Yucca Mountain News Clips - Thursday, October 21, 2004

Yucca Mountain News Clips
Thursday, October 21, 2004
---------------------------

Las Vegas SUN
October 21, 2004

Report: Waste to exceed Yucca's limit

Nuclear board extends power plants' licenses

By Suzanne Struglinski
<suzanne@lasvegassun.com>
Sun Washington Bureau

WASHINGTON -- A rise in nuclear power plant relicensing since 2002, when Congress approved a repository at Yucca Mountain, shows there will be thousands more tons of nuclear waste produced than the site can legally hold, a new report says.

The report, done by the Environmental Working Group Action Fund, argues that with new nuclear power production, the problem of nuclear waste won't go away, repeating an argument Nevada's congressional delegation and other critics of the site have used.

"The public never really gets the full story and is never really told what is going on," said Richard Wiles, senior vice president of the Environmental Working Group Action Fund. "They are not being told the truth about Yucca Mountain or nuclear waste in their communities."

He said the Energy Department claims Yucca Mountain, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas, will solve the waste problem, but as plants renew their licenses, that just means more waste will be generated on site. He said the real way to take care of the waste is to stop licensing plants.

"Then we'll know when the end is," he said.

Nuclear power is part of the administration's energy plan. The Energy Department and the industry point out that federal law already aims to rectify the problem.

"The law contemplated Congress would have to deal with this on an ongoing basis," said Steve Kraft, director of waste management at the Nuclear Energy Institute. "Things change. Congress will have ample time to evaluate it."

Under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act, the Energy Department can only store 70,000 metric tons at the repository, but has to go back to Congress between 2007 and 2010 to say what it plans to do with the rest of the waste. It can either expand storage at Yucca or decide to create a new site.

The Environmental Working Group Action Fund's report says said the Nuclear Regulatory Commission "quickly and quietly" started renewing more reactor licenses after Congress said the Yucca project could move forward.

The report, titled "X Marks the Spot," found that from March 2000 through June 2002 the Nuclear Regulatory Commission extended the licenses at five power plants, beginning with the Calvert Cliffs nuclear power plant in Maryland.

But from July 2002 through May 2004 the commission approved 10 similar license renewals. The report lists a state-by-state breakdown of plants with new licenses and how much more waste would be sent to Nevada.

"When approved and currently pending relicensing applications are considered together more than three times as many reactors were relicensed or applied for relicensing after the July 2002 vote, than before -- 34 versus 10," according to the report.

Nine power plants in seven states have renewals pending for 18 reactors. If those are renewed, they would generate 6,600 metric tons of spent fuel that would need to be stored at Yucca.

The group found that 26 reactors at 15 nuclear power plants have been relicensed since 2000. They will generate an additional 9,000 metric tons of nuclear waste during their 20-year extensions.

NRC spokesman David McIntyre said the commission issues multiple press releases when renewals are approved and nothing there is secret.

McIntyre said there is "no explicit or implied link" between Congress's approval of Yucca Mountain and the commission's approval of applications.

Congress voted to approve Yucca in July 2002. The first renewal after that was approved in March 2003, he said. All of the plants renewed after the vote also applied for their renewals well before the vote, he said. A renewal can take two years to complete in some cases.

Kraft said it is "purely serendipitous" that more renewals took place after the approval. He said the commission made a determination before the 2002 vote that waste disposal did not need to be included in a renewal application because a plan already existed for it.

Wiles said the finding confirmed his belief that the Yucca project is a "nuclear power expansion plan in disguise."

But Kraft called that claim "ridiculous."

"Yucca Mountain serves a lot of interests," he said. "Was Yucca Mountain a boost to the future of this industry? Yes, but Yucca Mountain would have been needed if this industry was going to stop. You would still need to dispose of it (nuclear waste)."

The report says that "virtually none of this newly generated waste can be shipped to Yucca Mountain without a formal, legal, expansion of the repository."

Kraft said nuclear power plants now hold about 46,000 tons of waste and have about 56,000 tons on site by the time Yucca is set to open in 2010. He said it would be 2030 before Yucca Mountain would reach the 70,000 metric ton capacity, but the bigger issue is how quickly the waste will be moved from the site to Nevada.

"One thing we know how to do is put it in geologic disposal. We owe it to future generations to do at least that," he said. "Although there is potential for future innovations we don't know about yet, but we can't bank on it."

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

Las Vegas Review-Journal
October 21, 2004
Report: Yucca Mountain to be at capacity before opening

License extensions results in more waste

By Keith Rogers
Review-Journal

More nuclear waste than the planned repository at Yucca Mountain can hold will pile up at reactor sites as the government continues to approve license extensions for power plants, an environmental research organization claimed in a study to be released today.

If a repository is built by 2010 in the mountain, 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas, its 77,000-ton capacity will be filled by existing spent fuel awaiting shipment. That's not counting another 9,900 tons that will have accumulated in the meantime from license extensions, according to the study by the Environmental Working Group.

"A more realistic estimate based on the 20-year average license extensions being granted, means that over 18,000 more metric tons (19,800 tons) of nuclear waste will cross the country to Nevada for disposal than estimated," the group's report states, referring to estimates by the Department of Energy.

"To accommodate all this high-level nuclear waste, Yucca Mountain will have to be expanded, and getting it there, by whatever means, will take decades longer than even the government's longest predictions," according to the study.

The increased inventory of spent fuel stems from reactor license extensions that were "quickly and quietly approved" by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the group claims.

The group said nuclear power plant re-licensing doubled after Congress approved the Yucca Mountain repository in 2002. There are renewal applications pending for 18 more reactors.

That means there will be more waste to store at reactor sites or above-ground facilities and more risks involved with thousands of more waste shipments than DOE has calculated, said Richard Wiles, senior vice president of the nonprofit group.

"The risk compounds itself, and they're not being truthful with the public about what their real plans are for the waste," Wiles said.

Allen Benson, a spokesman for DOE's Office of Repository Development in Las Vegas, noted that between 2007 and 2010 the agency is required to report to Congress on the need for additional disposal capacity.

In September 2002, two months after Congress approved the repository, DOE officials acknowledged there will be more high-level waste than space for it in Yucca Mountain as liquid waste in tanks at nuclear weapons facilities is converted into glass logs. Agency spokesman Joe Davis said at the time that Congress would have to decide on expanding the repository, if it's built, or finding a site for a second one.

DOE figures show that once the conversion task is completed in 2035, only 8,275 glass logs out of 23,475 will fit in the repository. The cost of converting liquid waste into glass logs will be $9 billion more than the repository's $58 billion price tag.

Wiles said the solution to the capacity dilemma is to stop making more waste and explore on-site storage at reactors as compared to risks involved with hauling it to Yucca Mountain.

"We're not saying shut down all the reactors today because we're too dependent on them as an energy source," he said.

Reliance on nuclear power can be reduced through more efficient use of electrical power and through environmentally sound operation of coal and natural gas plants until alternative energy sources are developed, he said.

The DOE contends that for security reasons it's better to put all the waste at a single location rather than have it scattered across the country.

Critics, including Nevada's delegation, have said that logic is flawed because some amount of spent fuel always will be at reactor sites as they continue to operate.

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

YubaNet
October 21, 2004

Wave of Nuclear Plant Relicensing

Yucca Mountain Approval Followed by Rapid Extension of Reactor Licenses

By: Environmental Working Group Action Fund

WASHINGTON — A new analysis of Department of Energy (DOE) figures shows that in the wake of the 2002 Senate vote to approve the Yucca Mountain dumpsite, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission quickly and quietly approved license extensions at nuclear reactors nationwide.

The EWG Action Fund analysis shows that the rate of nuclear power plant relicensing doubled after Congress approved the nuclear waste dumpsite in Yucca Mountain. Currently there are renewal applications pending for 18 more reactors. No application to date has been denied, making it a virtual certainty that these pending applications will be approved.

These plants will produce thousands of tons more waste, ensuring large or larger stockpiles near local power plants, much of which - after cooling on-site for decades - will probably come to Nevada to the Yucca Mountain dumpsite.

According to EWG Action Fund, if Yucca Mountain opens for storage on the day it is proposed to, its storage space will be fully claimed. Shortly thereafter, an additional 9,000 tons of nuclear waste will be waiting to come to Yucca and even more waste will sit at plants around the country. Therefore, Congress must either expand Yucca Mountain from its very first day of operation or allow nuclear waste to continue to pile up at 79 sites in 35 states.

"This analysis confirms what we suspected, but what the public was never told, that the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste site is really a nuclear expansion plan in disguise," said Richard Wiles of EWG Action Fund.

Recent court decisions will require reconsideration of radiation containment standards at Yucca Mountain. Congress is likely to revisit this issue in response to the judicial action.

EWG Action Fund's interactive website, available at www.ewg.org, lists each reactor around the country that has been or will soon be relicensed and for how long, along with how many tons of waste it will generate while in continued operation. Visitors to the site can see how much waste that reactor is permitted to send to Yucca, and how much will be left on site. Shipping the extra waste to Yucca will take either 6,000 more truck shipments or 1,050 train shipments through communities in Nevada.

Communities near each of the power plants were subjected to an aggressive public relations campaign by the nuclear industry and the Department of Energy that pushed the idea that the Yucca Mountain dumpsite would get rid of their waste. The relicensing wave means that most of these communities will see large or larger amounts of waste sitting on site for decades before being shipped to Nevada.

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

Las Vegas Review-Journal
October 21, 2004

BATTLEGROUND STATE: Poll says Bush has big lead

October survey reveals 10-point spread over Kerry

By Erin Neff
Review-Journal

The presidential race that has been neck-and-neck in Nevada for several months has opened up with President Bush enjoying a 10-point lead over John Kerry, according to a new statewide poll of likely voters.

Bush leads Kerry 52 percent to 42 percent, according to the poll taken for the Review-Journal and reviewjournal.com from Oct. 14 through Oct. 16. A similar poll in September gave Bush a 50 percent to 45 percent lead.

Independent candidate Ralph Nader gets 1 percent of the vote, and 4 percent are undecided.

The statewide poll of 625 voters by Washington, D.C.-based Mason-Dixon Polling & Research Inc. has a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percentage points.

Pollster Larry Harris said Bush appears to have a "comfortable lead" in Nevada not only because he holds 86 percent of his base, but he is pulling support from nearly 20 percent of Democrats.

The poll asked respondents which issue would be most influential in their election decision for federal offices.

Homeland security and the war on terrorism topped the list with 23 percent, followed by the war in Iraq at 17 percent.

Moral issues and family values finished third at 12 percent; 6 percent cited that as a top concern in last month's poll.

The economy as an issue dropped substantially from the September poll, coming in at 11 percent compared with its previous ranking at 16 percent.

"When you look at issues important to voters, these are the issues that play well for Bush," Harris said. "Given the fact that economic issues only pop at 11 percent, Kerry's message on the economy is just not resonating in Nevada."

Harris was unsure how Bush widened his lead in the month between polls after observers believed Kerry won the round of debates that took place from Sept. 30 to Oct. 13.

Ninety percent of those polled said they watched the debates, but 4 percent said the debates changed their mind.

"Your state is just a Republican-leaning state," Harris said.

The Kerry campaign in Nevada said the poll is out of line with others conducted in the state around the same time.

"Our last tracking poll last week had us down 3 points," Kerry spokesman Sean Smith said. "When you look at what's happening in Clark County with Democratic voter turnout, we believe that we're outworking them, and we know that we're outvoting them."

Bush spokeswoman Tracey Schmitt said she was particularly pleased with Bush's gain in Clark County.

In the September poll, county voters were going for Kerry 51 percent to 44 percent. The new poll has Bush up 48 to 47 percent in Clark County.

"We believe the state will go for Bush, but we still think it's a close race," Schmitt said. "What I think this poll demonstrates is that John Kerry's agenda is at odds with the state's concerns."

Hal Rothman, chairman of the history department at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, said he thought the race was going to come down to about 3,000 votes statewide.

"Watching voting trends and registration trends, I don't know who you polled," Rothman said. "A poll that says there's a 10-point lead for Bush or for Kerry at this point would not represent the reality of what's happening."

Kerry pollster Mark Mellman said he was surprised at the results because other polls he has seen showed the race much closer.

"I'm not going to say the poll is flawed because I don't know all the methodology, but these results are widely out of sync with every other poll that's been done in the state," Mellman said.

He suggested that if Kerry were down 10 points, the candidate would not be spending as much time courting the state in visits and television ad buys.

Kerry will campaign Friday in Reno and plans a stop next week in Las Vegas.

"The numbers are what they are," said Brad Coker, Mason Dixon's managing partner. "Nevada's been leaning Republican for several years, and I don't know why there's any reason Nevada should be going for Kerry."

Three percent of voters said the proposed nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain will be the most influential issue in their vote for federal offices.

Democrats have said Yucca Mountain is an issue that plays for them.

The closest Kerry has been to Bush in Nevada in the Mason-Dixon polls was in July, when the results showed Bush and Kerry in a statistical dead heat at 46 percent to 43 percent, respectively. The largest lead for Bush came in a March poll by Mason-Dixon. It showed Bush up 49 to 38 percent.

The recent poll was conducted statewide, with 385 interviews in Clark County, 130 interviews in Washoe County and 110 interviews in rural Nevada.

Rothman said the sample used does not accurately reflect the state's voting population. Roughly 70 percent of voters statewide are in Clark County. The Clark County sample polled is at 62 percent.

"You polled one in six in the cow counties," Rothman said. "That can't be right."

The poll broke evenly between the parties, with 43 percent of respondents identifying themselves as Republicans and 43 percent as Democrats.

A poll for the Las Vegas Sun; KLAS-TV, Channel 8; and KNPR public radio in late September showed Bush with a 5-point lead over Kerry, 47 to 42 percent.

Last week, a Zogby poll of Nevada voters had Kerry with a 1-point lead.

An average of nonpartisan polls taken in Nevada from Sept. 20 to Oct. 18, and reported by Real Clear Politics, showed Bush with a 5.5-point lead.

Sig Rogich, a Republican consultant in Nevada and a friend of President George H.W. Bush, said he did not think the race was at 10 points.

"I find those numbers suspect," Rogich said. "As much as I'd like to have those numbers, everything I can see is that it's a 4-point race, with Bush up 4."

Rogich said out-of-state pollsters need to understand the nuances of Nevada voters, including the frequency with which voters in the regions of the state vote.

"I do believe that Bush bottomed out a week or 10 days ago and that we're beginning to see upswings now," Rogich said. "I always felt that this was his state to lose, but it's definitely closer to four."

David Damore, a political science professor at UNLV, said he thinks the race is much closer than 10 points and suggests the pollsters "just got a sample that's out there."

"I think the race is in the margin of error," Damore said. "I'd chalk it up to an irregular sample."

The Mason-Dixon poll of battleground states last week showed Kerry closing in on Bush in Ohio, New Hampshire and Missouri, compared with polling in September.

West Virginia and Nevada are the only states won by Bush in 2000 in which Bush has increased his lead from the company's September poll. Bush is now up five points in West Virginia, compared with a 1-point advantage in the Mountaineer state in September.

The company plans to release data today from seven "blue" states, those that went for Al Gore in 2000.

The Nevada poll found that Bush is recognized favorably by 53 percent of Nevadans, compared with 37 percent unfavorable opinions and 10 percent neutral.

Kerry is recognized favorably by 38 percent, compared with a 46 percent unfavorable rating, 15 percent neutral and 1 percent who did not recognize him.

Michael Green, a history professor at the Community College of Southern Nevada, said he did not know what to make of any of the polls in Nevada.

"I know the Democrats have had better luck registering people," Green said. "I also know new registrants don't show up on polls of likely voters. But if you're asking me, what it might mean, call me back on Nov. 3."

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

Nevada Appeal
October 21, 2004

Kerry sets Nevada hopes on Yucca discontent

Associated Press

A high-level nuclear waste site 90 miles outside Las Vegas may be Sen. John Kerry's main hope for beating President Bush in Nevada.

The economy may not be as potent an issue as elsewhere, not with 90,000 more jobs than when Bush took office. But a weak economy in other states reduces tourism, the key to Las Vegas' health.

The state's demographics could help Kerry, because the Democratic-leaning Hispanic population is booming. But the president's team believes Bush can cut into Kerry's margins among Hispanics, and make up for any lost ground in the growing GOP-leaning suburbs around Las Vegas.

Nevada is fighting the Bush administration over a decision to put a big nuclear waste site at Yucca Mountain outside Las Vegas. Kerry has voted against it. Bush supports it. Kerry says Bush's stance broke a 2000 campaign promise; Bush's campaign says the president is following scientists' best advice.

Despite the controversial nature of the site, polls suggest that it's not the top issue for Nevada voters. Homeland security and the war on terror rank higher, and those are Bush's political strengths. But Kerry's team says his ratings in Nevada spike every time he visits the state and makes an issue of the dump. They plan to increase their criticism of Bush's position, using it to argue more broadly that Bush's word can't be trusted.

Bush beat Democrat Al Gore in Nevada by 4 percentage points in 2000. Polls show the race this year is close, with Bush clinging to a slender lead in some surveys.

The state is part of the so-called cactus caucus, along with Arizona, Colorado and New Mexico. Arizona is leaning Bush while Colorado (won by Bush in 2000) and New Mexico (won by Gore) are up for grabs.

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

MSNBC
October 20, 2004

Nevada -- Can Kerry beat the odds?

By Seth Stevenson

A Vegas casino table can feel like a focus group. When I sat down to play $5 blackjack at the Monte Carlo on the Las Vegas Strip, I found myself surrounded by a well-dressed guy from Massachusetts, a drug counselor from somewhere in the Midwest, a schoolteacher from Phoenix, and an extremely drunk dude from Denver. Wow, I thought, I'd love to know how these people will be voting. (I also thought: Should I double down here with the dealer showing a nine? And will Slate let me expense my extensive gambling losses?)

Sadly, it's taboo to talk politics at the tables. The one person willing to go there was the dealer. When she ID'd a guy who turned out to be old enough to play, she said that he'd passed "the global test." Then, after not getting a sufficient response, she mumbled that she wished "someone like Goldwater" were running this year.

As this painstaking research might suggest, Nevada leans conservative. It's gone Republican in every presidential vote since 1968, except for two Clinton wins eked out with a huge hand from Ross Perot. There's an obvious libertarian streak here and a surprising number of religious conservatives. (Mormons abound.) For Kerry to take the state, he'll have to steal it from Bush's grasp.

Still, polls this year have run tight. To suss out which factors might swing the state, I spoke with several locals—including a former governor, a professional poker player, and the guy who created the "What happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas" ad campaign. Some possible election-deciding phenomena:

The Two Nevadas

There are essentially two Nevadas. The first is Clark County—Las Vegas and its environs. Voters here skew Democratic, with a large minority population and a heavily urban populace. The second Nevada includes everything but Vegas—Reno (the only other population center), empty ranchland, and even emptier government land (with nuclear test sites, windswept military bases, and the infamous "Area 51"). These voters are solidly conservative.

Given this divide, the recipe for a Bush victory is clear: Come out of the hayseed counties ahead by 60,000 to 70,000 votes and hope Kerry can't make up the difference in and around Vegas. But if one variable might throw this GOP game plan off track it is …

Yucca Mountain

Most issues in Nevada are the same as anywhere else: Iraq, the economy, and so forth. Then there's Yucca Mountain—the Nevada-specific issue.

Yucca has long been slated to serve as a repository for the nation's nuclear waste. As Slate's Chris Suellentrop has pointed out, Nevada is where we hide all our unmentionables: gambling, prostitution … toxic sludge. In this case, the waste would be buried inside the mountain. Since the mountain is only 90 miles from Las Vegas, most Nevadans are less than thrilled with this idea.

George W. Bush made noises, in his 2000 campaign, about never letting Yucca turn into a waste dump. Yet it seems to have become a near fait accompli on his watch. Kerry, meanwhile, in a case of laser-focused, state-specific pandering, has sworn he will not let Yucca go toxic.

It's not so clear that Kerry, as president, could or would carry out this promise. (It would mean sticking other states with the waste instead and would require some serious cooperation from Congress.) It's also not clear that Nevadans care all that much. There's significant Yucca Mountain Fatigue across the state, with candidates having hammered at this issue in every election cycle, and many residents are resigned by now to a bad outcome. Still, there are thousands of newcomers to the state who are not yet fatigued by the issue, and in a close race it might swing just enough votes to make a difference.

The New New Nevada

When I say there are thousands of newcomers, I'm not kidding. Nevada has been the country's fastest growing state for 17 years running. This trend makes life easy for real-estate agents but miserable for campaign workers. According to Billy Vasiliadis, the "What happens in Vegas stays in Vegas" ad guy (and a Democratic bigwig), you have to "re-win" the state every time. "It's not like, for example, the Cubans in Florida," he says. "There are no organized minority groups here, or seniors' groups, because the population is so transient. That makes it very hard to find and recruit voters."

Of Nevada's rapid growth last year, 79 percent came in Clark County. At first glance, this number would seem to aid Kerry's chances. Many of these arrivals were Latinos (coming for low-wage casino jobs) who can be expected to trend Democratic. (The massive Culinary Workers Union, which represents most casino workers, has fought hard to organize its members for Kerry.) But registering Latino voters has been tough. Casino employees work odd hours, so it's hard to find them at home, and Latinos whose households include illegal aliens tend to fear registration.

Meanwhile, the other big influx here has been that of retirees, who in Nevada trend conservative. They've retired here for lower taxes, and with no school-age children, they're loath to cough up money for government services that they could be spending at the slots.

Sneaky Ballot Initiatives

Democrats here have pushed a ballot initiative that raises Nevada's minimum wage. It's getting big support, particularly from casino workers. This should help Kerry. Why? Because the true goal of this initiative isn't to raise the minimum wage, but rather to motivate left-leaning voters to turn out on Election Day.

Hotshot Dems

Nevada's senior senator, Democrat Harry Reid, nearly lost his job in his 1998 re-election bid. So, Reid geared up for the fight of his life this November, bringing in a slew of hired-gun strategists. When the big fight never really materialized—Reid's expected opponent dropped out, and the GOP replacement faltered—all this imported talent stuck around and turned its sights on the presidential race, boosting party registration, and devising get-out-the-vote tactics.

Economic Outlier

For all these potential Kerry assets, there's one big Bush advantage: Kerry can't play the economy card here. While other swing states have been crushed by job losses, Nevada has done just fine, thank you. The tourist industry has recovered from 9/11, and work is plentiful. As a result, one of Bush's main vulnerabilities is a strength here.

So, who'll win? Were I a betting man, I'd bet on Bush. Default goes to the GOP here, and Kerry will need massive Clark County turnout to score an upset. But real hope still exists for Kerry.

In a nod to Nevada tradition, I'd hoped to offer some odds for this election. But while there are online odds posted for Florida (Bush is favored as I write this), and Ohio (Kerry at the moment), I can find no propositions regarding Nevada. Even the handicappers, it seems, deem this race too close to call.

Seth Stevenson is a frequent contributor to Slate.

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

Arizona Daily Sun
October 21, 2004

Yucca Mtn. tour underscores Flag challenge

By LARRY HENDRICKS

YUCCA MOUNTAIN, Nev. -- At the top, cold wind cuts to the bone. Creosote bush grabs defiantly to parched soils of a dozen different shades of brown. Desolation abounds in spartan splendor.

The nearly three dozen visitors from Coconino County stare in one direction Tuesday morning at the Nevada Test Site, where hundreds of atomic bombs have been detonated over the years. In another direction, they see a mountain range that shrouds Groom Lake, also known as Area 51, in mystery. Death Valley is beyond another mountain range to the southwest.

And 1,000 feet below them, through dense and sometimes porous volcanic rock called "tuff," a 5-mile tunnel runs through the mountain. They stand on the site proposed (but yet to be licensed to operate) as a repository of all high-level radioactive waste in the country.

Three Flagstaff elected officials are among the crowd atop Yucca Mountain. Based on what they've heard by staff under contract with the U.S. Department of Energy, they said the repository appears to be a done deal. What concerns them is not the safety of the repository itself, which has more than a decade of scientific study to its credit, but the fact that tons of the radioactive waste to be stored here -- tentatively scheduled to begin in 2010 -- will have to come through Coconino County and Flagstaff to get here.

Mayor Joe Donaldson took the trip for a better understanding of the repository. "I know enough now to take a solid position on it," he said, adding that he supports the site's completion.

"Doesn't it make sense to bring (high-level radioactive waste) to one location? It certainly does to me," Donaldson said. "There has to be some place for it."

According to information from DOE, nearly 50,000 tons of high-level radioactive waste sit in 131 locations in 39 states. All of that material is above ground and within 75 miles of more than 160 million citizens, posing vast environmental hazard and making the material potentially vulnerable to sabotage or theft. Yucca Mountain is an effort to put all of that radioactive waste in one spot, deep under ground.

If Yucca Mountain gets licensed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to be built and operate, tons of deadly radioactive waste will be transported by rail or by truck through Coconino County and Flagstaff.

Jim Driscoll, emergency services coordinator for Coconino County, said the trip was organized for the benefit of the county's Local Emergency Planning Committee as part of the federal Community Right-to-Know Act. The LEPC is responsible for developing local hazardous material plans, and the act requires that communities to be informed of all hazardous materials that go into and through a community -- including high-level radioactive waste.

The Flagstaff Fire Department has radiation response capability, Driscoll said. The county also has hazardous materials emergency response plans in place, to include radioactive waste. And radioactive waste of a much lower level than the waste proposed to be stored at Yucca Mountain already gets transported through the city on a regular basis to a low-level nuclear waste site near Carlsbad, N.M.

"Our main concern is transport, and the transport of those materials through Coconino County," Driscoll said. "(The Yucca trip) gives us the opportunity to see the safety measures for its storage."

Among the agencies that sent staff on the trip were the Coconino County Department of Health Services, Flagstaff Medical Center, Flagstaff Fire Department, Flagstaff Police Department, Coconino County Sheriff's Office, Williams Police Department and the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality.

Transportation safety is what concerns Donaldson and city councilmembers Karen Cooper and Kara Kelty, who also took the trip to Yucca Mountain. During the trip, Donaldson began planning with Driscoll on setting up a demonstration in the near future for city residents to see how high-level radioactive waste will be transported through the city.

Cooper said her next order of business on the issue is to get busy educating herself on who to lobby for railroad and highway safety and maintenance to ensure deadly loads like those going to Yucca Mountain make it to their destination.

Although transportation issues were addressed and information was made available by the DOE contractor (see related story), the focus of the tour was on the safety of the repository and how much money was spent on the project so far: in excess of $5 billion.

Kelty said the tour had a "propaganda feeling." Cooper characterized the tour as a "concerted selling effort."

Donaldson, Cooper and Kelty all said they were impressed with the amount of study and science that has gone into the project. The trip has increased their knowledge about the project and their ability to talk about the project with Flagstaff residents.

The tour began with a visit to the Yucca Mountain Science Center, located in downtown Las Vegas. The center contains volumes of literature about the site and has dozens of displays on how the site is supposed to work. The displays explain how nuclear reactors work, why Yucca Mountain is a good choice for a repository, how a repository would work -- and how radioactive materials would be transported to the repository.

Max Powell, with the company Bechtel, the contractor for DOE, acted as tour guide for the group.

"It's the most studied piece of real estate in the world," he said during the two-hour bus ride across the Nevada desert from Las Vegas.

That study has focused on storing, for at least 10,000 years, high-level radioactive waste, Powell said. That waste includes used nuclear fuel rods from civilian power plants and military vessels and material left over from making nuclear weapons.

In the early 1980s, Congress passed the Nuclear Waste Policy Act, which made the federal government responsible for the waste. To fund the creation of a national repository, citizens who used power from nuclear power plants were taxed on the electricity used, creating a surplus of more than $20 billion to find a site, conduct studies, build a repository, operate it until full, then monitor it. The military portion of the waste will be covered in the federal budget.

Currently, there is about 50,000 tons of solid radioactive waste slated to make the journey to a repository, Powell said. The Yucca Mountain project makes accommodation for more than 70,000 tons of waste, and if it becomes operational, will remain open, at present calculations, for approximately 25 years, with approximately 175 rail and truck shipments to the site per year.

Because there is no railway to the site, more than 300 miles of track will have to be laid. And roads will have to be paved for trucks bearing shipments of waste.

Powell said the U.S. government was to take possession of all radioactive waste to be placed in a national repository by 1998. That did not happen, and several companies that operate nuclear power plants have sued for breach of contract.

Several sites in eight states were selected for study. That number was reduced to one in 1987 -- Yucca Mountain, Powell said.

Although President George Bush has approved Yucca Mountain to be developed, the site must still get a license to build and operate from the NRC. The license application is anticipated to be submitted in December. After that come years of public hearings on the public safety and environmental impacts the site might pose.

Critics have already voiced opposition to Environmental Impact Statements for the site that only went out 10,000 years into the future. The lifespan of the danger posed by radioactive material is much, much longer.

If the license is granted, DOE anticipates the first shipments of radioactive material to arrive in 2010.

If the license is not granted, the site will be abandoned, Powell said. The ball will be back in the court of Congress to decide what to do next.

The site currently consists of a huge 5-mile tunnel bored into Yucca Mountain at a depth of 1,000 feet. The tour stopped at the south end of the tunnel, called the south portal, to view the huge 25-foot diameter drilling machine used to bore the hole over a three-year period.

Bruce Reinert, an engineer with the Los Alamos Test Lab, who met the tour at the north portal into the mountain, said the north portal will be where rail and truck shipments will deposit the radioactive waste for storage.

Because the tunnel was undergoing maintenance, the tour was not allowed inside.

Reinert explained the scientific study that has gone into the site.

"Our main enemy in the mountain is water," Reinert said. The type of rock, coupled with the areas slight rainfall, and making the containers that hold the nuclear material out of material that is nearly impossible to corrode will ensure that the water table 1,000 feet below the repository doesn't get contaminated. T

The geology of the mountain is also stable with very few fault lines for water to flow into the water table, which is a slow moving, ancient body of water that is not used by the closest population centers. The area is not prone to earthquakes or vulcanism.

Another concern is the heat, Reinert said. When radioactive material breaks down, it creates heat as a by-product.

"We're really going to heat the mountain up," Reinert said.

For instance, inside the tunnels where the waste is to be kept, the temperature is expected to increase to 212 degrees Fahrenheit -- the boiling point of water -- and will stay that way for hundreds of years. Such heat will increase the surface temperature at the top of the mountain by 1 degree. A section of the tunnel has been fitted with heaters to simulate the effect of the heat on the rock. So far, so good, Reinert said.

Needless to say, people will not be able to enter the tunnels where the waste is stored after they are sealed, which will require robotic monitoring to ensure that no breaches of the containers occur, Reinert said.

After the tour, Donaldson said that the presentations about the testing affirms for him the quality of the work that has gone into the site, and he is satisfied Yucca Mountain appears to be, at this time, the best place to put the repository.

Cooper said she was impressed, and sometimes startled, by the frank explanations of the testing that has gone into the site. She expressed concern about the theories and the methodologies that spanned a 10,000-year period without mention of differing thoughts on alternative concepts to treat the waste -- like reprocessing it.

Kelty said she was impressed by the ingenuity of the science used to address the problem of what to do with the nuclear waste.

"But at the same time, I was disheartened by the path this ingenuity put us on," Kelty said.

She said she felt that during the tour the issue of controlling the use of energy through sustainable living was not addressed. Instead, the project, to her, appeared an effort to ensure unrelenting use of energy.

There are already plans in place for the repository to grow and stay open hundreds of years longer, according to DOE contractor staff on the tour. And at some point in the future, the issue of what to do with nuclear waste will have to be addressed again.

Reporter Larry Hendricks can be reached at lhendricks@azdailysun.com or 556-2262.

On the web at: www.ymp.gov

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

Miami Herald
October 21, 2004

Florida business briefs

ENERGY

Report: Florida No. 3 in nuclear waste

The Environmental Working Group, a Washington watchdog organization, released a report saying that Florida ranks No. 3 in the nation in the amount of its nuclear waste -- and more than 1,000 tons of waste will be added over the next 20 years, because of the renewal of the licenses of Florida Power & Light's Turkey Point and St. Lucie nuclear power plants.

Mike Casey of EWG said, 'People ought to be concerned because the industry and the Department of Energy lied two years ago when they said, `Get rid of the waste and consolidate the waste,' '' at Yucca Mountain, in Nevada.

Because of many complications, nuclear material from utilities has yet to be moved to the site, and it is unclear when the process will start.

FPL says the public has no reason to be concerned. ''There is no safety issue connected with any of this.'' said Carl Bible, an FPL nuclear engineering manager.

The utility has contributed $514 million to the federal nuclear waste fund, and it hopes eventually to move the waste to Yucca Mountain, Bible said. In the meantime, the material is being stored near the nuclear generators in spent-fuel pools. If the pools fill up, FPL believes it can safely store the waste in dry canisters, which some utilities have been using for years without incident.

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

The Republican
October 21, 2004

Environment seen as 'wedge issue'

Bush and Kerry are clearly at loggerheads on the environment.

By DAN RING
dring@repub.com

BOSTON - The two major candidates for president have some sharp differences on the environment that could help swing the race for the White House.

Though it's barely mentioned on the campaign trail, the environment might be a key issue in some states that could be decided by a small percentage of votes.

"It's a wedge issue that makes a difference with independent voters," said Lora Wondolowski of Greenfield, program manager in New England for the League of Conservation Voters. "The environment is something that clearly separates the candidates."

Sen. John F. Kerry, the Democratic nominee for president, and President George W. Bush clash on storage of nuclear waste, rules for clean air, gun rights for hunters and drilling for oil on the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska.

The environment isn't high profile, but it's generating a lot of emotions from both candidates and their supporters.

The League of Conservation Voters in Washington endorsed Kerry and gave Bush an "F" for his environmental record. League members are canvassing and advertising in five battleground states that could help decide the election, including Florida, New Mexico, Oregon, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

"The Bush administration has been a total failure on environmental issues," Wondolowki said.

Most voters also view Kerry as stronger on the environment, according to a USA Today/CNN/Gallup poll released Oct. 12. The poll, with a margin of error of 3 percent, found that 60 percent of voters believe Kerry would do a better job on the environment.

Bush's supporters said that criticism by environmentalists is largely partisan and exaggerated.

James D. Miller of South Deerfield, an associate professor of economics at Smith College in Northampton and Republican candidate for state Senate, said the environment is improving under Bush.

Miller said the president often favors environmental rights over the interests of landowners and businesses.

Shortly after taking office, for example, Bush accepted a rule by former President William Clinton that established further restrictions on development in wetlands. Bush boasts on the campaign trail that he wants to expand wetlands in the country.

Bush and Kerry are both going after the votes of hunters and sportsmen, an important component in key states such as Iowa, Wisconsin and New Mexico.

Bush is touting his record, which includes signing an agreement with major sportsmen's organizations to improve hunting and fishing access to federal lands.

The National Rifle Association in Fairfax, Va., which endorsed Bush, calls Kerry "the most anti-gun presidential nominee" in history.

The association cited Kerry's votes in the Senate to ban semi-automatic shotguns, close land in the Mojave Desert in California to hunting and establish waiting periods before people can purchase guns.

"Kerry has been less friendly to the sporting industry, the firearms industry, than Bush," said Robert W. Jackewich of Easthampton, a hunter who supports rights of gun owners. "If he is truly a sportsman, why is he so anti-firearm?"

During the third presidential debate on Oct. 13, Kerry reached out to sportsmen, saying he is a hunter, a gun owner and a supporter of the constitutional right to keep and bear arms.

"I've been a hunter since I was a kid, 12, 13 years old," Kerry said. "And I respect the Second Amendment and I will not tamper with the Second Amendment."

There are plenty of other environmental issues that could help decide the presidential election on Nov. 2.

In Nevada, where the race is tight, the environment is a major topic.

Kerry, four-term senator from Massachusetts, and Bush are waging a high-stakes battle over whether the nation's first high-level nuclear waste dump should be located in Yucca Mountain, about 80 miles northwest of Las Vegas.

The Nevada dump would be for spent fuel rods currently stored in caskets under pools at the sites of nuclear reactors including a decommissioned plant in Rowe in Western Massachusetts and the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station in Plymouth.

Bush supports the proposed waste site in Nevada, while Kerry is pledging to stop it. The Republican president believes it could be a secure repository for the waste, but Kerry is concerned the site is located near earthquake fault lines and could harm an underground water supply.

The issue could be pivotal since Bush in 2000 only won Nevada by 22,000 votes out of about 600,000 cast.

In Alaska, Bush also supports oil and gas exploration on the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, saying it would help free the United States of its dependence on foreign oil. Kerry has said the drilling could ruin the coastal plain and he has led Senate efforts to block it.

Another issue that splits the two candidates is the need for further restrictions on greenhouse gas emissions from oil and coal plants. Shortly after he took office, Bush, 58, rejected the so-called Kyoto Protocol, an international treaty to require industrialized nations to cut power plant emissions that contribute to global warming.

During the second presidential debate in St. Louis, when the environment arose as an issue, Bush said Kyoto would have cost America a lot of jobs.

"It's one of those deals where, in order to be popular in the halls of Europe, you sign a treaty," Bush said. "But I think there is a better way to do it."

Kerry said that when it comes to the environment, Bush has led "one of the worst administrations in modern history."

Kerry, 60, advocated a tougher position than Bush on emissions. Kerry said he would again begin negotiations with other countries in an attempt to fix the treaty.

"They pulled out of the global warming, declared it dead, didn't even accept the science," Kerry said. "I'm going to be a president who believes in science."

Kerry hit at Bush for giving his environmental initiatives "Orwellian" labels such as "Clear Skies" and "Healthy Forests."

In early 2002, Bush proposed a "Clear Skies" bill, which would cap the amount of mercury, nitrogen oxide and sulfur dioxide emissions from power plants. Mount Tom, a coal-burning plant in Holyoke ranked the No. 2 polluter in the state in 2002 by the federal government, is complying with state deadlines and standards to clean up pollutants.

Prevailing winds also carry to New England pollutants from Midwest plants, creating serious acid rain damage to forests and lakes in Massachusetts.

Bush said "Clear Skies" is an example of his "common sense" approach to environmental regulations because it accounts for the need to boost economic growth.

But James McCaffrey, director of the Massachusetts chapter of the Sierra Club, said Bush's initiative actually seeks to postpone federal mercury protections and roll back improvements under the existing Clean Air Act.

"Senator John Kerry has been a clear leader on the environment for two decades," McCaffrey said. "He's a clear choice when it comes to the environment."

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

WAVY
October 21, 2004

Associated Press

Report: Virginia will store more radioactive waste than all but S.C.

WASHINGTON A national report shows that in the upcoming years, Virginia will store more radioactive waste from nuclear power plants than any other state except South Carolina.

The Environmental Working Group analyzed figures from the U-S Department of Energy and found that the recent relicensing of Virginia's Surry and North Anna reactors will allow them to generate more than 14-hundred tons of nuclear waste. South Carolina will have 24-hundred tons.

The public interest group says waste can't be stored in Nevada's proposed Yucca Mountain repository, because that site limits how much waste it stores.

By law, the Yucca Mountain site is limited to 70-thousand metric tons of waste. The group says that's roughly equal to the amount of waste that U-S reactors will have stored at their sites by the time the repository opens in 2010.

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

Richmond Times Dispatch
October 21, 2004

Va. waste won't fit at Nevada site
Environmental group says Yucca Mountain can't hold additional nuclear waste

By Greg Edwards
Times-Dispatch Staff Writer

Additional nuclear waste from two relicensed nuclear power plants in Virginia cannot be stored at a planned national repository in Nevada given its capacity, an environmental group says.

That is also true for 13 other nuclear plants where reactor licenses have been extended, the Environmental Working Group, a public-interest watchdog group based in Washington, said in a report released yesterday.

Using Department of Energy information, the group calculated that Dominion Virginia Power's North Anna and Surry power stations, each of which has two nuclear reactors, will create an additional 1,434 metric tons of high-level nuclear waste over their 20-year license ex- tensions that cannot be stored in the Yucca Mountain repository.

Nationwide, 26 relicensed reactors will create more than 9,000 metric tons of extra waste that cannot be stored in the Nevada repository unless it is expanded, the group says. By law, the Yucca Mountain site is limited to 70,000 metric tons of waste, which, the group said, is roughly equal to the amount of waste that U.S. reactors will have stored at their sites by the time the repository opens in 2010.

The relicensing of 18 more reactors at nine power plants would create an additional 7,300 tons of waste, the group says.

"Nuclear power plants will be transformed into long-term nuclear waste dumps . . . as more waste is produced long after Yucca Mountain is full," the group said.

If the waste from reactors already relicensed can be moved to Nevada, it will require an additional 1,050 rail shipments or 6,000 truck shipments, according to the report's findings.

In Virginia, more than half a million people live within 1 mile of proposed nuclear waste transportation routes, and 150 schools and six hospitals are just as close, the report says.

Rick Zuercher, a spokesman for Dominion Virginia Power's nuclear plants, took no issue with the group's figures drawn from Energy Department reports but said the environmental group, by its comments, appears to have an anti-nuclear agenda. "It seems to me they'd just like to see nuclear go away."

Zuercher said Virginia Power stores nuclear waste securely and safely at its plants but wants to eventually move that used fuel to a national repository. Historically, used fuel has been moved safely, with 2,000 shipments having been made in the United States and routine shipments taking place in Europe. There has never been a radiation release.

Dominion supports all forms of electrical generation, including renewable sources of energy, Zuercher said. But nuclear, which produces a lot of power with no emissions, needs to be part of the equation, he said.

Licenses for North Anna's nuclear reactors have been extended until 2038 and 2040 and for Surry's to 2032 and 2033.

Although it produces 20 percent of the nation's electricity, nuclear power should be replaced with alternative forms of energy that are less risky to human health, the environment and national security, the environmental group said. Relicensing of nuclear plants should be halted and the nation should move toward cleaner energy alternatives such as wind, natural gas, clean coal and solar, combined with a serious commitment to energy efficiency, it said.

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

Virginian Pilot
October 21, 2004

Virginia ranks high for spent nuclear fuel storage
By SCOTT HARPER, The Virginian-Pilot

In the years ahead, Virginia will store more radioactive waste from nuclear power plants than any other state except South Carolina , according to a national report to be released today, while North Carolina will keep the fourth largest stockpile in the country.

The report by the Environmental Working Group is based on figures from the U.S. Department of Energy and is intended to make a point: Even if a federal waste site opens as planned by 2011 at Yucca Mountain in the Nevada desert , nuclear plants across the nation still will have to keep and safeguard tons of uranium-rich fuel rods in their own backyards.

“The public has been told that Yucca Mountain would handle all of these materials, that this was the solution. But it´s not true,’ said Richard Wiles , senior vice president for the Environmental Working Group, an advocacy organization based in Washington. “It´s the big lie about nuclear power in this country.’

Richard Zuercher , a spokesman for Dominion, the Richmond-based electric utility that owns both nuclear plants in Virginia – North Anna, 60 miles northwest of Richmond, and Surry, about 50 miles west of Norfolk – dismissed the study as politically motivated and alarmist.

While conceding that Yucca Mountain will not likely have enough room for all waste stored at the two Virginia power stations, Zuercher said Dominion is capable of handling its own leftover materials.

“We can safely manage the wastes on site,’ he said, noting that the company has done so without incident at Surry since 1986.

The environmental report also seeks to shed light on a recent surge in the relicensing of old nuclear power plants, to extend their lives by 20 years .

Wiles said it was no coincidence that the trend took off soon after Congress in July 2002 endorsed Yucca Mountain as an ample, environmentally safe repository for highly radioactive wastes. Numerous plants received relicensing afterward, and more are pending.

“To us, it seems obvious there was connection,’ Wiles said. “It sent a message to the industry – get your license done now while the public thinks the waste issue has been taken care of.’

Dominion started its relicensing process well in advance of the congressional vote and received its 20-year extensions for Surry and Lake Anna from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in March 2003 .

Each plant has two nuclear reactors. Surry now is approved to operate them until 2032 and 2033 , while North Anna´s reactors are good through 2038 and 2040 . The plants generate enough electricity to power about 850,000 homes .

Like most nuclear operators, Dominion stores its spent fuel rods in pools and in steel casks. The casks, about 16 feet tall , are set on concrete pads near the plants. They are protected by TV monitors, motion detectors, a security detail and lines of locked wire fence.

Dominion received approval last year to build a third concrete pad at Surry and two others at North Anna, Zuer-cher said. The utility will be shifting its storage technology when the centers open in 2007 at Surry and 2008 at North Anna, he said.

Bunker-like structures will hold the long, enriched fuel rods, Zuercher explained, instead of the current method of standing them on end in Thermos-like casks. Security and efficiency should be increased, he said.

The report said North Anna holds about 915 metric tons of such wastes today and will add an additional 766 metric tons through its relicensing. At Surry, about 960 metric tons are stored , with an additional 668 tons expected over the next three decades. Zuercher said those figures seemed correct.

The total increase of 1,434 metric tons is second only to South Carolina´s expected stockpile and is followed by Florida´s and then North Carolina´s total tonnage.

The government has spent billions on Yucca Mountain . The proposed waste site, in salt caverns about 100 miles outside of Las Vegas, still must win a license, which environmentalists and some politicians are vowing to fight.

At the earliest, the repository could open by 2011 and, under federal law, it can hold no more than 70,000 metric tons of uranium. The facility would accept nuclear wastes from commercial power plants and military installations.

The law could be changed to allow Yucca Mountain to take more tonnage, but that would likely ignite more controversy and require more preparatory work, officials said. Discussions already have begun to find another repository site, perhaps in the eastern United States, deep within granite caverns, according to published reports.

European nations, which rely more heavily on nuclear energy than the United States, similarly are scouting for waste repositories while temporarily storing their spent fuel.

Reach Scott Harper at 446-2340 or at scott.harper@pilotonline.com

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

Hampton Roads Daily Press
October 21, 2004

Nuclear waste storage still an issue
Virginia is projected to have the second most leftover nuclear waste of any state in the country.

By Chris Flores

The debate over what to do with waste left over from nuclear power plants heated up after a report released Wednesday detailed how much used fuel will be left at sites once the nation's permanent repository is full.

The Environmental Working Group said Virginia will be second in the nation only to South Carolina in tonnage of nuclear waste left over. That's because both of Virginia's Dominion Resources-owned nuclear sites, Surry Power Station in Isle of Wight and North Anna outside Richmond, already have gotten licenses to run an extra 20 years.

Congress approved in 2002 a permanent spot to bury nuclear waste in Yucca Mountain, Nev. But all the space at Yucca was spoken for prior to the approval of license extensions at the Virginia nuclear sites and 13 others nationwide that will create another 20 years of waste.

"You hear it wouldn't be a big deal to expand Yucca, but those discussions haven't been had yet," said Jon Corsiglia a spokesman for the environmental group.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has approved license extensions for 26 nuclear reactors at 15 sites since March 2000 and denied none. Surry and North Anna each have two reactors. Companies that own 18 reactors at nine sites also have applied for renewal.

The environmental group estimates the re-licensed plants will produce almost 19 tons of new waste each year.

The group said there will be at least 21,000 more tons of waste from the plants with accepted and pending license renewals.

The federal government has projected that Yucca will open in about 2010 and will take deliveries of waste through 2048. The allocated space in Yucca is only enough to dispose of the amount of waste that will exist when the repository opens in 2011.

There wasn't even enough room for the waste from reactors if they just operated through the end of their current licenses.

"We're already at a point where Yucca Mountain will be filled to capacity by the time the waste is delivered there," said Corsiglia. "The wave of re-licensing seems to be making that problem worse."

Steve Kerekes at the Nuclear Energy Institute said the Department of Energy originally estimated Yucca is large enough to accommodate about 132,000 tons. Kerekes said Congress can't get an energy bill passed in the middle of a "full-blown energy crisis," so it's not surprising or easy to understand why only 70,000 metric tons of space was approved.

"This is not at the top of Congress's priority list," said Kerekes.

The environmental group says the approval of Yucca encouraged more companies to get license renewals for their reactors because the waste currently on site can be disposed of. But as more licenses get renewed, the extra waste nationwide that won't fit at Yucca will grow.

Dusty Horwitt, an analyst at the environmental group, sees the growing waste problem as a reason to abandon nuclear power in favor of other alternatives. The group wants Congress to move away from nuclear power by the time the current licenses run out.

"There's not an ideal way to dispose of high-level nuclear waste," said Horwitt, "but we ought to stop making more of it. That's just making the problem worse."

Dominion disagrees with that idea, said Dominion spokesman Rick Zuercher. There is a place for nuclear power alongside renewable energy sources like wind and solar. Dominion also has plenty of plants that burn fossil fuels, which pollute the air and have become very expensive of late.

"The crux of this is where will we go in the country in terms of meeting this country's energy needs," said Zuercher.

But as long as nuclear power remains in the mix, there are still some serious waste decisions to be made.

Government projections of the amount of waste going to Yucca and time frame for delivery was based on an assumption that reactors will only get 10-year extensions. So far, 24 reactors got 20-year extensions and two others got 18- and 19-year licenses.

Surry currently has almost 1,060 tons of nuclear waste stored on-site in an underground pool and steel cylinder casks that are about 16 feet high and 8 feet in diameter. Radioactive fuel assemblies - rods filled with uranium pellets - go into the pool to cool for at least five years.

About 32 fuel assemblies are loaded underwater into each cask and a lid is put on top of the container. After the cask is removed from the pool, it is filled with helium gas, bolted down and placed on a concrete pad.

"It has a monitoring device and if there is any leak of helium, we can detect it and make any repairs necessary," said Zuercher.

Virginia may drop in the rankings of states with leftover waste in the future. Companies have either gotten, asked or intend to ask for a license extension for at least 73 nuclear reactors out of 103 reactors nationwide.

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

Environmental Media Services
October 20, 2004

Contact: Lauren Sucher 202/667-6982

Wave of Nuclear Plant Relicensing Will Mean Steep Increase in Local Waste Stockpiles and Shipments to Nevada

Yucca Mountain Approval Followed by Rapid Extension of Reactor Licenses

Recent court decisions will require reconsideration of radiation containment standards at Yucca Mountain. Congress is likely to revisit this issue in response to the judicial action.

EWG Action Fund is a nonprofit legislative advocacy organization based in Washington, DC that uses the power of information to protect the environment and human health.

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

Las Vegas SUN
October 20, 2004

NEVADA: Notes and quotes from battleground Nevada in Campaign 2004

By Ron Fournier
Associated Press

A high-level nuclear waste site 90 miles outside Las Vegas may be Sen. John Kerry's main hope for beating President Bush in Nevada.

The economy may not be as potent an issue as elsewhere, not with 90,000 more jobs than when Bush took office. But a weak economy in other states reduces tourism, the key to Las Vegas' health.

Bush beat Democrat Al Gore in Nevada by 4 percentage points in 2000. Polls show the race this year is close, with Bush clinging to a slender lead in some surveys.

---

BY THE NUMBERS:

5 - Nevada's electoral votes.

1.1 million - Record number of Nevadans registered to vote. More than 800,000 registered as Republicans or Democrats - almost equally divided. Some 155,000 nonpartisan.

22 - Percentage of Nevadans who are Hispanic.

17 - Consecutive years, including this year, Nevada has led the nation in rate of population growth.

One for 14 - Number of interviews that local media got with George Bush, Laura Bush and Dick Cheney on their stops in Nevada. John Kerry, Teresa Heinz Kerry and John and Elizabeth Edwards went seven for nine.

---

QUOTABLE:

- "What bothers me is when anybody starts picking on the veterans." - Carson City ironworker Donnie Woods. "John Kerry was on a Swift boat in the Mekong Delta. That's a narrow river, taking machine gun fire from both sides. Where was Bush? Texas? Alabama? Playing pingpong and drinking beer?"

- "I like the idea that he's letting the war be on someone else's turf instead of ours" - Andy Jaramillo, 50, of Reno, speaking of Bush. "And since nothing else has happened in the country since Sept. 11, I think he has done a good job."

---

NOTABLE:

With more than 100 get-out-the-vote organizations operating in Nevada, the number of newly registered voters exceeded 230,000, more than triple the number during the 2000 election.

Besides the presidential race, Nevadans are being drawn to the polls by ballot questions that deal with malpractice insurance and frivolous lawsuits, by state Supreme Court contests and by legislative races that have focused on positions taken by incumbents during a big tax battle in 2003.

---

WHAT TO WATCH ON ELECTION NIGHT:

When the first returns come in, most of the numbers will reflect early voting that preceded Election Day balloting. The percentage of the vote that candidates get in the early voting historically has been close to the final results.

---

IN NEVADA FOUR YEARS AGO:

During his only visit to Nevada in 2000, Bush said any decision on the proposed nuclear waste dump at Yucca Mountain would be based on "sound science." That statement was slightly stronger than Al Gore's - and some Democrats say it was just enough to swing voter sentiment Bush's way. He ended up with 49.5 percent of the vote to Gore's 46 percent - and then approved the dump in early 2002.

---

AP Correspondent Brendan Riley contributed to this report from Carson City.

---

On the Net:

An interactive look: http://wid.ap.org/campaign2004/battleground-nv.html

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