Yucca Mountain News Clips
Wednesday, September 14, 2005
---------------------------
Las Vegas SUN
September 14, 2005
USGS faces big budget cut
By Suzanne Struglinski
<suzanne@lasvegassun.com>
Sun Washington Bureau
WASHINGTON -- The U.S. Geological Survey faces an 89 percent budget cut for its work on the Energy Department's Yucca Mountain project. If finalized, government employees and contractors in Nevada and Colorado would lose their jobs by the end of the month.
Congress has not approved the Energy Department's final budget, which could change the outcome. Until it does, the USGS is taking action to prepare for the lower budget that would start Oct. 1. Officials from both agencies are scheduled to meet Sept. 19 to figure out the next steps or how to solve the problem.
"You don't wait until you get your appropriation," said Barbara Wainman, USGS communications director, who said it is normal for the agency to be taking these steps now with the type of budget cut proposed.
"We were anticipating the budget would have a steady decline, but not anticipating such a precipitous drop," Wainman said.
Controversy has surrounded the federal agencies this year when the department discovered e-mails written by USGS employees complaining about adhering to rules on how to document their work. Several government investigations are now in progress, including one by a congressional subcommittee led by Rep. Jon Porter, R-Nev., to see if any they falsified any data.
Wainman could not specify why the department was proposing such a dramatic cut.
In an Aug. 30 letter to Yucca's deputy director Paul Golan, USGS Associate Director Robert Hirsch said the Energy Department's "present budget projections place our proposed transition, continuity of the science program, and license support in great jeopardy."
Hirsch said the USGS would need to let go 15 contractors by the end of the month and reassign 39 employees or let them go as well. USGS will notify Nevada and Colorado officials that people will lose their jobs.
Wainman said six government employees and two contractors in Nevada would be at risk.
The USGS has worked with the department on the proposed nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas, since its inception, Wainman said. In 1995 it had a budget of $31.5 million for its research and scientific work. The USGS does not use any of its budget for Yucca, but acts more like a contractor to the Energy Department. The department reimburses the agency for its employees' work, Wainman said.
USGS officials met with aides to Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., and informed them of the cuts, Reid spokeswoman Tessa Hafen said. The Reid staffers were struck by the fact that the Energy Department had given the USGS no clear reason for the cuts, she said.
Hafen said the timing was "somewhat suspect" coming so soon after the disclosure of the controversial e-mails, Hafen said. The USGS still has an important role to play at Yucca, she said.
"They are still an independent agency -- independent from DOE," Hafen said.
Rep. Jim Gibbons, R-Nev., sent a letter to the Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman Tuesday demanding answers on the budget reduction.
"At a time when the integrity of the science and overall technical process surrounding the Yucca Mountain Project is being called into question and is the subject of a congressional investigation, how can the DOE ensure that the scientific process meant to assure public safety will not be compromised by such a drastic budget cut?," Gibbons wrote.
Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., said no more money should be spent on Yucca Mountain at all, but because the White House wants to move forward with it, she wonders why the USGS would be cut out.
"I question eliminating funding for work by the USGS given its role in performing scientific assessments at Yucca Mountain and the knowledge base that exists within the agency." Berkley said. "This move is the latest signal that all remaining science at the site is being jettisoned and that there is no interest on the part of the White House in answering lingering questions about the shoddy science and lack of quality assurance that has been well documented."
Berkley said the cuts also give the department a way to get rid of employees "who may know exactly what corners were cut and what findings were doctored" at the project.
Porter has requested a meeting with Hirsch to discus exactly what is happening,he said. The department's action does not surprise him. Porter believes the e-mail controversy is affecting all aspects of the program.
"If they take away the Quality Assurance and the scientists, what is going on there?," Porter said.
---------------------------
Las Vegas SUN
September 14, 2005
DOE proposes spending cuts for Yucca Mountain scientists
Associated Press
LAS VEGAS (AP) - The Energy Department has notified the U.S. Geological Survey that it should expect a large reduction in its 2006 funding for work on a proposed nuclear waste dump in southern Nevada.
The proposed 89 percent cut follows the disclosure in March that USGS scientists may have falsified data regarding the Yucca Mountain project.
The reduced budget would force the USGS to lay off or reassign 54 government employees and contractors in Nevada and Colorado by the end of the month, according to an Aug. 30 letter sent from USGS Associate Director Robert Hirsch to DOE's Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management.
"This effectively would end our Yucca Mountain project," USGS spokeswoman Barbara Wainman said, noting USGS scientists were responsible for about a third of the data DOE plans to use in its upcoming application to open the Yucca repository.
"This is pretty serious when you think about losing all the institutional knowledge and expertise needed to defend that work," she said.
DOE spokesman Allen Benson said Wednesday the USGS has been paid $379 million for Yucca Mountain work since 1983 and called discussion about Yucca Mountain funding projections "purely speculation."
In March, the DOE revealed that several USGS hydrologists wrote in e-mails of possibly falsifying quality assurance documents related to their Yucca research.
The e-mails, written between 1998 and 2000, prompted ongoing investigations by a House subcommittee and inspectors general in the Energy and Interior departments. The e-mail authors remain employed at USGS but have been removed from work on the Yucca project.
An aide to Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada called the timing of the proposed funding cuts "somewhat suspect," while Rep. Jim Gibbons, R-Nev., asked Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman in a letter to explain the proposal and how the department planned to replace the USGS.
Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., questioned eliminating funding for work by the USGS, and Rep. Jon Porter, R-Nev., chairman of a subcommittee investigating the e-mails, said he has asked to meet with Hirsch.
With the Energy Department shifting emphasis from site selection to licensing, Energy Department spending on USGS activity at Yucca Mountain has decreased from a peak of $31.5 million in fiscal 1995 to $8.7 million this year, according to budget documents. The 2006 proposal calls for $940,000.
Congress in 2002 picked Yucca Mountain as the site of the nation's nuclear waste repository, and the Energy Department plans to seek an operating license from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. It would entomb 77,000 tons of the nation's most radioactive waste for tens of thousands of years.
On the Net:
Yucca Mountain project: http://www.ymp.gov
Nuclear Regulatory Commission: http://www.nrc.gov
U.S. Geological Survey: http://www.usgs.gov
---------------------------
Las Vegas Review-Journal
September 14, 2005
DOE moves to boot agency
Proposed cuts follow disclosure of Yucca e-mails
By Steve Tetreault
Stephens Washington Bureau
WASHINGTON -- Months after the discovery of scientist e-mails critical of the Yucca Mountain Project, the Energy Department is preparing deep cuts in spending next year for the federal geology agency at the nuclear waste site, officials said.
The cuts essentially could sever ties between DOE and the U.S. Geological Survey at Yucca Mountain, which USGS earth scientists have studied for 26 years.
The timing of the proposal has caught interest in Congress. It follows the disclosure in March that several USGS hydrologists wrote of possibly falsifying quality assurance documents on their Yucca research.
The e-mails, written between 1998 and 2000, rocked both agencies and prompted ongoing investigations by a House subcommittee and inspectors general in the Energy and Interior departments.
USGS officials said they were surprised by DOE's plans, which formed over the summer. There is belief that DOE's decisions were linked to the e-mail controversy, according to three USGS officials who asked not to be identified.
"Obviously we were as disturbed by the e-mails as they were," a USGS executive said. "It is hard to completely separate the two, but we were not anticipating our budget would take this kind of decline."
The Energy Department had no immediate comment Tuesday. Spokesman Allen Benson said Congress has not yet appropriated a Yucca Mountain budget for next year, and it would be premature to speculate how it would be spent.
With the Energy Department shifting emphasis to Yucca Mountain licensing, science work at the site has been tapering. DOE spending on USGS activity has decreased gradually from a high of $31.5 million in fiscal 1995 to $8.7 million this year, according to budget documents.
In an Aug. 30 letter, USGS Associate Director Robert Hirsch said the agency was told by DOE and Yucca Mountain management firm Bechtel SAIC that it should expect an 89 percent cut in its 2006 work funding, to $940,000.
The budget projections place USGS's work "in great jeopardy," Hirsch said in the letter to Paul Golan, DOE deputy director of the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management.
"This effectively would end our Yucca Mountain project," USGS Communications Director Barbara Wainman said. "This has been a long-standing relationship. We were anticipating being on the project through the licensing process."
USGS personnel monitor water and precipitation at the Yucca site, 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas, take part in studies of natural characteristics that could corrode waste canisters, and have been working on revised peak radiation dose calculations that would be required by the Environmental Protection Agency, Wainman said.
Scientists also provide technical support on Nye County nuclear waste studies, she said.
The USGS has alerted federal lawmakers in Nevada and Colorado, where workers would be affected by the proposed cuts.
The lawmakers began reacting Tuesday.
Rep. Jim Gibbons, R-Nev., asked Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman in a letter to explain the proposal and how DOE planned to replace the USGS.
"At a time when the integrity of the science and overall technical process surrounding the Yucca Mountain Project is being called into question, how can the DOE ensure that the scientific process meant to assure public safety will not be compromised by such a drastic budget cut?" Gibbons wrote.
"I question eliminating nearly all funding for work by the USGS, given the role that they have played in performing scientific assessments and the knowledge base that exists within the agency," said Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev.
Rep. Jon Porter, R-Nev., chairman of a subcommittee investigating the e-mails, said he has asked to meet with Hirsch "to get to the bottom of this."
"DOE is remaining true to their standard operating procedure: Never let good science get in the way of a bad project," said Tessa Hafen, spokeswoman for Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev.
Authors of the controversial e-mails remain employed at USGS. They have been removed from Nevada work.
A primary e-mail author, hydrologist Joseph Hevesi, told Porter's subcommittee at a hearing in June that he did not falsify documents and his criticism of the project was "water cooler talk."
DOE managers authorized an internal probe to dissect work that Hevesi and others associated with the e-mail had performed. The investigation has tentatively concluded repository science was not compromised, but officials have said the scientists' work would be redone in any case to increase confidence.
Hirsch and USGS Director Patrick Leahy were scheduled to meet with DOE counterparts on Sept. 19 to discuss funding and the e-mail controversy. Wainman said DOE recently indicated it might increase spending on USGS work above the $940,000 amount.
USGS workers assigned to Yucca Mountain have been told they might be laid off or transferred. Forty-six federal workers and contractor employees are based in Denver while eight are in Nevada.
"As we move into the nuclear licensing process, over a third of the data sets that have been used in the science to support Yucca Mountain, and that DOE will be using in its license application, are USGS data," Wainman said. "This is pretty serious when you think about losing all the institutional knowledge and expertise needed to defend that work."
---------------------------
Las Vegas Review-Journal
September 14, 2005
Environmentalists ask Congress for Yucca probe
By Steve Tetreault
Stephens Washington Bureau
WASHINGTON -- Environmental activists on Tuesday called on Congress to convene an independent investigation of possible document falsification at Yucca Mountain, saying the Energy Department has avoided scrutiny on the issue.
E-mails made public in March show that U.S. Geological Survey scientists assigned to the nuclear waste repository project did not follow procedures to verify their work, the groups said.
They questioned an internal probe that DOE is conducting.
They also urged Congress to halt work on Yucca Mountain and require the department to "publicly release all relevant information."
"Asking DOE to conduct a sound, reliable investigation of itself is akin to asking the fox to count the hens to make sure none of them have been eaten," the groups said in a letter sent to Senate and House members.
The letter was signed by leaders of 22 environmental organizations that have been critical of the Yucca Mountain Project, including Nevada-based Citizen Alert and the Nevada Nuclear Waste Task Force.
Inspectors general for the Energy Department and the Interior Department are investigating the e-mails, but they are concentrating on possible criminal activity and not issues that would affect repository health and safety licensing, the activists said.
A House panel also is looking into the issue. DOE "has repeatedly ignored requests by the subcommittee for relevant documents, meetings with DOE managers and DOE and USGS scientists and responses to written questions," the groups said.
The House subcommittee chairman is Rep. Jon Porter, R-Nev. He said he understands activists' frustration, but he believes his investigation will be fruitful.
"We've been at this for five months and with hundreds of hours of investigation," Porter said. "If I believed we need an additional investigation, I would be the first one to call for it."
---------------------------
KVBC
September 14, 2005
Yucca Mountain Hearing In Caliente
A reminder for folks in the Caliente area. The Department Of Energy is holding a public hearing Thursday on the Yucca Mountain issue.
It concerns the Caliente Corridor. That's the proposed rail line that would carry radioactive waste from Caliente to Yucca Mountain. The rail line is 319 miles long.
The DOE wants to set aside 308,600 acres for up to 20 years while it looks at building that line. The set aside prevents any mining claims on that land. The public hearing is from 4p.m. to 8p.m. Thursday night at the Caliente Youth Center on Highway 93.
---------------------------
Pahrump Valley Times
September 14, 2005
Letter: Power play
Dear Doug,
I enjoy the insight, wit and sarcasm in your column. Some times I disagree, but always I enjoy it. Thanks for writing it for us.
I have only been here for two years, so am still learning the local political issues. I will not vote for local issues, only the national ones. I need to learn more on the local issues to feel secure in electing my representatives. I would like to ask you to contemplate two issues I have and comment on them.
No. 1 With all the millions or billions spent at the Test Site, it seems impossible that (Yucca Mountain) will not be completed and utilized by the country. There is a security force already in place to protect the site. I ask, why not build a massive nuclear power plant out there to supply power to Nevada and the West Coast? The dam should be able to cut back on the water used for hydropower, allowing the lake to recede at a slower rate or raise lake levels. The high paying jobs to construct and operate the plant would be a boom for Nye County work wise and better, tax wise. Lastly, that is where the waste is going to be eventually, so why not utilize the secure, remote area to benefit the entire West Coast energy wise?
No. 2 People who need to keep their water rights are wasting water every day. The groundwater that all are concerned about is forced to be pumped and wasted to maintain their water rights. I find it idiotic for the government to force people to use it or lose it. There is nothing wrong with accepting their rights and allow them to leave it in the ground. If you need a demonstration of the waste, drive by Terrible's Lakeside. South of there is a field waiting to be developed. To maintain the water rights the owner is forced to pump hundreds of thousands of gallons of water on the land for no reason at all. I am sure this is not the only site this has to be happening on. Will you investigate this and report on it?
Sincerely,
BOB MILLER
Editor's note: As reported in previous editions, the Southern Nye County Conservation District introduced legislation this year to ban the requirement that owners of water rights "put their water to beneficial use" or risk losing the commodity. The bill died in committee but the issue will undoubtedly be raised again when the 2007 Nevada Legislature convenes.
---------------------------
Nuclear Engineering
September 14, 2005
Bush nominates Sproat to waste management post
Edward Sproat has been named director of the Energy Department's Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management, by President Bush.
The office oversees the development the Yucca Mountain waste repository in Nevada and a system to transport nuclear waste to the site from commercial power reactors and federal plants. Responsibilities also include advising the energy secretary on scientific research and licencing of the nation's first permanent geologic repository for spent nuclear fuel.
If confirmed by the Senate, Sproat will be charged with reinvigorating the project beset by technical and legal bugbears.
Sproat, a nuclear industry executive from Pennsylvania, is expected to succeed Margaret Chu, who resigned as director in February.
Sproat is managing partner of a consulting firm, McNeil, Sproat & Associates, and has held executive posts at Exelon Corp and PECO Energy.
The nomination will be considered by the Energy Committee before going to the Senate itself.
---------------------------
Ogden Standard-Examiner
September 14, 2005
Vow made to block nuke waste
By Paul Foy
The Associated Press
Huntsman: I would stand on tracks
SALT LAKE CITY -- Utah is planning its challenge to a federal ruling that would allow shipments of nuclear waste to an impoverished American Indian reservation 45 miles southwest of Salt Lake City.
Gov. Jon Huntsman said Tuesday he would "stand in the middle of the railroad track" to stop the shipments, although a court battle seems much more likely.
In his biggest challenge since taking office in January, Huntsman took the vow as state lawyers prepared a case asking a federal appeals court to overturn the decision by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Utah has 60 days to appeal Friday's decision and is assessing whether it will find more sympathetic or critical judges at the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver or the District of Columbia Circuit, said Denise Chancellor, an assistant attorney general for the state.
U.S. Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, is equally furious over the use of the Skull Valley Goshute Indian Reservation as a ground-level storage depot for spent nuclear fuel rods. He called it dangerous and reckless, with F-16 fighter jets from Hill Air Force Base making 7,000 runs yearly over the reservation to the Utah Test and Training Range.
Utah made its strongest argument over the chance one of those jets could crash into a canister of highly radioactive fuel, or that terrorists could make a target of the concrete pad.
The NRC rejected the arguments Friday after eight years of hearings and deliberations by its Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, which split 2-1 on the safety questions. The dissenting judge, a nuclear engineer, questioned assumptions used to assess the likelihood of a jet crash.
The NRC then voted 3-1 to approve the license for Utah's version of Yucca Mountain, the troubled federal project to build a nuclear-waste repository in Nevada. The dissent was made by Commissioner Gregory Jaczko, who questioned the lack of a definitive analysis of the spread of radiation from a breached container.
The split on both boards opens a legal argument for Utah, which can argue in court that the NRC didn't satisfy its own safety standards for a nuclear-waste repository.
"Some deference will be given to NRC, but they have to comply with their own regulations, and I think we can demonstrate that while there have been a lot of hearings and computer modeling, there hasn't been a thorough analysis of the radiation consequences if and when a storage cask gets hit by an F-16 or a bomb," Chancellor said. "They basically looked at this without any standards whatsoever."
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has also objected to the decision. In a statement issued late Friday, church leaders said:
"We regret (the) decision by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to authorize the issuance of a license that would allow storage of radioactive waste in Skull Valley. Storage of nuclear waste in Utah is a matter of significant public interest that requires thorough scrutiny."
Former Rep. Jim Hansen still sees the U.S. Capitol as Utah's best hope, but says his bill to block the waste site's rail route with wilderness would have succeeded a few years ago if an environmentalist had not stymied the move.
The bill is being carried this year by Hansen's successor, Republican U.S. Rep. Rob Bishop. It has passed in the House but stalled once again in the Senate.
The state's congressional delegation fired off a letter to Interior Secretary Gale Norton asking her to block construction of a rail spur across federal land to the reservation.
Utah's leaders also plan to lobby the Bureau of Indian Affairs to withhold its approval for a lucrative lease that Private Fuel Storage offered the Skull Valley Band of Goshute Indians.
Asked Tuesday how the state would respond to an earthquake or other disaster hitting Skull Valley, Huntsman flatly said, "They won't be successful." He was referring to Private Fuel Storage, the consortium of nuclear-powered utilities looking for a temporary way station for nuclear waste.
If it comes to it, Huntsman said he would personally block rail shipments at Utah's border.
"But meantime, we have an executive-branch strategy, we have a legislative strategy, we have a legal strategy," Huntsman told radio station KCPW on Tuesday.
---------------------------
Lincoln County News
September 14, 2005
Maine Yankee Hires New President, CEO
By Greg Foster
Maine Yankee has hired Board Chairman Gerald Poulin as the new president and CEO of the company for its storage facility phase of the plant´s operation, company spokesman Eric Howes announced this week.
Poulin has served as member of the Maine Yankee board since 1989 and its chairman for the past six years, which he will be continuing to do.
Poulin will be overseeing the 64-concrete dry cask storage facility for spent fuel and high-level nuclear waste at Bailey Point, which is all that will be left on the site along with the security and operations building for the installation. Presently John Niles is the manager of the facility.
Poulin was employed with the Central Maine Power Co. for 30 years having retired as the senior vice president of engineering and power generation.
The previous president and CEO, Ted Feigenbaum, has accepted a position as president and general manager of the Bechtel SAIC in Nevada, which is associated with the proposed national high level nuclear waste storage facility at Yucca Mountain.
Currently Maine Yankee has been continuing it decommissioning operations, including the removal of tons of soil stockpiled on site as part of its remediation on the site. Howes estimated that there are 85 rail cars left to ship to a low level nuclear waste dump out of state.
“We have added additional cars to the fleet and are hopeful of being done in early to mid-October,’ Howes said. “There is not a lot of work to be done.’
A new gatehouse is now complete and will be in use as soon as the new gate is operational, according to Howes. The gatehouse is located on the access road closer to the storage area.
The measure is a part of the security provision for the storage facility, which is mostly surrounded by an earthen berm as well as fencing.
“We provide security there in accordance with the (federal) Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) regulations,’ Howes said.
Baily Point use:
Recently Maine Yankee received federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission acceptance of its final status survey packages for its radiological cleanup of the site, Howes said.
The next step in the process is a formal amendment to its NRC operating license which the company is waiting for now. The amendment will reduce the footprint of the plant from the original 180 acres at Bailey Point to the 12-acre parcel comprising the spent fuel storage facility.
As far as the future use of the acreage that will be freed up, that is uncertain, although there has been talk in the past about the sale of the property for possible economic development.
“The future of the peninsula is up in the air as long as the spent fuel is stored there,’ he said. “Our goal now is to get the spent fuel removed from there.’
Public CAP meeting
The next meeting of company´s reorganized Community Advisory Panel is scheduled Thurs., Oct. 20 at 6 p.m. at the Chewonki Foundation.
---------------------------
Environmental Protection Agency
September 14, 2005
[Federal Register: September 14, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 177)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 54325-54327]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr14se05-29]
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 197
[FRL-7968-7] RIN 2060-AN15
Opportunity to Obtain Information and Present Testimony on Proposed Public Health Environmental Radiation Protection Standards for Yucca Mountain, NV; Notice of Public Hearings
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Proposed rule; notice of public hearings.
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) will conduct public hearings to receive comments on its proposed amendments to the Public Health and Environmental Radiation Protection Standards for Yucca Mountain, Nevada in Amargosa Valley, NV; Las Vegas, NV; and Washington, DC.
The amended proposed standards were published in the Federal Register on August 22, 2005. The 60-day public comment period closes on October 21, 2005.
DATES: The schedule for the hearings is as follows:
Amargosa Valley, NV, October 3, 2005, from 7 p.m. to 9 p.m. This hearing will be preceded by an information session from 4 p.m. to 5:30 p.m., and a roundtable discussion from 5:30 p.m. to 6:30 p.m.
Las Vegas, NV, October 4, 2005, from 7 p.m. to 9 p.m. This hearing will be preceded by an information session from 4 p.m. to 5:30 p.m., and a roundtable discussion from 5:30 p.m. to 6:30 p.m.
Las Vegas, NV, October 5, 2005, from 11 a.m. to 12 a.m. This hearing will be preceded by an information session from 10 a.m. to 11 a.m.
Washington, DC, October 11, 2 p.m. to 4 p.m. This hearing will be preceded by an information session from 1 p.m. to 2 p.m. Specific locations for each city are detailed in the next section, ADDRESSES. Procedures for preregistering for and testifying at these public hearings are detailed in the ``'Hearings Procedures''' subsection (under Unit II) of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section.
ADDRESSES: EPA's public hearings to receive comments on the Agency's amended proposed radiation protection standards for Yucca Mountain, Nevada will be held on:
October 3, 2005 at the Amargosa Valley Community Center, 821 East Farm Road, Amargosa Valley, NV;
October 4 and 5, 2005 at The Cashman Center, 850 North Las Vegas Blvd, Las Vegas, NV;
October 11, 2005 at the EPA East Building, Room 1153, 1202 Constitution Ave, NW. (Federal Triangle Metro Stop). For additional information regarding the purpose and format of the hearings, please refer to Unit II of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section.
Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. OAR-2005-0083, by one of the following methods:
Electronically: If you submit an electronic comment as prescribed below, EPA recommends that you include your name, mailing address, and an e-mail address or other contact information in the body of your comment. Also include this contact information on the outside of any disk or CD ROM you submit, and in any cover letter accompanying the disk or CD ROM. This ensures that you can be identified as the submitter of the comment and allows EPA to contact you in case we cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties or we need further information on the substance of your comment. EPA's policy is that we will not edit your comment, and any identifying or contact information provided in the body of a comment will be included as part of the comment that is placed in the official public docket, and made available in EPA's electronic public docket. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, we may not be able to consider your comment.
Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
Agency Web site: http://www.epa.gov/edocket. EDOCKET,
EPA's
[[Page 54326]]
electronic public docket and comment system, is EPA's preferred method for receiving comments. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
E-mail: Comments may be sent by electronic mail (e-mail) to a-and-r-docket@epa.gov, Attention Docket ID No. OAR-2005-0083.
Fax: Fax your comments to: 202-566-1741, Attention Docket ID. No. OAR-2005-0083.
Surface Mail: Send your comments to: EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), Air and Radiation Docket, Environmental Protection Agency, EPA West, Mail Code 6102T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460. Attention Docket ID No. OAR-2005-0083.
Hand Delivery or Courier: Deliver your comments to: Air and Radiation Docket, EPA Docket Center, (EPA/DC) EPA West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC, Attention Docket ID No. OAR-2005-0083. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket Center's normal hours of operation and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments and information to Docket ID No. OAR-2005-0083. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available online at http://www.epa.gov/edocket, including any personal
information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through EDOCKET, regulations.gov, or e-mail. The EPA EDOCKET and the Federal regulations.gov Web sites are ``anonymous access'' systems, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through EDOCKET or regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
Public comments submitted on computer disks that are mailed or delivered to the docket will be transferred to EPA's electronic public docket. Public comments that are mailed or delivered to the docket will be scanned and placed in EPA's electronic public docket. Where practical, physical objects will be photographed, and the photograph will be placed in EPA's electronic public docket along with a brief description written by the docket staff. For additional information about EPA's public docket visit EDOCKET on-line or see the Federal Register of May 31, 2002 (67 FR 38102). For additional instructions on submitting comments, please refer to Units I.B., I.C., and I.D. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.
Docket: The official docket is the collection of materials that is available for public viewing at the Air and Radiation Docket in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is 202-566-1744. The telephone number for the Air and Radiation Docket is 202-566-1742. As provided in EPA's regulations at 40 CFR part 2, and in accordance with normal EPA docket procedures, if copies of any docket materials are requested, a reasonable fee may be charged.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ray Clark, Office of Radiation and Indoor Air, Radiation Protection Division (6608J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number: 202-343-9601; fax number: 202-343-2305; e-mail address: clark.ray@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Does This Action Apply to Me?
The DOE is the only entity regulated by these standards. Our standards affect NRC only because, under Section 801(b) of the EnPA, 42 U.S.C. 10141 n., NRC must modify its licensing requirements, as necessary, to make them consistent with our final standards. Before it may accept waste at the Yucca Mountain site, DOE must obtain a license from NRC. DOE will be subject to NRC's modified regulations, which NRC will implement through its licensing proceedings.
B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?
1. Submitting CBI. If you submit CBI, clearly mark the part or all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information on a disk or CD ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD ROM the specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. You may find the following suggestions helpful for preparing your comments:
1. Explain your views as clearly as possible.
2. Describe any assumptions that you used.
3. Provide any technical information and/or data you used that support your views.
4. If you estimate potential burden or costs, explain how you arrived at your estimate.
5. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns.
6. Offer alternatives.
7. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline identified.
8. Respond to specific questions from the Agency.
9. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, identify the appropriate docket identification number in the subject line on the first page of your response.
C. How Can I View Items in the Docket?
1. Information Files. EPA is working with the Lied Library at the University of Nevada-Las Vegas (http://www.library.unlv.edu/about/hours.html#desks ) and the Amargosa Valley, Nevada public library
(http://www.amargosavalley.com/Library.html) to provide information
files on this rulemaking. These files are not legal dockets, however every effort will be made to put the same material in them as in the official public docket in Washington, DC. The Lied Library information file is at the Research and Information Desk, Government Publications Section (702-895-2200). Hours vary based upon the academic calendar, so we suggest that you call ahead to be certain that the library will be open at the time you wish to visit (for a recorded message, call 702-895-2255).
[[Page 54327]]
The other information file is in the Public Library in Amargosa Valley, Nevada (phone 775-372-5340). As of the date of publication, the hours are Monday, Wednesday, and Friday (9 a.m.-5 p.m.); Tuesday and Thursday (9 a.m.-7 p.m.); and Saturday (9 a.m.-1 p.m.). The library is closed on Sunday. These hours can change, so we suggest that you call ahead to be certain when the library will be open.
2. Electronic Access. An electronic version of the public docket is available through EPA's electronic public docket and comment system, EPA Dockets (EDOCKET). You may use EDOCKET to submit or view comments, access the index listing of the contents of the official public docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that are available electronically. To access the docket either go directly to http://www.epa.gov/edocket or, from the EPA Internet Home Page (http://
http://www.epa.gov), select ``Information Sources'' (in the left column), then
``Dockets,'' then ``EPA Dockets'' (in the first paragraph). For either route, then click on ``Quick Search'' (in the left column). In the search window, type in the docket identification number OAR-2005-0083. Please be patient, the search could take about 30 seconds. This will bring you to the ``Docket Search Results'' page. At that point, click on OAR-2005-0083. From the resulting page, you may access the docket contents (e.g., OAR-2005-0083-0002) by clicking on the icon in the ``Rendition'' column.
D. Can I Access Information by Telephone or via the Internet?
Yes. You may call our toll-free information line (800-331-9477) 24 hours per day. By calling this number, you may listen to a brief update describing our rulemaking activities for Yucca Mountain, leave a message requesting that we add your name and address to the Yucca Mountain mailing list, or request that an EPA staff person return your call. In addition, we have established an electronic listserv through which you can receive electronic updates of activities related to this rulemaking. To subscribe to the listserv, please visit http://www.epa.gov/radiation/yucca/up-to-date.htm. Click on ``Yucca Updates
Listserv'' and follow to directions there. You also can find information and documents relevant to this rulemaking on the World Wide Web at http://www.epa.gov/radiation/yucca. We also recommend that you
examine the preamble and regulatory language for the earlier proposed and final rules, which appeared in the Federal Register on August 27, 1999 (64 FR 46976) and June 13, 2001 (66 FR 32074), respectively.
II. Meeting Purpose and Format
The meetings will provide opportunities for both informal exchanges of information and formal comments. Meeting formats are as follows:
Information Sessions: an informal opportunity to learn about the standards, meet EPA staff, and ask questions. Comments on the record can also be provided in writing or on tape.
Roundtable Dialogues: a facilitated conversation with EPA staff to discuss the standards and allow opportunities for the public to ask questions of EPA staff, and for EPA to respond. A summary of key points and questions will be recorded for the record.
Public Hearings: a formal opportunity to make verbal statements that will be recorded for the public record. For the convenience of the public, individuals and organizations should schedule a specific time to make their comments (see Hearings Procedures below).
Hearing Procedures
Persons wishing to testify at any of the public hearings are requested to pre-register by calling EPA's toll-free Yucca Mountain Information Line at 1-800-331-9477 at any time. You will be asked to leave a message with the following information:
Name/Organizational Affiliation (if any).
Hearing date, location, time(s) available to testify.
Daytime telephone number.
Your call will be returned within one business day to confirm a scheduled time for testimony. In order to obtain a scheduled speaking time, EPA must receive requests no later than September 30, 2005, for the hearings in Amargosa Valley and Las Vegas, Nevada; and October 7, 2005, for the hearing in Washington, DC. Speakers not registered in advance may register at the door but are not guaranteed the opportunity to testify, depending on time constraints (all individuals will also be able to comment in writing or on tape). Individuals testifying on their own behalf will be allowed 5 minutes. Groups or organizations must designate one individual to testify as the official representative, and each group will be allocated ten minutes for an oral presentation. Individuals and organizations may submit written comments in addition to oral testimony. Time allowed is exclusive of any time consumed by questions from the government panel and answers to these questions. Testimony from individuals and representatives of organizations is limited to one hearing location. In order to ensure that all individuals and groups are given an opportunity to testify, substitutions will not be permitted for any pre-registered person. Registrants will not be permitted to yield their time to other individuals or groups, nor will hearing time be used to ``'read into the record''' testimony from individuals not present at the hearings. In the event any person wishes to enter comments for the record, but either cannot or does not appear personally at the hearings, EPA will accept written comments during the hearings and other meetings. These written comments will be considered to the same extent as oral testimony and will be included as part of the official hearings transcripts. The hearing transcript will constitute the official record of the hearings. Written comments submitted outside of the public hearings must be received by EPA Docket OAR-2005-0083 in Washington, DC, by October 21, 2005. All comments received by EPA, whether written or oral, will be given equal consideration in development of the final rule.
Dated: September 8, 2005.
William L. Wehrum,
Acting Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation.
[FR Doc. 05-18226 Filed 9-13-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
---------------------------
State of Nevada
Agency for Nuclear Projects
www.state.nv.us/nucwaste/
nwpo@nuc.state.nv.us
775-687-3744
---------------------------