Yucca Mountain News Clips - Thursday, July 13, 2006

Yucca Mountain News Clips
Thursday, July 13, 2006
---------------------------

Nevada Appeal
July 13, 2006

Bush should listen to people on nuclear waste

It seems residents of Nevada and Russia have something in common - they don't want to be repositories for spent nuclear waste, and the Bush Administration doesn't seem to care.

The administration continues to push for completion of the Yucca Mountain site despite its many problems, and is now throwing support behind Russian President Vladimir Putin, who is planning to make his country into a nuclear waste repository to permanently store waste from several countries.

That's despite polls in Russia that show 90 percent of the Russian population opposes the plan.

It's unlikely that even if the plan is approved any waste from this country would end up in Russia. Instead, it would take nuclear waste from countries such as Japan and Taiwan. That nuclear fuel originated in the United States, which means Bush would have to give approval before it can be sent to Russia.

Putin's motivation is the billions of dollars his country could make from storing nuclear waste. Reportedly, the Bush Administration sees it as an opportunity to expand nuclear energy around the world. But it also needs to take security of the waste into consideration, and Russia has never been a stable country.

The administration should also keep in mind that democracy works best when it does the will of the people. And the will of the people in Russia, and in Nevada, is to not become dumping sites for nuclear waste.

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

Las Vegas City Life
July 13, 2006

Unsound science

Co-editor of new book on Yucca Mountain says the DOE's research is flawed

By Matt O'Brien

The Yucca Mountain project seems to be on especially shaky ground -- and we're not just talking geologically.

The Department of Energy, which oversees the project, has been wracked by turnover. It's being besieged by lawsuits. It can't decide on transportation routes. It can't even seem to put together a proper licensing application.

And now a damning new book, Uncertainty Underground: Yucca Mountain and the Nation's High-Level Nuclear Waste, has been released by the MIT Press. Consisting of more than 20 scientific papers, each its own chapter, the book paints the Yucca Mountain project as scientifically flawed.

Of course, the Energy Department will probably ignore Uncertainty Underground. It has done its own "research," its representatives have said. We, however, refuse to ignore the book. We recently sat down with co-editor Allison Macfarlane, a research associate at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

CityLife: How did the idea for the book come about?

Allison Macfarlane: It came about when [co-editor] Rod Ewing and I were really disturbed by the lack of geology in the decision-making about Yucca Mountain. There wasn't much geological input. We first got together at a major conference. At that meeting, we said we should do a book on the subject. We actually sketched an outline on a napkin.

CL: How were the chapters chosen?

AM: We approached the authors. Everything in the book was peer reviewed multiple times. Everything in the book is probably more reviewed than work in most regular peer-review journals. If somebody's paper didn't pass peer reviews -- and there were a couple that didn't -- they were rejected.

CL: There aren't a whole lot of Nevadans on the contributors list. Why is that?

AM: We looked for people who had expertise in particular areas. And some people we approached said they couldn't contribute because it was a conflict of interest, so we went to people in academia. We went to people at national labs. There are a couple of people who work for the DOE. There are people under contract with the DOE. There are a variety of people, viewpoints and institutions represented in the book.

CL: What's the standout chapter?

AM: The chapter on climate change [chapter nine]. It's a new take on the DOE's climate-change analysis. The important thing at Yucca Mountain, because the repository is above the water table, is how much water would get to the repository. And to understand how much water is going to get to the repository, you have to know how much precipitation is going to fall to the ground. Therefore, you have to have some kind of concept about what the climate's going to be like over the period of time the standard covers. First, the standard was 10,000 years. Now, it looks like it's going to be a million years. Well, what the DOE did was look at the last 400,000 years of climate in this area. What they didn't do was take into account the potential for climate change over the next few hundred years.

CL: What's the most damning piece of evidence in the book?

AM: I think the utility of the book is that it shows that there's lots of uncertainties in a lot of different areas. I wouldn't say there's one smoking gun. It's more like death by a thousand cuts.

CL: Is there anything in the book that makes a good case for Yucca Mountain?

AM: There are a couple of chapters that say, "Look, we can live with this and we think we can know this." There's a contributor named [G. S.] Bodvarsson who works at the Lawrence Berkeley lab. He's convinced it's a decent and reasonable site. That's what he argues in his chapter.

CL: What do you think should be done with nuke waste?

AM: I think it should go into a geologic repository. I'm just not sure Yucca Mountain is the right place for it. I'm not one of these people who say, "Leave it aboveground. Or interim storage is the answer. Or let's wait until we are smart enough to figure out the right thing to do with it." I think we have an ethical responsibility to deal with it now, because -- and people laugh at me when I say this -- we have no idea what's going to happen in terms of political change in this country. There's a possibility that things could get quite ugly and we could have a Soviet-style system, for instance, or a fascist system, where the government doesn't care about the people and doesn't care if they're exposed to massive amounts of radiation. That's what happened in the Soviet Union. They exposed their citizens to tons of stuff. They just treated their environment like a big trash heap.

CL: What's the message of the book?

AM: That there's a lot of uncertainty in nuclear waste disposal and Yucca Mountain is a very complex place geologically.

CL: What do you think will happen with the Yucca Mountain project?

AM: I think it could go either way. The Department of Energy's program is not in good shape. There are a number of people who are pro-nuclear who are worried that this will collapse. But at the same time, there's a lot of political pressure to make it happen.

Matt O'Brien is CityLife's news editor. He can be reached at 871-6780 ext. 350 or mobrien@lvcitylife.com.

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

Las Vegas City Life
July 13, 2006

Confederacy of dunces

Nearly half of the state Legislature got a D or lower on new conservation scorecard

By Emmily Bristol

It's report card time for most of Nevada's state legislators and the marks for many aren't good.

The Nevada Conservation League, an autonomous offshoot of the League of Conservation Voters, has issued a scorecard rating legislators' voting records for the 2005 session. This year's scorecard ranks each member of the Legislature (except Lt. Gov. Lorraine Hunt, who serves as president of the state Senate) and compares those ratings to the 2003 session.

"This tool, specifically, is very effective if you can get folks to read through it," says Scot Rutledge, executive director of the state league.

In states such as Washington, Oregon, California and Maryland, where similar conservation scorecards have been in play for years, the ratings are a valuable and trusted tool for voters, Rutledge says. And he's careful to point out up front that the organization is nonpartisan.

"It's not really about Democrats or Republicans. It's about legislators," Rutledge says.

While Rutledge says there is no bias for one party, it's clear from the numbers that Democrats vote in favor of conservation measures more often than Republicans. According to the scorecard, Assembly Democrats averaged 83 percent while Assembly Republicans averaged 51 percent. In the state Senate, Republicans ranked a dismal 45 percent while Democrats barely squeaked by with a passing 73 percent.

The 4-year-old Nevada Conservation League, which relocated its headquarters from Northern Nevada to Las Vegas in April, is run by a skeleton crew of two: Rutledge and Outreach Director Tony Guzman. The team is a pro-conservation lobby during legislative sessions and uses its first-hand experiences and those of other environmental group lobbyists -- such as Citizen Alert and the Progressive Leadership Alliance of Nevada -- to write the scorecard. This is the second such scorecard for Nevada.

"I thought it was very well done. I think [scorecards] can help," says Peggy Maze Johnson, executive director of the grassroots activist organization Citizen Alert. "We don't have the kind of oversight that these [government] boards should have."

In this year's scorecard, the league highlighted nine bills: five from the state Senate, three from the Assembly and one Assembly joint resolution. The bills chosen determine each legislator's score. Rutledge says picking the key bills from both houses is critical and involves "tough choices" that might not seem universal to all environmentalists.

"It's a subjective process," he admits.

This year's rankings are based on bills -- some of which failed and some of which passed -- that directly address conservation issues. These bills are wide-ranging and include SB 35, which raised the amount one county could charge another for using its water; the failed AB 485, the so-called neighborhood casino bill; and Assembly Joint Resolution 4, which affirms Nevada's opposition to a nuclear waste dump at Yucca Mountain.

Rutledge says it's hard to gauge how well Nevada does compared to other states when it comes to conservation issues.

"We could always do better," he says. "We need to look at sensible water and growth decisions [as well as] advancing or increasing our renewable energy portfolio. ... We should be a leader in the nation in terms of renewable energy."

Only three legislators received a 100 percent score: Assemblywomen Sheila Leslie and Peggy Pierce and state Senator Dina Titus. However, out of the three top scorers, Leslie is the only one who retained her 100 percent from the 2003 session scorecard. (Titus and Pierce each brought their 2003 numbers up from 60 and 86 percent, respectively.)

"I'm proud of my record on protecting the environment," says Titus, now a candidate for governor. "It does mean a lot."

The scorecard highlights Leslie's accomplishments as "a conservation champion" who secured $1 million for rural counties "to study and protect their water rights." Pierce was recognized for her focus on pollution problems related to rapid growth and protecting Las Vegas Valley drinking water.

Not everyone scored so well. The lowest score of any legislator, a basement-bottom 14 percent, went to Assemblywoman Sharron Angle (who is running for Congress). She actually managed to retain the lowest score of all and drop three points from the last scorecard in 2003. Angle's campaign spokesman John Franklin would not comment for this story.

And it wouldn't be so bad if there weren't so many Fs to go around. More than half of state senators and a third of those in the Assembly earned scores at or below 60 percent. When you add it up, nearly half of the Legislature received a D or lower on conservation.

For his part, Rutledge says he hopes the scorecard will spur those with failing grades to do better next session.

"When do we say, 'We need to do better?' And we can do better," Rutledge says.

Emmily Bristol is a CityLife staff writer. She can be reached at 871-6780 ext. 344 or ebristol@lvcitylife.com.

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

People's Weekly World
July 13, 2006

Locomotive engineers cite safety concerns

Author: Press Associates Inc.

Safety concerns on the trains they run dominated the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen´s conference in Las Vegas in late June. Topping the list were railroads´ plans to cut the crew members per train down to one and the issue of transportation of nuclear waste.

BLE&T delegates, whose union is now part of the Teamsters Rail Conference, took the rail safety issues to the following IBT convention in Las Vegas. Oregon BLE&T Legislative Chairman Scott Palmer told delegates “a serious threat’ looms to both workers and communities from transportation of spent nuclear fuel from U.S. reactors to the Energy Department´s deep underground storage site in Yucca Mountain, Nev. Virtually all of that spent fuel will come by rail.

Palmer said rail workers do not receive proper training to handle spent fuel and do not receive the same protections given to other nuclear industry workers. And DOE has no program to track rail workers´ exposure to potential radiation from the shipments. The federal agency contends the reinforced cement containers carrying the spent fuel will protect the workers and the public from radiation releases.

“It´s our goal to not only track but to lower exposure levels and keep them as low as possible,’ Palmer said. “Right now, no (rail) carrier even has a program that will protect pregnant workers from radiation. If you show up to work, you cannot turn down a train of radioactive material. Rail is the way they´re going to move it. It´s going to be dedicated trains, and it´s going to be 210 feet behind you.’

BLE&T is also leading a crusade against railroads´ schemes for engineerless freight locomotives in train yards — especially since the carriers, with Bush Federal Railroad Administration approval, liberally interpret the word “yard.’ Thirty years ago, there were five crew members on a freight train. Now, Burlington Northern-Santa Fe is experimenting with running freight trains out of Galesburg, Ill., with just the engineer. Much of the actual operation will be turned over to remote computer control. Dozens of cities, counties, towns and labor bodies have protested this practice, citing fatal accidents and safety threats.

The engineer-only freight trains were thrown into current bargaining between the nation´s freight railroads, which want them, and the Teamster-led union coalition representing rail workers. Chicago is the nation´s largest freight rail hub, followed by Kansas City.

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

Energy Tribune
July 12, 2006

Yucca Mountain Update

In 1982, Congress passed a law making the Department of Energy (DOE) responsible for the removal and storage of all radioactive waste generated by America´s nuclear power plants. And yet, two and a half decades later, the federal government has yet to remove any of the waste, and the planned repository at Nevada´s Yucca Mountain continues to be stuck in political limbo.

The result of the federal dithering: some 50,000 metric tons of spent radioactive fuel – to which we add 2,000 metric tons per year – is scattered across 39 states, at more than 100 plants that were never meant to store their own fuel. Plant operators are being forced to build more costly containment structures, which figures into new plant cost estimates. Meanwhile, legislation aimed at getting Yucca Mountain operational remains stalled in Congress.

Nuclear power plant operators say that the lack of movement on Yucca Mountain is costing them money. Pacific Gas and Electric, which owns California´s Diablo Canyon Power Plant, is in the process of building a new containment structure there. The building, which would sit near the plant, is an addition PG&E hopes it won´t have to use. But since Yucca Mountain has been stalled since 2002, there isn´t much reason to assume that Diablo´s nuclear waste will go anywhere but right next door. “We need to fix this, and soon,’ Thomas King, PG&E´s CEO, said at an industry conference in May, referring to the country´s nuclear waste storage problems.

There are similar troubles at Grand Gulf I, a 1,200-megawatt Entergy plant in Mississippi. The company has publicly admitted that, after 2007, it will no longer have the capacity to store waste. And while they still support the project, local residents are worried about the waste issue. “We still need to solve the problem of waste at these plants,’ said James E. Miller, the administrator of Claiborne County, which hosts the facility. “What will happen at Grand Gulf I?’

The waste-disposal woes are worrisome for utilities planning additional plants. Currently, 14 companies are considering building new nuclear plants, but cost estimates for these plants are sketchy at best, depending on factors like location, the cost of uranium, and the implementation of provisions in the 2005 Energy Policy Act. The potential costs of nuclear waste storage, and the possibility of building even more containment facilities, add yet another unknown factor that could deter would-be plant builders.

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

Las Vegas SUN
July 11, 2006

Firefighters contain wildfires near Death Valley

Associated Press

LAS VEGAS (AP) - Firefighters had contained two wildfires burning toward a Nevada town near Death Valley National Park by Tuesday evening, a fire official said.

Blazes outside Beatty, population 1,032, were 100 percent contained, said Linda Steinhaus, a spokeswoman for 400 state and federal firefighters battling the two fires flanking the town.

Neither the 3,600-acre Sawtooth Fire, three miles west of town, nor the 20,000-acre Beatty Fire, five miles east of Beatty, threatened U.S. 95, the main road to Las Vegas and Reno.

No injuries were reported, no structures were threatened and no one has been evacuated, Steinhaus said.

About 45 residents met with fire officials Monday for an update on the progress. Fire commander Merrill Saleen said he had plenty of resources to fight the lightning-ignited fires burning through dry desert grasses and brush in rocky mountain terrain. Eleven crews, 15 engines and three helicopters were on the scene Tuesday, Steinhaus said.

The Sawtooth Fire burned within a few hundred feet of the eastern edge of the huge Death Valley National Park, which is mostly in California.

The 18,600-acre Beatty Fire was less than three miles west of a Nellis Air Force Base bombing range and Yucca Mountain, on the western edge of government's secure Nevada Test Site.

Both fires were sparked by lightning Saturday evening, a day after Saleen and his Boise, Idaho-based federal firefighting group got control of a series of wildfires in the vast Desert National Wildlife Refuge north of Las Vegas.

Those lightning-sparked blazes covered 62 square miles in a wildlife refuge that is home to desert bighorn sheep and the endangered desert tortoise.

Firefighters have been trying not to injure tortoises and desert toads that are attracted by the scent of water and burrow into shady areas around and beneath firefighting equipment.

Firefighters contained the Mid-Valley Fire last week in the Nevada Test Site after authorities said it covered 8,500 acres about 10 miles east of Yucca Mountain. Authorities said that fire was not in areas used for nuclear weapons testing from 1951-1992, and no structures were damaged.

"We're optimistic we'll keep it off the test site," Saleen said Monday of the Beatty Fire, which he said might find little new fuel in an area that burned last summer.

---On the Net:

National Interagency Fire Center Incident Management Report: http://www.nifc.gov/nicc/sitreprt.pdf

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

Pottstown Mercury
July 12, 2006

Public worried over safety of spent fuel rods

Lindsay Moyer
lmoyer@pottsmerc.com

LIMERICK -- Many area residents who attended an information session on plans to store spent nuclear fuel left feeling better about the project, but others voiced concerns or outright opposition.

Exelon Nuclear´s Limerick Generating Plant held the public open house Tuesday after the township planning commission voted unanimously to recommend that the Board of Supervisors reject land development plans for the project. The supervisors´ vote is scheduled for Thursday.

Officials from Exelon, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Transnuclear Inc., the vendor from which Exelon is purchasing the dry cask system, were present at the open house to answer questions.

The three groups set up informational tables that included brochures, display maps and photographs, videos, a project model and even simulated nuclear fuel pellets for those attending to peruse.

Many people wanted to know where the above-ground casks housing spent fuel would be located, project manager Kevin Carrabine said. He drew a basic diagram that showed their placement, immediately west of the main power block of buildings and inside the plant´s security perimeter.

Carrabine and other officials said that most people were also asking when Yucca Mountain would open, at which time spent fuel stored in the dry cask system would be transported to the nuclear depository in Nevada. Although the answer to that question isn´t definite, Carrabine said, it´s not expected to open before 2015.

By 6:30 p.m., nearly 40 people had visited the open house, and project engineer Matthew Eyre said he´d heard widely varying opinions about the project from the visitors.

"It went from one person who said, ‘You can talk to me all you want but I won´t like this,´ to one guy who said, ‘You should build more of these,´" Eyre said.

Joseph Browne, a Pottstown resident, said he thought the proposal looked "pretty good safety-wise" and he didn´t think the storage facility would pose a terrorism risk.

"I don´t see terrorists seeing this as a good source of material," Browne said. "It´s too limited. They want to do something in the middle of New York City."

Joe Howard, also of Pottstown, agreed with Browne that Exelon´s project plans looked safe.

"It seems like they´ll be protecting (the fuel storage casks)," Howard said. "I think they´ve got a responsibility and they´re trying to handle it pretty good."

Limerick planning commission member Michele Chrisman said she came to the open house to see if Exelon would provide information that the commission requested, but didn´t receive, before it unanimously voted against recommendation of the proposal.

Exelon said it didn´t provide the information because of security concerns.

"It seems to be the same information," Chrisman said. "It´s the same photos from the brochures. I´m disappointed they´re not telling people more."

Chrisman, who is also a member of the township emergency management team, said she has "reservations" about the safety of the project.

"There´s too many unknowns -- what could fail, the ramifications if it does fail, and how do you move them?" she said.

Deborah Yusko, who lives near the nuclear plant, said she was "extremely concerned and extremely opposed" to the dry cask storage project.

"They tell you how safe it is," she said. "Most people who tell you that don´t live within the 20-mile radius affected. There´s probably a reason for that."

Yusko said she was also concerned about the information provided by Exelon.

"I think that there are a lot of safety issues that can happen, but they´re not going to tell you," she said. "Maybe it won´t affect me, but it will affect my kids."

NRC health physicist Robert Prince assured residents who turned out for the open house that the project would be conducted safely with oversight from the NRC. That oversight, which would take place after approval by township supervisors, would include ensuring that Exelon´s existing programs are revised to address the dry cask storage project, overseeing a "dry run" of loading the casks and the actual loading, and routine inspections, Prince said.

Township supervisors will meet at 6 p.m. Thursday at the township building on Ridge Pike to vote on Exelon´s land development proposal.

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

Las Vegas Review-Journal
July 11, 2006

Audit questions Yucca spending

County report challenges DOE priorities

By Steve Tetreault
Stephens Washington Bureau

WASHINGTON -- With the Yucca Mountain site still far from being designed or licensed, the Energy Department may be jumping the gun on some of the work it is preparing on the nuclear waste project next year, Clark County officials say.

The county is challenging DOE priorities for the proposed repository, based on a study of the department's $544.5 million congressional budget request for 2007.

Only a small portion of the budget was earmarked for repository licensing, the DOE's top priority, county officials said in a report.

Meanwhile, larger sums were planned to be spent on transportation, canister development and site work that "may be premature at this point," according to the report.

"It appears that at a minimum, $91,140,300 in activities described in DOE's budget request could be legitimately questioned as inappropriate for approval in fy (fiscal year) 2007," planning manager Irene Navis said in the analysis.

The Clark County budget breakdown was conducted in March. The resulting four-page report surfaced recently after it was sent to Nevada county and state officials, the Energy Department and members of Congress.

After his staff reviewed the analysis, Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., inserted a provision into the Senate's 2007 Energy Department spending bill calling for a Government Accountability Office audit of the Yucca budget.

"I've been concerned for some time that the DOE has been using some of its Yucca funding in ways that are prohibited under the law," Reid said in a statement. "Clark County's analysis also raised some serious concerns about the unauthorized use of Yucca funding."

Reid said that with a GAO audit, "we can take a closer look at the situation and make sure all the spending is in full compliance with the law."

Energy Department officials did not comment on the county's findings. Spokesman Allen Benson said it is up to Congress to determine what work is appropriate for DOE to conduct in the coming year.

"Our appropriations come from Congress," Benson said.

A final 2007 figure will be set later this year. A House bill would set aside DOE's full request while a Senate bill would cut it by $50 million.

Clark County, whose elected officials oppose the repository program, has performed DOE budget audits for the past three years, Navis said.

"We have pointed out things that go beyond where we think they ought to be considering where they are in the license application process," Navis said.

Navis said she does not believe DOE is breaking a law "but the Nuclear Waste Policy Act is specific about what DOE should and shouldn't be spending money on in this stage of the game."

For instance, she said the law prohibits DOE from establishing temporary storage facilities at the Yucca site, but according to the county memo it appears from the budget that DOE is considering interim storage "as a fait accompli."

The Energy Department postponed a December 2004 target date to submit a license application for a nuclear waste repository at the Yucca site 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas. DOE reportedly is eyeing a 2008 license application, with a projected repository opening between 2015 and 2020.

Clark County has challenged $28 million budgeted for fuel and canister-handling facilities at the Yucca site, and another $8 million for waste packaging, charging DOE has not yet designed the special containers that will carry the highly radioactive waste.

"A basic question is, if funds are spent now and there are changes in the license, or the canisters or the license are not approved, how will DOE recoup these millions of dollars?" the county report asked.

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

Las Vegas SUN
July 11, 2006

Nuclear waste proliferation

A Russian dump doesn't let Yucca off

By Lisa Mascaro
Las Vegas Sun

President Bush's proposal to consider helping Russia with its own version of Yucca Mountain won't diminish the administration's appetite for a nuclear waste dump in Nevada or soften the nuclear industry's push for a domestic disposal site, experts said Monday.

In fact, the administration's policy keeps the Nevada repository on the table as part of Bush's far-reaching, and some say unrealistic, strategy for a global nuclear renaissance.

As the president prepares for this week's G-8 summit in St. Petersburg, Russia, the administration has announced it is negotiating an agreement with Moscow that could send U.S. nuclear waste from overseas reactors to Russia. In exchange, Russian President Vladimir Putin would be expected to help block Iran's nuclear weapons program.

"This is another sort of example of the globalization of nuclear power," said Robert Alvarez, a senior scholar at the Institute for Policy Studies. "The Russians are looking to escape the isolation they've had in nuclear power, and the United States is looking to solve the foreign waste problem."

The U.S. deal would be a lucrative boost for Russia's ambitions as a leading nuclear-industry state. It would also resolve the administration's thorny problem of where to put the United States' spent nuclear fuel from across the globe, which has stymied nuclear energy expansion overseas much the way it has in this country.

The U.S. has control over nuclear fuel that originates in this country but is used overseas in such countries as South Korea and Taiwan and is responsible for it after it is used. Russia could be a final resting place for that nuclear waste.

Opening a waste site in Russia would help the Bush administration move forward with its Global Nuclear Energy Partnership - a controversial fuel recycling program that calls on nuclear states to produce energy for export in hopes of discouraging non-nuclear states from joining the nuclear club.

One of the many problems with that proposal has been what to do with all of the new waste - although experts also call recycling a potential boondoggle that will take decades to bring to fruition.

But nuclear policy experts are skeptical of Russia's ability to keep nuclear waste from falling into enemy hands . They point to polls that show the vast majority of Russians opposed to having that country become an international nuclear waste dump.

"The people who want to build these reactors will hold these up and say, 'We've solved the waste problem,' " said Kevin Kamps, nuclear waste specialist at the Nuclear Information and Resources Service. "But then reality intervenes. There's going to be huge problems encountered with this dump proposal."

Even with all of the problems facing Yucca Mountain - setbacks that now put its opening 20 years behind schedule - supporters continue to push for it as their best hope for handling the nation's spent fuel because the alternatives are even more problematic.

Experts said strict export and transit regulations would likely dissuade American nuclear energy companies from trying to ship domestic waste to Russia rather than wait for Yucca . Nuclear energy officials agree.

"Our material isn't going to go there," said Steven Kraft of the Nuclear Energy Institute, the nation's leading industry advocacy organization.

In recent months, focus has shifted away from Yucca as a facility to house spent nuclear fuel and toward one that would take on recycled fuel under the president's GNEP plan .

Energy Department spokesman Craig Stevens said Monday the administration stands by Yucca Mountain as its key to handling the nation's waste. But he added that opening up Russia would certainly help the nuclear renaissance.

"It eliminates a major hurdle to expand nuclear energy throughout the world."

Lisa Mascaro can be reached at (202) 662-7436 or at lisa.mascaro@lasvegassun.com.

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

Las Vegas SUN
July 11, 2006

Firefighters make gains on wildfires near Death Valley

Associated Press

LAS VEGAS (AP) - Firefighters have gained the upper hand on wildfires burning toward a Nevada town near Death Valley National Park, a fire officials said Tuesday.

Blazes outside Beatty, population 1,032, were 60 percent contained, and officials were expecting full containment by Tuesday night, said Linda Steinhaus, a spokeswoman for 400 state and federal firefighters battling the two fires flanking the town.

Neither the 3,600-acre Sawtooth Fire, three miles west of town, nor the 20,000-acre Beatty Fire, five miles east of Beatty, threatened U.S. 95, the main road to Las Vegas and Reno.

No injuries were reported, no structures were threatened and no one has been evacuated, Steinhaus said.

About 45 residents met with fire officials Monday for an updated on the progress. Fire commander Merrill Saleen said he had plenty of resources to fight the lightning-ignited fires burning through dry desert grasses and brush in rocky mountain terrain. Eleven crews, 15 engines and three helicopters were on the scene Tuesday, Steinhaus said.

The Sawtooth Fire burned within a few hundred feet of the eastern edge of the huge Death Valley National Park, which is mostly in California.

The 18,600-acre Beatty Fire was less than three miles west of a Nellis Air Force Base bombing range and Yucca Mountain, on the western edge of government's secure Nevada Test Site.

Those lightning-sparked blazes covered 62 square miles in a wildlife refuge that is home to desert bighorn sheep and the endangered desert tortoise.

Firefighters have been trying not to injure tortoises and desert toads that are attracted by the scent of water and burrow into shady areas around and beneath firefighting equipment.

"We're optimistic we'll keep it off the test site," Saleen said Monday of the Beatty Fire, which he said might find little new fuel in an area that burned last summer.

---On the Net:

National Interagency Fire Center Incident Management Report: http://www.nifc.gov/nicc/sitreprt.pdf

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

BYU Newsnet
July 11, 2006

Readers' Forum July 10, 2006

Nuclear storage

The U.S. federal government is building the world's largest dirty bomb at Yucca Mountain where over 77,000 tons of plutonium, uranium, and other radioactive materials are to be stored in 392 degree F casks in

tunnels that will be hot enough to evaporate minor leaks. The layer of porous rock above the tunnels is advertised as beneficial, but it can hold large quantities of water after heavy rains. Two earthquake faults intersect both the porous layer and the planned tunnels. If an earthquake were to occur, Yucca Mountain could experience a steam explosion similar to Mt. St. Helens, but with deadly fallout as dust and rain. Nuclear power can be beneficial, but not with underground storage

systems. Basalt internment or recycling into the Earth's core along subduction zones are safer and less expensive methods. See political-resources.com/ym/.

Bill Holmes
Portland, Oregon

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

Augusta Chronicle
July 11, 2006

Radioactive waste has new place at SRS

SRS canisters hold dangerous material

By Julia Sellers
South Carolina Bureau

AIKEN - Savannah River Site took another step Monday toward ensuring the safety of radioactive waste at SRS until it can be shipped to a permanent storage site in Nevada.

A second glass waste storage building, begun two years ago, was opened two months ahead of schedule and cost $8 million less than originally projected, said Jeffrey Allison, the U.S. Energy Department manager for SRS operations.

The storage facility houses immobilized radioactive nuclear waste dating back to the Cold War era in a glass matrix, or canister, Mr. Allison said.

To commemorate the occasion, SRS held a ribbon-cutting for the first shielded canister transporter, which moves the radioactive material to the glass waste storage facility. The canister is stored in an underground, reinforced concrete vault.

The process that stores the waste in glass reduces risks associated with storing radioactive material.

Each canister of radioactive sludge is 10 feet tall and 2 feet in diameter and weighs about 5,000 pounds. It takes a little more than a day to fill one canister.

Plans call for an underground radioactive storage facility at Yucca Mountain in Nevada to be completed before 2010. It would house the SRS waste.

In March, however, officials said that the Yucca Mountain site, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas, might not be completed until 2015 or even canceled altogether.

In 1997, Congress designated Yucca Mountain as the only permanent storage facility for high-level waste from nuclear weapons reservations and commercial reactors.

"We're planning that it will go to Yucca Mountain," Mr. Allison said. "Until then, it will be safe in Savannah River."

The glassification process began a decade ago at SRS.

"It was a painful process to get to that point," said Charles Anderson, the Energy Department's deputy assistant secretary for environmental management.

"We know (defense waste processing) can be done safely, quickly and cost effectively," Mr. Anderson said.

Reach Julia Sellers at (803) 648-1395, ext. 106, or julia.sellers@augustachronicle.com.

Sidebar: Plenty of Room

The new glass waste storage building at SRS was originally budgeted at $77.3 million, but it came in at $68.8 million, SRS spokeswoman Julie Peterson said.

About $55 million of that was for actual construction.

The new glass waste storage building can house 2,340 canisters.

The first glass waste storage building holds 2,142 canisters.

At the current rate of production, the buildings aren't expected to reach capacity until 2015.

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

MaineToday
July 11, 2006

State a tempting target for nuclear waste

By Keith Edwards
Staff Writer

AUGUSTA -- If a federal proposal to reprocess nuclear waste into fuel for reactors moves forward, Maine could be considered a good spot for a regional storage and reprocessing facility, the senior scientist for the Union of Concerned Scientists' Global Security Program said Monday at the University of Maine at Augusta.

Dr. Edwin Lyman said the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership proposal, part of President Bush's energy initiative, has a catchy, marketable name and a noble-sounding premise of seeking to reduce the amount of nuclear waste that must be stored by recycling it into nuclear reactor fuel.

But Lyman -- in a sparsely attended speech sponsored by the Maine chapter of Physicians for Social Responsibility, Union of Concerned Scientists, Peace Action Maine, University of Southern Maine Department of Environmental Science, Maine chapter of the Sierra Club, and the American Lung Association of Maine -- said the name is misleading and the end result could mean more nuclear waste to be stored.

And, he said, it could result in plutonium stockpiles that terrorists could target in an attack or try to acquire to make their own bomb.

The Bush proposal, according to a Department of Energy Web site, would seek to improve and spread technology capable of reprocessing used nuclear waste. The amount of spent nuclear fuel that would have to be stored for as long as 1 million years would thus be reduced, according to the department.

Lyman, however, said that reprocessing could actually create more nuclear waste, because materials used in reprocessing could also be considered at least low-level nuclear waste.

And, he warned, the process would extract plutonium from the spent fuel. The plutonium is embedded in the spent fuel, and is thus much more difficult to access, particularly for terrorists whom Lyman said could make a nuclear bomb from only a few pounds of plutonium.

He said reprocessing could create an additional 500 metric tons of plutonium if all existing nuclear waste is reprocessed.

"However bad disposing of it in the ground is, reprocessing it is even worse," Lyman said of a long-debated proposal to store nuclear waste underground in Yucca Mountain, Nev.

He said officials are looking for sites around the country interested in hosting a reprocessing facility.

Lyman said Maine, unfortunately, could be a very good candidate for a regional nuclear waste storage and reprocessing site for New England, perhaps at the Maine Yankee site.

However, Charles Pray, a state nuclear safety advisor, said the state and federal government have an agreement that the federal government will not seek to take possession of Maine Yankee, and he also said Maine Yankee would not seek to become a nuclear reprocessing facility.

But Pray also said he agreed with 99 percent of Lyman's speech, and said he advocates and supports storing nuclear waste in Yucca Mountain.

Lyman said the Union of Concerned Scientists, an independent nonprofit alliance of more than 100,000 citizens and scientists that advocates for a healthy environment, is neutral on nuclear power in general.

Keith Edwards -- 621-5647

kedwards@centralmaine.com

Reader Comments:

Wally of Gray, ME
Jul 11, 2006 8:29 AM

Why not bring nuclear waste to Maine??? Bringing out-of-state waste here is been the only thing the Baldacci administration has done for "economic development" in four years.

Remember... we bought the landfill in West Old Town, gave the paper company a sweetheart deal and built an incinerator (the paper company still closed) called Juniper Acres. Now the "environmental governor is trying to open a trash to energy incinerator in Athens, Maine to create 20 jobs.

I'll bet if Baldacci gets on the nuclear bandwagon, he'll promise us 50 jobs!

Rachel Powers of South Portland, ME
Jul 11, 2006 7:02 AM

The environmental president strikes again! Don't bring nuclear wastes to Maine. Wind turbines fine...but really who needs to become a waste site?

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

San Diego Union Tribune
July 10, 2006

Wildfires bracket Nevada town near Death Valley National Park

By Ken Ritter
Associated Press

LAS VEGAS – Wildfires bracketed the southern Nevada town of Beatty on Monday, with about 400 firefighters digging in to stop flames from getting closer than three miles, a fire incident commander said.

“Our priority is to secure the flanks that would have potential to burn toward Beatty,’ said Merrill Saleen, who put containment of the so-called Beatty and Sawtooth fires at 10 percent.

Saleen said he planned to meet Monday evening with some of Beatty's 1,032 residents, whom he said might get six to eight hours to clear out if ordered to evacuate.

He said he had plenty of resources to fight the lightning-ignited fires burning through dry desert grasses and brush in rocky mountain terrain. He said crews hoped to have containment before Wednesday, when forecasts called for hot, dry winds that could hamper firefighting.

Neither the 29-square-mile Beatty Fire, burning about five miles east of Beatty, nor the five-square-mile Sawtooth Fire about three miles west of town, threatened U.S. 95, the main road to Las Vegas and Reno.

No injuries were reported, Saleen said, and no structures were immediately threatened.

Both fires started Saturday, a day after Saleen and his Boise, Idaho-based federal firefighting group finished containing a series of wildfires in the vast Desert National Wildlife Refuge north of Las Vegas.

Those lightning-sparked blazes, including the Gass Complex and the Vegas Fire, covered 62 square miles in a wildlife refuge that is home to desert bighorn sheep and the endangered desert tortoise.

Saleen said firefighters have taken care not to injure tortoises and desert toads that he said are attracted by the scent of water and burrow into shady areas around and beneath firefighting equipment.

In Beatty, federal firefighters were bolstered by state, county and local firefighters from Las Vegas, 115 miles away, plus six helicopters and two bulldozers.

Saleen said the 3,500-acre Sawtooth Fire burned within a few hundred feet of the eastern edge of the huge Death Valley National Park, which is mostly in California.

The 18,600-acre Beatty Fire was less than three miles west of a Nellis Air Force Base bombing range and Yucca Mountain, on the western edge of government's secure Nevada Test Site.

“We're optimistic we'll keep it off the test site,’ Saleen said Monday of the Beatty Fire, which he said might find little new fuel in an area that burned last summer.

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