's Code of Professional Responsibility, as set out in the Energy Department's own guidelines for selecting the firm.
The delegation sent the entire docket of the LeBoeuf court case to the Nevada State Bar Thursday, saying the court and the department's inspector general's conclusions on apparent conflicts-of-interest need examination.
"These infractions have the potential to threaten the safety of all Nevadans and have seriously tainted the veracity of DOE's Yucca license application," said Nevada Sens. Harry Reid, a Democrat, and John Ensign, a Republican, along with Republican House members Jon Porter and Jim Gibbons and Democrat Shelley Berkley.
They also included affidavits from legal ethicists Geoffrey Hazard and former Nevada Supreme Court Justice Charles Springer that each make similar claims that Winston violated state legal rules.
They want the Nevada State Bar to review the law firm's work for the department and "take immedicate disciplinary actions against the law firm" if needed.
A Reid aide said the relevancy of the state bar's rules have been an issue from the start of this case. The appeals court decision opened the door for a closer examination of its relevancy and delegation's letter aims to push it along.
"Winston & Strawn were conflicted from the start," said Berkley said. "They are in bed with the nuclear industry, and that's not the type of law firms you want to work with the Department of Energy."
She said the firm did not disclose its other ties to the nuclear industry when applying for the contract.
"There is absolutely no excuse for the omission," Berkley said.
Allen Kimbrough, the bar's executive director, said he has not seen the letter yet so he could not comment on anything.
In October 2001, Berkley sent a letter to the District of Columbia Bar, also calling for an investigation based on the same conflict of interest charges.
The letter came after the Sun uncovered the firm had been a lobbyist for NEI.
A Berkley spokesman did not know yet if she or the delegation would send another letter to the D.C. Bar. Action by that bar would hold stronger consequences for the law firm, he said.
Berkley said a disqualification by the bar would force the department to find legal counsel "that's appropriate."
It could also lead to a disqualification of the two years of work the firm spent preparing the department's application for a Nuclear Regulatory Commission license, she said.
The department insists it will meet its December 2004 submission deadline.
Winston and Strawn withdrew as counsel in November 2001 although has not admitted any conflict existed. The project has been without a lawyer sine and the department for months would also not confirm if it has selected a new law firm to pick up work where Winston left off
If a judge finds that the Energy Department didn't consider the potential conflicts with the law firm, it could award the contract to another law firm and all of Winston's work may need to be reviewed, delaying the project.
Since the ruling on Oct. 28, the department has 45 days to ask that the court rehear the case and 90 days to file with the Supreme Court. After the 45 days the court will send the case back to the District Court in Washington to be heard and a court date could be set anytime after that. The department could not be reached to determine if it will appeal the case or to comment on the delegation letter. The NEI had no comment on the letter since anyone can file a complaint against a law firm, a spokesman said.
---------------------------
Las Vegas SUN
November 14, 2003
NRC to review Yucca data during close-door meetings
By Mary Manning
<manning@lasvegassun.com>
Las Vegas SUN
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is beginning a technical review of Energy Department information gathered on a proposed Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository, but state and county officials and the public aren't invited to the review.
Nevada and Clark County officials have protested the closed-door meetings, set for next week starting Monday at an undisclosed location.
The NRC staff will begin to look at the volumes of technical information gathered in the past 20 years at Yucca Mountain in case the Department of Energy submits a license for building a repository in December 2004, Thomas Matula, a NRC senior engineer, said in a Nov. 4 memorandum.
The NRC does not have time to revise its guidelines for public participation now, but may review them in the future, Matula said. A decision on any changes allowing observers into the meetings could be issued in early 2004, he said.
Steve Frishman, technical adviser for the Nevada Agency on Nuclear Projects, said that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission is ignoring its own guidelines set in 1993 by shutting observers out of the review.
"It looks as if, first of all, they are ignoring the standard of openness," Frishman said Thursday.
Although the NRC is doing nothing illegal, Frishman said, closing the technical review makes people less confident in the process.
"It borders on malfeasance," Frishman told Matula and others in Las Vegas on Thursday.
The Clark County Nuclear Waste Division also protested the closed-door meetings.
---------------------------
Las Vegas SUN
November 13, 2003
Nevada again denies water rights for federal nuclear dump
By Ken Ritter
Associated Press
LAS VEGAS (AP) - Nevada is again denying water rights to Yucca Mountain, the site the federal government plans for a national nuclear waste dump.
"The building of a nuclear waste repository is not a beneficial use," state Engineer Hugh Ricci said Thursday of his decision to deny permanent groundwater rights to the Energy Department.
Ricci's ruling, dated Nov. 7, has no immediate effect because a court order currently allows enough water for maintenance and scientific activities at the site 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas.
Ricci cited "overwhelming opposition in Nevada" to the Energy Department plan and called the Yucca Mountain repository "detrimental to the public interest."
The federal government can challenge Ricci's ruling, although Energy Department spokesman Allen Benson said Thursday in Las Vegas that no decision had been made.
"It's under review," Benson said.
The state and federal government have been battling since Ricci's predecessor denied water rights to the site in 2000 citing "public interest."
A federal judge in Las Vegas got lawyers for the state and federal governments to agree in December to allow pumping a limited amount of water from underground aquifers to refill storage tanks and serve restrooms and emergencies at Yucca Mountain.
That interim agreement does not provide enough water to build, open and operate the repository.
Water is just one issue unresolved since Congress and the Bush administration picked Yucca Mountain in July 2002 as the place to entomb the nation's commercial, industrial and military nuclear waste.
Nevada Nuclear Projects Agency chief Bob Loux noted Thursday that under the federal judge's order, Ricci's decision can't be challenged until the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit decides other lawsuits the state has filed against the Yucca Mountain project.
The state is challenging site selection standards, Environmental Protection Agency radioactivity standards and Nuclear Regulatory Commission rules for licensing the dump.
One case also challenges the constitutionality of forcing one state to accept the burden of other states' radioactive waste.
Oral arguments in those cases are scheduled for January.
The Energy Department plans by the end of 2004 to submit an application to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to open the repository in 2010.
---------------------------
Nevada Appeal
November 14, 2003
Yucca permit rejected again
Geoff dornan
Nevada's state engineer has again rejected the federal government's application for water permits to build the Yucca Mountain high-level nuclear waste dump.
Former State Engineer Mike Turnipseed denied the applications for a total of 430 acre feet of water a year in February 2000, saying the applications were not in the public interest under a state law specifically making it unlawful to store high-level nuclear water in Nevada.
A federal district court in Las Vegas ruled the state engineer abused his discretion in relying on the law because it amounted to a veto of the water application process. The judge said neither the federal government nor the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals had preempted Nevada's existing water law and directed the state to follow those statutes in ruling on the application.
He also said "mere statements and opinions by state officials will not suffice" as evidence.
State Engineer Hugh Ricci held additional hearings on the application and ruled this week that water in Nevada can only be appropriated for a "beneficial use."
He ruled there is "overwhelming opposition" to the Yucca Mountain project and cited the governor's opposition as well as the Legislative resolutions opposing the dump.
Ricci also made it clear that, contrary to what the federal court said, he believes it is up to the governor and Legislature to decide what is in the public's interest in Nevada.
"The people of the state of Nevada have spoken through their Legislature and governor that it is not in the public interest of the citizens of Nevada to use the water that belongs to that public for a purpose which is so adamantly opposed by the public," he said.
He said the opposition is based on the Department of Energy's "bad science, bad law and bad public policy." And he pointed out that even the Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board "found there was little doubt that the science could not presently support the suitability of the Yucca Mountain site."
Marta Adams, deputy attorney general defending the state's case, said the engineer's ruling is "certainly consistent with our view of what the public interest is."
Bob Loux, director of the Agency for Nuclear Projects, said he believes Ricci reached the correct conclusion.
"He arrived at that conclusion based primarily on the governor's executive powers and those of the Legislature in their public capacity," Loux said.
The Department of Energy needs the water to continue work preparing the Yucca Mountain site to receive 77,000 tons of radioactive waste. President George Bush approved Yucca Mountain almost immediately after receiving the recommendation, despite promises during his campaign that he would only do so after making sure the recommendation was based on "sound science."
Adams and Loux both said they expect the Department of Energy to appeal to federal district court but that the appeal would be put on hold while the Appeals Court in Washington, D.C., takes up arguments on the state's constitutional challenge of the decision to force the dump on Nevada.
Adams said hearings are scheduled in January on the state's constitutional challenge -- framing the issue as a violation of state's rights - and its challenge to how Department of Energy handled the entire process - changing its own rules repeatedly to make the site meet requirements despite the scientific evidence.
"The reality is the site is completely unsafe and DOE has not been able comply with its own rules basically since day one," she said.
Yucca Mountain is located 75 miles north of Las Vegas.
---------------------------
Pahrump Valley Times
November 14, 2003
COMMISSION PREVIEW
YMP issues top agenda
By Mark Waite
PVT
A Nye County resolution opposing the two proposed rail routes from the Interstate 15 corridor to Yucca Mountain through Pahrump and Las Vegas has been put on the Nye County Commission agenda for the 8:30 a.m. Tuesday meeting at the Pahrump Community Center.
The two rail routes are known as the Jean route, which would pass through Pahrump Valley, and the Valley Modified Route. It is one of three items concerning Yucca Mountain that have been placed on the agenda by Commissioner Candice Trummell.
Another item would be a resolution clarifying the county's stance on Yucca Mountain that would declare the county's intent to constructively engage with the Department of Energy on the licensing. The other item would direct the Nye County Department of Natural Resources and Federal Facilities to keep county officials informed of any meetings on Yucca Mountain 10 business days in advance and post notices according to the Nevada Open Meeting Law.
Public petitioner David Greber placed an item requesting the county change its position and declare total opposition to the construction of the Yucca Mountain repository.
Bradshaw has the 2004 Nye County Yucca Mountain oversight work plan up for approval before submitting it to the energy department.
Other items up for discussion and possible action:
• Contracts are up for approval involving consultants Don Watson and Jim Williams on a destination county transportation assessment.
• Nye County school officials are expected to request funding for graphing calculators for students in higher-level math courses and overhead calculators for the teachers.
• Commissioners will consider a policy requiring a one-year waiting period after a request is denied at a board meeting, unless there's been a substantial change in the circumstances.
• Budget Director Charlie Rodewald has requested reconsideration of the payment of over $25,000 in fees to Nevada Legal Services Inc.
• Commissioners might appoint a member to the Pahrump Regional Planning Commission to replace Pam Livingston.
• A $12,500 agreement with Chuck Nozicka and Joseph Donaldson to draft an Amargosa River Adaptive Management Plan is up for approval.
• Commissioners will consider establishing a position of Nye County Information Officer.
• Commissioner Patricia Cox could be appointed a liaison to the new Nye County Federal Impacts Advisory Board under another item.
• Commissioners will consider whether to issue a request for proposals for a commission agent to monitor major construction projects.
• Reports are due on a public meeting over the proposed landfill site and on the establishment of a health department or district.
---------------------------
Pahrump Valley Times
November 14, 2003
Locals protest sludge
By Mark Waite
PVT
AMARGOSA VALLEY - Local residents claimed Funeral Mountain Ranch violated federal regulations in applying bio-solids, or sludge, to alfalfa fields, during a Nevada Division of Environmental Protection hearing Wednesday.
The agency scheduled a hearing on an application by the Funeral Mountain Ranch to increase the rate of application of the treated sewage sludge from 100 cubic yards per day to 300 cubic yards, or eight truckloads.
The hearing notice stated the division administrator "Has determined that there is sufficient public interest in this draft permit to warrant a public hearing." That turned out to be an understatement as 75 local residents gathered at the Amargosa Valley Community Center.
Bruce Holmgren, staff engineer for the division's Bureau of Water Pollution Control, said Nevada has more stringent regulations than the EPA requires for the sludge, which is imported from the Orange County Sanitation District. Among the regulations, the sludge must be tilled into the soil within six hours of delivery, he said.
The EPA has rules of its own, Holmgren said, rules some residents said were violated: It must be applied more than three feet from groundwater, more than 100 feet from a road, more than 600 feet from a residence, not be applied to snowy or frozen fields and cannot affect endangered species.
"At the Sept. 25, 2003 Amargosa Valley Town Advisory Board meeting Mr. Bill DeWitt, the landowner, admitted that sewage sludge remained on the land overnight on more than one occasion," resident John Bosta claimed.
Bosta also said a clause in the permit that there shall be no objectionable odors had been violated. He said trucks have spilled the sludge on their way to the ranch.
Shiela Rau said the decision to issue the permit was made without a site visit, which would've revealed not only that the sludge was being applied near Forty Mile Wash, but also on farmland with multiple, unsealed irrigation wells. She alleged the Funeral Mountain Ranch violated a rule banning application within 600 feet of a residence, as the ranch owners allowed people to move into a double wide trailer less than 100 feet from a treated field.
Registered Nurse Christie Terraneo said, "Orange County Sanitation Department has had a stormy history dumping sludge. They have been stopped in Arizona and California." She said 14 counties now have ordinances prohibiting land application of sludge, recognizing the pathogens that may be present.
"It does not require a large quantity of any pathogen to make us ill. In some cases it can take only one microscopic particle to make an individual sick," Terraneo said. But she added, "A study conducted by the National Academies of Science, National Research Council concluded that there is a serious lack of health related information."
Local resident Genne Nelson, a geologist for the Nye County Early Warning Drilling Program, said studies of Yucca Mountain have shown with low rainfall and extremely high evaporation rates, it's likely only a small percentage of precipitation will trickle through the alluvium to reach groundwater.
But Nelson said contaminants deposited on one field at Funeral Mountain Ranch could enter the groundwater in about 28 years, based on percolation rates. She said fault zones could increase percolation rates in the valley, adding the exact location of many faults is not known.
"I used to get home from work and sit outside and relax. This is no longer possible," said resident Linda Bromell, who said she lived within spitting distance of the ranch. "When you're outside and you're swatting flies off your barbecue, could you feel comfortable about what you're eating?"
Pat Pierri talked about bad experiences farmers had with using sludge as fertilizer in Sparta, Mo., Lynden, Wash., and North Clarendon, Vt. She said Sparta dairy farmer Ed Rollers, after he began having problems with cows dying in 1990, conducted scientific tests. "We found lots of heavy metal contaminants," she quoted Rollers as saying.
"I had no idea this would raise such a firestorm in the community. We started on this about two years ago," ranch owner Bill DeWitt said in his opening remarks.
DeWitt said he originally had a deal with the Ponderosa Dairy to use cow manure for fertilizer, but Ponderosa had enough land to dispose of it on site. He talked about how farming had been a marginal business in Amargosa Valley following a recent rate increase by Valley Electric Association.
DeWitt said in two and a half years he could have all eight fields fertilized with the sludge, or if he could apply eight truckloads a day, that could be reduced to a year and nine months. The sludge has already been cooked for more than 20 days at over 100 degrees before delivery, killing contaminants, he said.
"We should work on real science and what the truth is and not turn this into a Salem witch hunt," DeWitt said.
Chris Marks, with Solid Solutions, said he can think of 35 farmers and their families who have taken larger quantities of the sludge and in seven years hasn't seen any of them get sick. He said his company is applying the sludge in the morning, when there's less chance of airborne odors spreading.
Layne Baroldi, legal and regulatory affairs liaison with the Orange County Sanitation District, said the district goes above and beyond federal standards. Baroldi said the effluent of the Orange County Sanitation District sewage plants actually meets drinking water standards.
---------------------------
Las Vegas SUN
November 14, 2003
Opposition to USA Patriot Act swells in Nevada
By Ken Ritter
Associated Press
LAS VEGAS (AP) - Rebecca Foster couldn't believe it when a bank cited the USA Patriot Act and asked her and fellow homeowners association board members for their Social Security and driver's license numbers and dates of birth.
"They said they had to check us against a terrorist list," said Foster, a grandmother who heads a five-member board that oversees a Las Vegas community. "That seemed kind of preposterous. None of us are terrorists."
A week earlier, the FBI in Las Vegas acknowledged agents used Patriot Act authorization instead of the grand jury to investigate a striptease club owner and several elected officials.
The American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada calls both uses excessive and warns that Congress in its haste to give the Bush administration tools to fight terror after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks handed over cherished American rights.
Calls for repeal of the act have found fertile ground Nevada - an old cowboy state where state vs. federal issues are still fought on riverbeds, at nuclear sites and in the courts.
A broad spectrum including liberals, conservatives, Libertarians, gay and Hispanic activists rallied in three corners of the state this week, calling for Nevada to join Alaska, Hawaii and Vermont and 210 U.S. communities that have passed resolutions urging curbs on the Patriot Act.
"The fact that this issue crosses the political spectrum really lends credibility to the concern," said Janine Hansen of Sparks, president of the conservative Nevada Eagle Forum.
A Justice Department official denied the Patriot Act infringes on Constitutional rights and called the act necessary to fight terrorism.
"It protects the lives and liberties of Americans, rather than detracting from them," said spokeswoman Monica Goodling from Washington, D.C. "It is simply an update of the laws that was needed to help close gaping loopholes in our ability to fight modern-day terror."
Officially called the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act, it granted the government broad powers for searches, wiretaps and electronic and computer eavesdropping. Authorities can search people's homes and delay notifying them and track multiple phones with "roving wiretaps."
"The act was intended to be used against terrorists, and we're using it against American citizens without constitutional protections," said Lana Noland of Elko.
A former Libertarian Party chairwoman, Noland has been active in a long-running dispute with the U.S. Forest Service over jurisdiction of a remote gravel road running along the Jarbidge River. On Thursday, she joined one of three Nevada rallies against the Patriot Act.
"Do you really want somebody looking through your financial records so you can serve on a homeowners association board?" she asked. "I don't think so."
Natsu Taylor Saito, a professor of law at Georgia State University in Atlanta and author of a recent Oregon Law Review article about uses of the Patriot Act, said she expects that as elements of the measure touch more people, more people will oppose it.
"What we see in the Patriot Act is an attempt to legalize and make more easily available to intelligence agencies tools that were used illegally and unconstitutionally to fight attempts to bring about social and political change," Saito said.
"I think people are seeing enough instances in which lawful and constitutionally protected activities are being targeted to realize they don't want this unbridled power given to law enforcement agencies," she said.
Peggy Maze Johnson of Las Vegas heads Citizen Alert, a statewide activist organization that added opposition to the Patriot Act to its battle to stop the federal government from building a national nuclear waste dump in the southern Nevada desert.
"We've had to fight the government for 28 years over the Nevada Test Site and Yucca Mountain," Johnson said.
"And I don't want to be in their system any more than I already am," Johnson said.
The Justice Department's Goodling said law enforcers have a responsibility to use laws that Congress provides to fight crime.
"Americans expect us to use every legal tool available to do our jobs in enforcing the law," she said.
But in recent weeks, two members of Nevada's five-person congressional delegation expressed concern that the government might be going too far.
After the FBI acknowledged using the Patriot Act in the political corruption case, Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., sent a letter asking Attorney General John Ashcroft for an explanation.
Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., also expressed second-thoughts about approving the measure in late 2001.
"There are concerns that misuse of the Patriot Act could lead to a widespread invasion of privacy," Reid said in a statement. "We have to be tough on terrorists, but we also have to guard the privacy of American citizens."
Gary Peck, executive director of the ACLU in Las Vegas, called the act "a seamless web of arcane provisions that fit together in ways that are still unclear to many of us."
"Last week, we found out how they could easily dig deeply into all of your private financial records without any meaningful checks, and without you knowing it," he said. "We're just now beginning to grasp how far-reaching the Patriot Act's tentacles are, and how profound its implications are for ordinary people who have nothing to do with terrorism."
---
On the Net: Nevada Campaign to Defeat the Patriot Act: http://www.ncdpa.org
---------------------------
Washington Times
November 14, 2003
Post-Cold War necessities
Editorial/Op-Ed
House and Senate negotiators recently resolved their differences over the 2004 energy and water spending bill, and the resulting conference report now awaits final action in both chambers. Beyond the customary pork-barrel water projects, the legislation also funds important post-Cold War nuclear-weapons programs intended to deflect rogue nations from coming into possession of weapons of mass destruction.
On balance, the final product represents a step forward. But it is not as big a step as is needed. Compromises were necessary, largely because the House's chief negotiator, Rep. David Hobson of Ohio, balked at fully supporting national-security policies embraced by President Bush and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. On the other hand, Mr. Hobson achieved an important, constructive victory by obtaining a major funding increase for the creation of a secure national nuclear-waste depository at Nevada's Yucca Mountain.
Mr. Bush requested, and the Senate initially approved, $15 million to study the development of small, tactical, earth-penetrating nuclear weapons capable of destroying deeply buried, hardened WMD storage sites while limiting above-ground damage. The conference committee provided $7.5 million in funding for the project.
Unlike the House version that included no funding, the final bill also provides $6 million to study "advanced weapons concepts," which could include very-low-yield nuclear weapons ranging from 5 kilotons to 0.1 kiloton of TNT. Researching low-yield weapons had been prohibited since 1994, but the conference committee dealing with the defense authorization bill recently repealed that prohibition.
Such nuclear devices might prove valuable in destroying nuclear-, biological- and chemical-weapons sites, while, at the same time, vastly limiting collateral damage. The Pentagon's current Cold War nuclear arsenal contains powerful weapons designed to deter an attack by a superpower of the Soviet Union's caliber. Their use against much smaller states, such as North Korea and Iran, would be so destructive that the United States would be reluctant to use them. Because today's threats emerging from North Korea and Iran are much different from the those of the Cold War, deterrence must change to address them. Having smaller, mission-specific weapons in the arsenal might well serve as a greater deterrent against these rogue states than weapons that are unlikely to be used.
The fact that the United States has not tested a nuclear weapon since 1992 has not deterred India, Pakistan, North Korea and Iran from pursuing nuclear-weapons development. Today, it would take the United States about three years to prepare to conduct a nuclear test. The Bush administration sought to shorten that period to 18 months; in another compromise, the bill provides nearly $25 million to reduce the lead time to two years.
While not going as far as we would like, the compromise bill nonetheless takes some important steps in the right direction.
---------------------------
State of Nevada
Agency for Nuclear Projects
www.state.nv.us/nucwaste/
nwpo@nuc.state.nv.us
775-687-3744
---------------------------