Yucca Mountain News Clips
Monday, July 31, 2006
---------------------------

Amarillo Globe-News
July 31, 2006

Column: Bernard L. Weinstein: Nuclear energy comeback might drown out naysayers

By Bernard L. Weinstein

DENTON - Once again, violence has flared in the Middle East and oil prices have shot up in response. At nearly $80 a barrel, petroleum is now at an all-time high, adjusted for inflation. And some analysts predict the price could rise as high as $100 a barrel over the next several months.

The possibility of supply disruptions from this politically unstable region, along with the rapidly escalating price, drives home the imperative to diversify Americas energy base and reduce our dependence on oil imports. A revival of the nuclear energy industry can help.

In recent weeks, the press has been filled with articles suggesting that nuclear power is on the rebound in America. For example, a March Gallup poll found that a majority of Americans support construction of more nuclear power plants, while the co-founder of Greenpeace, Patrick Moore, has come out in support of nuclear energy as a safe, efficient and environmentally friendly alternative to fossil fuels.

On the Texas front, NRG Energy, the operator of the South Texas Project near Bay City, has announced plans to add two nuclear plants to the two already in service at a cost of $5.2 billion. NRG expects to finish the first plant by 2014 and open the second in 2015. TXU, which plans to build 11 traditional coal-fired plants in Texas over the next decade, claims it is considering expansion of its Comanche Peak nuclear power facility.

Will these plans materialize? If America is to have a clean, affordable and reliable supply of electric power in the decades ahead, lets hope so. The U.S. hasnt built a nuclear plant since the 1970s. But new legislation providing loan guarantees, production tax credits and federal risk insurance seems to be reviving the industry. Importantly, President George Bush - unlike his predecessors - has become a vocal advocate for nuclear power, emphasizing its importance in ensuring economic security as well as national security.

Today, the United States has 103 nuclear plants in 31 states, and these facilities generate about one-fifth of the nations electricity. While the nations 600 coal-fired power plants produce 36 percent of all U.S. emissions and nearly 10 percent of global greenhouse gases, nuclear power generation is environmentally benign. Whats more, new reactor designs will permit nuclear plants to be built more cheaply with enhanced safety and less spent fuel.

Of course, anti-nuclear naysayers still abound, claiming the technology is inherently unsafe while producing waste that is dangerous for thousands of years. This same crowd claims we can obtain all the energy we need through conservation and renewables. Certainly, conservation can help. Indeed, weve already made considerable progress by dramatically reducing our energy usage relative to gross domestic product during the past 20 years. Wind, solar and other renewables have their place, but because they are intermittent and unpredictable, they cant be viewed as substitutes for large baseload plants.

As for the safety issue, the nuclear industry can point to almost 60 years of commercial operation without a fatal accident. Even the 1979 incident at Three Mile Island resulted in no injuries or deaths to plant workers or nearby residents. Can the U.S. coal industry say the same?

Furthermore, since 1964 the industry has transported more than 10,000 used fuel assemblies without incident to temporary storage sites. Once the U.S. Department of Energy begins accepting nuclear waste at a permanent repository in Nevadas Yucca Mountain, the controversy over what to do with spent fuel finally will be over. And though used fuel remains radioactive for centuries, within 40 years it loses 99.9 percent of the radioactivity it had when removed from the reactor.

Are nuclear reactors vulnerable to terrorist attacks? Absolutely not. Even if a 747 crashed into a reactor and breached the 6-foot-thick reinforced concrete containment vessel, no explosion would occur. Chemical plants and pipelines are much more exposed to a terrorist attack than a nuclear power plant.

With political pressure building for caps on carbon emissions, and oil and natural gas prices on a permanently higher plateau, nows the time to aggressively build new nuclear power plants. By themselves, these plants wont wean America off fossil fuels or eliminate the need to import oil and gas. But they can help ensure a balanced mix of energy sources, hold down long-term power costs, and improve our economic and environmental health.

Bernard L. Weinstein is director of the Center for Economic Development and Research at University of North Texas, Denton.

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

Detroit News
July 31, 2006

'Manhattan' energy project yet another pork scheme

Dems want more bureaucracy, not real solutions

It's good to see that congressional Democrats are concerned about energy and gas prices, but if they really want to provide some relief for consumers, they'll start supporting the domestic solutions that actually will make a difference.

This week could be an especially active one for pandering. Gas prices in Michigan have gone as high as $3.15 a gallon and temperatures in the 90s mean electricity bills will remain high to keep the air conditioners humming. It's the perfect setup for the election, but voters shouldn't be fooled.

Of particular interest is a federal proposal made public on Tuesday that would, among other things, devote $5 billion over 10 years to establish a "New Manhattan Center for High Efficiency Vehicles" for developing automotive technologies.

But unlike the Manhattan Project, for which the Democratic plan is named, automotive research and development already is strong, and it appropriately is guided by what consumers want, not government directives. Also, there was no market or private investment for building the atomic bomb, so federal funds were warranted.

The plan would establish a national biofuels infrastructure and delivery system; promote mass transit; create a national energy security commission and require that federal government vehicle fleets be powered by alternative fuels. In short, the money will pay for yet another expansion of the federal bureaucracy to attack a problem the federal government is unequipped to solve.

Prices at the pump are certainly affecting American families, though not as severely as politicians would have us think. Consumption of gasoline is up nearly 2 percent from this time last year and when adjusted for inflation, gasoline prices are comparable with those paid in 1981.

Attainable energy independence solutions have been offered repeatedly, but Democrats most often vote against them.

Most recently, Democrats killed proposals to drill for known oil reserves in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. They've also blocked expanded drilling in the Gulf of Mexico and off the coasts.

The U.S. Senate last week agreed to reopen debate on a proposal to open 8.3 million acres of the Gulf to energy exploration. The measure must be approved, along with a companion proposal to allow drilling 50 miles off the coasts.

Nuclear power also must be considered as a viable alternative energy option and the siting of plants expedited.

Environmentalists abhor the idea, but they also reject most other solutions that don't rely 100 percent on conservation. Nuclear power is the surest way to ease our dependence on foreign-oil and has proven to be safe.

It would allow the national economy to keep growing, without increasing the dependence on foreign oil. But Democrats, led by Sen. Harry Reid of Nevada, have blocked a proposal to develop a nuclear waste dump in Yucca Mountain in Reid's home state.

Without a safe place to store expended fuel rods, the potential for nuclear power is limited.

Addressing these issues might actually result in expanding America's energy options faster than the creation of committees and task forces and multibillion-dollar federal agencies.

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

Nature
July 31, 2006

Britain urged to store nuclear waste underground

Expert panel warns that plans for disposal should begin without delay.

Jim Giles

Britain should take steps to join the ranks of countries planning to store nuclear waste deep underground, an advisory committee has told the government. Because any such plan will take decades to implement, the panel adds that politicians need to act on the committee's recommendations immediately.

The backing for 'geological disposal' comes from the Committee on Radioactive Waste Management, which has been considering various storage options since 2003. The process has not always been straightforward — two panel members left after accusing the committee of focusing on public opinion rather than science — but the findings, announced today, put Britain in line with international thinking on how such storage issues should be addressed.

Plans to create an underground storage facility are at an advanced stage in other countries such as the United States, where a site at Yucca Mountain in the Nevada desert has been studied for almost 30 years. Geological disposal plans are also under way in China, India and Finland, among others.

At Yucca Mountain, waste would be stored some 300 metres below the surface, in multilayered metal canisters that are designed to secure material safely for thousands of years. Several areas of Britain, such as parts of Wales and the Lake District in northern England, are considered geologically stable enough to host similar stores.

Get a move on

"The UK has been creating radioactive waste for 50 years without any clear idea of what to do with it," says Gordon MacKerron, committee chair and a science policy expert at the University of Sussex, UK. "We are confident that our recommendations provide the way forward."

But persuading local communities to host such a project could pose a more tricky challenge than the technical difficulties of waste disposal. A proposal to create a waste store at Sellafield, an existing nuclear power plant, was thrown out by a public enquiry in 1997. The committee says that a repeat will only be avoided if benefits such as economic investment can be used to persuade local people to partner with the government on any storage plan.

MacKerron and other committee members warn that forging such a partnership is likely to involve many years of discussion, but that a robust interim storage solution is needed now. Most waste from Britain's 33 nuclear power stations is currently stored at the plants where it is produced. The safety of these facilities should also be reviewed, the committee adds — they need to be safe for at least 100 years in case of delays to long-term storage programmes such as geological disposal.

"It is good that they have recognized that this will be a long process and that most of the key decisions will be made by future generations," comments Neil Chapman, a geologist at the University of Sheffield, UK. "What is needed now is the will to get the process moving quickly."

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

Las Vegas SUN
July 29, 2006

Nevada congressional candidate step up attacks

By Kathleen Hennessey
Associated Press

HENDERSON, Nev. (AP) - Democratic congressional candidate Tessa Hafen stepped up her attacks on her Republican opponent, Rep. Jon Porter, on Saturday, as she launched a "100 Broken Promises" tour 100 days before the November election.

Hafen, the former press secretary to Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, accused the two-term congressman of failed leadership and acting as a "puppet" for the Bush administration.

"The common theme I've heard from voters is they want real leadership. They're tired of career politicians saying one thing and doing another," she told a group of supporters gathered at her campaign headquarters. "They're tired of broken promises."

Hafen criticized Porter, 51, for several votes in Congress, saying he voted to extend tax breaks for oil and gas companies, supported a ban on the importation of prescription drugs from Canada and voted to cut services for veterans.

A campaign statement said Porter broke his promise to make Nevada safe "by failing to get the Las Vegas valley back on the 'high alert' list for Homeland Security" funding.

Clark County lost a portion of its federal security funding when it was dropped from a list of most targeted cities. The funding has not been restore despite lobbying from every member of southern Nevada's congressional delegation.

"I would be much more agressive in going after anyone who was doing possible damage to the state of Nevada," she said.

Porter campaign manager Mike Slanker called Hafen's charges "just silly," and dismissed the 30-year-old candidate as a "professional press release writer" with too little experience to understand the issues.

"Sure, she has great experience in Washington, D.C.," Slanker said. "She's done this for a living. She speaks this stuff for people, she reads words on a page. But to her, this is all a game. She's never employed anybody, she's never made a mortgage payment."

Hafen is running in Nevada's 3rd Congressional District, a largely suburban district with a roughly equal number of registered Democrats and Republicans. She was raised in Henderson, and worked for Reid for eight years on Capitol Hill, first as an intern and then later as press secretary and senior adviser. Her father is Henderson City Councilman Andy Hafen.

As Reid's aide, Hafen said she worked closely on the fight against the proposed nuclear repository at Yucca Mountain and on securing earmarks for projects in southern Nevada. Hafen said she oversaw four employees in Reid's office.

She described herself as anti-abortion and said she believes marriage "should be between a man and a woman." On the violence in the Middle East, she said, "I think that Israel has every right to defend itself in any way the country feels necessary. It's a right that we as Americans demand and expect."

Hafen has received substantial fundraising help from her former boss. In July, she reported $601,000 in her campaign coffers and a campaign-to-date total of $758,000.

Porter has raised about three times that amount. Helped by a fundraiser with President Bush, the congressman reported raising $514,000 from April to June and $2.3 million so far this cycle.

Porter has a record $1.6 million on hand, according to his campaign.

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

Indianapolis Star
July 30, 2006

Renewable energy sources would be better investment

Jack Corpuz is correct that Indiana should invest in alternatives to coal, but his proposed solution -- "nuclear power" -- ignores the hazards of this technology and the viability of cleaner, more efficient alternatives ("Boost state's energy supply with nuclear power," July 23).

The elephant in the room that Corpuz fails to mention is the highly radioactive nuclear waste for which no country in the world has found a permanent solution. The U.S. government's proposed waste dump at Yucca Mountain in Nevada, which sits atop a drinking water aquifer, above earthquake fault lines and near volcanoes, is mired in scientific fraud and mismanagement and may never open.

And despite the $12 billion in cradle-to-grave subsidies and tax credits for the nuclear industry passed in the 2005 Energy Policy Act, even credit rating agencies are dubious that these giveaways are sufficient to protect the credit of utilities who choose to build new reactors.

But numerous studies, including one from Shell Oil, have concluded that renewable energies "solar, wind, advanced hydro and geothermal technologies" can meet our energy needs. Indiana should wisely invest in renewable and efficiency technologies to avoid the hazards and expense of nuclear power.

Michele Boyd
Legislative director, Public Citizen's Critical Mass Energy Program
Washington

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

Cherry Hill Courier Post
July 30, 2006

Activists fret over nuclear fuel transfer

By Lawrence Hajna
Courier-Post Staff

Lower Alloways Creek

It's an idea that has anti-nuclear energy activists on edge but one the state's largest electric utility says is critical to continue meeting New Jersey's ever-growing energy needs.

Around September, PSEG Nuclear, the arm of Public Service Enterprise Group that operates the three-reactor Salem Generating Station at the neck of Delaware Bay, will begin moving highly radioactive fuel rods from one of its reactors into specially designed casks to be stored next to the plant.

The company is conducting test runs of the process, practicing moving its lethally radioactive fuel onto a specially constructed pad adjacent to the Hope Creek reactor.

A water-filled building at the reactor, built and designed only to allow the fuel to cool, is expected to run out of space by next year.

While PSEG could continue operating for three more years by shuffling fuel around within the reactor core, the utility would no longer be able to access parts of the reactor in the event of mechanical problems or emergencies.

Once the reactor core filled up, the company would face the prospect of shutting down a major part of what is the nation's second largest nuclear-reactor complex, which is about 35 miles south of Philadelphia.

"If you can't make room in the pools, there comes a point when you can't operate anymore," PSEG Nuclear project manager Brian Gustems said Friday.

The company expects to run out of room in similar pools for its Salem 1 and 2 reactors in 2011 and 2015, respectively.

Hope Creek joins the growing number of nuclear plants across the nation that have had to build outdoor cask storage systems because the federal government has failed to build a permanent underground repository for the nation's nuclear waste.

The U.S. Department of Energy has set a timetable calling for a repository at Yucca Mountain in the Nevada desert to open in 2017. But state officials, environmentalists and members of Congress remain adamantly opposed.

More than 30 plants, including New Jersey's other reactor -- Oyster Creek in Ocean County -- are now using temporary storage systems.

But anti-nuclear activists worry the casks will become permanent fixtures at the reactors, saying they see no end to the political battle over Yucca Mountain.

"Yucca Mountain may never open," said Norm Cohen, a Linwood, Atlantic County, resident who is coordinator of the UNPLUG Salem Campaign. "More and more it's looking like the fuel will be staying on-site for a long time."

Even if the Yucca Mountain hurdle is someday cleared, activists fear the casks could become targets for terrorists or become involved in accidents during transportation through highly populated areas.

Although precise transportation routes have not been designated, the fuel from the Salem plants would likely travel along rail lines through the tri-county area before veering west through Philadelphia, according to environmental groups that have analyzed federal documents.

"Our basic feeling is that we don't want nuclear power," Cohen said. "But since we don't have the choice to shut Hope Creek off, we want it to be as safe as possible."

He has argued for construction of underground bunkers to protect the waste, something the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission has not required.

But, in fact, Cohen has mixed feelings about placing the fuel in what are known in the industry as dry casks.

He believes the casks are at least safer than keeping the fuel -- which will remain highly radioactive for 10,000 years -- in the current storage buildings where they are immersed in 40 feet of water. The water provides an effective barrier to the release of radiation.

Cohen feels these large buildings, looming next to the Delaware River, are easier terrorist targets, especially for attacks by air, than the casks.

Vera Essler, 60, lives on the access road to the nuclear complex. Her front porch looks across farmland and marshes to the reactor complex some three miles away.

"We really don't have any control. They're going to do what they're going to do, what they need to do," she said. "They should know what they're doing."

Reach Lawrence Hajna at (856) 486-2466 or lhajna@courierpostonline.com

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

Today's Sunbeam
July 30, 2006

Space for waste begins to dry up

LOWER ALLOWAYS CREEK TWP. -- With no federally-approved repository for the used radioactive fuel needed to power the nation's nuclear plants, utility operators -- including those at the Hope Creek Generating Station here -- are turning to alternative storage methods as their "temporary" facilities begin to run out of room.

PSEG Nuclear, operator of Hope Creek, will begin this fall storing the used or "spent" fuel outdoors in huge specially-designed containers in a method called dry cask storage.

The spent fuel from the three nuclear plants at Artificial Island is currently stored in indoor pools of water adjacent to the nuclear reactors where groups of fuel rods assembled into "bundles" slowly cool.

But those spent fuel pools were designed to only be temporary holding areas until the fuel could be taken off-site and transported to a permanent repository set up by the federal government.

Estimates now are that the earliest Yucca Mountain in Nevada -- the site proposed to be the nation's nuclear waste repository -- could begin receiving spent fuel from the nation's 103 licensed nuclear plants and other businesses that deal with radioactive materials is 2017. Facing prospect of running out of room to store spent fuel and possibly being forced to shut down nuclear reactors, utility operators are turning to other methods as they wait for the Department of Energy to ready Yucca Mountain.

One method, approved by the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the agency which oversees the operation of the nation's nuclear plants, is dry cask storage.

The concrete and steel reinforced casks will hold sealed stainless steel containers filled with 10.5 tons of the spent fuel. The casks stand about 20 feet tall and are 12 feet in diameter. When filled with fuel and sealed, the entire cask package will weigh about 180 tons.

Perhaps the simplest way to envision how the whole container looks is to think of a soda can inserted into one of those foam rings that insulate it to keep it cool. The can would be the container holding the fuel and the foam ring, the concrete and steel cask protecting it.

The plan is to store these casks on-site at nuclear power plants until the fuel can be moved to permanent storage, a date which is murky.

Across the U.S. 33 sites are now using dry cask storage or have been licensed to do so, including PSEG's operations at Artificial Island. That number is expected to grow.

While Hope Creek is the first of the three reactor sites at the Island to near seeing its spent fuel pool fill up (estimates are it will run out of space in 2007), the other two stations will soon be facing the same problem. The pools at the Salem 1 and Salem 2 plants are expected to reach capacity in 2011 and 2015 respectively. The cask storage site was constructed to accommodate spent fuel from those reactors, too, when the need arises in the future.

PSEG Nuclear has contracted with Holtec International, a Marlton-based company to supply its storage casks. Holtec has clients across the U.S. and in Europe in Spain and the Ukraine.

In a highly-secured outdoor storage area at Artificial Island, the containers will be highly monitored until the day their contents can be removed to a permanent resting place, officials say.

The storage area consists of three concrete pads, each approximately 200 feet long and 91 feet wide. Because they, like the rest of the buildings here were built on a manmade island, special steps were needed in the construction.

The three-foot thick concrete pads are supported underneath by a series of alternating 45-foot and 22-foot concrete columns driven into the ground.

The site is in the shadow of the 500-foot Hope Creek cooling tower and on the site where a cooling tower for a second Hope Creek reactor was to be built before plans for it were scrapped.

The site's official name is an "independent spent fuel storage installation" or ISFSI.

The dry cask process

Filling the cask actually takes place underwater inside the spent fuel pool adjacent to the nuclear reactor.

The process for storing the spent fuel is somewhat like filling a can.

A special stainless steel container with one-half inch thick walls is placed in a protective sleeve and filled with water. It is lowered underwater into the spent fuel pool. At that point, the 12-foot long radioactive fuel bundles are lifted in the pool and slid into the honeycomb-shaped slots in the container.

A stainless steel lid is then placed on the container while it is under water. Still in its protective sleeve, the container is lifted from the water. At that point the steel lid is welded shut, the water is drained from the container through special ports and it is filled with helium. The small ports on the container, too, are welded shut.

The steel container is then lifted and slid out of its protective sleeve into the cask. It is then topped off with a reinforced concrete and steel lid.

The cask has small vents at the bottom and top which allow air to circulate around the steel container inside so that heat given off by the fuel may escape. The concrete and steel cask enclosure, however, shields against the escape of radiation.

Refueling outages are generally conducted at nuclear power plants every 18 months.

Hope Creek's reactor hold 764 bundles of fuel of which about 240 are replaced each refueling cycle.

Once placed in the spent fuel pool, the bundles begin to cool. Those selected for cask storage will generally be older ones -- at least five years old --that have significantly cooled. Removed from the indoor spent fuel pool, they will allow room for new ones recently removed from the reactor core.

About 68 bundles of fuel will fit into a container inside a cask.

Gustems estimates the entire process -- filling, sealing and transporting the cask -- will take about one week.

While Hope Creek was the last plant at the Island to come on line (1986), its design provided for a smaller spent fuel pool than neighboring Salem 1 (which came on line in late 1976) and Salem 2 (which began producing power in mid 1981).

Why is space running out?

Nuclear power now accounts for approximately 20 percent of all electric used in the United States. In New Jersey, that figure has risen to more than 50 percent.

The question of when nuclear power plant operators will finally be able to move their spent fuel off-site to a government-run facility remains uncertain. Originally the government had said Yucca Mountain would begin receiving fuel for storage in early 1998. The most recent estimate from an Energy Department officials, given just this month, is 2017, more than a decade away.

But even that date is uncertain. As NRC Spokeswoman Diane Screnci noted, the Department of Energy hasn't even yet submitted an application to the NRC to gain approval to store the waste at Yucca Mountain.

When the desert site some 100 miles North of Las Vegas does open, radioactive waste will be stored some 1,000 feet below the surface in huge caves.

The breach of contract suits seek damages from the government to pay for the costs the utilities have incurred to pay for alternative storage room they must build at their plants.

Gustems estimates PSEG has spent about $50 million so far on the dry cask project, primarily constructing the pads in the storage yard for the containers. In addition, the casks cost roughly $1 million a piece. In all, with space for potentially 200 casks at its outdoor storage space, the tab for the utility will be a large one.

So far, according to estimates, more than $7 billion has been spent on the Yucca Mountain project. And, according to some published reports, the total cost may hit somewhere between $50 and 100 billion.

Electric ratepayers are picking up part of the tab.

Concerns for safety

The first use of dry cask storage was at the Surry Nuclear Power Plant in Virginia in 1986.

According to Screnci, there have been no problems with the alternative storage system.

"There have been no leaks of radioactive material from any dry cask storage systems loaded to date," Screnci said Friday.

The cask system has been thoroughly tested, officials say.

Joy Russell of Holtec says the casks containing the fuel containers are extremely strong.

"We have a 1-inch carbon steel shell on the outside and one on the inside and then there is 27 inches of concrete in between," Russell said. "It's a very robust body of the cask."

With any type of facility that handles radioactive fuel, concern over security is always high.

The State of New Jersey has three new on-site monitoring units surrounding the dry cask storage area. Gustems said the monitoring units will provide real time observations to state officials.

PSEG Nuclear also has sophisticated new monitoring in place designed especially for the dry cask yard to detect any problems with radiation.

Security at the site, as it is anywhere around the three nuclear plants, is extremely high.

The NRC has already been on site to observe run-throughs of moving the casks. The agency also has on-site resident inspectors who monitor the process.

But some critics of the nuclear power industry aren't so happy with the new storage process.

"We have mixed feelings about building dry cask storage. Our preference would be for the nuclear plants to shut down when their pools fill up, but we understand that is an unrealistic request in today's world of high energy prices," said Norm Cohen, coordinator for the UnPlug Salem Project, a group whose long-term goal remains the decommissioning of Salem Units 1 and 2, but has evolved into a safety and public health watchdog organization.

Cohen also said his group is also opposed to the use of Yucca Mountain for permanent nuclear waste storage.

"We have always opposed opening Yucca Mountain because of the transportation safety concerns and because Yucca Mountain does not appear to be a safe enough repository to hold nuclear waste for thousands of years."

"The government did make a promise to the nuclear companies, which is one reason why the spent fuel pools were built smaller. They could have built pools to hold 60 years of waste."

Because of its failure, Cohen believes the government should use money collected to support Yucca Mountain to build robust dry cask storage sites at the nation's nuclear power plants.

Cohen says he worries, too, that so much spent fuel at a site may be inviting to terrorists.

Also, if the federal government does not move on Yucca Mountain, he feels the Island will become a long-term nuclear waste storage facility, something he believes officials in Lower Alloways Creek never envisioned.

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

Las Vegas Review-Journal
July 29, 2006

Bush administration says Yucca study not required

By Steve Tetreault
Stephens Washington Bureau

WASHINGTON -- The latest clash between Nevada and the Bush administration over Yucca Mountain took a turn on Friday when the White House said it was not required to produce an environmental study of its latest bill for the nuclear waste site.

Sens. Harry Reid, D-Nev., and John Ensign, R-Nev., said this week a federal law, the National Environmental Policy Act, mandated the White House lay out the potential impacts of the bill, which seeks to streamline portions of the Yucca project.

In a letter Wednesday, Reid and Ensign asked James Connaughton, director of the White House Council of Environmental Quality, to see the report on the Yucca Mountain bill that the Bush administration sent to Capitol Hill on April 5.

Connaughton told the Nevadans on Friday he had a different interpretation of the law.

Connaughton said in a letter the White House council "is not responsible for preparation of environmental impact statements for other agencies' proposed actions." He suggested Reid and Ensign talk to the Department of Energy, which runs the Yucca Mountain program.

"I am disappointed in the CEQ's response but not surprised," Reid said in a statement. "This administration continues to disregard the public safety and environmental concerns when it comes to Yucca Mountain."

Ensign had not seen the letter and would not comment, spokesman Jack Finn said.

The Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee has scheduled a hearing on the Yucca Mountain bill on Thursday.

The bill contains a number of changes the Department of Energy said would help the Yucca project move forward. Most of them would take place over the objections of Nevada officials and environmental groups that oppose the planned nuclear waste repository.

Among them, the bill would withdraw federal land in Nye County for repository construction and strengthen Energy Department claims for water and transportation authority on the project.

The measure also would expand the amount of nuclear waste that could be placed within the mountain. In addition, it seeks to streamline reviews of a repository application the Energy Department says it plans to file in 2008.

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

Pahrump Valley Times
July 28, 2006

New Yucca Mountain center opens

By Phillip Gomez
PVT

Despite political setbacks in the drive to see Yucca Mountain become a nuclear storage reality, the U.S. Department of Energy's principal contractor, Bechtel Science Applications International Corp., has moved ahead on the public relations front by opening a new 5,000-square-foot information center in Pahrump across the street from the post office.

The information center opens to the public on Monday with hours from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.

Thursday saw a special open house for invited VIPs -- representatives of the stakeholder counties most affected by Yucca Mountain and invested in the federal Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management, which would oversee waste-handling and transport operations.

The new facility replaces the old information center in the plaza at the Pahrump Station on Postal Drive, just down the street. That was only 600 square feet and saw about 300 visitors per year, serving as the staging area for bus tours to Yucca Mountain in the fall and spring seasons.

The bus tours will continue, says facility manager Claire Sinclair, and now visitors in Pahrump will be offered a more enriching experience learning about the government project, its history and the natural history of the geographic area east of Beatty.

Moreover, the new building houses 2,500 square feet of office space for 16 staffers and a 35-person-capacity conference room.

"We're working in a very positive direction," says Sinclair. "This makes sense that the county most affected by Yucca Mountain has a good resource for people to find out about the project. It certainly shows our commitment to Nye County by putting together a facility like this and preparing for additional staff to be employed in Pahrump."

Staff positions will be advertised when Bechtel determines the specific skills needed by the people to be hired, Sinclair says.

Department of Energy officials recently announced plans to upgrade the staging area at the repository site itself, 54 miles north of Pahrump. DOE plans to spend $100 million over the next several years to construct and improve 33 miles of roads, install more than 20 miles of power lines and replace existing facilities with six new buildings, according to a new 70-page environmental assessment.

The buildings are to include a 43,000-square-foot operations center, a 10,000-square-foot fire station and a 43,000-square-foot maintenance and repair shop.

Back in Pahrump, Sinclair says, "I'm hoping this (new Pahrump facility) will be the base for our outreach programs." She says Bechtel has a 25-foot trailer equipped with science and technology displays explaining Yucca Mountain, its geology, hydrology and safety features, which she intends to use for field trips to local schools.

As for the new bricks-and-mortar building, brand-new exhibits tell the story of the arid land on the edge of the Nellis Air Force Range from prehistoric times to 1997, when DOE's giant boring machine cut its way under and through Yucca Mountain in construction of the main tunnel.

A 12-minute film presents an overview history of the site's selection and development. Exhibits placed in a tunnel-like interior design continue the story with DOE's plans for transportation of the nuclear waste to the site and an explanation of the repository's operations.

Like more sophisticated museums devoted to an area's human and natural history, Indian artifacts are on display, along with specimens of local flora, broadening the Yucca Mountain story for visitor interest.

Other exhibits present more technical information in more easily grasped, three-dimensional forms, explaining how the facilities for nuclear waste storage would be designed and appear upon completion.

The museum is intended to be self-guided, but staff will be available to answer visitors' questions, Sinclair says.

One special exhibit, a business person's contact station, permits on-line access to DOE regarding vendor applications and government regulations for doing business with Yucca Mountain.

Other Yucca Mountain information centers exist in Las Vegas and in Beatty, but Pahrump's is the first new center to be built in over a decade, Sinclair says.

"We're excited for people to come and visit us," she says. "There's no charge to come. We're looking forward to serving the community."

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

Pahrump Valley Times
July 28, 2006

Sheriff, Trummell debate communications system

By Mark Waite
PVT

TONOPAH -- When it comes to a proposed $2 million Nye County Sheriff's Department microwave communications system, Sheriff Tony DeMeo and County Commissioner Candice Trummell certainly weren't on the same frequency Tuesday.

The purchase of a microwave system from Harris Corp. to connect Pahrump to Beatty, Tonopah and Warm Springs, would cost $2.04 million. Nye County could fund $1.5 million with an emergency management grant; the county could pay the remaining $555,000 over the next three years from the Payment Equal to Taxes it receives for the land value of Yucca Mountain.

DeMeo said all of the sheriff's office telephone and Internet communications could be broadcast on the new network instead of just using telephone lines. It would allow patrol vehicles in Pahrump to communicate with other sheriff's office personnel in Tonopah or Smoky Valley, or any other areas within the third largest county geographically in the nation. Other county departments could also piggyback onto the system, the sheriff said.

The system would also provide a backup in case existing phone lines went out, DeMeo said. The sheriff said that has happened a few times since he took office, including one incident when even the 911 service was down in Tonopah. The new system would include 26 T-1 lines for Internet capability, he said.

"We don't have any redundancy in the system. If Tonopah is down, Tonopah is down," DeMeo said. "The communication system now isn't even in the 1940s."

"No one had the foresight to look into communication needs for Nye County," the sheriff said. "This system is so good other entities in the state are looking at it."

But Commissioner Candice Trummell said Nye County isn't ready to go with a group of 74 frequencies it acquired from the Federal Communications Commission, after paying an FCC consultant $60,000 one and a half years ago.

"We don't know if we'll have frequencies that will work," she said.

DeMeo said his office has been talking regularly with Motorola Company about the system. But Trummell only wanted a straight answer.

"Is it up and running?" she asked the sheriff.

"No," DeMeo replied.

"That's all I said," Trummell said. "It's not up and running, which is what we were told was going to occur at this point in time."

Trummell became agitated enough that County Commission Chairman Gary Hollis had to rap the gavel to bring the discussion back to order.

Sheriff's Lt. Jack Henigan, who is working on the project for DeMeo's office, said the contract for the frequencies wasn't approved until last August. A lot of things are out of the control of the sheriff's department, like the approval of the frequencies and the approval of repeater sites, he said.

"The county spent $2.5 million for two towers that are doing nothing but blinking lights and transmitting for other agencies," DeMeo said.

Commissioner Patricia Cox wanted the item brought back for consideration. She asked for more assurances from Harris Corp. about time lines for delivering the system and late penalties.

With the system, the county would use existing microwave dishes and repeater towers on Sawtooth Mountain, Gold Point and Brock Mountain but would construct another repeater tower on Robs Peak for better service to Amargosa Valley.

Commissioner Joni Eastley asked about delaying approval until Interim County Manager Ron Williams presents a report on funding requests for the Yucca Mountain money, which is expected next week. Williams said the county would have funds to finance its share of the project.

DeMeo said the Nevada Highway Patrol spent a lot of money on a new VHF radio system, then simply abandoned it. Trummell said she was glad DeMeo brought that up, adding, "I'm afraid this system may go the same way where we have frequencies that may not work."

DeMeo denied Trummell's claim the county was buying a proprietary system.

"It's proprietary technology," Trummell said. "You can buy your radios and everything from somebody other than Motorola?"

When there was a power failure in Las Vegas, the sheriff said dispatchers had to relay a message to Beatty using a solar-powered antenna and Beatty dispatchers relayed it to Tonopah.

"We're dealing with public safety issues," he said. "I had 10 technicians rushing into a room to find out why Tonopah was down. If we miss a 911 call, whose life is on the line?"

But Trummell said to invest money when the county doesn't have the frequencies up and running is a waste of money. She said there was trouble with a pair of frequencies "bleeding" into other frequencies. DeMeo said the problem was that transmitting towers on Mt. Potosi were so high they created interference.

Nye County formed a partnership with the U.S. Forest Service to use their frequencies, DeMeo said. He added the system would also allow Nye County to tap into SNAC, the Southern Nevada Area Communications system. DeMeo said he would be able to communicate by radio directly with Las Vegas Metro.

After the commission meeting, DeMeo claimed Trummell was being influenced by a competitor seeking the contract.

"I don't know what her motives are. I find it questionable because there is another company that has been trying to interject themselves in this," he said.

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

Contra Costa Times
July 29, 2006

Atomic bomb survivor will join protesters

LIVERMORE: Rallies on anniversaries of Hiroshima, Nagasaki bombings to decry use of nuclear weapons

By Betsy Mason
Contra Costa Times

A survivor of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima, Japan, will speak at an Aug. 6 rally in Livermore to mark the 61st anniversary of the event.

During the week after the bombing, Keiji Tsuchiya served as a rescue worker aiding other victims. Today, the 78-year-old is vice president of the Okayama A-bomb Sufferers Association. He is traveling from Japan to participate in the Livermore rally in protest of nuclear weapons.

Demonstrators plan to gather at 8 a.m. Aug. 6 at Lawrence Livermore Laboratory, on the corner of Vasco Road and Patterson Pass, for speeches and ceremonies. They will march to the laboratory gate at 9 a.m. for a nondenominational ceremony.

Other speakers will include author and media critic Norman Soloman and Marylia Kelley, director of Tri-Valley Communities Against a Radioactive Environment.

Another rally is planned for Aug. 9, the anniversary of the U.S. atomic bombing of Nagasaki, Japan. Participants will meet at 9 a.m. in front of the Bechtel Corp. headquarters, 50 Beale St. in San Francisco.

Bechtel recently joined the University of California in a successful bid for the management of the Los Alamos National Laboratory and is a partner in the management of the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository.

Aug. 9 is also the United Nations International Day of the World's Indigenous Peoples, and the featured speaker at the rally will be Corbin Harney, a spiritual leader of the Western Shoshone Nation. The Yucca Mountain site is on land to which the Western Shoshone claim they hold the rights.

The rallies are linked to events at nuclear weapons sites across the country. Information about the effort is available at the Web site: http://august6.org.

Reach Betsy Mason at 925-847-2158 or bmason@cctimes.com.

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

Concord Monitor
July 29, 2006

Seabrook

Is it time for more nuclear power?

As energy costs soar, an old battle begins anew

By Lisa Arsenault
Monitor staff

Ten years after the last nuclear power plant opened in the United States, nuclear power is making a comeback. Since the federal government passed comprehensive energy laws in 2005 with incentives to build new nuclear reactors, a dozen companies have come forward with plans.

In New Hampshire, a national debate over nuclear energy dredges up memories of the long, expensive fight over the Seabrook nuclear power plant. The owners of the Seabrook reactor, FPL Energy, say they have no plans to build a second reactor. But opponents who spent years trying to stop Seabrook I say they are prepared for another fight.

Seabrook Station was originally pitched in 1972 as a $1.3 billion plant with two nuclear reactors that would be built by 1979. But ongoing protests and the passage of laws that prevented PSNH from recouping costs during construction caused lengthy delays while the price mounted. Construction of the second reactor was ultimately canceled due to costs that reached more than $2 billion by 1987. Two years later, PSNH filed for bankruptcy and its customers are still paying off some the costs.

Today at Seabrook Station, the shell of the second reactor remains. The unfinished concrete dome has been covered with a metal roof that is streaked with rust from years of exposure. Beside it, the building that would have housed the steam turbines and the electric generator is standing but mainly empty, according to Seabrook spokesman Alan Griffith.

Griffith said it is unlikely that Florida Power and Light would decide to build the second reactor because of "the political climate in the Northeast." It is more likely that the company would consider building a different kind of power plant on the site - like one that runs on natural gas, he said.

The 1,220-megawatt plant employs about 800 people and produces enough electricity to power 1.2 million homes a year. Crews at the plant are finishing a project this year to increase capacity to 1,260 megawatts - enough to power another 100,000 homes.

Of the 25 new reactors that have been proposed across the country, the majority of them are at existing nuclear plants in the southeast, according to Scott Burnell, a spokesman for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The United States has 103 operating nuclear plants, the newest of which went online in Tennessee in 1996. FPL Group, which owns three other nuclear plants, is one of the utilities talking about building a new plant but its location has not yet been named, Burnell said.

"The discussions I've seen are focused on Florida, not New Hampshire," Burnell said.

Nuclear advocates across the country argue that nuclear power is the answer to meeting growing electricity demand while countering global warming and reducing reliance on expensive foreign oil. It has been touted by President Bush and Sen. John McCain, a Republican from Arizona who may run for president in 2008. The regulatory process has been streamlined since Seabrook was built; incentives and more security for investments are being offered for the first new nuclear plants proposed, according to information provided by the Nuclear Energy Institute in Washington D.C.

Some New Hampshire legislators say that because the infrastructure is in place at Seabrook and the image of nuclear power is better than 10 years ago, building Seabrook's second reactor is a good idea.

"When you see oil at $75 a barrel, people understand that we need to find alternative energy sources," said Senate President Ted Gatsas, a Republican from Manchester. "I think they should be considering it (the second Seabrook reactor)."

Senate Majority Leader Bob Clegg, a Republican from Hudson, agrees. He said he thinks the opposition is slowly changing its mind about nuclear power, even in New Hampshire.

"I think people have a better sense of our energy needs," he said. "Who doesn't have air conditioning in their homes? When we did it (Seabrook) in 1976, nobody did."

But longtime Seabrook protestors such as Manchester lawyer Bob Backus, who represents the Seacoast Anti-Pollution League, and Clamshell Alliance co-founder John Gunter say nuclear power is still a terrible idea.

The Clamshell Alliance hasn't had an office since the early 1990s, but the group has been holding meetings recently, Backus said. A Clamshell Alliance reunion was planned for this weekend but Backus and Gunter were mum on the details.

"The people that were gathered to oppose Seabrook are already gathering again to prevent a resurgence and again say this is not a reasonable solution to the problem," Backus said. "Because of the talk that we need another nuclear plant to defeat global warming there has been a revitalization of the Clamshell Alliance and other associated groups."

Because none of the major problems with nuclear power have been solved, the recent revival of building plants is "delusional," said Gunter, who now lives near Washington D.C. and works for an anti-nuclear group called the Nuclear Information and Resource Service. Perhaps the biggest problem, Gunter said, is that there is still no solution for spent nuclear fuel. The plants are terrorist targets and parts of the nuclear energy process still contribute to global warming, he said.

"This industry has always had a problem with reality," Gunter said. "This is just one more in a string of misinformation and spin for a sales pitch."

Seabrook's operators are one of several nuclear plant owners that is suing the federal government because it has not provided long-term storage for spent fuel. At Seabrook, the spent fuel is all stored in a water-filled pool on site. Construction has begun on a dry-storage area as well, Griffith said. By 2008, crews will start taking fuel out of the pool and putting it in concrete containment vessels several layers thick, Griffith said.

The federal storage facility at Yucca Mountain in Nevada has been built but not licensed. It is stalled due to political fighting led by lawmakers from nearby states. Several other plans have been proposed by politicians fighting Yucca Mountain - including a plan to start reprocessing the spent fuel to extract useable uranium, which is being done in other countries and would reduce the amount of waste needing storage, supporters say. That plan also calls for setting aside money to build interim storage facilities in other states or at existing plants. Governors in those states would not have veto power over the storage facilities.

The four members of New Hampshire's congressional delegation said in interviews this week that nuclear power needs to be in the energy mix in the future, but they don't believe a second reactor at Seabrook is likely.

Despite the cost overruns and the political rancor caused by Seabrook, it has turned out to be a good investment for New Hampshire because of the jobs it provides, its strong safety record and the electricity produced there, said Congressman Jeb Bradley. But, he said, regulators need to resolve the question of long-term waste storage by completing Yucca Mountain.

"I think we ought to be taking a second look at nuclear power, but we need to do it in a way that is balanced and environmentally sound,"he said.

Anne Ross, the state's consumer advocate for electricity, said one major change at the state level since Seabrook was built is that the cost of any construction there would not fall on ratepayers anymore. The state has since passed deregulation laws meant to increase electric competition and reduce rates. Seabrook is owned by an unregulated, independent company financed by shareholders instead of ratepayers, as PSNH was.

Amy Ignatius, director of the state office of energy and planning, said that "the governor would look long and hard at any proposal" for a power plant in the state, including a second reactor at Seabrook. But, she added, the lack of a federal storage facility for the spent fuel is a "real concern" for building more reactors.

She said her office has been asked by the governor to study how federal proposals for storing spent nuclear waste could impact New Hampshire - particularly the plan to build interim storage facilities at existing plants without the option of a governor's veto.

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