Yucca Mountain News Clips - Friday, May 20, 2005

Yucca Mountain News Clips
Friday, May 20, 2005
---------------------------

Las Vegas SUN
May 20, 2005

Guest columnist Jim Gibbons: Another perspective on Yucca Mountain

Jim Gibbons, a Republican in the U.S. House of Representatives, represents Nevada's 2nd Congressional District.

It is unfortunate that Jeff German, who writes for a paper committed to reporting every development with the Yucca Mountain Project, did not take the time to review my record in fighting this misguided policy. In a recent column, "Gibbons has late awakening," Mr. German asks, "Where has Gibbons been during his eight years on Capitol Hill?" While he could easily read the back issues of the Las Vegas Sun, I am pleased to have this opportunity to answer him directly.

As a member of Congress, I have vigorously fought and opposed the Yucca Mountain Project against both the Clinton administration and the Bush administration. I have spoken out against this proposal over 100 times on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives. I have written dozens of letters to key administration leaders identifying areas where the science at Yucca has proven to be inconsistent with the law outlined in the Nuclear Waste Policy Act. I have met with officials from both the current and previous administrations urging them to reconsider their proposed efforts to ship and store nuclear waste in Nevada due to the poor credibility of the science.

When Yucca Mountain was officially proposed by then-DOE Secretary Abraham to President Bush, I was quoted as saying, "It is unfortunate that Secretary Abraham would continue green-lighting a project that has been riddled with corruption and mismanagement since its inception." This statement echoes my remarks in 2001 when allegations arose about a key Yucca contractor under the Clinton administration.

At that time, I said, "This appears to be part of an ongoing persistent bias to find Yucca Mountain suitable long before the evidence has been completed." I have maintained this same position about the bias of DOE towards opening Yucca Mountain at any cost during my entire Congressional career.

I have also consistently voted against every spending bill put forward in Congress that allocated federal funding to Yucca Mountain and have continuously opposed spending billions of dollars on Yucca Mountain. The Las Vegas Sun even quoted me as saying, "I think it is irresponsible to continue to waste millions upon millions of dollars on a project that is unsafe and in no way will solve our nation's nuclear waste problem."

Additionally, in the Las Vegas Sun's own analysis of the 2004 Congressional races, the paper stated: "Gibbons strongly opposes a nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain. As a geologist, he says he cannot accept the idea that putting such highly radioactive material in a mountain would work."

Furthermore, I find it unfortunate that Peggy Maze Johnson of Citizen Alert asserts that I have not been paying attention to the issue of science. My office has oftentimes utilized the talent and research provided by many activist groups in our fight against Yucca Mountain -- including from Citizen Alert.

As a geologist, I am fully aware of the scientific problems with Yucca Mountain and the policy of deep geologic burial of high-level nuclear waste. In fact, I have publicized them for years. In 2001 the General Accounting Office outlined over 200 technical and scientific flaws with the project. At that time, I stated both to the Las Vegas Sun and to President Bush that it is a failed scientific process and Yucca Mountain will turn out to be the greatest waste of taxpayer dollars in U.S. history.

The Nevada delegation remains unified in our opposition to the Yucca Mountain Project. I would give Citizen Alert more credibility if they offered to meet with me or my staff to discuss specific areas where we could strengthen or advance our fight in Congress. Unfortunately, they issue a politically charged attack against me -- even though they seem to share my passionate opposition to the Yucca Mountain project.

The fact remains that throughout my tenure in Congress, I have taken on both Republican and Democratic administrations as well as congressional leaders on this issue. While my fight against Yucca Mountain has not sat well with leaders in my own party, including the Speaker of the House, I remain committed to seeing that the Nuclear Waste Policy Act is modified so that it reflects the science and technology of the 21st century ... rather than the outdated, decades-old science that was used to create it.

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

Las Vegas SUN
May 20, 2005

Poll: Nevada governor's plan for state workers not popular

Associated Press

LAS VEGAS (AP) - Nevada Gov. Kenny Guinn's proposal to scrap health benefits for future state hires drew heavy opposition in a statewide poll, and almost three in five said the state should provide a bigger pay raise for teachers and state workers than the governor wants.

Guinn has proposed a 2 percent pay raise for state employees and teachers in each of the next two years. But 59 percent of the 625 registered voters surveyed last week for the Las Vegas Review-Journal said they'd offer raises from 3 to 5 percent per year. Guinn said he does not oppose state lawmakers increasing the level of raises.

Sixty-four percent of respondents said they don't like the governor's proposal to scrap retiree health insurance benefits for those hired by the state in the future. One in four said they support the idea.

An overwhelming 74 percent of those surveyed opposed cutting retirement benefits of state workers, compared with 17 percent in support.

The poll was conducted May 12-14 by Mason-Dixon Polling & Research Inc. of Washington, D.C. It had a sampling error margin of plus or minus 4 percentage points.

Ken Lange, executive director of the Nevada State Education Association, and Scott MacKenzie, executive director of the State of Nevada Employees Association, said the poll sends a clear message to lawmakers.

"The average person doesn't want to take away something a worker has earned," McKenzie said.

Guinn spokesman Greg Bortolin said retirement benefits are the state's biggest liability, and cutting retiree health benefits for future hires could save an estimated $500 million over 30 years.

One poll question asked voters whether they support or oppose various proposals to reduce state spending.

Voters overwhelmingly oppose closing higher education institutions, with 73 percent opposed to shutting the dental school at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, and 60 percent opposed to closing the Nevada State College at Henderson.

One savings plan voters did overwhelmingly support - at 79 percent - was one that would require university professors to teach at least three classes per semester.

Voters were fairly split on whether to close the state's Washington, D.C., lobbying office or to stop funding the state's "anti-Yucca Mountain office."

Forty-six percent supported ending funding for the Yucca efforts, while 44 percent opposed that, while 47 percent opposed closing the state's federal lobbying office.

Half of those surveyed supported higher standards in the Millennium Scholarship program. The move is designed to limit eligibility and save costs. Just 19 percent supported spending $100 million to secure the program.

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

Las Vegas Review Journal
May 20, 2005

Voters skeptical of cuts

Poll finds opposition to Guinn's proposals

By Erin Neff
Review-Journal

Voters don't always have the same priorities as elected officials -- especially when it comes to proposals to reduce state spending.

A poll conducted for the Review-Journal and reviewjournal.com found voters opposed to several of Gov. Kenny Guinn's proposals -- from his level of pay raises to a plan to scrap retiree health benefits for future state hires.

The poll also found few residents support cutting higher education programs.

Two of Guinn's proposals saw the biggest differential among voters, according to results of the poll conducted May 12 to 14 by Washington, D.C.-based Mason-Dixon Polling & Research Inc. The phone survey of 625 registered voters has a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percentage points.

Guinn has proposed giving state employees and teachers a 2 percent pay raise in each of the two years of the biennium. A majority of voters, 59 percent, would up the ante and offer raises from 3 to 5 percent per year.

"It's time in an environment when there is an abundance of resources available to go ahead and give higher raises than the governor has proposed," said Ken Lange, executive director of the Nevada State Education Association. "I believe the poll's a clear message."

Guinn said he does not oppose lawmakers increasing the level of raises.

"If they can get a (higher) salary increase for the teachers and state employees, I'm all for that," he said.

Voters also differed with Guinn on his proposal to scrap retiree health insurance benefits for those hired by the state in the future. Sixty-four percent of voters oppose the proposal, with 25 percent in support of the plan.

And voters asked to list their support or opposition in general to cutting retirement benefits of state workers overwhelmingly opposed the plan. Seventy-four percent of those surveyed opposed cuts, compared with 17 percent in support.

"The average person doesn't want to take away something a worker has earned," said Scott MacKenzie, executive director of the State of Nevada Employees Association.

Guinn's spokesman Greg Bortolin said he understands that voters "are sympathetic on the benefits issue."

"The governor just thinks it's a good business decision to end that system for new hires," Bortolin said. "It's the biggest liability the state has."

Cutting retiree health benefits for future hires could save an estimated $500 million over 30 years, Bortolin said.

And MacKenzie said his union is aware that something has to change to reduce the state's liability.

"We've talked to the governor's office about prefunding or sharing some of the burden," MacKenzie said. "We just want to have a place at the table to discuss the changes without just implementing something that could have serious repercussions."

One question asked voters whether they support or oppose certain plans that have emerged to reduce state spending.

"I think it's a vote of support for the dental school and the state college," said Dan Klaich, vice chancellor for legal affairs for the university system. "I have a tendency to think that regardless of how it gets asked, and you asked it in the context of spending cuts, I would guess that the regular person on the street would say they support these institutions as a benefit to the state."

One savings plan voters did overwhelmingly support -- at 79 percent -- was one that would require university professors to teach at least three classes per semester.

"I think that the question doesn't understand that we're doing that already," Klaich said.

Voters were fairly split on whether to close the state's Washington, D.C., lobbying office or to stop funding the state's "anti-Yucca Mountain office."

Forty-six percent supported ending funding for the Yucca efforts, while 44 percent opposed that.

Lawmakers voted this session to cut in half the governor's proposed $2 million budget to fund Yucca opposition. The move came after DOE e-mails suggested attempts to falsify data at the proposed nuclear repository 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas.

Forty-seven percent of voters said they opposed closing the state's federal lobbying office. The Assembly Ways and Means Committee, which is scheduled to close that budget today, has raised concerns about funding the office.

Half of voters surveyed said they supported raising standards in the Millennium Scholarship program. The move is designed to limit eligibility and save costs. Just 19 percent supported spending $100 million to secure the program.

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

Las Vegas Review-Journal
May 20, 2005

Reid draws spotlight at center of filibuster fight

Nevada senator leading charge to preserve Senate rule

By Tony Batt
Stephens Washington Bureau

WASHINGTON -- Sen. Harry Reid's place at the center of a landmark Senate fight over federal judges and filibuster rights was marked Thursday by the frantic clicks of camera shutters most places he moved in public.

Appearing at an event with the Congressional Black Caucus, each of his gestures set photographers off on new frenzies. Likewise, when he emerged from an afternoon meeting with other Democrats, cameras tracked his path down a Capitol hallway.

The spotlight continued to follow the Nevadan from Searchlight as the Senate stepped to a choreographed debate expected to lead to major confrontation and political drama next week.

That's when Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., is expected to move to change long-standing Senate rules to prevent filibusters on judicial nominees, the so-called "nuclear option."

If it passes, the change is expected to clear a path toward simple majority confirmation votes for a handful of President Bush's judicial nominees that minority Democrats say are out of the mainstream and have blocked through filibuster. Filibusters require 60 votes to overcome.

"There is no question this is a historic debate, and one of the most important votes any of us will make in our careers," said Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., who argues Democrats have abused the filibuster and who has urged Frist to invoke the rules change.

Up to a dozen centrist Democrats and Republicans have been meeting to explore possible compromises but no deal has appeared close.

Each day this week, Frist and Reid opened the Senate session with a verbal joust over judges, and continued to press their cause in follow-up appearances with interest groups.

"We've been debating a very simple principle: nominees deserve a fair up-or-down vote on the floor of the United States Senate," Frist said.

Reid framed the debate in broad terms.

"This vision of our government -- the vision of our Founding Fathers -- no longer suits President Bush and the Republicans in the Senate," Reid said Thursday. "They don't want consensus or compromise. They don't want advise and consent. They want absolute power."

Reid usually sticks to talking points when discussing the nuclear option in public. On Thursday, he added Nevada angles to his repertoire.

Elaborating on a theme that Republicans are obsessed with the nuclear option to the detriment of more important issues, Reid cited skyrocketing gasoline prices. He said a friend complained he would have to pay $90 to drive from Las Vegas to Los Angeles and back for back surgery.

If Republicans take away the filibuster on judicial nominations, Reid warned, they also could take away a Nevada filibuster against nuclear waste storage at Yucca Mountain.

Reid also has begun playing hardball. On Wednesday, he invoked a rule that prevents committees from meeting for longer than two hours after the Senate begins its session.

On Thursday he agreed to allow only the Foreign Relations Committee to meet for longer than two hours.

Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., protested the Democrats "are shutting down the work of the Senate. This is incredibly irresponsible."

Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., responded the nuclear option merited the Senate's full attention. "If we're going to do this, let's not have hearings on every other topic under the sun," he said.

A political analyst said Reid will probably not suffer loss of stature as Democratic leader if his party loses next week's vote.

"The Democrats are looking for his ability to hold the party together and fight," analyst Stuart Rothenberg said. "If it turns out he's inside the Alamo and is overwhelmed by Republicans, I don't think he will be seen poorly."

But if a last-ditch compromise is struck without the Nevadan's input, Reid may look "extreme and ineffective," Rothenberg said.

Although he has met with senators seeking to broker a compromise, Reid has consistently downplayed prospects for a deal.

"There are a number of senators, both Democrat and Republican trying to work something out," Reid said. "The fact is they haven't been able to."

If Republicans succeed in changing the filibuster rules, Reid will face another challenge, Rothenberg said.

"The Democrats will have a lot of bitterness and a desire for payback," he said. "While that's understandable, Reid has to make sure Democrats don't look just partisan. He'll be in the limelight, and he needs to show that whatever happened, Democrats have a desire to move forward with the business of the country."

Reid remained hazy about his plans if Democrats lose.

"Under Senate tradition, we defer to the majority to let them set the schedule," he said. "But if they're willing to upend Senate tradition, so are we. We will no longer defer to them."

Ensign, who plans to vote for the nuclear option, said he believes the president's judicial nominees are entitled to an up-or-down vote on the Senate floor.

"I think it's wrong for 40 senators to be able to tell 100 senators how a vote should be," Ensign said.

Despite the increasingly bitter tone of the partisan debate, Ensign said he and Reid continue to enjoy a strong relationship.

At breakfast with visiting Nevadans on Thursday morning, Reid said he had just come from a meeting with Frist. Ensign joked it looked like Reid had bruises on his face, according to a witness.

"No," Reid quipped. "That's just lipstick."

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

Las Vegas SUN
May 19, 2005

State seeks license application draft

Expected rejection of latest request to trigger evaluation

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

WASHINGTON -- Nevada's attorneys were to send a letter to the Energy Department today asking for a draft copy of the Yucca Mountain project's license application, even though they know it will be denied.

The department has denied several requests by the state for the draft before, but this rejection will allow additional evaluation by a panel of the Atomic Safety Licensing Board within the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

The department claims it does not have to give the state a copy of the draft license application, or make it public, while the state argues it should be a public document and made available. The state believes the draft holds vital information, especially on the proposed nuclear waste repository's ability to hold it radiation.

At a hearing on Yucca Mountain project documents Wednesday, Judge Alan Rosenthal said it is important to have this matter issued quickly.

The board is evaluating how the state, the department and other interested parties have to put documents into a special database known as the Licensing Support Network. The database will be used during hearings as the board evaluates the department's license application to store nuclear waste at Yucca.

The department did not anticipate including the draft when it finalized its document collection, possibly later this year, and the state was likely to file a complaint, arguing that it should be included.

So the board, the state and the department agreed Wednesday to work out the issue even before the document collection is complete.

The state and the department will file briefs until the end of June on the issue.

Attorney Michael Shebelskie of the law firm Hunton & Williams, which represents the Energy Department, said if the board were to side with Nevada, the department would not have to produce the draft until it completes its collection.

Also at the hearing, the board said it has tentatively concluded that documents deemed confidential, archaeological or private will just simply be redacted and put into the database.

It is also leaning toward allowing some "employee concern" documents, or papers that outline complaints made by department employees or contractors about the project on the network.

The board described a process in which documents that contain no personal or private information, such as a name, Social Security number or address but are relevant to the Yucca project can be put in the database without redaction. But documents that contain personal information must be redacted and put into a separate database.

Those with access to the private database can only access the redacted documents under a special agreement that they cannot give them to anyone else.

Attorney Joe Egan, who represents Nevada, called this "an acceptable compromise."

The state wants to see what problems employees raised in order for the state to flesh out its arguments against the repository.

Kelly Faglioni of Hunton & Williams said a portion of 5,000 documents would fall into that category, but they could not be narrowed down further without a document-by-document search.

Egan said the board did not address rules for documents deemed protected under attorney-client privilege, deliberative process or work-product, the three-major classifications. Egan expects the judges will address them in their final decision, which is expected to come later this year.

Meanwhile, the board also ordered the department to file monthly updates of its estimated schedule for the Yucca Mountain project.

The department's attorneys will have to keep the board informed on when it will complete its document collection and turn in the license application.

Judge Thomas Moore, the board chairman, told the department's attorneys that he wants a realistic schedule and that it made no sense for the board to set deadlines if it was going to make them "sweat excessively."

"This board is not interested in the politics of this," Moore said. "It makes a huge difference in how many towels it's going to take to keep your forehead dry."

Moore said the licensing hearing for the project are also likely to go on for a "very long time ... contrary to what is politically correct to say."

The licensing process is limited to three years by federal law, with a one-year extension option that Congress would need to approve.

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

Las Vegas SUN
May 19, 2005

Reid warns against GOP use of 'nuclear option'

Frist expected to call for filibuster rule change

By Benjamin Grove
<grove@lasvegassun.com>
Sun Washington Bureau Chief

WASHINGTON -- Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said today the "nuclear option" under debate in the Senate could pave the way for Republicans to more easily approve not just conservative judges but all nominees and even legislation, including Yucca Mountain legislation.

"It's a slippery slope," Reid said at a press conference this morning.

As expected, Reid and Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., led their parties into battle Wednesday over judicial nominations. But the debate is also a historic showdown over Senate rules, the so-called nuclear option, and, some say, the future of the Senate itself.

The debate continued today, with a possible resolution expected Tuesday.

"The hour of decision has come for our nation's Senate," Reid told reporters gathered at the foot of the Capitol steps Wednesday. "In the debate that has begun, the Republican majority that holds the reins of power will have to make a choice. They will have to choose between their partisan interests or the people's interests."

The debate began when Frist called for action on federal appellate court nominee Priscilla Owen, a Texas Supreme Court justice. She is one of 10 controversial judicial nominees nominated by President Bush and blocked by filibuster by Democrats in the last Congress.

The nomination of a second of those controversial nominees, Janice Rogers Brown of the California Supreme Court, is also under debate, although Owen is expected to be the test case for what has been called the "nuclear option."

Under that option, Frist is expected to call for a rule change that would allow a simple majority, 51 senators, to halt a filibuster and call for a vote on Owen's nomination. Currently it takes 60 votes to halt a filibuster. The Senate has 55 Republicans.

"At some point, you quit talking and you give these people an up or down vote," Sen. Trent Lott, R-Miss., said today.

Reid has said the nuclear option could clear the way for Republicans to more easily approve not just judges but all nominees and even controversial legislation. Reid said he had long been "a thorn in the side" of lawmakers who advocate the proposed nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain because he had filibuster power.

There is no major Yucca Mountain legislation pending in Congress, except Yucca budget bills. Reid fights each year to cut the Yucca budget.

The Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 bars senators from filibustering Yucca legislation under the act, but Nevada senators have used, or threatened to use, filibusters to block other Yucca-related bills. Beginning in 1996, Reid and former Sen. Richard Bryan, D-Nev., were able to use those tactics to delay a bill that would create a temporary nuclear waste dump at Yucca and speed waste shipments there. That legislation was ultimately approved by Congress but died after President Clinton vetoed it in 2000.

The nuclear option is so named because it is expected to yield new levels of partisan rancor and likely result in frustrated Democrats slowing the business of the Senate.

Democrats say the nuclear option would destroy the filibuster, which they say has been a vital check on the majority party's power throughout the history of the Senate.

"This is not the Senate envisioned by our founding fathers," Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., said.

Republicans say they are pursuing the nuclear option because Democrats in the last Congress made a historic decision to filibuster Bush nominees who are certain to have majority support in the Senate.

"I don't believe 40 senators in the minority should be able to decide who is on the bench," Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., said in a Senate floor speech. "These good people deserve an up or down vote."

A number of Republican senators have said they are responding to conservative voters who now rank judicial nominations among their top political interests.

Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., said voters are concerned about activist liberal judges who are restricting everything from the death penalty to the Pledge of Allegiance and Christmas displays. Liberal activist groups, with the support of the liberal media, are unfairly smearing Bush nominees, Sessions said.

"They should not be calling the shots here," Sessions said.

Liberal activist groups have turned from the legislative and executive branches of government to the courts, Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kan., said.

"The left wants people who will pass laws from the bench," Brownback said.

Democrats argue the opposite -- that the Republicans, who already control the White House and Congress, are now seeking to rubber stamp all Bush nominees, even a handful of the most controversial.

"Republicans have sought to destroy the balance of power in our government by grabbing power for the presidency, silencing the minority and weakening our democracy," Reid said in remarks on the floor. "America does not work the way the radical right-wing dictates to President Bush and the Republican Senate leaders."

Republicans seek "essentially a dictatorship," Sen. Ken Salazar, D-Colo., said. "They want to have 100 percent of the power in their hands, and that is not the American way."

Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., said, "The nuclear option is an assault on the American people. It is the tyranny of the majority personified."

The list of controversial judges has actually dwindled from 10 to seven as three withdrew or retired. As a compromise, Democrats have proposed allowing votes on all but three if Republicans abandon the nuclear option. Republicans rejected that.

Democrats made several early attempts Wednesday as debate got under way to sidetrack the showdown. Reid proposed a senators-only meeting in which the lawmakers hammer out a compromise on their own. Reid also proposed that Frist bring noncontroversial nominees to the floor instead of Owen and Brown.

Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., even suggested that one nominee in particular -- Nevada Attorney General Brian Sandoval, nominated by Bush on March 1 to be a U.S. District Court judge -- be debated and voted on by the Senate instead of more controversial nominees.

But Frist brushed the proposals aside and debate soon began on Owen and Brown.

"I don't rise for party," Frist said. "I rise for principle. I rise for the principle that the judicial nominees with the support of the majority of senators deserve up or down votes on this floor."

Republicans defended Owen and Brown. Sen. George Allen, R-Va., said the nominees were the victims of "character assassination." Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, former Judiciary Committee chairman, said Owen was "eminently qualified."

Democrats said the two were outside the mainstream. Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Ill., said Owen had a "radical agenda." Reid has called them "radical judges."

Reid held a press conference with the Congressional Black Caucus, whose 43 members sent a letter to Frist today expressing the irony that the filibuster, once used to block civil rights legislation, could now be discarded to pave the way for judges who caucus members say have not been supportive of minority rights.

Reid descended the Capitol steps for another press conference on Wednesday, closely trailed by Black Caucus members and dozens of other House and Senate Democrats who crowded behind him in a symbolic show of support.

Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., yelled, "Give 'em hell, Harry!" The Nevada senator turned and smiled before launching into his speech.

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

Pahrump Valley Times
May 20, 2005

Number Mix-Up

Discrepancy in county budget

Maher Informs Commissioners of $800,000 Shortfall

By Phillip Gomez
PVT

In shaping Nye County's current budget, due in Carson City June 1, commissioners are finding that if the document were a toxic environmental disaster, Nye County might qualify as a federal superfund cleanup site.

On Monday's convening of the Nye County Board of Commissioners, County Manager Michael Maher announced that last Friday he received word from the Nevada Department of Revenue the county's figures don't match those of state bookkeepers - to the tune of $800,000.

The commissioners were prepared to approve tentative budgets for the current fiscal year, including the overall county budget, when Maher said sheepishly adjustments would have to be made according to new information received regarding caps on property tax revenues disbursed back to Nye County.

"We're not sure where they're getting their data from," Maher said.

The budgeted shortfalls concern several separate budgets covering the county's town advisory boards, the Beatty Improvement District and two defunct hospital districts. As a result, the commission had to put off approving its budgets until Maher could sort out the discrepancies in revenues owed the county.

Then came an outpour of public comment.

Pahrump resident John McDonald, a retired accountant who has worked for several state agencies in Carson City, stepped forward to insist that something was amiss with the county's regional hospital district, since dissolved by the county commission but still showing an ending fund balance in a recent report.

Acting commission Chairwoman Joni Eastley at first discounted McDonald's argument as the latter repeated, and Eastley denied that something was wrong. Finally the truth sunk in.

Something was wrong.

"Somebody got their signals crossed," was how McDonald would later put it.

Despite the fact that the Nye Regional Hospital District's debt was supposed to have been paid off in April 2004, McDonald noticed on the most recent treasurer's report - included in the backup information mailed to him by the county - the hospital district showed an ending balance of $2.6 million and a debt of $229,717.20.

That was the treasurer's report for March 2005, the latest figures available on monthly fund transactions.

"I don't know if they ever paid off the debt," McDonald said afterwards in an interview. "The county manager may not have paid it off."

Maher is known to be currently over-tasked with numerous mundane assignments, and the newly hired county comptroller has not yet come on board, a position that has gone unfilled for over a year since first proposed. The county has also not yet filled retired budget director Charles Rodewald's vacancy. Rodewald retired six weeks ago.

McDonald said he became suspicious when he noticed that two defunct hospital districts showed up on the treasurer's report with ending fund balances and existing debts. "That's what made me look into it," he said. "I'm just trying to keep you from getting yelled at by some very angry taxpayers," he told the commissioners.

Last March Rodewald, on the recommendation of commission Chairwoman Candice Trummell and commissioner Patricia Cox, announced that Pahrump Medical Center's debt would be wiped clean and taxpayers freed of the tax obligation. PETT funds were used to pay off the debt.

PETT is Payments Equal To Taxes, the annual funding the county receives from the federal Department of Energy for the Yucca Mountain project.

In the treasurer's report for March 31, the ending fund balance for the Pahrump Hospital District still shows $1,032,820.91 and a debt of $288,103.39. A negative $38,151.70 is reported for "capital projects."

Nye County is currently in litigation with the succeeding corporate entity that donated the land for the medical center, and the county is still responsible for paying the facility's operating costs. The matter is further complicated by the Department of Energy grant the county received last fall through the offices of senators Harry Reid and John Ensign for rehabilitating the facility. The $725,000 grant must be returned if the facility is not put to use within a specified period of time.

Nye County's history of hospital district administration is dismal. According to McDonald's recollection, the county took over Tonopah's Nye Regional Hospital in the mid-1990s due to mismanagement by the then operator. After trying to manage the facility for about a year, the county "sold it for a song" to Round Mountain Gold Corporation, McDonald said, with the proviso that the mining giant keep its doors open. It is still open.

But the district's debts have long been closed, at least on the books - apparently on all except Nye's.

According to Commissioner Eastley, the ad valorem tax rates still on the rolls for the Nye Regional Hospital District only affects residents of that defunct district: Tonopah, Beatty and the Big Smoky Valley.

"Sometimes that stuff happens," she said.

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

AEP
May 20, 2005

AEP completes sale of its share of South Texas Project to co-owners; Company preparing to file for stranded cost recovery in Texas

COLUMBUS, Ohio, May 19, 2005 – American Electric Power (NYSE: AEP) subsidiary AEP Texas Central Company (TCC) completed the sale of its 25.2 percent share of the South Texas Project (STP) nuclear plant to STP co-owners Texas Genco LLC and CPS Energy (formerly City Public Service of San Antonio) for approximately $314 million. AEP will use the proceeds from the sale to reduce capitalization at AEP Texas Central Company.

STP is a 2,500-megawatt nuclear plant located in Matagorda County, Texas, approximately 90 miles southwest of Houston. AEP´s 25.2 percent share of the plant was approximately 630 megawatts.

Texas Genco purchased 13.2 percent of STP for approximately $164 million and CPS Energy purchased 12 percent of STP for approximately $150 million, after adjustments. Texas Genco now owns 44 percent of STP, and CPS Energy owns 40 percent. The City of Austin continues to own 16 percent of STP. The plant is operated by STP Nuclear Operating Company.

"With the closing of the sale of AEP´s share of STP, AEP Texas enters the last stage of the transition to the competitive market envisioned by Texas lawmakers and the Governor when they enacted the industry restructuring legislation in 1999. We will file at the Public Utility Commission of Texas (PUCT) soon for the true-up of the difference between the book value and the market value of our generation, referred to as our stranded costs, as authorized by the statute," said Charles Patton, AEP Texas, president and chief operating officer.

AEP announced plans in December 2002 to sell all 4,497 MW of the generation assets owned by its TCC subsidiary to determine their market value for calculating stranded costs (the amount that the book value exceeds the market value of the assets) under Texas restructuring legislation. AEP completed sale of 3,813 MW of these generating assets, including eight natural gas plants, one coal-fired plant and one hydro plant, to a joint venture of Sempra Energy Partners and Carlyle/Riverstone Global Energy and Power Fund July 1, 2004.

AEP continues to work toward completing the sale of TCC´s 7.8 percent share of Oklaunion Plant but expects to receive approval from the Public Utility Commission of Texas to proceed with its stranded costs recovery filing while the Oklaunion sale proceeds toward closing.

American Electric Power owns more than 36,000 megawatts of generating capacity in the United States and is the nation´s largest electricity generator. AEP is also one of the largest electric utilities in the United States, with more than 5 million customers linked to AEP´s 11-state electricity transmission and distribution grid. The company is based in Columbus, Ohio.

- - -This report made by AEP and certain of its subsidiaries contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Although AEP and each of its registrant subsidiaries believe that their expectations are based on reasonable assumptions, any such statements may be influenced by factors that could cause actual outcomes and results to be materially different from those projected. Among the factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those in the forward-looking statements are: electric load and customer growth; weather conditions, including storms; available sources and costs of, and transportation for, fuels and the creditworthiness of fuel suppliers and transporters; availability of generating capacity and the performance of AEP´s generating plants; the ability to recover regulatory assets and stranded costs in connection with deregulation; the ability to recover increases in fuel and other energy costs through regulated or competitive electric rates; new legislation, litigation and government regulation including requirements for reduced emissions of sulfur, nitrogen, mercury, carbon and other substances; timing and resolution of pending and future rate cases, negotiations and other regulatory decisions (including rate or other recovery for new investments, transmission service and environmental compliance); oversight and/or investigation of the energy sector or its participants; resolution of litigation (including pending Clean Air Act enforcement actions and disputes arising from the bankruptcy of Enron Corp.); AEP´s ability to constrain its operation and maintenance costs; AEP´s ability to sell assets at acceptable prices and on other acceptable terms, including rights to share in earnings derived from the assets subsequent to their sale; the economic climate and growth in AEP´s service territory and changes in market demand and demographic patterns; inflationary trends; AEP´s ability to develop and execute a strategy based on a view regarding prices of electricity, natural gas, and other energy-related commodities; changes in the creditworthiness and number of participants in the energy trading market; changes in the financial markets, particularly those affecting the availability of capital and AEP´s ability to refinance existing debt at attractive rates; actions of rating agencies, including changes in the ratings of debt; volatility and changes in markets for electricity, natural gas, and other energy-related commodities; changes in utility regulation, including membership and integration into regional transmission structures; accounting pronouncements periodically issued by accounting standard-setting bodies; the performance of AEP´s pension and other postretirement benefit plans; prices for power that AEP generates and sells at wholesale; changes in technology and other risks and unforeseen events, including wars, the effects of terrorism (including increased security costs), embargoes and other catastrophic events.

Media contact:
Pat D. Hemlepp
Director, Corporate Media Relations
614/716-1620

Analysts contact:
Julie Sloat
Vice President, Investor Relations
614/716-2885

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

Brattleboro Reformer
May 20, 2005

Panel approves VY dry cask deal

By Carolyn Lorié
Reformer Staff

MONTPELIER -- On Thursday, the House Natural Resources and Energy Committee approved a bill that allows spent nuclear fuel at Vermont Yankee to be stored in concrete containers in exchange for a $4 million annual payment to the state.

The funds collected from Entergy Nuclear, the Louisiana-based company that owns the plant, will go into a renewable energy fund. The Department of Public Service will administer it.

"This is a very important bill for Vermont's energy future," said Rep. Steve Darrow, D-Putney.

In the bill, legislators wrote that the uncertainty of how long the fuel will be in the state creates a need for "intergenerational equity to help balance the burdens and benefits of nuclear power between succeeding generations of Vermont electricity consumers."

The company will be expected to pay the annual charge as long as the fuel is there, even after the plant shuts down.

Also in the bill are specific instructions for the Vermont Public Service Board on environmental matters concerning dry cask storage. Entergy is expected to file for a certificate of public good from the board as soon as the Legislature passes the final bill.

The bill limits the number of dry casks to that necessary to allow the plant to operate until 2012 and further stipulates that the company must seek legislative approval to extend its license.

The Ways and Means Committee, as well as Appropriations, must still approve the bill, before it can be considered by the full House and eventually the Senate.

"We put a lot of work into this bill. We've put a lot of important things in it," said Darrow. "I hope to see the Senate pass it and get it on the governor's desk this year."

Negotiations between the state and Entergy continue, meaning if a memorandum of understanding is reached, the bill could be radically altered to reflect that agreement.

Company officials, the Department of Public Service and three representatives from the Natural Resources and Energy Committee met throughout the day on Thursday.

According to committee chairman Robert Dostis, D-Waterbury, the talks are moving in a "positive direction." He declined to comment further on the substance of the negotiations, citing an agreement by all sides to not discuss the matter publicly until a deal in finalized.

Entergy officials had no comment on Thursday's vote by the committee.

Though company officials have argued that a fee would create a financial hardship, testimony provided by Richard Cowart, consultant to the committee from the Regulatory Assistance Project, showed that the company stood to make an additional $40 million to $50 million a year, if the bid to increase power by 20 percent is approved. At its peak, the company could make as much as $83 million a year.

The figures, however, are estimates based on data revealed during the sale of the plant in 2002. Entergy officials have not released the company's actual earnings, claiming the information is proprietary.

While the bill calls for the company to pay $4 million a year, there is a provision that would allow the Department of Public Service to develop a system whereby Entergy would be given credit for investing in renewable energy in the state. The credit would go toward reducing the annual charge.

Another provision authorizes the Public Service Board to make a determination about whether the charge would be a financial hardship for the company.

In addition to an annual fee for the right to store the fuel in dry casks, the bill also calls for imposing a $25 per year charge per kilowatt-hour for generating plants that produce more than 510 megawatts. Vermont Yankee will meet that criterion if its bid to increase power by 20 percent is approved by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Spent nuclear fuel at Vermont Yankee is currently stored in a pool in the reactor building. Like all nuclear plants, however, the pool was designed only as temporary storage. Initially, fuel was to be shipped out to be reprocessed and then, when reprocessing was stopped, it was supposed to get sent to a national repository.

The federal government, however, has yet to open Yucca Mountain and there is some uncertainty about whether it will ever open.

In the meantime, nuclear plants around the country are running out of storage space for the spent fuel and turning to dry casks as a way of creating more room in the spent fuel pool. Vermont Yankee officials expect to run out of room by 2008 or 2007 if the power boost is approved.

The issue of allowing dry casks to be installed at the plant site has been a contentious one, with environmental groups lobbying for heavy restrictions and Entergy resisting the imposition of any charge.

After Thursday's vote, Peter Alexander, executive director of the New England Coalition, lauded aspects of the bill, but said that an agreement between Entergy and the state would be preferable.

"It looks like that will only happen if the Legislature threatens to fail to pass this bill," he said.

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