Yucca Mountain News Clips - Friday, September 2, 2005

Yucca Mountain News Clips
Friday, September 2, 2005
---------------------------

Las Vegas SUN
September 02, 2005

Nevada hits NRC with suit over 1990 ruling

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

WASHINGTON -- Nevada has filed yet another lawsuit aimed at thwarting Yucca Mountain.

The state on Thursday sued the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, charging that an obscure NRC rule illegally prejudges the proposed Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository.

In a 1990 rule, the NRC formally recognized the national waste plan in its so-called "waste confidence" rule. It states that a geologic repository will be available by 2025.

To avoid the appearance of NRC bias toward Yucca, the 15-year-old NRC rule stated that if Yucca failed to obtain a license by 2000 that there would be plenty of time for the nation to license and construct another repository.

But now there's no time to develop any waste site except Yucca, Attorney General Brian Sandoval said.

"Today the only way NRC can meet its requirement that a repository will be available by 2025 is to presume it will give Yucca a license," Sandoval said. "For an ostensibly impartial regulator to make that prejudgment is simply unlawful. Frankly, it's also appalling public policy."

The agency will judge the Energy Department's license application to build Yucca Mountain, but faces a conflict of interest because it oversees the licensing and re-licensing of nuclear facilities, Nevada's lawyers say.

Nuclear plants must explain a long-term waste plan, which, in line with what Congress has deemed to be a national waste plan, is the permanent storage of waste in a geological repository.

The problem, Nevada attorneys say, is the NRC can't approve the plant licenses without approving Yucca Mountain.

The state first formally objected to the NRC rule in a petition it filed March 1, arguing that the agency should change its rule by stripping out the 2025 requirement. The NRC rejected the petition last month. Sandoval said that was the first time the NRC had rejected a rule-making petition without publishing it in the Federal Register and seeking public comment.

"They're bending over backwards to ram this project forward, and we're confident the court will see through it," Sandoval said.

NRC spokesman David McIntyre said he could not comment because the NRC had not reviewed the lawsuit.

But in rejecting Nevada's petition in an Aug. 10 letter to the state, the NRC stated that "reasonable assurance exists that at least one mined geologic repository will be available by 2025."

The NRC asserted that the agency "remains committed to a fair and comprehensive adjudication" and that the commitment is not jeopardized by the 2025 rule.

The letter even noted that there is still the "potential" that the NRC could deny a license to Yucca. The letter states that the NRC will not reconsider the 2025 rule unless the NRC rejects Yucca or unless the Energy Department abandons Yucca.

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

Las Vegas Review-Journal
September 02, 2005

YUCCA MOUNTAIN: State adds to lawsuits against project

Filing marks at least the eighth legal case that Nevada has pressed in recent years

By Steve Tetreault
Stephens Washington Bureau

WASHINGTON -- Attorneys for Nevada returned to federal court on Thursday to file a new lawsuit on Yucca Mountain.

The state charged in legal papers that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission acted improperly when it declined this month to consider changing one of its nuclear waste regulations.

Attorney General Brian Sandoval said the NRC's "waste confidence rule" prejudges the completion of the proposed Nevada waste repository and will influence officials when they decide whether to license the project.

"For an ostensibly impartial regulator to make that prejudgment is simply unlawful," Sandoval said. "Frankly, it's also appalling public policy."

The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. It marked at least the eighth legal case the state has pressed in recent years related to the government's efforts to build a high-level nuclear waste center in Nevada.

The waste confidence regulation, written in 1990, guides the NRC's consideration of power plant extensions and waste storage permits.

For purposes of streamlining the process, the regulation assumes that an underground repository will be open by 2025 to handle waste generated by nuclear facilities. Although it does not mention Yucca Mountain, that is the only waste site being developed.

Nevada attorneys petitioned the NRC in March to change the rule, arguing that Yucca Mountain flaws makes it improbable that the government will have a repository ready by 2025.

But as long at the waste confidence rule remained on the books, they contended, the nuclear agency could be pressured to approve the Yucca site.

The state's lawsuit asks judges to direct the NRC to revise its regulations.

The NRC rejected Nevada's request on Aug. 10. Sandoval said that, to his knowledge, it was the first time the agency had rejected a rulemaking petition outright without seeking public comment.

"It shows how afraid they are of having a level playing field for Yucca," Sandoval said. "They're bending over backward to ram this project through, and we're confident the court will see through it."

NRC attorneys had not reviewed the lawsuit yet and the agency had no immediate comment on it, spokesman Dave McIntyre said. He confirmed that it was rare, if not unprecedented, for the NRC to reject a petition without inviting public reaction first.

In rejecting Nevada's petition, the NRC said the state had misinterpreted the regulation. Opening it up for reconsideration "would not be a prudent use of the agency's limited resources," the agency said.

The commission said it was committed to a "fair and comprehensive" review of Yucca Mountain that would not be affected by the regulation.

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

Nevada Appeal
September 02, 2005

Nevada sues Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Appeal Capital Bureau

Nevada Attorney General Brian Sandoval says a 1990 rule used to license nuclear power plants must be changed because it presumes Yucca Mountain will be licensed as a waste dump.

The state sued the Nuclear Regulatory Commission this week demanding the so-called "Waste Confidence Rule" be changed.

The rule states that the NRC can continue to license new nuclear power plants because a geologic repository to dispose of radioactive waste will be available by 2025.

"Today, the only way NRC can meet its requirement that a repository will be available by 2025 is to presume it will give Yucca a license," he said. "For an ostensibly impartial regulator to make that prejudgment is simply unlawful. Frankly, it's also appalling public policy."

The state petitioned NRC to change the rule in March but was rejected in August. Sandoval said that is the first time in NRC history a rulemaking petition was rejected without public comment.

"They're bending over backwards to ram this project forward and we're confident the court will see through it," he said.

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

Reno Gazette-Journal
September 02, 2005

State files suit against over Yucca dump

Associated Press

LAS VEGAS — Nevada filed suit Thursday against the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, accusing the agency of prejudging an upcoming Energy Department application for a license to open a nuclear waste dump at Yucca Mountain.

“The only way NRC can meet its requirement that a repository will be available by 2025 is to presume it will give Yucca a license,’ Attorney General Brian Sandoval said in a statement. “For an ostensibly impartial regulator to make that prejudgment is simply unlawful.’

The 15-page petition filed in federal court in Washington, D.C., seeks to overturn a commission decision to reject a March 1 challenge the state filed against the so-called “waste confidence rule.’

The rule, adopted in 1990, lets the NRC continue licensing new nuclear plants and power plant waste storage facilities around the country with the expectation that, if the Yucca repository never opens, the government will find and open another site by 2025.

NRC spokesman David McIntyre denied Sandoval´s claim, saying the commission has yet to decide whether it will award the Energy Department a license to operate Yucca Mountain.

“We do not accept that the waste confidence decision prejudges the NRC decision on a potential license for Yucca Mountain,’ he said.

The commission notified state lawyers Aug. 10 and published notice in the Federal Register on Aug. 17 that the March challenge misconstrued the 1990 waste confidence rule.

It said the NRC was committed to a fair and comprehensive review of the Energy Department´s application, which is expected to be filed next year. Recent setbacks have pushed back the target date for receiving waste from 2010 to 2012 or later.

The new lawsuit is the latest in a series of legal challenges the state has filed against the federal plan to bury the nation´s most radioactive waste beneath a mountain 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas.

The state also has a suit pending in the same federal court challenging an Energy Department plan to build a dedicated 319-mile railroad line across Nevada to ship nuclear waste to the Yucca Mountain site.

Oral arguments in that case are scheduled Oct. 18.

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

Pahrump Valley Times
September 02, 2005

Commission Preview

Eye to go bye?

Commission Puts Duck Ponds Up for Auction

By Phillip Gomez
PVT

A possible decision to sell the Calvada Eye at auction tops the short agenda of items scheduled for hearings Tuesday in Tonopah at The Nye County Board of Commissioners meeting.

On Aug. 27, 2004 the commission decided to purchase the 32-acre, oval-shaped parcel dividing Calvada Boulevard for $3.2 million. The property, long vacant after the bankruptcy of Preferred Equities Corp., was acquired to serve as a nucleus for a community "One-Stop" public service center, anchored by the 11th Nevada JobConnect opened in the state. The One-Stop, occupying only part of the grounds, opened for business in May.

The property's purchase was prompted by a $400,000 allocation from the state Workforce Development Board. The Pahrump Chamber of Commerce was the project's sponsor.

A treasured community icon, the Calvada Eye, otherwise known as the "duck ponds," was early on intended to partially serve also as extra space for county offices.

Tuesday's action item includes as well a possible decision to sell 29 parcels along with separately listed county property located at 5501 N. Becky Lane northeast of Harris Farm Road.

The Calvada Eye was purchased with PETT funds, the county's annual appropriation of Payments Equal To Taxes from The federal Department of Energy for the Yucca Mountain project.

At the time, however, former Commissioner Henry Neth announced that the county could sell off some of its vacant property in Pahrump to finance the purchase.

Since then, the commissioners have taken out a $6 million loan to partially finance needed repairs and reconstruction of the main building on the property and for the purchase of additional water rights for the property. Meanwhile, public opinion has swayed against the commissioners for making the purchase, and offers have been tendered for twice the price they paid for it last year.

According to Commissioner Patricia Cox, the minimum acceptable bid for the property is $6 million.

Other items scheduled for the commission's attention include:

• At 9:30 a.m., an action item is scheduled to initiate the acquisition of public land from the Bureau of Land Management for commercial development at Lathrop Wells in Amargosa Valley. Congressionally earmarked funds are due on the project. The commissioners are scheduled to also issue a request for proposal to purchase a new water well or to fix the existing well.

Also on the list of action possibilities is the withdrawal of an expired tentative subdivision map for the Amargosa Valley Science and Technology Park at Lathrop Wells. The plan here, if adopted, is to proceed with development of the parcel.

• Approval is sought to purchase a mini-van for $23,000 for the county division of aging services. The van is for long-distance medical trips for seniors. The funding comes from a previously received grant.

• Approval is sought for a grant award from the Bureau of Land Management's rural fire assistance program. The total amount of the funding is $49,990, matched by Nevada Division of Forestry volunteer fire assistance in the amount of $20,062.

• Approval is sought for the purchase of a backup motor for the town of Gabbs. The budgeted purchase is for $5,515 for the town's water supply. Approval is also sought for donation of a 1989 Ford Ranger pickup truck to Beatty's water and sanitation district.

• An action item is scheduled for a bill proposing to repeal the ordinance establishing the Nye County Federal Impacts Advisory Board. The board advises the Board of Commissioners regarding activities related to the Department of Energy and the Yucca Mountain Repository.

• An action item is scheduled to approve the revised Nye County Community Protection Plan and to print the final report for public release.

• An action item is scheduled for again joining Eureka County for a (second year) cooperative study of groundwater, including that in the Monitor Valley. Also scheduled is approval of a joint-funding agreement with the U.S. Geological Service.

• An action item to send out a request for qualifications for a firm or individual to prepare and print brochures, educational materials, policy papers and similar documents dealing with the Yucca Mountain Repository.

• An action item to approve a request for qualifications to hire a consultant to provide assistance to the director of the Nuclear Waste Repository Project Office for developing a strategy of benefit to Nye County in upcoming negotiations with the Energy Department over the Yucca Mountain Repository.

• In the Nye County Public Works Department, an action item is scheduled for scuttling a previously approved highway safety study for the Bob Ruud Memorial Highway, not yet begun, and for authorizing instead a consultant to study truck routes and freight movement in Pahrump. The cost of the new study is approximately $61,000, to be shared equally with the Town of Pahrump.

• In the planning department, three action items are scheduled for the division of property located on parcel maps for Amargosa Valley. The first, approximately 170 acres to be divided into four 40-plus-acre parcels, is located at the northwest corner of Mecca Road and Miner Road.

Second is an application to divide two 10-acre parcels into four 5-acre parcels. The property is located at the southeast corner of Valley View Boulevard and Frontier Street.

Third is an application to divide two 10-acre parcels into four 5-acre parcels. The property is located at the northwest corner of Valley View Boulevard and Booth Avenue.

A fourth item, to adopt a resolution accepting an offer of dedication for portions of Diablo Drive in Amargosa Valley is also scheduled.

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

Jurist
September 02, 2005

Paper Chase Newsburst

Nevada AG brings new challenge to Yucca Mountain waste site

Chris Buell

Nevada Attorney General Brian Sandoval [official website] has challenged a Nuclear Regulatory Commission [official website] decision on regulations for the proposed nuclear waste site at Yucca Mountain [official project website], adding to a rash of litigation that has stalled the project for years. Sandoval's office on Thursday filed a suit over the NRC's refusal to consider its petition to alter a regulation that assumes a nuclear waste site will be open by 2025. The Department of Energy [official website] has been preparing an application to have the site licensed by the NRC, and Sandoval claimed the regulation made it more likely that the application would be approved without considering its merits. The regulation does not reference Yucca Mountain specifically, but it is the only site being considered by DOE. The suit is the eighth to challenge the project, which has remained bogged down since DOE received a green light to proceed in 2002. Read a Nevada Attorney General press release [PDF text] on the suit. The Las Vegas Review-Journal has more.

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

Platts
September 01, 2005

Nevada wants court to force NRC to reconsider Yucca Mt. ruling

Washington (Platts)--1Sep2005

Nevada has asked a federal appeals court to order NRC to reconsider the state's petition seeking a change in NRC's Waste Confidence rule. The 1990 rule says the commission is confident that spent fuel can be safely stored in casks at reactor sites for 100 years and that irradiated fuel will be moved to a geologic repository by 2025. Nevada has been fighting the repository DOE plans to build at Yucca Mountain. The state argued in a complaint it filed today with the U.S. Appeals Court in Washington, D.C. that NRC's recent denial of the state petition was unlawful, according to Joseph Egan, an attorney for Nevada. The state maintains the 2025 date is "arbitrary and capricious" and that DOE will not have a repository ready by then, he said. Separately, Nevada Senior Deputy Attorney General Marta Adams said the state would closely monitor NRC and Environmental Protection Agency regulation developments for a Yucca Mountain repository, indicating legal action on that front was possible if the agencies did not change their two-tiered approach.

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

Foster's Daily Democrat
September 02, 2005

Another view of BRAC and base closings

By Douglas MacGregor
Dover

The recent BRAC announcement to keep open the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard was met with a collective sigh of relief for the region. Thanks to the intense efforts of a region united, for the foreseeable future it will continue to provide the employment and economic support to which many in our region have grown accustomed.

Over the past few months, however, I kept thinking that there was another side to this story.

The mountain of red ink that our conservative President Bush has created is no secret. The federal government has grown significantly under his reign (much more so than under the Clinton administration). So when the federal government actually proposes to cut spending, i.e. close unneeded military bases, shouldn't we applaud this rare act of fiscally sound thinking?

Many of the sites on the closure list were leftover bases from World War II. The world, the nation and our military have changed a great deal in the last 60 years. Certainly there are bases that are now obsolete and simply not necessary. By consolidating smaller bases with larger sites, money is saved by eliminating the duplication of the base infrastructure. In other cases sites have been maintained simply as jobs programs for the members of congress in that district.

There is no shortage of arguments for downsizing. Past rounds of base closures are estimated to save the government $6 billion each year. In addition, land that was property- and sales-tax free is replaced by taxpaying private industry. The success of the Pease AFB closure is an example of how a closure can have positive effects for a region.

These are sound arguments when viewed from above. But when any individual base is examined, a recurring principle of American life sneaks into the equation. It is not new, but lately I see the idea of NIMBY (not in my back yard) in a number of scenarios.

One example that comes to mind is the proposal to place windmills in Nantucket Sound as an alternative source of energy. The clean and cheap energy should be a welcome substitute for fossil fuels. But the idea that the distant sight of windmills might blight the panoramic ocean view of the seaside homes was enough to send Ted Kennedy and his enviro-friendly crowd into an upheaval. Ted likes the environment; just try the next harbor, please.

The last oil refinery built in the US opened in 1976. No one likes high gas prices, but try and build a refinery somewhere? Activists come like ants at a picnic.

How about depositing nuclear waste, a huge environmental and terrorist threat, in the wasteland of Yucca Mountain, Nevada? Not so fast, say Nevadans. We might need that desert mountain in 10,000 years.

The base closures certainly fall into the NIMBY category. Some people could not accept the possibility that our nation might be better off with their beloved bases closed. The fights that ensued were expected and commendable. Fighting for yourself and family always is. But some arguments heard around the nation were one-sided and narrow minded. People need to be reminded that most often there is another side of the story than your own.

When we take off our tunnel vision glasses, we might just see those panoramic views those Nantucket millionaires like so much.

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

Las Vegas SUN
September 01, 2005

Nevada files suit against NRC over Yucca license process

By Ken Ritter
Associated Press

LAS VEGAS (AP) - Nevada filed a lawsuit Thursday against the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, accusing the agency of prejudging an upcoming Energy Department application for a license to open a nuclear waste dump at Yucca Mountain.

"The only way NRC can meet its requirement that a repository will be available by 2025 is to presume it will give Yucca a license," Attorney General Brian Sandoval said in a statement. "For an ostensibly impartial regulator to make that prejudgment is simply unlawful."

The 15-page petition asks the U.S. District Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C., to overturn a commission decision to reject a March 1 challenge the state filed against the "Waste Confidence Rule."

NRC spokesman David McIntyre denied Sandoval's claim, saying the commission has yet to decide whether it will award the Energy Department a license to operate Yucca Mountain.

"We do not accept that the waste confidence decision prejudges the NRC decision on a potential license for Yucca Mountain," he said.

The commission notified state lawyers Aug. 10 and published notice in the Federal Register on Aug. 17 that the March challenge misconstrued the 1990 waste confidence rule.

It said the NRC was committed to a fair and comprehensive review of the Energy Department's application, which is expected to be filed next year. Recent setbacks have pushed back the target date for receiving waste from 2010 to 2012 or later.

The new lawsuit is the latest in a series of legal challenges the state has filed against the federal plan to bury the nation's most radioactive waste beneath a mountain 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas.

Oral arguments in that case are scheduled Oct. 18.

On the Net:

Nuclear Regulatory Commission: http://www.nrc.gov

Nevada's Agency for Nuclear Projects: http://www.state.nv.us/nucwaste

Yucca Mountain project: http://www.ymp.gov

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

Provo Daily Herald
September 01, 2005

In Our View: Nuclear waste and terrorism

The Daily Herald

When the Department of Homeland Security was formed, it was billed as a broad-based agency dedicated to fighting terrorism on our shores.

In the largest consolidation of agencies since the Defense Department was created, the Coast Guard, Secret Service, Border Patrol, Transportation Security Administration and other agencies were merged into the DHS to respond to terrorism.

But as we found out in Utah, the department's powers aren't all that encompassing.

DHS officials were in Utah recently to review Private Fuel Storage's plans to store nuclear waste above ground on the Goshute reservation in Skull Valley. Sen. Orrin G. Hatch, R-Utah, said storing the waste within 45 miles of Salt Lake City and Salt Lake International Airport poses a significant national security risk. We think it's also a national security risk to ship the material from the east coast to either Utah or the repository at Yucca Mountain, Nev.

Everyone hoped that the DHS could come in and put a stop to PFS' plan once and for all, seeing that other avenues of appeal haven't worked out for Utah.

But DHS' power is limited in this area. Michelle Petrovich, DHS spokeswoman, said the department can only make recommendations to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. It cannot take any regulatory action. Even that power is limited; DHS cannot make any recommendations on transportation plans, which is the part of the nuclear waste plan that poses the greatest risk to the public.

We have to ask ourselves why the agency designated to deal with the threat of terrorism within our borders is relegated to making suggestions when it comes to nuclear waste storage, and told to shut up and sit down when it comes to transporting said waste. After all, it's Homeland Security personnel who tell us we can't take nail clippers on airliners, yet they can't do anything about nuclear waste?

The NRC does have the expertise to understand issues surrounding nuclear waste, such as half-lives of various materials and how to contain radiation. But when a valid national security issue is raised regarding nuclear waste, should the agency charged with assessing threats and protecting the country have more authority than a mere advisor?

In the days before Sept. 11, 2001, that arrangement may have been somewhat acceptable. But since the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, things have changed. We have to start thinking about the unthinkable, and how to respond to it.

John Parkyn, PFS' chairman, argues that leaving the waste where it is, in storage pools by nuclear reactors, is a greater threat to security since the reactors are near population centers. But it's easier to protect the waste from a terrorist assault at a nuclear power plant (which should be fortified against terrorist attacks in the first place) than it is to safeguard it while it's rolling on the rails or highways to either Utah or Nevada.

It may not hurt to amend the legislation that created DHS to either put part of the NRC under its jurisdiction, or make DHS recommendations binding upon the NRC when it comes to the storage and transportation of nuclear waste.

If we want DHS to truly fulfill its mission of protecting Americans, shouldn't it have as much authority over nuclear waste as it does nail clippers and cigarette lighters on airliners?

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

Grand Junction Sentinel
September 01, 2005

RAND study says oil shale promise might come true

By Gary Harmon
The Daily Sentinel

Oil shale´s time seems fast approaching, according to a RAND Corp. report commissioned by the U.S. Department of Energy.

The report suggests caution by the federal government in committing resources to developing the oil shale of Colorado, Utah and Wyoming, but it also says federal agencies need to look more creatively at leasing public lands overlaying the shale.

The study calls for the Energy Department to make oil shale a research-and-development priority. Asked by the Energy Department for an independent perspective, “We tried our best to look at the big picture,’ said Dr. Jim Bartis, lead author of the study for RAND. “We were very pleasantly surprised by what we saw.’

Technical advancements in extracting oil from shale, including work at Shell´s Mahogany Research Project in northwest Colorado, have shown that oil shale could play a significant role, but not an immediate one, Bartis said.

“Even though oil shale doesn´t solve today´s problem, you´ve got to start,’ he said.

The Shell process, which involves no mining and minimal disturbance, “might be the kind of breakthrough that oil shale deserves and needs to get,’ he said.

The ability to produce oil from shale in the United States and elsewhere could help hold down oil prices, he said.

RAND recommended against a rush to develop oil shale, said Bartis, who visited western Colorado in the 1980s, before the oil shale bust.

“Been there, done that,’ he said. “We have to make sure that this resource is approached in a way that is sustainable, not a dead end like nuclear power or Yucca Mountain.’

Recommendations include development of a federal oil shale leasing strategy for the Green River Formation, which contains as much as 1.3 trillion barrels of oil, making it the most energy-intensive resource in the world.

Some parts of the formation contain concentrations equal to 2.5 million barrels of oil underneath a single acre of surface land, he said.

That calls for the federal government to look at a leasing program that accounts for those conditions, as well as reclamation afterwards, he said.

The report also calls for the establishment of a national oil shale archive and a task force of federal and state officials to deal with the effects of development.

In that area, the report falls short, said Jim Evans of the Associated Governments of Northwest Colorado.

Local officials should be deeply involved in the planning for oil shale development, Evans said.

So far as the recommendation for federal research, “I think this report is 20 years late,’ he said.

The Department of Defense also should be recognized as a player in oil shale, Evans said.

The RAND report calls for further study of the effects of water and air quality as oil shale is developed.

The various elements of oil shale development have to be coordinated by the federal government “in a thoughtful manner,’ Bartis said. “Otherwise, the first plants you put up may end being your last plants.’

Gary Harmon can be reached via e-mail at gharmon@gjds.com.

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